I don't get why when Patti sings, she

[Zeitoujo]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 11:52am

Has her jaw vibrate...I love her. But does anyone else think that her vibratto is way too much?

[jpbran]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 11:53am

[broadwayjules]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 12:04pm

I was wondering what the LuPone freaks would have to bitch about next

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 12:32pm

Because the woman can't sing with natural vibrato. She simply sings straight tone, with lots of tension in her vocal folds and laryngeal muscles. When she wants to adds "vibrato", she manufactures it with her larynx, tongue, and jaw.


You can argue, but it's right there to see.

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 12:57pm

But after years of professional vocal training, couldn't that have been solved?

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 12:59pm

My first exposure to La LuPone was in September 1980 when I saw her in EVITA (at the Broadway Theatre). I was 15 years old. One thing that stood out was the way she sang everything as if she was angry. She sang everything with that snarl on her lip. Elvis-like and all.

Here were are today. Almost 28 years later, and she still sings everything with that snarl on her lip and as if she's angry.

Wow!

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:02pm

It most certainly could be fixed. Miss LuPone has had a LOT of vocal trouble, especially in Evita. It's because on top of being such a challenging score, she wasn't singing it properly.

Hopefully her voice holds up for Mama Rose. You don't need to belt EVERYTHING.


I doubt she could sing Rainbow High like she could 30 years ago.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:05pm

I don't get why when Patti sings, she has her jaw vibrate...

Because it feels good to her and it sounds good to audiences.

I don't get why YOU have a problem with it.

Bub.

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:08pm

Who said there was a problem? Is someone asks why the sky is blue, it doesn't mean they're saying, "ew, the sky is blue! Why?! I have such a problem with it."

[jennyish]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:10pm

Leigh Ann Larkin does it, too, to a MUCH lesser extent.

[jrb]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:16pm

Let's be careful, folks. Talking about vocal technique and vibrato is dangerous since incorrect facts abound.

Vibrato is not actually a natural occurance. It is an affect placed onto a note to add color.

Take a cello for example. The vibration of the strings causes pitch but no vibrato. The player needs to "force" the vibrato by moving the string back and forth on the finger board. The same goes for the voice. Natural virbation of the vocal folds is what gives a note pitch. It is the addition of a secondary vibration that causes the virbato to come into existance. Classical singers (and I'm one of them) have simply come to believe that it is natural. This is a falsehood, however. Vibrato may help to keep the vocalis (vocal apparatus) "free" and "relaxed" but it is not something that happens without the interference of other muscles.

The same is true of any instrument that uses vibration of strings or even the manipulation of air to make sound. Pianos have no vibrato, violins have vibrato only when it is manufactored - the flute and other wind instruments have no vibrato unless it is added in by the player.

Interstingly enough - vibrato in instruments became much more prevalent when singers in the "modern era" (not an official term) began using more vibrato.

As for Patty - a shaking of the jaw is a sign of Jaw tension. If her vibrato were caused by tension it would most likely be noticed under the jaw as a pressing down of the tongue onto the larynx - which i think is what TotalyEffed was trying to say.

Yes, this could be worked out early on in her developement, but when you've got a voice and a career like her's, why bother? Besides, I think her vocal quirks and personality have aided in building her diva persona.

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:21pm

jrb, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.


Vocal sound, that we perceive as one long sound, is actually successive puffs of air, 261 puffs of air per second at middle C and 1,000 per second at soprano high C. What we hear as vibrato is the natural oscillation of the vocal folds when the proper amount of air pressure and tension, correct tension, exist.


A cello, obviously, doesn't have vocal folds so one would have to force "vibrato".


*edited to be clearer and pwn harder* Updated On: 7/2/08 at 01:21 PM

[jrb]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:32pm

The pitch that comes out of your mouth is rooted in the bernoulli effect - an interaction of pressure and the same principle that causes lift in the wings of an airplane.
The movement of the chords produces pitch...not vibrato.

This isn't something I'm pulling out of my butt, Effed. I'm not some jerk who is throwing junk out there. I have two degrees in music and have studied vocal pedagogy for years (yes...I'm confirming that I'm a complete tool). And please, I'm not self-aggrandizing. I'm just covering my bases.

In any event, you can draw parallels between celli and the voice because they both create pitch via vibration and thus deal with many of the same principles of physics.
I threw the flute in there to point out that wind instruments deal with the same principles.

If this turns into a message board fight it will officially be the dorkiest thing in existance. lol. I apologize to all.

[Jonny boy]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:32pm

TotallyEffed .... I think you are the one who is off! I think it shows a lack of control when a singer cant sing a straight tone..... Where they cant control thier vibrato. Raul Esperanza for instance.... that mans voice is all over the place! He is one who cant control his vibrato

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:38pm

The fact that you're comparing the voice to instruments is ridiculous. I simply cannot believe you would consider yourself a singer and claim that vibrato is not natural.

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:40pm

Raul Esperanza

I LOVE YOU!

His name is actually Raul Esparza.

[jrb]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:45pm

But let me clarify. I never said that using vibrato wasn't healthy. I said that it was not a natural function of the voice.

Singing straight tone with high breath pressure can cause damage and using vibrato can relieve some of that tension by freeing things up. This doesn't make it something our bodies do without interference, however. It doesn't mean that virbato isn't fundamentally manufactered.

Funny how vibrato wasn't used all the time in early music. Pre common practice singers used vibrato exclusively as a decoration like a trill or an appaggiatura. It wasn't until later that it was adopted as a standard for "healthy" vocal production. Perhaps this was connected to the need for further freedom when our tenors started popping out high B's in all-out chest. :)

And trust me, Effed...I know that this is a really controversial topic. Vocal science always has been that way since we know so little about what actually happens to produce the sounds that we produce.

[figaroindy]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:48pm

Actually, Effed is correct in stating that vibrato is natural - IN SOME VOICES - and unnatural in others. Voices that have a natural vibrato only shorten their vocal life by trying to sing straight tone (and the crap about unable to "hold" a straight tone is exactly that - crap - if you're "DOING" anything, then you're creating tension - the voice can do its own work without your help. Holding vibrato out is just as bad as "creating it with the jaw" - both allow tension to stress the vocal folds.)
I agree with Effed that comparing stringed instruments to vocal folds is a bit ridiculous, too.

That said - JRB is correct in the idea that Patti's is tension in the jaw that causes that. A lot of belters do that because it's the way they have to keep the excessive pressure (air and tension) that creates a belt voice under control...the tension has to go somewhere....hers goes to the jaw.

I've also studied voice and pedagogy, JRB - just remember, there are as many theories on vocal production as there are teachers.....not just one!

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:52pm

What's vocal pedagogy?

Sounds dirty.

[jrb]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:54pm

The fact that you WOULDN'T compare the human voice to an instrument concerns me.

The same rules of physics govern the creation of sound no matter how that sound is created. The voice doesn't make sound in some magical way. It doesn't escape the rules. The shortening and lengthening of the vocal folks is what causes changes in pitch, much the same way a finger sliding up a finger board (and thus shortening the string) causes a change in pitch. Obviously there are key difference - otherwised i'd sing by jamming my fingers into my throat in an attempt to play the strings. :)

We ARE instruments. Our carrying case is our body. There shouldn't be a distinction save for the fact that we are more directly linked to emotion since we ARE our instruments. Our gift is hightened communication.

Now back to topic - Patti LuPone, Jennifer Holiday, B. Peters, Audra....I could list any singer who has made it and site numerous vocal "issues" that they have. But bottom line is that they are amazing to watch and hear. It's not always about the technique. Sometimes you have to let it go and perform.

[jrb]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:55pm

You're right figaro.
Soooo many points of view. Eventually you just have to agree to disagree.

Vocal Ped is the art and science of teaching voice.

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:57pm

Although different ideas and views. I am glad this thread didn't turn into Patti bashing. It's fascinating to read all the different and similar opinions on voice, etc.

[Jonny boy]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 1:58pm

"Raul Esperanza

I LOVE YOU!

His name is actually Raul Esparza. "

=-) Excuse my spelling!

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 2:01pm

Thank you, figaroindy.

I was trying to say earlier what you said just now-some singers do have jaw tension which causes the jaw to shake or waggle. I compare it to when you've been holding something heavy for too long and your muscles start to shake. (Like Leigh Ann Larkin) I don't think that's the case with Ms. LuPone-I think she actually uses her jaw, larynx, and tongue to create her vibrato, much like a trill. If you watch her sing, you can see how she sings straight tone and when she adds her vibrato her larynx and jaw immediately begin to shake in time with the "vibrato". You can disagree, but I've spent a lot of time studying Ms. LuPone, including watching her sing front row, center on several occasions.

jrb, you have no idea what you're talking about.

[jrb]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 2:08pm

Well, effed. I think we just sit on opposite ends of the specrum. As figaro said, there are thousands of schools of voice and they all share one thing in common - none of them is certain or definitive.

I LOVE the challenging conversation that comes of this kind of thread and wish BWW would have more intelligent conversation about theater and the arts. It's fun to be challenged and taken to task.

If you're in NYC, effed or anyone for that matter, you might be interested in taking a class with a guy named Aaron Hagan. He's a vocal coach and teacher who keeps himself on the forefront of vocal science. You'd agree with some of what he says and disagree with other stuff (I did) but you might find it interesting.

Also, Westminster Choir college (I didn't go there...so this isn't a plug) has an amazing vocal ped department with a state-of-the art research center. Another good place to get new information on the voice.

Thanks!