wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] Dale August 21, 2008 - 02:03PM

  Are you sure the Proms debate is over vocal performers? Or just strings?

  http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/08/its_vibrato_wars_at_the_proms.html

  It would seem the ban would be just for stings, according to that blog.

  
  
• [2] Mark from Manhattan August 21, 2008 - 02:14PM

  At least in bel canto opera, vibrato is almost expected although even then the degree and the quality seems to vary varies from singer to singer. If the UK wants to ban something, start with the practice in popular music of singers gliding all over the scale until they hit the note that they want. Rather than hitting specific notes along the way -- something that would require some vocal training -- they use the annoying technical of hitting every possible note along the scale.

  
  
• [3] Dale August 21, 2008 - 02:14PM

  Personally, there are some vocal performers that don't do vibrato correctly. I've been taught that it is a whole body experience. Where a lot of performers will wag their jaw, or similar superficial technique.

  
  
• [4] Charlie Roberts from Oceanport, NJ August 21, 2008 - 02:16PM

  John,

  I think you're running out of musical topics to discuss.

  Vibrato?

  It's like debating on (if any) or how much salt to put on food. It's a matter of personal taste!

  You know what would be really cool? Run an entire Soundcheck program through a Leslie cabinet!

  I could really get off on that!!!!

  
  
• [5] Michelle from NY August 21, 2008 - 02:20PM

  Um, I know for a fact that vibrato is a natural occurence in a healthy voice. Ask any brilliant vocal technician or throat Dr. If I want to get rid of my vibrato I have to push more air through my vocal chords to spin them out so that they are not relaxed. A pushed forced sound will result. For instance Christina Aguilera's voice. Or I can quietly sing and not use as much air but still support the chords which results in a soft, non-vibrato tone as in Monteverdi's time.

  A relaxed healthy voice produces a healthy tight vibrato. The vibrato that sounds like giant waves as in an older voice is caused by not enough air supporting the chords, therefore the vocal chords flop all over the place. For someone to say that we create vibrato in our throats on purpose is ignorant and truly does not know what he is talking about. A properly trained opera singer's voice can last years and years. A pop singers, not so much...

  Tough to explain in sound bites but I did my best.

  
  
• [6] Orin Buck from NYC August 21, 2008 - 02:21PM

  Vibrato consists of playing around the note; in other words, you don't play the note! I was taught that you do this in an orchestra to hide the fact that lots of people are playing out of tune, just a little. It takes a highly practiced group like the Beach Boys to sing without vibrato and not embarrass themselves. So it's not just a matter of taste.

  But even if you do like it as a matter of taste, I beg you to consider that it takes less skill and musicality than singing in other traditions like Indian and Middle Eastern where they sing around the note by singing microtonaly, not random vibrato. I'm not sure whether American R&B is microtonal, but those singers are also using something more interesting than mere vibrato. Vibrato is mindless; microtonality is a higher musicality.

  
  
• [7] Connie August 21, 2008 - 02:25PM

  Different singers sound as if they produce vibrato in different ways. What are the physical ways that singers can produce vibrato?

  
  
• [8] Mark G from Brooklyn August 21, 2008 - 02:27PM

  What is with the verrry slow vibrato I have heard the occasional singer employing as I've been performing around the ny theatre scene?

  
  
• [9] Rob from BK August 21, 2008 - 02:27PM

  Ruins.

  There is definitely a place for vibrato but I feel like it is not used with enough discrimination.

  
  
• [10] Brenda from Manhattan August 21, 2008 - 02:29PM

  THANK YOU, Michelle of New York, for presenting the truth of classical vocal production, in which vibrato is not a choice but a healthy, natural, and necessary component of projecting and sustaining operatic vocal lines. Of course there are degrees, and as you wrote, an aging, wobbly opera singer is far from the standard or the ideal. But it is aggravating to hear a jazz singer make ignorant comments about classical singer's vibrato being "wide" when in fact most jazz singers' vibratos (including hers) are far wider in pitch than the average opera singer's relatively speedy, consistent, shining vibrato.

  
  
• [11] AV from Brooklyn, NY August 21, 2008 - 02:36PM

  I don't know where to begin. With respect to your guests, and talking mainly about the voice, they confuse style with technique. Vibrato is a natural occurrence. It *is* a matter of choice/taste whether one chooses to use vibrato, but it's not a sign of bad technique. In fact, a lot of people who sing with straight tone are often out of tune because they don't have the healthy technique that starts with a clean vibrating tone to enable it. And again, with respect to Nancy, to say that singing with vibrato causes you to run out of breath faster than singing straight is patently false. It's how efficiently you breathe and support your sound that causes you to run out of breath. I mean, has she ever heard Monserrat Caballe? That woman smoked like a chimney, sang with consistent vibrato and had air for days.

  There's such a thing, of course, as bad vibrato. It comes from bad technique. Period.

  
  
• [12] CC from New York August 21, 2008 - 02:38PM

  I tend to dislike vibrato but when cabaret type music is sung it seems to work. I love Church Choral music where notes are clean and vibrato is omitted. What annoys me is the singing of the beautiful American National anthem, which I think should be sung like a hymn with crisp clean notes. Whenever I hear it sung at sporting and other public events, it is absolutely ruined by the vibrato as it is usually sung by a pop singer instead of a classically trained singer.

  
  
• [13] Richard G from New York, NY August 21, 2008 - 02:45PM

  What is a purist? Things change. As Bach didn't compose his Toccata & Fugue in D Minor for a 6,000 pipe behemoth, nor Mozart his symphonies for a modern romantic orchestra, and singers in Wagner's time didn't have to compete with a huge orchestra on equal terms, but rather one sunk deeply beneath the stage at Bayreuth.

  It's all a matter of period and taste.

  I like vibrato...but not in pop music. Especially when it cannot be achieved in the throat but rather the Whitney Houston/Charlotte Church jaw wiggle.

  But then again, my classical friends look at me askance when I occasionally enjoy a warble (in older singers). There's something worn an weary about it. But again, circumstances determine whether it's good or not.

  
  
• [14] harvest.ink August 21, 2008 - 02:46PM

  I think of vibrato as an ornament, similar to a trill or mordent. Unfortunately, as classical musicians have forgotten their rich tradition of improvisation, vibrato is all that's left for them. Sad, really.

  
  
• [15] Dirk Digler from UES August 21, 2008 - 02:47PM

  I respectfully disagree with #11 - vibrato is definitely not a natural occurrence and anyone who uses it has spent a lot of effort (if not necessarily skill) trying to cultivate it. In general, it should be like a seasoning but too many singers drip it on because they can't stay on pitch otherwise...

  
  
• [16] Dan from NJ August 21, 2008 - 02:55PM

  can it broken into two camps? those whose voices do it naturally sort of unintentionally [usually fast]- like Edith Piaf or Fiona Apple as compared to singers who maybe do it naturally but work it a bit, like Elvis Costello.

  Personnally, I love that unintentional vibrato, but I have to say Neko Case has a great non vibratto voice- loud and bell like.

  
  
• [17] will from from lawn guylint August 22, 2008 - 09:57AM

  There seems to be two distinct classes of vibrato:

  1) The warble, where pitch vascillates above and below the intended pitch regardless of the 'speed' of the warble, which everyone is talking about here, and

  2) "Volume" vibrato, where the singer increases and decreases the loudness of the steady pitch.

  Elvis Costello, Aaron Neville, and Joni Mitchell all have this second type of vibrato. I'm surprised no one has mentioned this fundamental difference.

  
  
• [18] Jeannette LoVetri from new york city August 24, 2008 - 01:32AM

  About 1 in 5 people has a natural vibrato (its there with no effort). Some people have a straight tone (no vibrato) and like it that way. Necessary for barbershop music, Baroque music, and some styles of jazz and country, like bluegrass. Mainstream classical vocalists are expected to have vibrato that is generally agreed to be between 5.5 - 6.5 cps and between a quarter to a half tone above and below the pitch being sustained.

  Contrary to popular belief, vibrato has not too much to do with breath support. I participated in a vibrato by having my larynx pierced so electricity could pass through my folds. I can assure everyone that vibrato is generated at the level of the vocal folds themselves, which control the airflow. That is a scientific fact.

  And, vibrato has absolutely no bearing on vocal health.

  If you put an EGG on someone while he sustains a consistent pitch, it fluctuates constantly, but only in tiny increments. A 440 would be 438, 441, 442, 437, in micro-seconds. This, too, is a fact.

  A well trained singer can learn to control the vibrato, to create one if there isn't one and to get rid of it if they have one naturally. Playing the violin, however, is an entirely different situation. Clearly, if you do not deliberately move your fingers (and hands), a learned behavior, you will not have a vibrato. If you play classical music you must be able to demonstrate control over vibrato, no matter what you play. www.thevoiceworkshop.com