On 21 Jul 2005 at 22:14, Tyler Turner wrote: > --- Richard Yates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > It is the belief of many professionals that > > singing > > > out of one's normal range is bad for the voice. > > > > The question was whether or not it causes injury. > > Injury to the voice, right? Every "vocal authority" > I've spoken to about the subject has told me that it > does. There is medical evidence to support the claim.
I'd like to hear it. What I know of the "experts" in vocal technique is that they are full of BS in many cases (and I'm an Oberling product and include the very prominent just-retired head of the voice department among those who espouse obviously bogus ideas). [] > > Well, I guess I don't know who you are talking about > > here. Your were > > responding to my questions but all I have done is > > ask for evidence and a > > clearer rationale for the decision. If you don't > > have it then why are you > > responding to my questions about it? > > My point was in part to say that it wasn't necessary. > But if you're interested, there are many articles on > the subject. Here's one: > http://www1.wfubmc.edu/voice/nodules/singer.htm Oh, puh-leaze. That article doesn't address the topic at all. It doesn't say that singing outside your natural range causes nodules. It does say that some people who are not vocally trained develop nodules (and ignores that fact that some people who *are* trained develop them as well), and tries to argue that the training is what makes the difference. There is nothing in there about singing outside one's natural range, except the suggestion that it contributes to vocal fatigue. In any event, one doesn't need to refute such assertions in order to show the Texas rule to be bad in the way it seems to be enforced, because the Texas rule seems not to allow for males and females whose natural vocal range falls outside the conventional ranges for male and female voices. A blanket rule prohibiting women from singing alto means that some low-voiced women would *not* be able to participate singing in their normal range, and that a countertenor singing in *his* natural range cannot sing, except in a section that sings in a range that is *not* normal for *his* particular voice. So, whether or not singing outside one's normal range is damaging or not is really not the issue. Indeed, if it *is*, then the rule should ensure that no one is forced to sing outside their normal range by rules that prohibit countertenors from singing in the alto section and low-voiced women from singing in the tenor section. Forcing the countertenor to sing tenor is going to be putting him in a non- natural range, as is forcing the low-voiced woman to sing alto. The rule is too rigid because it ignores the variation in actual human voices. I say, trash the rule, and let the judges of the audition decide whether a girl ought to be singing tenor or a boy, alto. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
