Broadway's obsession with Belting.- Page 2

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 12:42pm

It all started with the high priestess of belting - Ethel Merman

Posted: 12/5/04 at 12:43pm

A lot of scores today are written for belters because Broadway has an obsession with POP music. I don't want to call it "new", but it is very big at this point in time. Since the days of Mariah and Whitney, female pop music has been about showing each other up--belting higher, holding notes longer, etc. Broadway, in it's effort to gain a larger base of audience members, tried to replicate that.

But that doesn't mean that there are NO shows for sopranos--or even mezzos who don't belt--aside from Phantom (which calls for a HIGH soprano singer--except for little Meg, but she has to be a ballerina!). The core of Sondheim's singers (I would say all, but there are a few minor exceptions) haven't been belters. Bernadette--not "a belter". She can belt, and has, but not one. The Drac female parts? Def not belters. And both Melissa and Kelli have wonderful careers with many opportunities. R&H women? Not belters.

And if you look at the shows with the big belters, there are always sopranos at the forefront too, because you just can't listen to screaming for 2 hours (that's why I refuse to see Brooklyn, no offence to all you Brooklyn lovers). Millie had Miss Dorothy, Jekyll and Hyde had Emma, Glinda and Elphaba never belt at the same time and Glinda is primarily used for her soprano contrast. See? There's plenty of diversity.

I have much more to say on this, but can't think. Hehe. Talk to you all later!

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 12:51pm

It's all about old-fashioned technique, which most of today's younger singers don't have, since they are used to being mic'ed, and it's why their voices are so delicate as to require rest when they are not onstage. Karen Ziemba can act the sh*t out of any role, and her very pleasant mezzo can hit the back of any house without yelling or pushing - and without a mic, as was proven one night during NEVER GONNA DANCE when her mic went out. She also practically holds attendance records even with keeping a normal social schedule and spending a good deal of her days recording voice overs and audiobooks - no vocal rest for her. Technique, technique, technique.

[LittleFish8386]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 12:57pm

Todays Belters should probably be referred to as Screamers. Idina Menzel is going to have no voice in 20 years, b/c all that girl does it scream. I personally enjoy people with non-belting/screaming voices.

AKA Jennifer Laura Thompson, she can "belt" out a note or two, but most of her performance is just her having a nice voice.

[bronxboundexpress]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 1:02pm

"Burn in hell, Idina!!!" lol

[MagicToDo82]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 1:15pm

Well said Rathnait..."Technique, technique, technique." Exactly. It's sad that a lot of younger girls who are musical fans start emulating these performers and "belting" without proper vocal training, and ruin their voices in the process. Now, Im a fan of belters as much as anyone else, but I'm a bigger fan of technique and healthy voices~*

[Elphaba4]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 2:08pm

I dunno, I like belting, although it does irk me that your supposed to belt high notes instead of just transitioning into your head voice. I mean, it sounds good when other people do it, but when i do it. . . ugh

[jmaclover]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 2:10pm

Rathanit,

I agree there is a lot of technique involved - everyone will. As for as resting your voice - I think that is important. Epecially since so many people depend on their voice to earn a living.

[theatreangel]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 2:41pm

I agree with Sarah. I can't say that I'm not a fan of some of the pop scores on Broadway nowadays, but for someone like me, who is an aspiring theatre actress and a high soprano, that really doesn't leave very many opportunities for me and it's becoming increasingly frustrating.

[InTheMoney]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 2:55pm

I wouldn't say a lot of musical theatre scores now are writeen for belters - rather that they are written for women with a powerful chest/mix voice. I mean, I've heard LOADS of "belt" songs (On My Own, I'd Give My Life For You, Defying Gravity, As Long As He Needs Me, Someone Like You, When I Look At You, Don't Rain On My Parade to name a few) sung by women with very powerful classical voices and they sound just as good as when sung by belters (in some cases, better!).

I disagree that belt = emotion. A good vocal actress can convey emotion without screeching like a banshee. In a lot of cases, belting just = noise!

I think the main problem with belting now IS down to a lack of technique & is also due to the fact that many, MANY singers are TAUGHT to belt. It is, to a certain extent, a natural capability which can then be nourished and honed. Singers who aren't natural belters but learn it at drama school (or whatever your US equivalent is) sound strained and screechy.

Hoepfully Woman In White will see a revolution, particularly if you get Maria Freidman. She's got one of the most brilliant voice types - equally excellent belt & classical capacity.

I actually think that ALL MT singers should be taught classical music (even if it's just light stuff like CARMEN) as well as belting. Not only would it make them more versatile, but, I believe, it would make them more appreciative of the need for excellent technique and of just how the voice works. Learning to sing classical can be incredibly enlightening.

Posted: 12/5/04 at 3:07pm

I agree inthemoney...I think singers need to be more versatile.

[jmaclover]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 3:09pm

I started off singing opera - HIGH soprano.

TO make my voice stronger, though, my voice teacher had me belting the scale. I dunno.

But now, I can belt low and sing high.

Posted: 12/5/04 at 3:11pm

I like some belters. If they do it with feeling. Like Linda Eder and Patti LuPone have amazing voices.

[InTheMoney]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 3:20pm

jma, I was the other way round. Before I had lessons I was a belter but only a first alto. Then I started lessons with a classically-trained teacher who specialised in opera & musical theatre and discovered my head voice. I'm now a first sop (bottom E/D to top C & can belt/mix up to F when necessary) which I would never have acheived without all of that technical training.

I can belt, and do in some songs, but on higher notes (top notes in Defying Gravity & How Many Tears) I prefer to mix or use strong head voice because it gives the same effect but is a little kinder on the ears.

I love being able to sing both! At the minute, I'm in 2 amdram companies - a Musical Theatre company and a Gilbert & Sullivan company (here I have to brag & say my MD at my Uni choir was one of the world's leading G&S experts! *does happy dance*). I get to do all of my MT & belting with the MT company, but then I'm also working my classical voice with the G&S. And I am looking at supporting/lead roles in both!

Twice the ability = twice the shows & twice the roles.
Which of course = more work, but oh so much more FUN!!!!

(For the record, I never thought I'd like singing opera til I tried it, or that I'd get anything out of learning to sing classical - hence why I think it should be compulsory. Too many people would refuse to learn it out of choice, thinking either it was boring or that they wouldn't need it cos they're only going to do musicals and that couldn't be further from the truth!)

[jczelyph]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 3:33pm

InTheMoney: Are you at St. Andrews?

[InTheMoney]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 3:36pm

Nope. I'm in the West Midlands now and studied at the Unviersity of Wales, Aberystwyth (graduated this year).

[jmaclover]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 3:38pm

My first, real big show, was in France and was Carmen. I loved doing L'amour est un oiseau rebel

[Addicted2Seaweed]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 3:55pm

I feel so torn about belting. Part of me doesn't like it because (sometimes) it really is just screaming. And it sends this message to a lot of young singers that "this is what talent is".

When I was about 12, I was always singing songs like Love Changes Everything and It Might As Well Be Spring and I was so frustrated my teacher never let me sing pop. Now of course I don't really give a crap about pop, but then I was still transitioning from Britney Spears. But I felt so... untalented. Meanwhile, I was 12 so I'm not exactly Sarah Brightman. (who I really can't stand, but that's another story) I also couldn't/can't do all that Mariah Cary vocal gymnastics crap.

But I don't consider belters less talented than other singers, I just consider it a different skill. Some people just can't belt. Others can't sing really quietly strongly. It's kinda like comparing an alto to a soprano I think.

[My Fair Lady]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 3:56pm

Also, the sucky thing about beltign for me is that I can't belt for my life. I have a nice soprano but the highest note I can belt is a middle G#. I take voice lessons but no matter how long I take them for, I know I can never belt like Idina Menzel or Sutton Foster.

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 4:32pm

I've never been able to belt very well. I can do it sometimes on some notes. But I'm a lyrical high soprano and thats what I'm most comfortable with. Some belters are great aka Sutton, but other like Idina just don't do much for me.


I mainly fear for those teenagers who think they can belt stuff from Wicked when they really can't. eep!

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 4:33pm

I've never been able to belt very well. I can do it sometimes on some notes. But I'm a lyrical high soprano and thats what I'm most comfortable with. Some belters are great aka Sutton, but other like Idina just don't do much for me.


I mainly fear for those teenagers who think they can belt stuff from Wicked when they really can't. eep!

[wickedkiwi]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 6:30pm

i am a natural belter, don't know why or how it happened, except that i've always one heck of a loud obnoxious little girl jejeje

anyway when i started singing, i was a belter, still am. at first it was a matter of getting me to breathe right and stuff, cause i'd gotten a lot of vices from choir at school, and then it was about mixing it so it sounded clearer and less brassy (in the bad way).

now my singing teacher is making me sing aaall opera, all clasical, all head voice. i feel great cause its the first time ive been using head voice, and my voice just sounds sooo pretty compared to before (where it was good, but not "pretty" jajaja to me ther'es a difference).

but aaaa problem, im not as good as belting anymore, at least not by myself...anybody know why this happens? is it maybe that i just am getting used to the opera style?

as for that comment about not being able to get a job cause there are virtually no soprano roles, its actually the other way around. imagine how many girls are otu there and are considered belters etc. then comes this one soprano chick, and suddenly she's christine/emma/marian/glinda/all other female roles that arent belters. so ur one in a million, u'll always have a spot on broadway.

blah dunno if anyyy of that stuff made sense.

Posted: 12/5/04 at 6:33pm

I think its great that you've been training classicaly. Im sure your belt will come back with practice. Now you'll be more of a versatile singer, which is great. It greatly expands the type of roles you'll be able to play.

[Necromancer07707]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 10:06pm

I think what it comes down to is a lack of text and music translation. That or lack of depth in the music or text in the first place. Belting has little to do with emotion. It's like shouting on the straight play stage. Shouting is a no-no unless if it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. The emotion can be carried without the larynx destruction. Save the belting for the final notes of Finales for god's sake.

[Sumofallthings]

Posted: 12/5/04 at 10:21pm

Hello operator? GET ME MARGO!