# Opera Singing vs. Musical Theatre Singing



## apiroscsizmak (Oct 13, 2013)

Why do they sound so different? Even the singing in older works like Rodgers and Hammerstein seems to have a different quality to it. I am not particularly familiar with technical aspects of singing, though it's something that interests me quite a lot.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

> Why do they sound so different?


Because the singers are trained differently. What people often call "opera voice" is more properly called classical voice training, used in classical music outside opera as well. Musicals singers don't learn the same way and if they do, they still don't use all they have (or should have) learned when they perform on musical theatre stage.


----------



## apiroscsizmak (Oct 13, 2013)

How does the training differ? What sort of learned skills would get used in opera that aren't used in opera? And why does this difference come up? (Sorry for the cluelessness.  )


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

Opera singers, not using microphones, have techniques designed to make the voice much bigger via projection and resonance (resonance is like, sometimes in a bathroom you know how you can just barely hum a note and it sounds huge, like the walls itself are singing the note with you? Same principle as how a flute works too).
These techniques include developing muscles in your throat to keep your larynx low in your trachea, keeping the soft palate (the soft, mushy part in the upper back part of the inside of your mouth) lifted, and per a paper I read a few days ago there are certain flaps in your larynx that normally life and are activated in screams, to add more volume to your sound. Bringing all these techniques under control in order to create maximum volume is a significant part of classical voice training. There is far more to it, of course -- classical singing requires far more technique. Learning to trill, controlling your vibrato, having nice tremolo, developing agility necessary for coloratura passages -- all challenges that "normal" singers don't need to know and so likely never learn.

In stage singing, everyone is miked so you can just sing without training and be heard by everyone in the audience. Heck, as long as you have a passable voice, any old person off the street can sing in My Fair Lady.

e: as for why older musicals sound different than modern singing -- vocal amplification is a fairly new trend, relatively speaking. Any singers from the 50s or earlier likely received some training to learn how to amplify their voice since they too would need to project -- wireless microphones certainly weren't around then


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

When I studied voice, in high school and college, it was in order to sing the Broadway musical theatre repertoire. I started listening to opera in college and immediately noticed both similarities and differences in the vocal production for both genres. One major difference, I think, is that Broadway singers have always had a "simpler" sound than opera singers have. The standard sound for Broadway is a more "forward in the mask" sound. I know that opera singers are also told to sing "in the mask," but Broadway singers have an _even more_ "forward" resonance and, conversely, less "back" (i.e. back of the mouth) resonance; the standard sound for Broadway is more slender and less round. This is due as well to language differences: compared to Italian (on whose vowels all of classical singing is based), English has vowels that are less open; the less-open vowels allow less sound to come out, and the result is a less "complex" sound.

And in good Broadway singing, there is always that sense that the singer is not using any more sound than he/she really needs in order to illuminate the words.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Bellinilover said:


> When I studied voice, in high school and college, it was in order to sing the Broadway musical theatre repertoire. I started listening to opera in college and immediately noticed both similarities and differences in the vocal production for both genres. One major difference, I think, is that Broadway singers have always had a "simpler" sound than opera singers have. The standard sound for Broadway is a more "forward in the mask" sound. I know that opera singers are also told to sing "in the mask," but Broadway singers have an _even more_ "forward" resonance and, conversely, less "back" (i.e. back of the mouth) resonance; the standard sound for Broadway is more slender and less round. This is due as well to language differences: compared to Italian (on whose vowels all of classical singing is based), English has vowels that are less open; the less-open vowels allow less sound to come out, and the result is a less "complex" sound.
> 
> And in good Broadway singing, there is always that sense that the singer is not using any more sound than he/she really needs in order to illuminate the words.


Or, if you're in Australia...any old TV star is good enough for Gilbert & Sullivan/Rodgers & Hammerstein etc


----------



## Siren (Apr 5, 2018)

Sorry I'm still learning how to work this forum. Ok So "a complex" Sound. Each technical genre has its own set of complexities. Classical singing is much less forgiving than Musical theatre. I would prefer that than using the term complex when comparing vocal styles. I am a classically trained singer and one thing I have learned is that word choice is EVERYTHING! I am very careful with how i present a new technique with a student. So if I were to say, "Musical Theatre singing is much less complex." What that says to the student is..."Oh I don't have to work as hard." That is exactly the kind of thinking I would want to avoid from my students because that would invite laziness which does not bode well if they are pursuing such a thing in a professional sense.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

Siren said:


> Sorry I'm still learning how to work this forum. Ok So "a complex" Sound. Each technical genre has its own set of complexities. Classical singing is much less forgiving than Musical theatre. I would prefer that than using the term complex when comparing vocal styles. I am a classically trained singer and one thing I have learned is that word choice is EVERYTHING! I am very careful with how i present a new technique with a student. So if I were to say, "Musical Theatre singing is much less complex." What that says to the student is..."Oh I don't have to work as hard." That is exactly the kind of thinking I would want to avoid from my students because that would invite laziness which does not bode well if they are pursuing such a thing in a professional sense.


I don't mean complex in the sense of difficulty; I mean complex in the sense of a tone with a great deal of heaviness and depth. So when I say "a simpler sound for musical theatre," that has nothing to do with laziness; instead, it has to do with the fact that the tone itself is lighter and has less depth and roundness to it.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

rgz said:


> In stage singing, everyone is miked so you can just sing without training and be heard by everyone in the audience. Heck, as long as you have a passable voice, any old person off the street can sing in My Fair Lady.


I dispute this. Whereas today musicals are usually miked, they weren't in the past, and the original interpreters of *My Fair Lady* (Julie Andrews and Rex Harrison) would have had to sing unmiked. I've heard some with passable voices attempt the roles of Eliza and Freddie (who sings _On the street where you live_) but they weren't very good.

The role of Emil de Becque in *South Pacific* was written for Ezio Pinza, and has also been sung on stage by such as Giorgio Tozzi and Justino Diaz. PInza would also have had to sing without a mike, as would his co-star Mary Martin.


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

This might prove illuminating: Barbara Cook, original performer in Bernstein's _Candide,_ singing "Glitter and Be Gay." It's a wonderful high soprano voice, but still strictly Broadway technique:






And here is an opera singer, Diana Damrau, overacting and oversinging (in a native language not her own) with an operatic technique the same song:






Ms. Cook gives primacy to communicating the words, and thereby the drama and humor of the text, above all else.

Ms. Damrau gives primacy to a beautiful legato line, wonderful high notes, and making sure the top of her dress stays up.

Kind regards, :tiphat:

George


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

You might like to listen to yesterday's BBC Radio 3 Building a Library, where Candide was the work being considered. The chap doing the choosing seemed to be very much on the side of broadway, and the benchmark Bernstein/LSO operatic performance was frowned upon. From the clips, I actually disagreed with what he was saying, Bernstein/LSO sounded wonderful to me, the "broadway" performances just sounded rather rough.


----------



## lolitacallas (Apr 20, 2018)

rgz said:


> Opera singers, not using microphones, have techniques designed to make the voice much bigger via projection and resonance (resonance is like, sometimes in a bathroom, you know how you can just barely hum a note and it sounds huge, like the walls itself are singing the note with you? The same principle as how a flute works too).
> These techniques include developing muscles in your throat to keep your larynx low in your trachea, keeping the soft palate (the soft, mushy part in the upper back part of the inside of your mouth) lifted, and per a paper I read a few days ago there are certain flaps in your larynx that normally life and are activated in screams, to add more volume to your sound. Bringing all these techniques under control in order to create maximum volume is a significant part of classical voice training. There is far more to it, of course -- classical singing requires far more technique. Learning to trill, controlling your vibrato, having nice tremolo, developing agility necessary for coloratura passages -- all challenges that "normal" singers don't need to know and so likely never learn.
> 
> In stage singing, everyone is miked so you can just sing without training and be heard by everyone in the audience. Heck, as long as you have a passable voice, any old person off the street can sing in My Fair Lady.
> ...


I agree with almost everything. We, classical singers, are taught to NEVER! and I mean *NEVER! make use of our throat* other than just move it along with the normality it comes with phonation. the muscle we DO use is the *DIAPHRAGM* because that's the one we use as a bellow. Is the one that gives us support for sustaining a note, support to go to our highest note and to our lowest note. Support to do a fortissimo and support to make a pianissimo. Support to make an ornament, however the difficulty. Don't take offense, but it is very, very harmful to say that classical singers use the throat to sing, and even "scream" (maybe, just maybe I misunderstood) but we NEVER use the throat because it can harm the vocal chords to no repair. Not even musical singers use the throat. Not anyone I heard sing has ever use their throat other than to make a grotesque sound that was specifically required in the compo.

The reason musicals and opera sound so different is mainly in the type of composition (what types of notes, how they are combined and where they are placed), the language, and it's more "talked" if you will...Opera singers have to project way, way more, to go over the sound of a whole orchestra AND in a waaaay bigger theatre. I'm no expert in Musical, it is not my genre, but those are the differences I have learned so far.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

lolitacallas said:


> I agree with almost everything. We, classical singers, are taught to NEVER! and I mean *NEVER! make use of our throat* other than just move it along with the normality it comes with phonation. the muscle we DO use is the *DIAPHRAGM* because that's the one we use as a bellow. Is the one that gives us support for sustaining a note, support to go to our highest note and to our lowest note. Support to do a fortissimo and support to make a pianissimo. Support to make an ornament, however the difficulty. Don't take offense, but it is very, very harmful to say that classical singers use the throat to sing, and even "scream" (maybe, just maybe I misunderstood) but we NEVER use the throat because it can harm the vocal chords to no repair. Not even musical singers use the throat. Not anyone I heard sing has ever use their throat other than to make a grotesque sound that was specifically required in the compo.
> 
> The reason musicals and opera sound so different is mainly in the type of composition (what types of notes, how they are combined and where they are placed), the language, and it's more "talked" if you will...Opera singers have to project way, way more, to go over the sound of a whole orchestra AND in a waaaay bigger theatre. I'm no expert in Musical, it is not my genre, but those are the differences I have learned so far.


I can assure you that musical theatre singers also don't use their throats, even when "belting". If they did, they'd never get through eight shows a week, miked or not. They also have to learn to use their diaphragm and support the voice.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Mal said:


> You might like to listen to yesterday's BBC Radio 3 Building a Library, where Candide was the work being considered. The chap doing the choosing seemed to be very much on the side of broadway, and the benchmark Bernstein/LSO operatic performance was frowned upon. From the clips, I actually disagreed with what he was saying, Bernstein/LSO sounded wonderful to me, the "broadway" performances just sounded rather rough.


I'd go with the BBC Radio 3 Building a Library chap too. _Most_ opera singers doing musical theatre repertoire, even operatically based repertoire, don't connect to the words so well. Dawn Upshaw, who manages cross over better than any other soprano I know, does the best _Glitter and be gay_ of all the opera singers I've heard doing it, but I think, if pushed, I'd still plump for Barbara Cook, whose diction is so clear you can almost taste the words, and consequently gets across more of the humour.


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

Greg, I agree, I had never heard Dawn Upshaw sing this, it's the best opera-singer rendition I've ever heard. But Cook still takes the lead.

Kind regards, :tiphat:

George


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

*Kristin Chenoweth, Comedienne, Sings "Glitter and Be Gay"*

Here is yet a third approach to this song. Kristin Chenoweth has a very high, somewhat shrill voice (a la Minnie Mouse) but is a superb vocal and physical comedienne. And there's seldom a laugh she doesn't manage to mine from the vocal gold that Bernstein wrote in this tour de force for soprano. This is not a voice you would want to hear sing the Queen of the Night, but it's great for this piece. As a bonus, another wonderful singing actress, Patti Lupone, gets some good laughs without singing a note:






Kind regards, :tiphat:

George


----------



## lolitacallas (Apr 20, 2018)

GregMitchell said:


> I can assure you that musical theatre singers also don't use their throats, even when "belting". If they did, they'd never get through eight shows a week, miked or not. They also have to learn to use their diaphragm and support the voice.


100% agree. I'm not sure I came thru with that concept.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

Barelytenor said:


> Greg, I agree, I had never heard Dawn Upshaw sing this, it's the best opera-singer rendition I've ever heard. But Cook still takes the lead.
> 
> Kind regards, :tiphat:
> 
> George


Yes, Dawn Upshaw's performance is my favorite next to Barbara Cook's; Upshaw has a similar clarity of timbre to Cook, though her voice is, of course, more of an "operatic" one.

I've long contended that part of what makes "Glitter and Be Gay" so thrilling is the chance it provides to hear a "Broadway" voice cope with "operatic" writing. Of course, with more and more actual opera sopranos singing Cunogonde, this kind of thing is becoming passe (though there was recently that concert performance of CANDIDE with Kristin Chenowith as Cunogonde -- see above).


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

GregMitchell said:


> I'd go with the BBC Radio 3 Building a Library chap too. _Most_ opera singers doing musical theatre repertoire, even operatically based repertoire, don't connect to the words so well. Dawn Upshaw, who manages cross over better than any other soprano I know, does the best _Glitter and be gay_ of all the opera singers I've heard doing it, but I think, if pushed, I'd still plump for Barbara Cook, whose diction is so clear you can almost taste the words, and consequently gets across more of the humour.


Barbara Cook was quoted in the Original Cast Recording liner notes.

ON opening night (1st December 1956) of Candide, Bernstein came round before curtain up to wish me good luck. 
"Oh, by the way, Callas is out front".
"Thank you very much I really needed to know that." I said.
"Forget it, she'd kill for your high E flats."

I can't take Opera singers doing musical comdey or vice versa. There is a differece and it's haveing what the material demands.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Helen Traubel was one of the very few opera singers who excelled both at opera and onstage. She was one of the highest paid opera stars in the world, but when Bing made her quit opera for her trash singing, as he called it, she made much more money in musicals and nightclubs! She had a lot more personality in musicals and in nightclubs than she exhibited in Wagner. She also had a large, creamy lower register and it was in this part of her voice that she sang all of her musicals. This is the second part of my series of speeches on Traubel that dealt with her career in popular music and musicals:


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

*Eileen Farrell Sings the Blues and Ponchielli's 'Suicidio'*

And don't forget Eileen Farrell who also had a similar voice and great pop style!











Regarding all the discussion of classical versus pop/Broadway technique, of course both use the diaphragm and avoid stressing the throat. But in general there is less air space in the mouth for pop, with a flatter tongue and teeth against the inner cheeks. The back of the tongue is more raised and there is airspace between the teeth and inner cheeks for opera/classical. And the nasal cavities are more open in classical. These are generalizations but there is a great deal of truth here. (And beginning classical singers can get a major improvement by finding those extra airspaces.)

After listening to "Suicidio" for a second or third time as Farrell sings it, I had to add one thing: I find it really interesting that, despite having a marvelous chest voice that could easily accommodate those bottom notes of the lowest musical phrase, "fra le tenebre," she keeps her voice in the middle register, as most sopranos would. Compare this with the snarling chest voice Callas uses at the same point. This is strictly a classical technique. When Farrell sings blues or pop, she switches to a different approach, completely authentic and automatic.

Kind regards, :tiphat:

George


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Barelytenor said:


> And don't forget Eileen Farrell who also had a similar voice and great pop style!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Of course! The only reason I didn't mention Farrell was that she never sang in an actual musical like Traubel did, but only sang on TV and on the radio. Farrell had a phenominal voice but had a face made for radio..... Traubel was so successful at musicals and nightclub singing that she made twice the money in one year that she used to make at singing opera and concerts when she was kicked out of the Met by Bing.'Bacj to Farrell, WOW!!!! I had never seen this Suicidio clip. It is her best opera video that I've seen. THANKS.


----------



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

*'Love Is Where You Find It'*

I actually think Farrell is quite lovely in a zaftig sort of way. "Face made for radio" is mean. I think she could easily have done some musicals--OK, maybe character parts--if she had been booted out of the Met like Traubel was.

Anyway. You are forgiven.

I think this is an interesting contrast, two sopranos both singing the same pop song. "Love Is Where You Find it" comes from the 1949 romantic comedy (a commercial disaster)_ The Kissing Bandit_ starring Frank Sinatra and Kathryn Grayson. So it's a pop song but written in an operatic style, with lots of high notes (top Ds, I think) for soprano.

Here are first, Anna Moffo, and then Eleanor Steber singing it. Which one do you think is more likely to find love?











Perhaps we could next have a sing-off with DavidA and Woodduck and vote for our favorites. Of course, both of them would want to go last. :lol:

Kind regards, :tiphat:

George


----------



## Siren (Apr 5, 2018)

So what you are describing then is the different color techniques used in singing. Musical theatre uses more voice color techniques than Classical singing techniques. Classical technique employs throat color more than any other color along with some head voice color and the occassional mouth color for instances such as recitative. Musical theatre employs Mouth color along with nasal color and head color for affect in Musical theatre. The tone for all of these colors can be changed with vowel choices and technical placement. So again...I would not choose the word complex for what you are describing. They are simply different.


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

And one who apparently can do both.

From a review of the Met's current Cosi Fan Tutte.

https://www.newcriterion.com/issues/2018/5/new-york-chronicle-9785

"The great surprise of this production-even more than the bearded lady or snake-handler-was Kelli O'Hara in the role of Despina. O'Hara is maybe the greatest Broadway star of her age. And here she was in an opera, singing a role that is heavy on recitatives. In fact, Despina does relatively little singing-real singing, apart from recitative. When O'Hara had a chance to sing, I was delighted. Yet she handled her recitatives well too-with accurate pitch, for example. And her Italian was genuine Italian. She was perhaps a bit small of voice, but not too small, and I had this thought: if she has no need of being miked in this vast opera house, why does she have to be miked in the comparatively small theaters in which she spends her career? The overamplification of Broadway is one of the scandals and outrages of our age. In any event, Kelli O'Hara was fearless in her Mozart-and fearless in Mozart is a very hard and good thing to be.
May I say that few Despinas have ever been so beautiful? Also, I doubt the role was ever better acted. Finally, here is the big question: If you had no idea-if you knew nothing about Kelli O'Hara, this great, world-famous star of the musical theater-would you think she was an opera singer? A real, full-time opera singer? I think the answer is yes."

I heard this Matinee Broadcast on Radio 3 (in the backgound) and without knowing who was in the cast I greatly enjoyed it and thought nothing more about the fine singing I heard.

This summer she comes to London in The King and I. Saving up for my ticket now.


----------



## Sieglinde (Oct 25, 2009)

For comparison here's an opera singer doing Bring Him Home (in French).


----------



## Don Fatale (Aug 31, 2009)

Barelytenor said:


> This might prove illuminating: Barbara Cook, original performer in Bernstein's _Candide,_
> Ms. Cook gives primacy to communicating the words, and thereby the drama and humor of the text, above all else.
> 
> Ms. Damrau gives primacy to a beautiful legato line, wonderful high notes, and making sure the top of her dress stays up.
> ...


... and that's why I'm an opera fan. Much as I respect the composers, artists and certainly the lyricists of musical theatre, Damrau's voice is the one that works for me.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Don Fatale said:


> ... and that's why I'm an opera fan. Much as I respect the composers, artists and certainly the lyricists of musical theatre, Damrau's voice is the one that works for me.


I'm an opera fan too, but I'm firmly in the Cook group; that said, I've also always put beautifully _expressed_ singing above merely beautiful singing.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

Sieglinde said:


> For comparison here's an opera singer doing Bring Him Home (in French).


That's fine, I guess? I've heard many better versions. Someone being a good opera singer does not mean that they will do well with Broadway songs (just like someone being able to sing one opera aria does not mean they will put the time/effort into singing a different aria).

That being said it's interesting to hear this sung in French It wasn't on the original French concept album; it's one of the many songs written/re-written originally for the first English version. I haven't heard the 1991 Paris Revival Cast Recording.


----------

