Classical Music Forum banner

"Singing is ... cultivated screaming"

8.2K views 57 replies 33 participants last post by  zeffiretto  
#1 ·
From a well known singer...

"Singing is heightened speech, cultivated screaming. I have trained myself to scream really beautifully and loud enough to get over a full orchestra."

Comments...
 
#5 ·
The director of our amateur male choir always points out how singing with all its accentuations ought to originate out of normal speech. So often we are just declamating the text in order to learn where to ppp of fff: listening to natural speech. From this it seems a far way to equate singing & screaming (heightened or cultivated).
 
#8 · (Edited)
I was actually in speechless awe the first time I heard operatic singing live. And the second.. the second time really even more so, my jaw was lying on the opera box's floor during entire performance and some time after. Drinks helped to find it and close it. And the third performance, the forth and so on. There is simply no comparison between classical, operatic voices and non-classical. Superior voices, techniques, control, and I dare say approach, that's operatic singing and all those things if they are observed do not allow for screaming. I heard once what I think must've been dramatic soprano or some such to cover the whole orchestra and tenor (though he was good) with her voice like an avalanche. No microphones, no props, without any screaming, she just sailed like a fr..ing battleship through whole 'Rule Britannia'.

And operatic singers do this for 2-3hours straight in performance. The stamina required is collosal, i have only respect for them. How can I take 'normal' singers seriously after this?
 
#18 ·
And operatic singers do this for 2-3hours straight in performance. The stamina required is collosal, i have only respect for them. How can I take 'normal' singers seriously after this?
I share that sentiment. Recently I have been listening to one particular classical singer - Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau - a lot, in various roles: lieder, opera, other vocal works. After that, my first thought on accidentally hearing some "normal", non-classical vocals is: "And they call THAT singing?!"
 
#10 · (Edited)
I agree it's cultivated screaming. I'd also add pretentious. The human voice was never intended to make these sorts of sounds except in situations of distress, such a fight or flight. Evolution had an plan for human screeching, and it was not as entertainment. But really, to me it sounds artificial, unnatural, strained, and arrogant. I can tolerate it if the music is unbelievably beautiful, as with many Mozart operas.
 
#19 ·
First of all, evolution was not a plan, it was just what happened that turned out to be advantageous for survival. And even if it had, how does blowing into various wooden or brass tubes fit into the scheme? Also I'd like to know in what way it is arrogant?
A demonstration of outstanding (natural) ability in an era of militant mediocrity can indeed be perceived as arrogance. Not that this perception is correct, of course.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pugg
#12 ·
I try to listen beneath the surface, to not be a shallow listener, but there's only so much surface ugliness I can tolerate, and opera singing often passes this threshold for me. I wish they went for a more beautiful style now that there are microphones and loudspeakers. Opera could be awesome, instead of the very acquired taste of a few.
 
#13 · (Edited)
I think it's an interesting question! I can't come up with an answer immediately. I like the evolutionary approach Richard8655 takes. That would be my first approach as well because the fundamentals should always be searched for there first. Nevertheless I'm not sure I'm satisfied with that answer.

Maybe I should contact Frans de Waal who has done livelong very interesting studies on primates and proved many things we thought were exclusively human are not. E.g. cooperation, morals, fairness, etc. Most interesting is that his research shows we don't need religion to have morals. Morals are deep-seated in our animal genes. So what about singing in primates? Do they sing? Can they be taught to sing? I would be interested to know if anybody ever did research on that. My gut feeling would be that they don't and can't but these gut feelings have been proven false often before.
Nevertheless my first inclination would however be that singing originates from a later date and is part of 'human evolution'.

At this point in my post I googled a liitle bit:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/trending/2012/08/24/lar_gibbon_monkeys_singing_abilities_just_like_hum an_sopranos_according_to_new_study_.html



So, what do you think of that? It ain't plain screaming...
 
#16 ·
As I recall, it was Pavarotti himself who said this in an interview. He then proceeded to let out a scream that left the poor interviewer half deaf. :)

He had a point too: sound amplification is a relatively recent invention, and as concert halls and orchestras became ever larger, opera singers needed ever louder singing to be heard at all.

Folks who have never heard opera singing and are used to American Idol music cannot relate to the excessive vibrato and relatively loud volume of opera.
The excessive vibrato is one reason why I am often turned off by classical singing. With some pieces and singers, it sounds to me like they are completely off key half the time, or they vibrate so much that it is not clear to me which note they are singing. I also detest a great deal of virtuoso singing: once again, few singers can manage to stay on the note, or so it sounds to me.

I very much prefer styles and singers where vibrato is almost, or even completely, absent. And where excessive demands are not made on the voice - if you want scales of 64th notes running up and down three octaves, use a frickin' violin, for heaven's sake. :)
 
#53 ·
As I recall, it was Pavarotti himself who said this in an interview. He then proceeded to let out a scream that left the poor interviewer half deaf. :)

He had a point too: sound amplification is a relatively recent invention, and as concert halls and orchestras became ever larger, opera singers needed ever louder singing to be heard at all.



The excessive vibrato is one reason why I am often turned off by classical singing. With some pieces and singers, it sounds to me like they are completely off key half the time, or they vibrate so much that it is not clear to me which note they are singing. I also detest a great deal of virtuoso singing: once again, few singers can manage to stay on the note, or so it sounds to me.

I very much prefer styles and singers where vibrato is almost, or even completely, absent. And where excessive demands are not made on the voice - if you want scales of 64th notes running up and down three octaves, use a frickin' violin, for heaven's sake. :)
Excessive vibrato....you probably mean a wobble or a bleat, which is a sound made by a damaged voice from singing with improper technique. You just might love ultra-classical bel canto technique which is preserved on a very few old vintage recordings from the beginning of the 20th century. Voices like Nellie Melba, Frieda Hempel, Selma Kurz, Marcella Sembrich all have a very narrow yet healthy vibrato, a clear tone, and there is no question as to what pitch they are singing. They are also masters of virtuoso singing and quite able to stay on the note so to speak. If most opera singers sang like they did in terms of technique, perhaps more people would not be horrified by the sounds of operatic voices.
 
#20 · (Edited)
The thread title is misleading:

"Singing is .... cultivated screaming."

No. Mel Torme, Nat King Cole and Frank Sinatra could sing, which is why they had so much popular mass appeal. "Cultivated screamers", not.

I would imagine that the intent of the thread title was to be "Opera singing ...is cultivated screaming." Pro or con.
 
#28 ·
The thread title is misleading:

"Singing is .... cultivated screaming."

No. Mel Torme, Nat King Cole and Frank Sinatra could sing, which is why they had so much popular mass appeal. "Cultivated screamers", not.

I would imagine that the intent of the thread title was to be "Opera singing ...is cultivated screaming." Pro or con.
Agree - the quote probably was intended to mean opera singing. Also good point that singing can sound natural, unforced, and inviting. Opera singing doesn't exactly attract a new generation of classical music lovers, and its anachronistic style is quite a barrier to overcome without support, encouragement, and forceful engagement. Most people just don't gravitate to it naturally.
 
#24 ·
singing loud enough to be heard over an orchestra, or a full pipe organ or anything else is actually different from screaming, but really only in a few technical points.

basically, when screaming in pain or fright, you are going to be too tense. Also, when you sing, you have to form a vowel sound to carry the pitch. you really don't do that when you scream

you do, however, move air from your diaphragm when you scream. basically, the more air you can move, the louder you are.

so "cultivated screaming" could be a pretty reasonable description. you have to get past the connotations and look at the physical act, but there are similarities. and there are differences, ...but a "cultivated scream"?

yea, I can accept that
 
#25 ·
If I want to hear people screaming (I don't), I would go to a rock concert.

I do not consider operatic singing (at least that of any value to listen to) as screaming. Screaming is generally uncontrolled; whereas opera is very controlled vocalizations. Screaming is generally not something practiced (though Johnny Winter did practice and refine his screams as a teen); opera is practiced and requires specific training to ensure quality sound and to protect the voice. Screaming is generally very hard on the voice; opera singing is hard on the voice but with proper technique and restraint, the quality voice can hold out for an entire career.

Now someone go drag up a You Tube of someone who is a professional screamer and has practiced incessantly to refine their screams. I am sure it has been done.
 
#27 ·
If we're talking about operatic singing...yeah, this is kind of true. It's "unnatural" but so are a lot of highly developed art forms.

The kind of singing you find in pop, jazz and early classical music is more "natural."

I've known people first exposed to operatic singing close up to be shocked, above all, by how incredibly loud it is.
 
#31 ·
People hearing operatic singing for the first time may react in a variety of ways. If they're perceptive and have any sense of vocal production, and especially if they themselves sing or have tried to sing, they'll recognize it as a heightened, more accomplished and refined form of something which is indeed natural. I sang in church for years before hearing an opera singer, and when I did hear one I recognized that he was doing exactly what I did, but better: steadier, stronger, more flexible, more powerful. Great singing is a maximization of the voice's potential capabilities, not some alien species of sound production.

That said, singing is one thing, singers another. There's plenty of forced, wobbly singing on the operatic stage. Singing opera is difficult. But singing like this


has nothing in common with screaming except the expulsion of air through the larynx.

God jul (Merry Christmas) to all.
 
#33 ·
People hearing operatic singing for the first time may react in a variety of ways. If they're perceptive and have any sense of vocal production, and especially if they themselves sing or have tried to sing, they'll recognize it as a heightened, more accomplished and refined form of something which is indeed natural.
Opera singing is one of those things with which I am deeply impressed without actually liking it much, and the more difficult the piece, the more impressed I am and the less I like it. Not that this is at all an internally consistent thing. E.g. I like Mahler's orchestral songs, despite the fact that they don't differ all that much from opera.