Hi Jay,

 

Regarding your statement about St. Olaf choral ensembles singing with straight tone, what gives you that impression? As far as I can remember, I was never asked to sing with straight tone as a student (graduated in 03), and in many cases I remember being asked to sing like an intelligent soloist. 

 

Austen

to me, it is not a cultural thing, if it is a complex chord, you have to sing it without vibrato to hear the chord. but if you sing pop/jazz, after the chord is clear, you may vibrate a little bit to beautfy the sentence.

Hi, Jay.  I wish it were simple enought to give you chapter and verse, but it isn't.  You seem to assume that whether or not to use vibrato and how much of it to use is something that is, and must be, taught.  I would suggest that instead it is very much a matter of tradition, and traditions can't be pinned down to a single time, place, or country although they can often be associated with one.  And of course a number of DIFFENT traditions can be taking place at the same time within shouting distance of each other, and it would surprise no one.

 

My son toured with Chanticleer for four years.  They adjusted the amount of vibrato used depending on the music they were doing, using less for the pure harmonies of renaissance choral music, but also using less for the tight voicings of good jazz vocal writing.  And I'm quite sure that the guys themselves came out of a wide variety of backgrounds and experience, but were quite capable of making adjustments to fit the music, and they cerrtainly did NOT sing without vibrato all the time; I'm not sure where you got that idea.

 

St. Olaf did have that reputation for a while, but that's ancient history today.  And some vocal jazz groups in the '50s and '60s did sing with relatively straight tone, but not all by any means.  The Four Freshmen often did, in order to ring their chords, and since many of their voicings were quite low they would have turned into pure mud with wide vibratos, but neither the Hi-Lo's nor the Singers Unlimited used straight tone except for special effects.  Some contemporary vocal jazz groups do use a lot more straight tone, but others do not.  And the best often vary it.

 

I'm afraid that you're trying to oversimplify something that is not at all simple, and seldom prescriptive, and traditions can and do change all the time.  May I ask whether you're a student, doing this research for a class assignment?

All the best,

John

Hi, Jay.

 

I would agree with what John has said and add this.  In the mid-20th century in the US, tonal approaches seemed to be more individualized choir by choir, and a given choir would tend to sing all of their literature in the prescribed tone.  (This is a broad generalization, I know.)  Two examples of this were St. Olaf under F. Melius Christiansen and Westminster under John Findlay Williamson.  (Christiansen preferred a purer sound with less vibrato and Williamson favored a full, heavy sound with vibrato.)  When Jennings came to St. Olaf and Flummerfelt came to Westminster, that began to change, and the tonal approach adjusted to the style of the literature (in a manner that John suggested).  This referred not only to vibrato vs. no vibrato, but also to the timbre of the sound.  Today under Armstrong and Miller, respectively, both choirs sing with great variety and flexibilty to their tone, and adjust to the style of the piece being sung.  And I believe these choirs reflect the trend that has come as a welcome breeze on a hot day: today's conductors tend to aim toward an adjustable tonal concept that suits the literature, and not a single approach.  (There is no longer the St. Olaf or Westminster "sound.")  

 

Your comment about the Whitacre London choir is less about Whitacre himself and more about his music.  Since it so often has tight clusters of notes (some would call it "close harmony"), minimizing or eliminating vibrato is essential to hearing and identifying all of those tightly bunched pitches.  (Ditto for jazz, as John already mentioned.)  

 

I can't speak to European choirs or possible "traditions" there, but I would venture to say there probably aren't too many choirs in the US that sing with a consistent "straight tone," and if there are, I would venture a guess that they are probably groups that confine themselves to a certain style of literature (such as Renaissance or jazz, though I imagine John would argue that even jazz groups use vibrato from time to time).  

 

Good luck in your search, because I think it's going to be a tough one, as John suggested.

http://www.renaissancechorus.org

 

 The RCNY( and it's successor groups:Music Divine/Renaissance Street Singers, et al) which started at HS Music & Art in NY 1953-4, and concretized to 1982 was taught by Mr. Brown a cappella/ low vibrato. This was NOT, if you remember other groups in NY like the Dessoff Choirs, the dominant practice then. He was a pioneer. Compare their old recordings! The RCNY women were generally untrained. In longer cantus or pedal lines basses might be allowed to mix in color.

 

Most of the RCNY singers were instrumentalists or folk-affiliated (cultural?), and but few were interested in opera. Those who were made careers in early music & avant-garde music. Bob Mitchell's chorus memoir on the site noted the problem for one primarily using 'regular' solo projection. Brown's decisions were based on his (& now current) ideas of performance practice of polyphonic music based on chant. These obviously are considered 'Cultural';  As a composer his work also depended on straight tone. That music demands a certain 'palette' of colors- that might be 'cultural' or as in liturgy, based on emotive (therefore projective) traditions. Although all decisions are under the general idea of 'ART'-  There certainly is technique/science behind blending harmonically! 

 

 SIR

Thank you, everyone.

 

John, to answer your question, yes, I am completing my master of Choral Conducting degree at CU Boulder and I've been asked by my professor, in preparation for my oral exams, to come up with "proof" (essentially) that the European tradition is to train choirs sans vibrato. As I mentioned in my initial post, a simple google search reveals that this is a commonly held beleif and yet I can find no real proof that this is true (perhaps that was my professor's intention).

All of your comments are helpful. It seems that the only "cultural" proof that vibrato was ever not universal was during the pre-classical era. Obviously during my oral exams I can't simply say, "Arabic and South Asian ensembles sing without vibrato." It's not enough. I need specifics. Perhaps a scholorly book that would mention this.

 

Anyway, I know this is a tough one and it's been an englightening search.

 

Thank you all for your help.

Jay

Imho, I think there is a problem with the premise that this is a black/white issue--straight tone vs. vibrato.  What singers are doing is much more complex and varied along a spectrum of sound production, as demonstrated by modern acoustic science. For the real voice geeks among us, I did a litttle googling and came across this journal artical re vibrato:  http://www.csm.unavarra.es/Publicaciones/Images/Pub259.pdf, re vibrato for point of vew of acoustic science.

 

My training as a singer has been mostly western classical, but am an Estill student (very science-based) and have studied S. Indian Vocal Music and Javanese music with well-respected ethnomusicologist who had himself studied with masters. In the ragas(I think there are over 70 of them), fast vibrato on certain pitches is considered an essential part of singing the raga correctly.  I have heard Arab singers from different coutries sing with significant vibrato. I have also heard the Manhattan Transfer sing with considerable vibrato, very well matched among the singers.

There are so many factors that go into the perception of the choral sound, (e.g. consistency of vowel production, formants, amount of aspiration, shape of resonators, etc)I don't belive true vibrato or straight tone, originating in the glottis can always be accurately discerned by the ear alone, but rather by measuring the frequencies and amplitude of the oscillations.  ( I hope I have my terms correct!)

 

As for St. Olaf, I heard very old recordings at a presentation by Dr. Armstrong (and featured on Minnesota Public Radio).  I think they might hve been under direction of Paul C., not F. Melius, but much vibrato there--the emphasis was on quality of resonance and perfectly matched vowel production, which may lead some listeners to think they do not hear vibrato.

 

BAck to the original post--if someone has the technical expertise to take recordings of some choirs, representing distinct cultural traditions, separate out the voices, and acoustically analyze them, one could objectively say some are using all straight tone, some vibrato, some varying  among singers, some varyng between phrases, etc., and also discover that even if there is some individual vibrato, but they appear to sound straight tone, how they are actually using their voices to achieve this effect. Maybe someone has done this. Journals of Acoustic Research are the place to go.

 

Sorry for being so nerdy, I just love the acoustic science perspective.  But I do love the definition of "Isograd" and the quote attributed to Duke Ellington-"If it sounds good, it is good."

 

 

Hello all, and greetings from the North.

 

I have a few additions to this discussion. First of all, I think it is extremely dubious to speak of a (or the) European tradition. There are so many different traditions of music and vocal style on the Old continent that such generalisations feel unhelpful. Just think of Bulgarian female choirs, Italian opera choruses and Nordic youth choirs. Secondly, the idea that European choirs would have a dogmatic approach to singing sans vibrato seems quite strange to me (a European choral conductor and singer). At least in the Nordic countries vibrato is discussed quite little - it just is not much of an issue. What you hear in choral singing is pretty much how the choral singers sing by nature.

 

There is a pretty good discussion on vibrato in James Stark, Bel Canto. A History of Vocal Pedagogy (University of Toronto Press 1999). Very readable, yet informative (both historically and technically).

In Australia, most choirs which sing exacting coontemporary compositions and / or early music favour a straight tone. I favour it too. Last year I took my choir Wayfarers Australia on a 5 month tour of Asia and Europe. While we were in Russia, we attended a choral festival / competition. It soon became clear that eastern Europe favours a much fuller sound, with some vibrato, for all styles of music - even Eastern European children's choirs sounded like fully-blown adults. It looks as though how people sing is cultural, based on centuries of tradition, dependent on where you live on the planet. 

Jay,

I am reading a lot of conversations about this topic. Some people have referred to Barbershop Singing as Straight toned singing. Like many other people on this thread, I don't believe that anybody teaches straight toned singing rather they teach how to lessen the vibrato on certain songs. Even going back to Ancient Times the recordings that I heard were not completely straight toned but had much less vibrato than some of the songs that we hear today.

Wow, interesting topic.  I've read all the posts (and hi to Chuck Livesay!).

 

I'm no historian, but Jay, I'm in Denver, and (I can't believe I'm even suggesting this!) would enjoy meeting you at a tunnel going under Yale Avenue in Denver to sing Hildegard von Bingen for you!  I went there last December as prep for performances with the Ars Nova Singers right up there in Boulder, because, as dulcimer-artist-in-residence for ANS's 2012 Christmas concert, I had to get a handle on what Tom Morgan, this chant, and each space we performed in were asking us to do.  I found out in big ways in the tunnel, AND it was a highly therapeutic and calming experience!  What I learned from singing in the tunnel is that straight tone is KING, and vibrato would be a complete disaster.

 

This is just a hunch, but my impression is that, instead of looking at cultural influences/reasoning, architecture has more to do with it.  As it turns out, vibrato is written into Gregorian chant!  (Look up "vibrato" in the Harvard Dictionary of Music.)  And beyond this, singing in the tunnel makes me wonder if part of the reason vibrato came into being is to make up for acoustic liveliness in less acoustic spaces, something I deal with at my church.

 

I hope to take a couple of students to the tunnel this Tuesday 3/5 ca. 5pm to sing Hildegard for them, and some chant for Lent 4.  This is my first post after officially joining ChoralNet, and you are welcome to contact me privately AND meet us there if you can.  The phone would be easier, and I'll be glad to chat with you. Heavens, this is a huge subject, and I really need to start a related thread to get some other information about vibrato.  HTH!