a few observations/clarifications, if you'll indulge an opera parvenu:
(1) the new york state theater has an "ehnancement system"; it's a modified version of a system installed in amsterdam to deal w/ atrocious vocal acoustics in a hall built for other purposes. the state theater was built for dance, not voice ... city opera actually had little choice. that said, the best way to think of the system is that it mikes the house, not the performers. (in point of fact, the enhancement system places more mikes in the pit than "on" the stage.) it is widely hoped that the pending enhancements to the facility will improve things.
(2) the metropolitan opera house of course has an amplification system, but it is an urban legend that the Met mike singers. never.
(3) opera singers are trained to sing differently than popular singers. (i'd attribute it to the diaphragm, but there's more to it than that.) this is why the old battleships used to just trod out, stand on their marks and belt them out -- and why the new generation finds the theater that directors and audiences increasingly demand so much work -- singing AND acting is damned physical! being classically trained, i suspect chenowith knows what she needs to do with her voice to reach the family circle.
thanks for indulging me ... the stuff about amplification at both NYCO and the Met comes up on this board every six months, and i hate seing city opera's predicament (i.e., a sh*tty hall for voice) miscast -- if they didnt HAVE to "enhance", they wouldnt!
"You, sir, are a moron." (PlayItAgain)
