# There aren't "different techniques for different voice types".



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

You could maybe make an argument that there are slight difference in technique vs how you sing, say, Handel, vs early Verdi vs Strauss, but you can't make the same argument based on voice type (even in this case, I'd say it's like 90% the same, but my opinion on that isn't as strong).

The only real difference between voice types is 
1) the length of the vocal cords 
2) slight differences in body structures that act as additional resonators (ex: maybe your large head or barrel chest gives you a slight boost in sound)
3) gender

Other than that, the actual vocal apparatus itself is exactly the same. everyone has a mouth, a tongue, a larynx, vocal cords, a diaphragm, etc. likewise, everyone needs to develop physiological vocal skills support, head voice, breath control, chest voice, vocal flexibility, etc and musical skills like legato, diminuendo, portamento, etc.

People say nonsense like "but she's a dramatic soprano, she doesn't have to develop agility", or "you're a lyric tenor, so you should sing more softly" are using a superficial knowledge of voice to attempt to over-specialize singers, when, in reality, they're causing singers of _all_ voice types to remain under-developed.

Meanwhile, Kirsten Flagstad always referred to bel canto as "medicine for the voice" and returned to that rep regularly. She was considered by many to be the greatest dramatic soprano of the 20th century. Do you really think she would have title if she just stuck to stereotypical belting and never developed the ability to do vocal runs or trills?

If we look at tenors, does anyone giving this advice really think lyric/leggiero tenor Pavarotti sang "soft and light" all the time? Would be able to impress audiences the world over singing Calaf and Manrico if he didn't also develop powerful and exciting singing along with those softer moments?

Yes, there is a _relative_ advantage of a dramatic tenor singing more powerfully than a lyric tenor, a _relative_ advantage of a coloratura soprano over a Wagnerian soprano with regards to vocal agility, but, at the end of the day, vocal technique is vocal technique. if people do want to specialize and play around with small differences in how to approach Bach vs Puccini, they must do so only _after_ that basic foundation is set.


----------



## Yotam1703 (Apr 26, 2021)

Well... it’s more complicated than that. 
Yes, it’s true that singing works the same (only “boosted” or “modified” by different anatomical attributes), but singing is also about the rep, not just the voice. 
If all you’re singing is Brunhilde’s, Isolde’s and Turandot’s, why develop agility? And if you’re only hired to sing Queen of the Night around the world, you have no reason to have a really boomey chest voice like Obrastzova. 
Also, I’m not sure that every voice can do everything; there’s a reason voices like dramatic coloraturas and agile contraltos are very rare. Big, dramatic voices have long and thick vocal chords that are harder to move around, and light voices will have weaker cricothyroid muscles and thus weaker chest voices. 

Given that, I agree with you that the most exciting voices do have well rounded techniques, like the full chest voice of Elvira de Hidalgo (Maria Callas’s teacher) and the slight bit of coloratura on singers like Anna Netrebko and Sondra Radvanovsky.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I honestly do not know whether there are different technical approaches suitable for different voices. Perhaps only experienced teachers of singers, working with diverse voices, have the definitive answer. I do feel pretty certain that, as Yotam1703 (welcome to the forum, by the way!) has pointed out, not all voices are equally capable of doing everything. It would be extremely counterintuitive to assume otherwise. Flagstad may have had decent agility, but after studying the score carefully she decided that Norma was not for her. No one contends, because of that, that her vocal technique was defective. Birgit Nilsson, I'm guessing, would have wasted her time trying to sing bel canto roles - she declined Norma too - but her technique was considered impressive by fellow artists and it stood her in good stead in the demanding repertoire she found most suitable.

The basic techniques of singing are probably the same for everyone, but certain refinements may not be worth everyone's while to pursue.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Flagstad may have had decent agility, but after studying the score carefully she decided that Norma was not for her. No one contends, because of that, that her vocal technique was defective. Birgit Nilsson, I'm guessing, would have wasted her time trying to sing bel canto roles - she declined Norma too - but her technique was considered impressive by fellow artists and it stood her in good stead in the demanding repertoire she found most suitable.


That said, I have a feeling Frida Leider could have managed Norma quite well. She left an excellent recording of Leonora's _D'amor sul'ali rosee_, demonstrating a superb trill and an easy command of the florid writing. She also sings the trills Wagner wrote into Brünnhilde's music, which we almost ever hear these days.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I believe Norma was in Leider's repertoire, but I would suppose she sang it only in German and in Germany. Jane Eaglen was another Wagnerian who sang it. Of course Lilli Lehmann and Callas exemplify the small minority of singers who could sing just about everything, though not necessarily with equal effectiveness. It does appear that formerly singers specialized less than they do now; Wagner had no "Wagnerian sopranos" to work with, and Verdi had no "Verdi baritones," but exactly what those composers expected versus what they actually got we'll never fully know. It took some time for the increasingly diverse styles of opera to give rise to the "fachs" we're familiar with, and for the music business to start shunting singers into more limited specialties. This process was well under way before WW II, and I regret not being able to hear certain singers of that era in certain roles which they simply didn't get to sing. Melchior, for example, was given only Wagner at the Met, depriving us of potentially superb broadcasts of _Otello_ and _Pagliacci._ His recorded bits from those operas take a back seat to no one's, IMO.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> I believe Norma was in Leider's repertoire, but I would suppose she sang it only in German and in Germany. Jane Eaglen was another Wagnerian who sang it. Of course Lilli Lehmann and Callas exemplify the small minority of singers who could sing just about everything, though not necessarily with equal effectiveness. It does appear that formerly singers specialized less than they do now; Wagner had no "Wagnerian sopranos" to work with, and Verdi had no "Verdi baritones," but exactly what those composers expected versus what they actually got we'll never fully know. It took some time for the increasingly diverse styles of opera to give rise to the "fachs" we're familiar with, and for the music business to start shunting singers into more limited specialties. This process was well under way before WW II, and I regret not being able to hear certain singers of that era in certain roles which they simply didn't get to sing. Melchior, for example, was given only Wagner at the Met, depriving us of potentially superb broadcasts of _Otello_ and _Pagliacci._ His recorded bits from those operas take a back seat to no one's, IMO.


I've heard the Jane Eaglen recording of Norma and I'd say that her articulation of the coloratura is a little, shall we say, vague.

Already by Callas's time, singers had begun to specialise and larger voices no longer felt the need to work on their scales and gruppetti. The reason her singing of Leonora in *Il Trovatore* was such a revelation was that all the filigree Verdi wrote into the role was revealed in all its glory. Commentators remarked it was like seeing an old master being restored and lovingly brought back to life. Norma had become the province of dramatic sopranos, who couldn't articuate the coloartura properly, whilst Amina was given to light voiced high coloraturas, though the two roles were in fact written for the same singer, Guiditta Pasta. Callas was a bit of an anomaly; a large voiced soprano who had been trained by a light coloratura. Callas said that she thought all the work they did on florid technique was to keep her voice light and supple. She didn't think she would go down the _bel canto_ path. Remember she at first thought Serafin was crazy to want her to sing Elvira in *I Puritani*, even though she'd already sung Norma by that time.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> I honestly do not know whether there are different technical approaches suitable for different voices. Perhaps only experienced teachers of singers, working with diverse voices, have the definitive answer. I do feel pretty certain that, as Yotam1703 (welcome to the forum, by the way!) has pointed out, not all voices are equally capable of doing everything. It would be extremely counterintuitive to assume otherwise. Flagstad may have had decent agility, but after studying the score carefully she decided that Norma was not for her. No one contends, because of that, that her vocal technique was defective. Birgit Nilsson, I'm guessing, would have wasted her time trying to sing bel canto roles - she declined Norma too - but her technique was considered impressive by fellow artists and it stood her in good stead in the demanding repertoire she found most suitable.
> 
> The basic techniques of singing are probably the same for everyone, but certain refinements may not be worth everyone's while to pursue.


speaking of Flagstad, one of the keys to her longevity was always singing a little bel canto, and she has marvelous recordings of baroque and bel canto up until her death.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Of course Nilsson's bread and butter was Wagner, but she made the Met give her Donna Anna and Verdi as it kept her voice light. Regular voice teachers could not train her voice and she had to work out her technique onstage. I guess it worked! She was never an optimal Mozart singer, but I'm willing to put up with it made her Wagner better and kept her from getting a matronly voice that Woodduck hates LOL


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

It was unquestionably good for the voices of both Flagstad and Nilsson to sing repertoire other than Wagner, but neither of them sound entirely at home with coloratura. Both of their voices "speak" too slowly to be described as agile. Flagstad may have been a bit better than Nilsson in that respect, and we know that she had a career singing less heavy repertoire in Norway before coming to America at age 40 and being confined by the Met, with Melchior, to their "Wagner wing." It's interesting to hear in the above "Inflammatus" that she seems to have had a half-decent trill. But I feel a slight sluggishness that makes her sound less than entirely natural in the music. That's even more true when Nilsson tackles Mozart or Verdi's Lady Macbeth. As Seattleoperafan points out, it was a struggle for Nilsson to work out a technique for a voice that was naturally huge and unwieldy, with one teacher, as I recall, advising her simply to give up. It confirms my suspicion that voices are very different in their natural capabilities. Some people are destined to sing the Queen of the Night only at parties, as Nilsson reportedly did.

For a comparison with Flagstad, we can hear Nilsson in the "Inflammatus" here (skip to 3:55):

https://i.pinimg.com/474x/3c/8e/a0/3c8ea0e90aa71829f9723ca052708da3.jpg

For some perspective on this, try Eleanor Steber






or Eileen Farrell






Both these voices have "quickness" (including a fast vibrato) that makes them more naturally agile.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

I think I understand what you're getting at. I'm not sure I'd call it "sluggish" though. To my ears, Flagstad's voice was like the waves of the ocean. Where most dramatic voices had a bit more "bite", hers would just...wash over you, envelop you in a warm, melodious lilt that never lost its feminine grace even in the most demanding passages. 

I like that you included Eileen Farrell though, as I think there is too strong a correlation drawn with "light voices move more easily", and she is one of many voices to the contrary.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BalalaikaBoy said:


> I think I understand what you're getting at. I'm not sure I'd call it "sluggish" though. To my ears, Flagstad's voice was like the waves of the ocean. Where most dramatic voices had a bit more "bite", hers would just...wash over you, envelop you in a warm, melodious lilt that never lost its feminine grace even in the most demanding passages.
> 
> I like that you included Eileen Farrell though, as I think there is too strong a correlation drawn with "light voices move more easily", and she is one of many voices to the contrary.


All generalizations are no more than that. Farrell was phenomenal. Callas paid her tribute, reportedly saying "The Met can hardly be considered a serious artistic institution. They don't even have Farrell."


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Aside from Flagstad, I listened to the Steber and Farrell versions of the Rossini _Inflammatus_ and then followed it with Tebaldi. I started to think that maybe it was the slimmer voices, by which I mean those with cleaner focus, who negotiate the florid writing more easily. Both Tebaldi and Flagstad have richer, more velvety voices, with more overtones, but have more trrouble with the fast moving music. Tebaldi was actually quite clumsy. Steber and Farrell both have more piercing voices (again possibly the wrong word because I don't mean to imply that their voices were in any way strident or shrill, quite the reverse).

Then I remembered Nilsson, who also has a voice that I would call piercing, but she too sounds clumsy in the coloratura sections. She negotiates them up to a point, but nowhere near as easily as Steber and Farrell, so that's where my theory fell apart.

Incidentally, a propos of teachers and the effect they might have on their students, I wonder how Callas and Tebaldi would have turned out if they had had each other's teachers.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Aside from Flagstad, I listened to the Steber and Farrell versions of the Rossini _Inflammatus_ and then followed it with Tebaldi. I started to think that maybe it was the slimmer voices, by which I mean those with cleaner focus, who negotiate the florid writing more easily. Both Tebaldi and Flagstad have richer, more velvety voices, with more overtones, but have more trrouble with the fast moving music. Tebaldi was actually quite clumsy. Steber and Farrell both have more piercing voices (again possibly the wrong word because I don't mean to imply that their voices were in any way strident or shrill, quite the reverse).
> 
> Then I remembered Nilsson, who also has a voice that I would call piercing, but she too sounds clumsy in the coloratura sections. She negotiates them up to a point, but nowhere near as easily as Steber and Farrell, so that's where my theory fell apart.
> 
> Incidentally, a propos of teachers and the effect they might have on their students, I wonder how Callas and Tebaldi would have turned out if they had had each other's teachers.


I think it is the fault (if one can use that term) in training. Larger voices usually have trouble negotiating florid music, _unless they are trained in that technique_, like Callas, Sutherland and the like. As we know, Callas was trained by a coloratura soprano, Sutherland by her husband, a bel canto aficionado, in all of the tricks of the trade. Both of their large voices were moulded and contained by that training, though I think Callas learned to lighten her voice when approaching florid music, which was not the case with Sutherland.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I listened to Tebaldi in two different performances of the "Inflammatus." The voice sounded great, but she aspirated everything, and didn't even attempt the trills. Even if you don't have a trill, you can do a little shake or turn or something to embellish the notes (Nilsson at least gestures in the right direction). It's curious, but Flagstad, with less of the authentic style in her blood and vocal makeup, never aspirates and actually does trill quite decently. Life is full of little surprises.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Aside from Flagstad, I listened to the Steber and Farrell versions of the Rossini _Inflammatus_ and then followed it with Tebaldi. I started to think that maybe it was the slimmer voices, by which I mean those with cleaner focus, who negotiate the florid writing more easily. Both Tebaldi and Flagstad have richer, more velvety voices, with more overtones, but have more trrouble with the fast moving music. Tebaldi was actually quite clumsy. Steber and Farrell both have more piercing voices (again possibly the wrong word because I don't mean to imply that their voices were in any way strident or shrill, quite the reverse).
> 
> Then I remembered Nilsson, who also has a voice that I would call piercing, but she too sounds clumsy in the coloratura sections. She negotiates them up to a point, but nowhere near as easily as Steber and Farrell, so that's where my theory fell apart.
> 
> Incidentally, a propos of teachers and the effect they might have on their students, I wonder how Callas and Tebaldi would have turned out if they had had each other's teachers.


Flagstad premiered Richard Strauss's *Vier Letzte Lieder* as written, but in later performances eschewed the song _Frühling_ which had melismatic variations as well as a higher tessitura, both of which were more difficult for her at the time.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

My sister the opera singer/ voice teacher said that you use the same technique for teaching different types of voices for breathing and vocal placement, two of the main foundations of classical singing. She said you are born with a trill and flexibility and pianissimos and they is not dependent of vocal size. She had a student with a small lyric voice but no capacity for florid singing. A teacher builds on that natural born ability.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Seattleoperafan said:


> My sister the opera singer/ voice teacher said that you use the same technique for teaching different types of voices for breathing and vocal placement, two of the main foundations of classical singing. She said you are born with a trill and flexibility and pianissimos and they is not dependent of vocal size. She had a student with a small lyric voice but no capacity for florid singing. A teacher builds on that natural born ability.


Joan Sutherland believed that the ability to trill is inborn. Against that, I seem to recall that some singers have said they worked hard to achieve it. I think the truth is, as so often, somewhat on all sides: some people can trill easily, others can do it with enough practice, and some will never be capable of it. I would also say, in agreement with the premise of the thread, that all singers should work at trills and other skills to give the voice agility, and do as well as they can, even if all they plan to sing is Berg and Puccini. Agility practice isn't separable from acquiring a generally sound technique, just as the maximal development of any muscular skill requires working on both strength and flexibility. Your Wagner will sound better if your Handel sounds good too:






It seems plausible, in the light of that, that your Handel will sound better if your Wagner sounds good as well. As far as I'm concerned, the HIP people are welcome to supply ornaments and cadenzas before being shown the door.


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Joan Sutherland believed that the ability to trill is inborn. Against that, I seem to recall that some singers have said they worked hard to achieve it. I think the truth is, as so often, somewhat on all sides: some people can trill easily, others can do it with enough practice, and some will never be capable of it. I would also say, in agreement with the premise of the thread, that all singers should work at trills and other skills to give the voice agility, and do as well as they can, even if all they plan to sing is Berg and Puccini. *Agility practice isn't separable from acquiring a generally sound technique, just as the maximal development of any muscular skill requires working on both strength and flexibility. Your Wagner will sound better if your Handel sounds good too:*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


beat me to the punch. you still benefit from developing the basics to a rudimentary degree even if you don't regularly employ all of them. to use two previous examples: Flagstad's voice moved more fluidly than most Wagnerians because she developed her coloratura to some degree. Ferrell's sound had more "core" to the sound because she developed her chest voice even though she employed more sparingly than, say, Ponselle or Traubel.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

MAS said:


> Flagstad premiered Richard Strauss's *Vier Letzte Lieder* as written, but in later performances eschewed the song _Frühling_ which had melismatic variations as well as a higher tessitura, both of which were more difficult for her at the time.


I think she was too old to do the songs justice, with or without _Frühling._ Apparently Strauss wasn't familiar with her and hired her on someone's recommendation.


----------

