What The Italian Singing Masters Didn't Say Pt. 2

Another formidable obstacle to overcome in trying to tease out of the masters their method(s) of voice training is in interpreting a number of their key concepts. For instance, it’s not at all clear what the differences are between what they called “voce di petto”—chest voice; “voce di testa”—head voice; and “voce finta”—falsetto voice. The latter two concepts, in particular, have created centuries-long debates of the most heated kind. Here, once again, the blame for this situation has to be laid at the feet of the masters, for they did not carefully define what each term meant. In fact, in some cases the masters seem to suggest that voce di testa is a different sort of voice from voce finta, yet at other times they address them as though they were interchangeable, and there are other complicating issues.

It’s not all together obvious if by voce di testa(head voice) the masters were speaking literally or metaphorically. Is there a real voice that they believed is created, even partially, in the head cavity? Or is this concept their way of conveniently and imaginatively describing a voice with a less resonant, lighter vocal color, than a heavier, lower register tone? The same situation holds for the most famous notion of all in the world of vocal pedagogy: the “open throat”—“la gola aperta.” What did the masters mean by la gola aperta? Do good singers really sing with more physical space in the throat? Or is the open throat simply a way to think about good vocal technique—as a sort of inspirational, visual image? Many modern voice instructors and singers believe that the latter is the case. The great masters did not close the issue sufficiently. Again, the same problem rears its ugly head with the meaning of “voce mista”—the mixed voice. Is it a real mixture of lower and higher voices or is it a different sort of voice all together? The masters were not adequately forthcoming. There are more confusing examples I could cite.

If these concepts are to have value to students, they need to be understood. It’s only in this way that they could possibly be of service in the technical development of one's voice, as well as work as a framework for artistic excellence. With the masters’ ambiguous and inconsistent use of these terms, singing students are typically victimized by ignorant or ethically corrupt voice teachers, or left to their own confusing experiential insights.

In their defense, the masters believed that their teaching methods followed the laws of nature and that it wasn’t necessary for them to go into extensive, unambiguous detail as to how they achieved their astonishing results. “Just look to nature—to how your bodies function when you sing—for your explanations; she will guide you!” could easily have been their collective refrain if they were asked for additional information on their methods of teaching. In my view, however, granting this defense is unjustified: they should have been more systematic and detailed in their explanations and recommendations.

The great maestros undoubtedly understood that their era represented an elevated moment in musical history and that their treatises on singing would lay the ground for all subsequent practitioners of the art form. Indeed, these works are copious in important details that address almost every area in the world of singing. Unfortunately, the most important information of all—namely, how precisely to carry out their vocal training—was not adequately addressed. The omission of step-by-step, well defined instructions to voice training was to have profound repercussions for the history of singing—for now its great traditions were left to the creative imagination of modern voice instructors, and to their students, to determine how specifically to realize the voice teaching and performance ideals laid down by the Italian masters. Unfortunately, a creative imagination could be just as fruitless—and destructive—as no imagination at all.

We must point out in passing that the art of singing did not spring spontaneously out of the throats of the castrati of the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries. Singing was an important component of Italian church music during the Middle Ages, and the tradition of artful singing was being cultivated dutifully all during that time. The unprecedented outpouring of vocal splendor in the 18th century, in other words, was made possible by the developments in vocal music and singing pedagogy that preceded it.

Image source: Ivica Drusany / Shutterstock.com