Which do you prefer - Protecting the voice, or grinding it to shreds? — Page 2

It used to be that females were only expected to belt to B-flat or B, which is where most female voices naturally break. The high note for Sally Bowles in CABARET is a B-flat, and even Mama Rose tops out at B ("for you and for MEEEEEEEEEEE!") Now, as several people have pointed out, women are expected to shrill out Ds and Es on a regular basis. The OBCs of RENT and THE LAST FIVE YEARS make me cringe for that reason alone.

---

She could run around the earth. She still doesn't move me. And that's what matters.

Still, I know, for a fact, that Idina is NOT "grinding" or "damaging" or is "untrained" or whatever. She is very well-trained, still in training and sings properly. She is dedicated and warms up daily and works closely with her teacher on a regular basis to NOT damage, lose, strain or do anything to hurt her instrument.

I know because I study with the same teacher . . .and she [the teacher] is incredible! And Idina is also still her student.

---

I love LBB, but she does not hit that note consistently because she does not tend to sing correctly. When she hits "the note" she gets very throaty. Other people can hit that note perfectly in a strong belt and healthily.

Thank you, Ang, for pointing out that Idina IS in fact singing healthily. It's very possible that she has had vocal problems, but you can hear a major difference between the OBC recording of Rent and the recordings of Lippa's Wild Party and Wicked. She isn't quite as raspy. She has learned to belt more correctly, but she has maintained that nasal, shrill sound because it is naturally a part of her voice. If you don't like that, that's fine, but that doesn't mean she's hurting herself. She's able to hit these notes consistently, unlike LBB.

Look at people like Kate Shindle who can belt up to God knows where on an everyday basis. The reason people are expected to belt higher nowadays than before is the same reason iceskaters are expected to do more difficult moves: we've genetically become stronger and more capable. We've learned to understand the different facets of our voices and how to place them differently. I agree, however, that there are roles written to be quite strenuous (aka Elle), but there are those few out there who can handle it and can maintain correct breath support while hitting such difficult notes.

There are so many different kinds of voices out there, and honestly, I have the most respect for those like Judy Kuhn who can prove to have both powerful legit and belting voices (Cosette in Les Mis and Florence in Chess). That shows true talent and range. True, there are unhealthy singers as well, but all high belting is NOT unhealthy. There are SURELY correct ways to mix and maintain a belt. Why can't we just appreciate all of these different types of voices for what they are? Performance quality is what truly matters. I know I love the Jennifer Hollidays just as much as the Sutton Fosters.

It isn't any "healthier" for female singers to belt Ds and Es over and over nowadays than it was 50 years ago. There may be those with unusually strong voices who can do that without hurting themselves, but I can hear them working--and that kills it for me. And I can't listen to THE LAST FIVE YEARS because it sounds to me as if Sherie Rene Scott is belting beyond her limits, on notes that could have been mixed. (I get the same feeling during parts of AIDA--"Of lov---EEEEEEERS no tyranny could separate.")

Personally, I prefer people who don't truncate their voices, and who are able to glide from upper to lower register without forcing either one (Judy Kuhn, Liz Callaway.) The great jazz singers knew how to lighten their belts and take enough vibrato out of their higher mixes so that you couldn't tell the difference--what has happened to that art these days?

---

Two words: Bonnie. Tyler.

>> And it kills me when I watch auditions these days and hear
>> young actresses trying to match Idina's high-flying showiness
>> with badly screeched renditions of "Defying Gravity"--

They are singing "Defying Gravity" at auditions?!!! Isn't that a bit "NO, NO!"? Isn't the rule to do nothing from 'Wicked', 'Cats' or Sondheim? At auditions?

I mean, recently, at an audition for "The Sound of Music" . . .for the international tour; the moderator had to KEEP REPEATING . . .Only TRADITIONAL MUSICAL THEATRE and adding "don't do anything written AFTER 1965." She also repeated to sing legit and no belting. I guess girls were going in there belting out modern Broadway musicals! And even their call in Backstage CLEARLY said "traditional musical theatre".

>> I actually shudder to think of they day when WICKED
>> becomes available and we have to try to cast it.

Some of us can sing the role. Although, by the time it is "available" we will be too old for the role! *wink*!

---

I love both smooth-sounding voices and edgier voices. However, I only want them when I know that they sound like that in a natural, trained, healthy way.

Nothing makes me cringe more than seeing high school, college, regional, and even professional musicals where actors are belting night after night incorrectly, because I know that if they keep it up, their voices are going to go and their careers will be over, or severely hindered.

I definitely agree about the standard being raised and that being the reason that a lot of people are singing without proper training and getting hurt. Rent is incredibly demanding and has ruined a ton of people's voices. Someone I know told me that a friend of hers blew his voice during CALLBACKS for Rent because they kept asking him to come back and sing more demanding songs.

I guess it's an issue of ethics, really. Do you cast an untrained voice in a vocally-demanding role if they sound amazing now but could ruin their futures down the line? Or do you search high and low for a natural or trained voice?

Overall, I don't want to see anyone's voice get hurt. But sometimes it really suits the role. My answer is a copout: it really depends on the role/song.