Unobtrusive, realistic personal miking became available in the late '70s. Also, there was a very influential and controversial article published at that time--I forget by whom or in what periodical--called "Singin' in the Pain," that denounced the then-current style of broadway singing as hazardous to singers' voices. The basic argument was that Ethel Merman had pioneered a style of brassy, high-volume broadway voice that could be heard easily in a large hall over a pit orchestra playing at top volume; that this type of singing had become standard on B'way, but that unlike similarly loud opera singing, the sound was being produced by sheer blasting, and that vocal careers were being drastically foreshortened as a result.
As I understand it (and I have studied with and worked with some excellent voice teachers, although I am not one myself), there are two distinctly different approaches to voice projection, whether for the spoken voice or for the singing voices. The "American" approach, taught in theater schools, is to "belt" by restricting the free flow of air through the vocal folds and then singing against that restriction in order to produce the energy to project the voice. The "British" approach, on the other hand, teaches relaxation and the proper use of the resonant cavities in the head, just as bel canto voice teachers do, which allows vocal projection without a built in invitation to vocal damage. Singing opera is just as damaging to a voice as belting, if the voice is not properly trained and the singer is not properly experienced.
It is possible to project well in a theater with healthy vocal technique and without vocal damage. It is also possible to use unhealthy technique that results in vocal damage. Back in the '80s there was a voice teacher at Brigham Young University who taught vowel modification that allowed the singer to choose conventional classical sound or conventional Broadway sound without vocal damage. I wish I knew her secret!
The article strongly endorsed amplification as a solution to this problem, and decried anti-miking arguments (essentially the same ones presented in this thread) as uncaring of singers' health.
I'd be very interested in getting Crystal's take on this, since it's been her field over a period of time. It's quite true that theater people approach this quite differently from music people.
I served as vocal director for a community production of "Annie" a few years ago. After listening to the original cast recording and looking at the vocal ranges for the Orphans, I was really scared for their vocal health. My wife, who was a very fine Kodaly and Orff teacher and church youth choir director, took their first rehearsal, explained that the kids who did the show on Broadway were the lucky survivors who had learned to save their voices and still get the Broadway belt sound, and got them bridging into head voice where the high Fs and F#s are free and easy.
As it happened, my mother passed away and that was the only rehearsal Susie had with them, but when we got back six weeks later I was blown away. They had listened, they had heard, and they were using their voices properly, and still giving our stage director the energy and projection she wanted and not sounding like choirboys! (And some of the 9-year-olds could vocalize past the top of the piano--Mariah Carrey, watch out!!)
The increasing use of amplified instruments in the pit is clearly of great relevance here.
Which is, fundamentally, a question of musicianship. The volume controls can be turned in both directions!
John
-- John & Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
