Anna Netrebko had a baby - voice change

[Marc]

I heard her live once, and it was enough for me to comprehend her mediocrity as a singer.

That's what I call thorough listening!
But yes, she's hyped.
But no, I wouldn't call her mediocre.
Let's draw, shall we?
Second rank.
But how many first rank (opera) singers do we really have? (Or should I say: did?)

[Ciel_Rouge]

Alright, if you provided specific examples elsewhere I shall try to search for them. I guess it is okay if I like her and you don't

All those who DO like her, have some research about voice change in general or can provide first hand examples of how pregnancy affects the voice, are more than welcome to participate ;-)

[owlice]

Yes, having a baby can be the cause of many changes in a woman, which might include having bigger feet, vocal changes, increase in creativity and ability to multitask, exhaustion, and lack of discretionary income.

The body produces a hormone called relaxin; the joints of the pelvis needing to expand for the birthing process, the production of relaxin increases tenfold in a pregnant woman. The hormone's function is as its name implies: it relaxes the joints of the body so that the pelvis can stretch to accommodate the watermelon-headed baby who needs to be pushed out, usually with great effort on the part of the woman, kicking and screaming into the bright, noisy world.

Because relaxin circulates in the bloodstream, its action is not limited to the pelvic joints. Other joints may relax as well; back pain is common in pregnant women and is sometimes caused (in part) by the action of relaxin on the spine. Some women end up with feet that are larger after pregnancy than before pregnancy. (Some women's feet are larger during and shortly after pregnancy, but return to the pre-pregnancy size. Alas, some don't, and if anyone knows of a good source of women's shoes in size 10.5, please let me know; thanks!)

After I gave birth -- which was over 16 years ago; I've given up on my feet going back to my pre-pregnancy size -- I found that my range had greatly increased, so much so that during one annual audition for my seat in a chorus, the auditioner tested my upper range first and asked, "Why aren't you singing soprano for us?!" (Then he tested my lower range, and said, "Oh!" He got it!) In all the years I auditioned and reauditioned for that group, it was only after I'd been pregnant that I got comments about needing to be placed as a soprano. (Ah, no; I like singing alto!)

Such changes may or may not be permanent, just as in the size of one's feet. (Did you know that most shoe stores don't carry women's shoes in a 10.5? Half- and whole-sizes are available up to size 10, and then, if a store carries sizes over 10, it'll carry 11s and sometimes 12s, but no 10.5 or 11.15.)

And such changes may not be positive or negative; indeed, they may be completely neutral as the singer learns to sing with the changes, negative if the singer tries to ignore the changes, or positive if a change such as a range increase is permanent.

Or there may be no changes at all, of course; just as some women get stretch marks and others don't, some have morning sickness and others don't, and some women's feet don't get larger (lucky them!) and some women's feet do (darn it!), whether there are vocal changes, and if so, what they might be, is an individual thing.

[Ciel_Rouge]

Amazing answer owlice, this is exactly what would be of value in this thread. So this is how it works... It keeps me wondering why people don't tell women what is going to happen to them. I had absolutely no idea about the feet and yes, I think it is weird that shoe shops do not account for that. Why is it kept secret or ignored? This is 2010 and not 1810 after all... Disempowerment of women is a thing of the past... I hope...

Coming back to the voice - you said you prefer to sing alto but it is now possible for you to sing the soprano. How do you feel about that?

[owlice]

Ciel, I don't think it's a secret that women may end up with bigger feet after having a baby! Shoe shops accommodate most women just fine -- shoes are offered in many sizes. It's just if one starts out with big feet (I have a firm understanding ), having them get bigger can be a problem.

(My son, who at 16 wears a 13.5 shoe, has the same problem I have -- a lot of shoe stores sell whole- and half-sizes in men's shoes up to 13, then the next size, if they have anything larger than a 13, is a 14, which is too big for him. We're not really a family of Bigfoots; we're all simply taller than average, so our feet are bigger than average, too. Okay, maybe we're also a family of Bigfoots! )

Pregnancy can do weird things, but any woman (or man) reading a good book about pregnancy will find out what the weird things are. And the "weird" is relative, after all -- it's not weird, really, that these things happen; it's just that if they happen, it's only during a particular time when a woman is in this particular condition, so it's "weird" only in contrast to all the time a woman spends not pregnant. I doubt very very much at Netrebko didn't know her voice might change some before she got pregnant.

Re: voice, I have in the (now distant) past sung soprano, but I've always preferred singing lower. When I was in fourth grade, I wanted to learn harmony, so declared my alto-hood then, and unless I was placed in a soprano section by a choral director -- which happened a few times -- I've sung the lower voice. I don't like my high sound; my low voice is much warmer. Pregnancy made my range expand, down a little, but especially up. The audition I mentioned in my previous post resulted in me winning a seat right back in the alto section, as a low alto (alto II). That auditioner, who had certainly heard my voice before, hadn't heard the top of my voice because that top hadn't existed for me before.

[jochanaan]

Thanks for that information and viewpoint, Owl.  I was especially interested in how your range expanded; that tells me that pregnancy and giving birth probably had a very positive effect on your abdominal muscles.  Tell me, are the "singing" muscles down there the same muscles you use in delivering a baby?  Or nearly the same?

[Sarastro]

That's what I call thorough listening!

Well, it is not necessary to eat an entire piece of poop just to make sure it is poop.

[jochanaan]

Well, it is not necessary to eat an entire piece of poop just to make sure it is poop.

But poop is always poop.  Singers, on the other hand, sometimes just have bad nights.

[Sarastro]

But poop is always poop.  Singers, on the other hand, sometimes just have bad nights.

You are right. But before the live performance I had listened to a couple CD's of Netrebko, and I thought it was just the fault of records, that the CD's could not convey the expressiveness, that she'd be better live and whatnot... and I was quite disappointed. Not by her looks, though, but what matters in opera is the voice.

[knight66]

I don't much enjoy this singer, but I do have this album.


You are Russian and I am not, but to my ears she sounds superb on this disc, but I simply don't enjoy her in the Italian repertoire.

Mike

[Sarastro]

You are Russian and I am not.

You do not understand Russian, but I do not understand Netrebko, errr, I mean the words -- such poor diction she has (it's no better in other languages). And it seems she herself does not understand the meaning of what she sings; the entire album -- except for one track -- seems to be rather plain vocalizing, rather than singing. It is one of those commercial records that are made for general public and have little to do with genuine art, I think. Unfortunately, for today's opera Netrebko is even not too bad, which does not mean that Netrebko is good, but rather that today's opera is in stagnation.

[knight66]

Well, your reply does not in the least surprise me.

I have a deaf ear to any of Ian Bostridge's qualities. It is only with reluctance that I can ever admit that his work holds merit. I see you stand in a similar corner with Netrebko. Clearly lots of well informed people like each of these singers, but, as so often, it is what reaches the individual ear that is the deciding factor and what others feel is irrelevant to us.

Which does not always make the other listeners wrong.

Mike

[Sarastro]

I have a deaf ear to any of Ian Bostridge's qualities. It is only with reluctance that I can ever admit that his work holds merit. I see you stand in a similar corner with Netrebko. Clearly lots of well informed people like each of these singers, but, as so often, it is what reaches the individual ear that is the deciding factor and what others feel is irrelevant to us.

I can admit that some accomplished singers do not reach my ear; however, I can see why they are considered great. I think there are certain criteria an opera singer should meet to be considered at least "good". I may like the way my grandmother sang me lullaby, it definitely reached my ears, but that does not in the least mean she was a great opera singer. Netrebko, as I already noted, has very poor diction and very little understanding of the music. She is simply unmusical, and everything she does sounds the same -- as if there were a little slot and someone permanently wound up the little clockwork. Even her admirers often have to admit her vocal technique is pretty bad. But she's got some great natural voice and good looks -- it's sufficient for success today. Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera are also quite popular, and they touch more ears than even Netrebko...

[Lilas Pastia]

Sarastro, you're basically right about a few things, and quite wrong on others. IMHO, that is  .

I totally agree that "everything she does sounds the same -- as if there were a little slot and someone permanently wound up the little clockwork". Well put. But the same goes for Juan Diego Florez and much, much of Nathalie Dessay's work. Coincidence: they share Netrebko's basically lovely voice and good looks:  "it's sufficient for success today" - agreed, even though that's an expeditive way to downsize the basic talent and sheer hard work of managing an international carreer in this "Now you see me, now you don't" era.

So, Netrebko has poor diction. That's a no-no in my book. But so did Corelli and Tebaldi, who made handsome carreers of singing italian opera in their native language, not to mention  Price, Nilsson and Sutherland, who did what they could in that respect.  Björling, Gedda and Pavarotti could have twisted them all around their pinkie when it came to diction. And yet, I prefer listening to Price, Nilsson and Corelli than Pav' - in the end it's the emotion conveyed by the voice that counts. Which I don't intend as a defense of Netrebko. She hasn't come across as personable enough to stand on her own two feet so far - that is, without a great tenor partner. Luckily, Villazon was around. An unconventional voice and an unsettling, almost too spontaneous singing actor (the exact opposite of Netrebko).

To label Netrebko as 'simply unmusical' is open to argument. You'll have to come up with specific instances rather than generalizations or hearsay. And please spare me the  Britneay Spears and Aguilera addendum, it's unnecessary to the discussion, and offensive to the thousands of hardworking voice students around the world  .

[Sarastro]

But the same goes for Juan Diego Florez and much, much of Nathalie Dessay's work.

I heard Florez live twice in the same opera -- he did not sound quite the same and ornamented his arias quite differently. In addition to that, his acting was also nuanced and accented differently. But there is some sort of... being impeccable all the time, which might bore someone who has heard him many times. I never heard Dessay live, but my one my friend did -- as well as Florez and Netrebko -- and said he was amazed by the acting and the vocal stature of hers. And he also liked Florez, but was not so praising about Netrebko... I personally am not a great fan of Dessay, but she can be considered a great singer. Even from her interviews one can tell her attitude toward music, whereas Netrebko's interviews, be they in English or Russian, are just plain dumb. I still remember the one where she was saying how she had forgotten her underwear in a night club. Or, for example, how she "was using the microphone between her tits!" (you can read about it here -- http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article2224243.ece -- along with Louis Vuitton shoes and drinking habits). All that is very much alike the Brintey Spears and Christina Aguilera style. Of course, a tiny bit of brain is not required of an opera singer, but those little vulgar things just add up, along with over-promotion and bad singing.

But so did Corelli and Tebaldi, who made handsome carreers of singing italian opera in their native language, not to mention  Price, Nilsson and Sutherland, who did what they could in that respect.

Despite Corelli's southern accent, it is not too hard to understand his diction, even though Italian is not my native language. I was quite shocked when I couldn't tell the words from Netrebko's mushy pronounciation. Maybe Sutherland comes somewhere close, but do not forget that Sutherland had a sinus surgery earlier in her career, in addition to problems with teeth. It is truly a miracle that she could sing after that surgery!

To label Netrebko as 'simply unmusical' is open to argument. You'll have to come up with specific instances rather than generalizations or hearsay.

Am I supposed to explain what "musicality" means?

[Ciel_Rouge]

I personally am not a great fan of Dessay, but she can be considered a great singer. Even from her interviews one can tell her attitude toward music, whereas Netrebko's interviews, be they in English or Russian, are just plain dumb. I still remember the one where she was saying how she had forgotten her underwear in a night club. Or, for example, how she "was using the microphone between her tits!" (you can read about it here -- http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article2224243.ece -- along with Louis Vuitton shoes and drinking habits). All that is very much alike the Brintey Spears and Christina Aguilera style. Of course, a tiny bit of brain is not required of an opera singer, but those little vulgar things just add up, along with over-promotion and bad singing.

The one with the microphone was put out of context. I guess what she meant was using some technique of breathing to amplify her voice - look:

"Though my voice has doubled in the past few years. It started suddenly to be bigger, because I was using the microphone between my tits!"

I think sometimes non-native English speakers simply get their thoughts misunderstood or dumbed down because of the language thing. The interview you mentioned was simply honest and sincere, something I value, especially in women. It was some interview for a silly magazine - I am not sure if its fair comparing it to serious interviews given by Deassay for professional magazines etc. But even in this interview Netrebko said some tings of value:

"On stage you are for the audience; it's wonderful to give to people. When I come off, I am hearing this applause, they are giving back what you gave to them. Usually you have beautiful flowers — sometimes so many I cannot carry them."

and especially:

"I am not a vicious diva. I might be nervous or unhappy about my performance and then I just want to slink out. But I can't be like that."

I suppose it is fashionable to poop on opera singers who also have the looks and further humiliate them by comparing them to pop singers. But I liked her Souvenirs and The Mozart Album and questioning her musicality is just weird.

But let's not turn this thread into some kind of flame nonsense. When I started this thread, I just wanted to explore the influence of different factors on a singer's voice and also explore the new voice of Anna Netrebko, one of my favourite opera singers.

[Sarastro]

I think sometimes non-native English speakers simply get their thoughts misunderstood or dumbed down because of the language thing.

Netrebko speaks Russian primarily, and she clearly stated how she had forgotten her underwear in a night club along with how she likes to get drunk. I never heard of any breathing technique that requires sticking a microphone between tits, but who knows...

I suppose it is fashionable to poop on opera singers who also have the looks and further humiliate them by comparing them to pop singers.

To me, Florez has much better looks than Netrebko... how come I don't "poop" and "humiliate" Florez then?

[Ciel_Rouge]

Netrebko speaks Russian primarily, and she clearly stated how she had forgotten her underwear in a night club along with how she likes to get drunk. I never heard of any breathing technique that requires sticking a microphone between tits, but who knows...

She talked about her voice getting bigger - I  once saw some semi-serious piece of advice regarding breathing and it was similar in content. So who knows what she meant. I do not think placing a mic between breasts would make any sense - or maybe she refers to some small mic that was really placed there during some performance - for me this is not clear at all.

A lot of women "forget" their underwear when going to night clubs - no big deal. Besides, you have not linked to that interview. As for the drinking - in Russia the attitude towards that is very specific ;-) But I would rather concentrate on the voice and not some pop star gossip.

[Sarastro]

Besides, you have not linked to that interview.

It is in Russian.

The point is, however, that regardless of whether you leave your underwear or not, it is not very appropriate to chat about it with journalists, unless you cannot draw attention to your personality by other means. Such statements draw a certain layer of public who is not necessarily interested in opera, but rather in all those gossips. That is sad.

[Lilas Pastia]

I suppose it is fashionable to poop on opera singers who also have the looks and further humiliate them by comparing them to pop singers

Ouch!  Coincidentally, I was reading Eileen Farrell's autobiography last week - and am listening to a few of her albums this week. She is one of those rare opera singers who was successful in what was then considered the "pop repertoire'. She was nonplussed about the term 'crossover'. She crossed over regularly and easily, but in those days, what are now considered 'american art songs' was just 'pop'. Farrell stressed that words come first, and the music has to be 'breathed over them'. IOW, if you don't have good enunciation, you're not a good singer. What I hear in her singing is perfectly natural diction that manages to give full musical value AND make the use of texts totally unnecessary. Everything is swinging or swooning, yet crystal clear. The ultimate in sophistication. This is something I noticed also about Billie Holliday, Lena Horne, Sarah Vaughan and Ella Fitzgerald. And yet, I wonder what kind of musical education these queens of the blues had?

What I'm aiming at is that without the ability to communicate through the words, the singing qua singing is of a definitely lesser quality. Back to Netrebko: I don't hear anything unmusical in her work (that's a loaded word). Which doesn't mean it's great art.