I was wondering whether any of you could give me some examples of clasically trained singers who've had or have fairly small ranges, but had a total mastery of it and were or are known as great interpreters? Male or female, it doesn't matter.
The first example that comes to my mind is Tito Schipa. Even in his primes, he would be at pains to go beyond a B, but his "first" high notes (Fs-A) were as perfect as you can imagine in a lyric tenor. He was able to sing mezzavoce beyond F, which is something many high tenors can't do. Pertile wasn't a super high voice either, but was in similar command of his range. I would mention Bruscantini and Cloe Elmo too.
It depends what "range" means. The late lamented Hugues Cuénod did not have a huge voice - he could not have been one of the 3 tenors - but chose to sing a wide range of superior music from the Renaissance to the modern. You can find him on the earliest Monteverdi recording we have (I think) and singing Dowland, Schubert, Fauré and Stravinsky, among others. Another tenor whose vocal "range" was limited was Julius Patzak, who did not sing any heavier roles than Mime in Siegfried - his repertoire however, like Cuénod's - was wide-ranging, from Mozart to Schubert, Massenet and Krenek.
So - small vocal range sometimes goes with big repertoire range - as with Schipa, mentioned by Harry below.
I've never heard range refer to vocal weight as you seem to be suggesting here mjwal. Surely range is intended in terms of the range of notes they could sing.
I am of the opinion that the lower limit of a voice is a given and shouldn't be pushed downwards. But the upper range doesn't actually have a limit except for how much the chest voice can be easily extended upwards. Baritones usually don't go past an F above middle C except when they sing in the falsetto. Tenors with training can usually bring the chest up to a Bb, but beyond that it can sound strident (like bleating).
Sopranos usually peak at around Eb in alt so usually can't cross the line into Queen of the Night like their much rarer coloratura sisters who chirp the high F's with ease. It has been said that Victoria de los Angeles had a "limited" upper range but I have been of the opinion (and of one of my teachers) that she was more of a mezzo soprano.
ZB
We don't see eye to eye on that last suggestion, but were it true, then her substantial repertoire would have been greatly increased, as in opera she took the Soprano roles.
Mike
Why shouldn't the lower limit be pushed down zamyra?
Quote from: Guido on May 15, 2011, 11:29:46 AM
Why shouldn't the lower limit be pushed down zamyra?
I am not an expert in physiology but it seems the thickest muscles of the larynx and vocal chords cannot or should not be stretched or interefered with. An analogy would be string instruments that have the thickest strings as their lowest limits. It is possible in rare occasions to tune a violin in
scordatura to have the G string an F# for the Danse Macabre of Saint-Saens but this does not suit the instrument.
ZB
Quote from: knight66 on May 15, 2011, 09:23:24 AM
We don't see eye to eye on that last suggestion, but were it true, then her substantial repertoire would have been greatly increased, as in opera she took the Soprano roles.
Mike
I know we have been down this road before but I have worked with some women who insist they are sopranos just because they can pass the upper line of the treble clef. A light mezzo on the order of a Fredericka von Stade can also sing some soprano rep but not all. I actually heard De los Angeles in public in the
Scheherazade of Ravel and
Ah Perfido of Beethoven. She was excellent in the first.
However, the quality of the tones is the real issue. The high notes of a true soprano have brighter overtones. Hers don't. I also remember (but cannot cite right now) where she sings Lieder in the lower key. This is a dead giveaway. But there have been women who have straddled the cracks as it were and defy categories - Jessye Norman, Régine Crespin, etc. In the 19th Century one wouldn't have bothered about it as much.
ZB
We might think two another explanations to de los Ángeles problems with the high notes:
a) She wasn't taugh correctly to place them in the mask.
b) She was another example of a voice losing its top due to excess of sonority in the middle fach.
Quote from: Sylph on May 11, 2011, 01:36:21 PM
I was wondering whether any of you could give me some examples of clasically trained singers who've had or have fairly small ranges, but had a total mastery of it and were or are known as great interpreters? Male or female, it doesn't matter.
According to some, Richard Crooks, one of my favorite tenors, was limited on the top, though he could actually do the high notes. Here is an explanation on the Bach Cantatas site:
"Although limited in the upper register, Richard Crooks possessed a voice of uncommon sweetness mixed with virility, and he learned to produce the top notes as cleverly mixed head tones."
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Bio/Crooks-Richard.htm
He certainly could hit the high notes, but he did seem to have to use a different technique to hit them.
What about Fischer Dieskau? I wouldn't consider him to be a Verdi baritone.
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 15, 2011, 02:34:54 AM
I am of the opinion that the lower limit of a voice is a given and shouldn't be pushed downwards. But the upper range doesn't actually have a limit except for how much the chest voice can be easily extended upwards. Baritones usually don't go past an F above middle C except when they sing in the falsetto. Tenors with training can usually bring the chest up to a Bb, but beyond that it can sound strident (like bleating).
Sopranos usually peak at around Eb in alt so usually can't cross the line into Queen of the Night like their much rarer coloratura sisters who chirp the high F's with ease. It has been said that Victoria de los Angeles had a "limited" upper range but I have been of the opinion (and of one of my teachers) that she was more of a mezzo soprano.
ZB
In a chorus, I can sometimes actually get quite low, down E and even D or C. I feel it in my stomach! Years ago, I couldn't do that, and it doesn't seem to hurt my voice, but I don't, and really can't, push notes that low--I wouldn't be able to do it, i'd lose the notes. I'm a baritone and I could never get that low in a solo, where my effective lower limit is about G. I have had a high G for several decades, as well, and as I get older, the high Gs have gotten easier.
I have never understood female voices, so I'm not going to comment on Victoria de los Angeles, except she was a fine singer. She was Mimi in the Beecham Boheme, and we always thought she did it very well.
Quote from: Harry Powell on May 16, 2011, 02:29:04 PM
We might think two another explanations to de los Ángeles problems with the high notes:
a) She wasn't taugh correctly to place them in the mask.
b) She was another example of a voice losing its top due to excess of sonority in the middle fach.
On the contrary, VdlA's tones were very much focused in the "mask". A simpler explanation is that sopranos have the nicer roles. Anna Moffo did a convincing
Carmen but that doesn't make her a mezzo. I mention her instead of Maria Callas as Moffo was not famous for her chest tones like Callas, but was considered having a light voice.
ZB
Quote from: Xenophanes on May 16, 2011, 06:08:00 PM
In a chorus, I can sometimes actually get quite low, down E and even D or C. I feel it in my stomach! Years ago, I couldn't do that, and it doesn't seem to hurt my voice, but I don't, and really can't, push notes that low--I wouldn't be able to do it, i'd lost the notes. I'm a baritone and I could never get that low in a solo, where my effective lower limit is about G. I have had a high G for several decades, as well, and as I get older, the high Gs have gotten easier.
When I am totally telaxed or coming out of a cold (don't know why), I can vocalize to a C below middle C or even slightly lower. Usually I can go down to D easily (without pushing of course) and found that most women can as well when there are no other obstructions or tensions.
Intuitively, though, I don't think it a good idea to extend the lower range. To keep the high notes, well, that is a matter of practice. I have a student who is a baritone and can reach a G, but at this point, don't like to repeat it more than once or twice in a session. He can also sing the A above middle C in
Largo al Factotum in falsetto and doing it that way seems to me the best policy.
ZB
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 16, 2011, 11:52:34 PM
On the contrary, VdlA's tones were very much focused in the "mask". A simpler explanation is that sopranos have the nicer roles. Anna Moffo did a convincing Carmen but that doesn't make her a mezzo. I mention her instead of Maria Callas as Moffo was not famous for her chest tones like Callas, but was considered having a light voice.
ZB
It may have been a naturally placed voice as middle tones are concerned, but her high notes were rather "open". They sounded more of a shrill, something a good placement in the mask should have avoided.
Quote from: Harry Powell on May 17, 2011, 05:55:30 AM
It may have been a naturally placed voice as middle tones are concerned, but her high notes were rather "open". They sounded more of a shrill, something a good placement in the mask should have avoided.
From the point of view of a lyric soprano (me), after about a C above middle C, I don't feel the bulk of the vibrations (pressure, or whatever you want to call it) in the "mask" but going back and up the palate. Humming gives a good idea where the vibrations naturally fall.
ZB
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 16, 2011, 11:59:36 PM
When I am totally telaxed or coming out of a cold (don't know why), I can vocalize to a C below middle C or even slightly lower. Usually I can go down to D easily (without pushing of course) and found that most women can as well when there are no other obstructions or tensions.
Well, everyone's voice sounds darker during a cold. I guess nasal congestion prevents the sound from reaching the upper resonators and it acquires a guttural quality (the "false resonance" the Italians speak of). My voice would clasified as tenor but I sound as a bad baritone when I catch a cold.
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 17, 2011, 11:28:53 AM
From the point of view of a lyric soprano (me), after about a C above middle C, I don't feel the bulk of the vibrations (pressure, or whatever you want to call it) in the "mask" but going back and up the palate. Humming gives a good idea where the vibrations naturally fall.
ZB
Ok, but don't vibrations go through your palate and resonate in the mask? If not, how could you possibly be heard when humming? As far as I know, the whole range must rely partly on the mask, more and more as you go higher. When one listens to singers like Ebe Stignani it's easy to perceive even her lower tones being in the mask. People singing exclussively on chest tones would sound as ventriloquists (and in fact some of them do)
Quote from: Leon on May 17, 2011, 11:35:28 AM
Would Bidú Sayão be a candidate for this thread?
Sayão was a soprano on the order of soubrette. She had an almost cultlike admiration in the days of silver screen stars with honeyed voices like Jeanette McDonald's. Fads change with time and it is practically unimaginable that she would be as popular today. It seems that megavoices in the 60's (Leontyne Price, Joan Sutherland) followed on the heels of the sweet and saccarine ladies. As for soubrettes and light voices, I prefer Licia Albanese from that period and later, Rita Streich and Lucia Popp.
ZB
Quote from: Harry Powell on May 17, 2011, 12:21:31 PM
Ok, but don't vibrations go through your palate and resonate in the mask? If not, how could you possibly be heard when humming? As far as I know, the whole range must rely partly on the mask, more and more as you go higher. When one listens to singers like Ebe Stignani it's easy to perceive even her lower tones being in the mask. People singing exclussively on chest tones would sound as ventriloquists (and in fact some of them do)
I was just looking for Lotte Lehman's book on singing but temporarily couldn't find it. In it, she has a diagram of where she experiences each note, going slightly higher in the head as the pitch inceases. In fact, the idea of pitch getting higher, because in reality the oscillations just get faster, probably is related to how one feels the notes while singing. The theory of the registers going back at least 400 years was intuitively developed.
One doesn't sing in the chest but the vibrations are felt below around D above middle C (for women) in the collarbone area. After an E or F and octave above middle C, I promise you that the tones are not naturally felt in the mask (forward resonance) but very much on the palate and increasingly back and up. For men of course it is somewhat different but the principle is the same.
ZB
Quote from: Guido on May 14, 2011, 02:52:22 PM
I've never heard range refer to vocal weight as you seem to be suggesting here mjwal. Surely range is intended in terms of the range of notes they could sing.
Well, in this case, both singers had a limited range of notes as well as a limited dynamic range and weight. Patzak said famously that he, unlike some other tenors, had no real high C - but
he could
sing it (does anyone know Patzak's Gerontius, by the way?).
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 18, 2011, 04:51:51 AM
Sayão was a soprano on the order of soubrette. She had an almost cultlike admiration in the days of silver screen stars with honeyed voices like Jeanette McDonald's. Fads change with time and it is practically unimaginable that she would be as popular today. It seems that megavoices in the 60's (Leontyne Price, Joan Sutherland) followed on the heels of the sweet and saccarine ladies. As for soubrettes and light voices, I prefer Licia Albanese from that period and later, Rita Streich and Lucia Popp.
ZB
Agreed on the 'practically unimaginable that she would be a popular star today' comment. True, the range was limited. But so was the range of most french and italian soprano roles apart from Verdi and Puccini. Sayaô wisely abstained from heavy roles, although she couldn't resist singing Butterfly. However, she was the kind of singer (like De los Angeles) that cast a spell on operagoers (then) and cd listeners (now) by virtue of her gift for verbal communication. Toscanini went to great lengths to have her sing La Damoiselle élue. It's not a great work, and it will only come to life with a singer who has the ability (like Della Casa, Danco) to illuminate both text and music within a narrow range.
Singers with a wide range and ability to project the tone (Horne, Callas are prime examples) make a carreer out of their amazing vocal versatility. It doesn't hurt that they are charismatic interpreters. 'Big voice' singers with limited extension in the lower range, such as Sutherland usually had to forego the heavier roles - but there are notable exceptions: although Sutherland quickly abandoned Aïda and never sang Santuzza, Forza's Leonora or Turandot on the stage, she triumphed in Norma and Anna Bolena by dint of her willigness to learn new roles she thought were beyond her vocal range (her husband and coach Richard Bonynge knew her better than herself).
Others like Moffo and Scotto, who had great vocal abilities but didn't have a wise vocal coach to steer them intelligently through the immense hurdles of mastering the incredibly wide possibilities of the soprano roles quickly drowned in those treacherous waters. Scotto was for some 15 years an immensely gifted lyric soprano. When she attempted the heavier roles, for which she had the range, but not the vocal heft (two very different things), she quickly lost any sense of direction and her voice started to play nasty tricks. Moffo's is a sad story. A lyric soprano with a lovely timbre, she had limited low extension and a good high range (up to high E-flat). However, voices, like wine and food, have various shelf life. When she started to lose control of her range (and that was rather early in her carreer) she became unpredictable and only too predictable (in a negative way) when she tried uncharted waters like Carmen (a sultry photo doesn't a Carmen make).
Back to the original post: yes, there are. Singers with a limited range that achieve greatness in opera do so by combining a distinctive timbre (the essence of the singer) with a power to communicate the libretto's or the composer's dramatic intentions. In other words, it's not the extension of the vocal range that makes a great opera singer, but how it's used. As has been mentioned here, a prime example (and the reason for her durable success) would be De los Angeles. And Danco, Della Casa, even Schwarzkopf (her range was limited). Among other vocal types, we could name Peter Pears, Jon Vickers (no lower range to speak of - even though he had you believe - quite convincingly - he had one. Same with Gobbi, the greatest bass-baritone ever in italian opera. No 'juice' in the voice, either at the high or low end of the range, but he covered any tessitura through a mixture of verbal and dramatic abilities.
I recently heard an EMI recital by the soprano Li-Ping Zhang. According to the notes she was a great success in many major opera houses as Liu. Well she should have made a specialty of those lyric roles, working on the upper range to cultivate a lovely tone and purity of projection. But, would you believe it? She decided (or is it EMI ??) to record Elena (Merce diletti), Violetta, Lucia, Norma (!!!), Tosca, Butterfly, Medora and Trovatore's Leonora. Egad... :o
A prime example of a limited vocal range pushed wayyyyy beyond its limits. A very bad disc, with audible screeches on the highest notes and not heft to the low ones - the kind of which an intelligent singer, impresario and record producer would have thought better of.
Andre, Good to see you back and with a three course meal of a post. Thanks.
Mike
André, I don't know how you can say that Schwartzkopf had a limited range when she was at home with all kinds of Lieder and the ultra-high tessiture of Strauss' operas (not just a one shot high Eb at the end of a Verdi aria. Also I fail to see how Moffo and Scotto were badly advised or that Vickers or Gobbi did not have proper lower ranges.
For me, a woman's voice is fairly simple. The limitations don't have to do so much with range but weight. If you can accept an opinion from someone who sings and also works with women's voices, that is, who taught them for over 25 years (until somewhere in the middle my teacher said I could start to work with male voices), there are not as many classiifcations as you seem to be putting forward. The theory of the registers intuited by the original Bel Cantists is not a gross oversimplification and makes life much easier in handling voices, including one's own.
Without going into a full exegesis, the lower limits are fairly set around a D below middle C for both mezzos and sopranos. The passaggi are fairly standard, a bit lower for mezzo than soprano. The QUALITY of the notes above the staff usually reveals if a voice is mezzo or dramatic soprano. Upper ranges are on the whole, determined by development and approach, not by a natural limitation. Properly handled, a good soprano can sing a crowning high Eb or E once or twice in an opera and the colorature can go a bit higher. I don't believe that soprano voices, especially professional ones, would "stop" at a Bb or B. If such a voice is not heavy, it probably belongs in the light mezzo category. Otherwise, one could blame not the vocal coach but the voice teacher for the "limitations".
The problem with lighter voices as with Moffo, Scotto, Freni, et al, is venturing out into more dramatic roles they are not naturally suited for. For me, this is very simple. Shouting out too many high C's was Callas' downfall as well. She wasn't a natural heavyweight like Gencer or Price, but maybe somewhere in between.
ZB
Hi Mike, hello Zamira !
ZB, you certainly put it better tan I do and I don't dispute your knowledge of singing, particularly the very interesting aspect of its physiology. When I speak of range, I mean the tessitura a singer is most comfortable in. Some have more top or bottom extension than others. In that sense I don't think Vickers had a wide range. He wasn't comfortable with the high C, and his bottom range was rather short. Maybe it's the timbre that makes me say he had a short bottom. He often resorted to quasi parlando in that area. He certainly didn't lack weight or volume - indeed he had a huge voice. Corelli's bottom notes were big, juicy, with an almost baritonal heft, and his high ones rang thrillingly (he sailed to a high D with no trouble). In that sense he had a wider range (tessitura) than Vickers.
I'm not making any judgment about voice quality or artistry. 100 meter runners or swimmers are more or less equal to the task, but physically they are different. I would assume the same should be true of any set of vocal cords. Actually, I think there are more differences (qualities, characteristics) about vocal cords than in any other parts of the human body.
Here's a small - admittedly meaningless - quiz. What roles did these pairs of singers have in common ?
- Birgit Nilsson and Gundula Janowitz (there's more than one)
- Marilyn Horne and Hilde Gueden
- Margaret Price and Kirsten Flagstad
- Rita Streich and Joan Sutherland
Quote from: André on June 18, 2011, 03:17:56 PM
Hi Mike, hello Zamira !
I'm not making any judgment about voice quality or artistry. 100 meter runners or swimmers are more or less equal to the task, but physically they are different. I would assume the same should be true of any set of vocal cords. Actually, I think there are more differences (qualities, characteristics) about vocal cords than in any other parts of the human body.
Here's a small - admittedly meaningless - quiz. What roles did these pairs of singers have in common ?
- Birgit Nilsson and Gundula Janowitz (there's more than one)
- Marilyn Horne and Hilde Gueden
- Margaret Price and Kirsten Flagstad
- Rita Streich and Joan Sutherland
Actually, my real name is Janet. Anyway, I think the abundant differences reside in the resonators and outer bodily structures rather than the cords themselves. As inner organs go, like the heart, the vocal cords, larynx, etc., are fairly standard and proportional to size and sex.
Offhand, I would say that Nilsson and Janowitz have more in common than Horne and Gueden who may have done one or more of the same Mozart roles. Maybe you have Wagner in mind for the first two. Could be the same for Price and Flagstad unless the latter also did Aida. Streich and Sutherland both excelled in coloratura. Here's where body size does make a difference. I love both singers but Streich is the more chirpy (I mean it in a good way) of the two.
ZB
-Birgit Nilsson and Gundula Janowitz (there's more than one)....Elizabeth in Tannhauser, Donna Anna, Leonora in Fidelio
- Marilyn Horne and Hilde Gueden....can't think of any possibilities there!
- Margaret Price and Kirsten Flagstad.... Isolde, Aida....though Price never sang Isolde live.
- Rita Streich and Joan Sutherland....Lucia? Merry Widow? Olympia, Forest Bird in Siegfried, Gilda
As you know, Vickers is amongst my favourite singers; but yes, his bottom notes are weak up against what happens higher up. Odd, all the way through this thread I have been reading limited range as referring to notes reached comfortably as against numbers of roles mastered.
Mike
Marilyn Horne and Hilde Gueden - is it Zerlina perhaps?
Quote from: knight66 on June 18, 2011, 11:48:59 PM
-Birgit Nilsson and Gundula Janowitz (there's more than one)....Elizabeth in Tannhauser, Donna Anna, Leonora in Fidelio
Sieglinde, Elsa, Agathe.
Thanks all. Yes, I think it's been all covered:
Nilsson and Janowitz = Agathe, Fidelio and Sieglinde ( was not aware that Janowitz was a Donna Anna.)
Horne and Gueden: indeed, strange as it may seem both singers were Zerlinas (as were Erna Berger, Cecilia Bartoli, Teresa Berganza and other unlikely proponents).
Flagstad and Price (Margaret, not Leontyne): Isolde. Famous recordings of course. I don't think Margaret Price ever sang Isolde on stage.
Streich and Sutherland: actually they shared a few roles, but on stage I think Olympia was their only common operatic assumption. But unless I'm mistaken, both sang Glière's wonderful coloratura concerto.
Janet, your use of the adjective 'chirpy' for Streich is spot on. What a lovely lady !
Another silly quiz related to the topic (range of the soprano voice): what role did Vishnevskaya, Sutherland, Callas, Leontyne Price, Tebaldi, Caballé, Freni and Nilsson all sang on the opera stage? I can think of only one...
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/01/KirstenFlagstad4.jpg/200px-KirstenFlagstad4.jpg)
It was a wild guess but turned out to be correct. Flagstad did sing Aida in 1929, but seems to have forsworn Verdian roles after that.
Janet
Quote from: André on June 22, 2011, 07:06:58 PM
Another silly quiz related to the topic (range of the soprano voice): what role did Vishnevskaya, Sutherland, Callas, Leontyne Price, Tebaldi, Caballé, Freni and Nilsson all sang on the opera stage? I can think of only one...
Aida. Sills(!) could be added to that list, as well.
Quote from: André on June 22, 2011, 07:06:58 PM
Another silly quiz related to the topic (range of the soprano voice): what role did Vishnevskaya, Sutherland, Callas, Leontyne Price, Tebaldi, Caballé, Freni and Nilsson all sang on the opera stage? I can think of only one...
As Wendell has already pointed out, Aida is the obvious choice. However there is video footage of Sutherland singing the second act of Tosca (with Gobbi as it happens). I have no idea if she ever sang the whole role on stage, but all the other ladies did.
Vishnevskaya, Caballé, Barbara Hendricks
Mike
Yep.
Mike
Excellent !
Goes to show that vocal range is something artistry (and ambition, and foolhardiness) can tame. Di Stefano displayed all these qualities (?).
Right now listening to various youtube clips of Franco Corelli, a tenor for whom the mere concept of vocal range seemed a big laugh.
All right friends, see you in the Louise thread (coming soon) !
Foolhardiness, di Stefano could spare.
If you think Bartoli being Zerlina is weird, she has also sung Donna Elvira AND Donna Anna on stage.
Quote from: Guido on June 27, 2011, 02:36:27 AM
If you think Bartoli being Zerlina is weird, she has also sung Donna Elvira AND Donna Anna on stage.
Of the three, Zerlina seems to me to be the least weird choice.
Quote from: Guido on June 27, 2011, 02:36:27 AM
If you think Bartoli being Zerlina is weird, she has also sung Donna Elvira AND Donna Anna on stage.
I don't think Zerlina is a weird choice for Bartoli either. In the Mozart's time, singers would start with roles like Marcellina and then move up to Susanna and the Countess. In the 19th Century, mezzos would sing soprano roles and vice versa.
ZB
In fact one shouldn't use "mezzosoprano" when referring to Mozart, "seconda donna" would be more accurate. The demands on the lower range are similar in all roles.
The problem is the artificial voice Bartoli has fabricated.