Advice to Singers Part 3

Rounden the refractory note--give it a full tone in practising, and produce it well from the chest, letting the sound reverberate from the centre of the roof of the mouth--neither too far back towards the throat, nor too much on the teeth. Your teacher, if he knows his business, will soon put you into the way of this. Voices vary so much that these very general remarks must suffice here; but each voice, if it has its peculiar difficulties, has also, doubtless, its peculiar charm; and for light tenors, rich in both charms and difficulties, the rule is all-important: Do not try to imitate anybody else, but let your aim be to do the best that can be done with such natural gifts as you may have, aided by the best training that you can procure for them.

=Tenore-Robusto.=--The robust or strong tenor is the male voice corresponding to the mezzo-soprano of a female. It is not an uncommon voice, but is rarely met with in anything like perfection. A robust tenor voice of large compa.s.s and round full tone is a treasure of the utmost value. The fact is, that too frequently the possessor of a good voice of this kind, instead of taking care of it and training it for the future, begins using it too soon, strains and forces it into coa.r.s.eness, and spoils it for ever. People do not realize that a voice may be strong in quality and powerful in tone, and yet in itself be an excessively delicate thing to keep in order.

Moreover, voices of this kind in their youth frequently resemble barytones, and their owners, fired with ambition to rival some popular barytone singer, mistake their vocation, and shout and bellow on the very part of the voice--the upper "chest" register--which requires the tenderest nursing to fit it for future difficulties. Consequently, when the voice develops with age, and the singer finds that barytone work is too heavy for the lower part of the voice, and that he can without much difficulty extend his compa.s.s beyond the barytone limits, he discovers that what he has been using as the top of his voice is nearer the middle of it, and that the mode of using those notes which he has practised is excessively difficult, if not impossible, with those which now lie above them. The result is either the creation of a very awkward "break," which even time and practice can never entirely remove, or else (and this is a commoner case) the same process of forcing which has been employed hitherto is applied to the upper notes, as far as strength can take it!

This is the reason why so many tenor singers are utterly unable to produce the real tenor "tone," and sound like barytones forced up to a higher compa.s.s. There is no sweetness in the upper notes so produced--nothing but force and noise; while the hapless perpetrator of the howls which represent high notes turns scarlet in the face, and quivers all over with his exertions. I therefore give to tenors of this cla.s.s exactly the same warning that I gave to soprani:--Do not ignore the fact that you have three, or at all events two, distinct registers of the voice, the (so-called) "chest," "throat," and "head." Do not suppose, when you hear a great singer produce on a high note exactly the same quality of tone as he produced on a low one, that he did it exactly the same way, or "got it from the same place," as some people say. The perfection of his training and the diligence of his practice have enabled him to a.s.similate the quality of one register to that of another so completely as to deceive your ear. The proof that this is true may be found in inspecting a great deal of music written for and sung by the most famous operatic tenors of the past--the singers of that pure Italian school of which so few disciples now remain.

There are notes and pa.s.sages in that music which no "chest" register could by any physical possibility execute, but some of which have been sung within the recollection even of the "rising generation" with all the effect intended, and with the very tone that critical slang calls "chest notes," (simply because it so closely resembles the tone of chest notes that few, if any, can detect that they are differently produced from the low notes.)

For obvious reasons I abstain from mentioning the names of any living singers, but I can name one, not very long since dead, who attained the highest reputation here as a _tenore di forza_--whose "chest notes" were chronicled by the newspaper critics, and were the envy of aspiring youths--and yet who has ever been heard distinctly to deny that he ever produced those notes in the same way as the lower ones, and to laugh at the idea that such a thing was possible; and this was Mongini.

I have entered into this at some length because it is a point which is more and more ignored by the singers and teachers of this generation. I might almost say that a school of singing exists the whole aim of which is to abolish the natural upper part of the voice, in order to stretch and force the one lower register up beyond its natural compa.s.s. I do not deny that in certain cases a voice results from this treatment which is powerful, effective, and capable of executing a good deal of music with much success and satisfaction to the performer; but for one case where this treatment so far succeeds, it fails in twenty to produce a voice both pleasing and useful; it is, moreover, in singers trained on this method that we most commonly hear the odious (and involuntary) trembling of the upper notes commonly called the _vibrato_.

Therefore, to sum up those who find, when their voices begin to form, that the natural quality of their voice is lighter than that of a ba.s.s, had better make up their minds at once to give the voice fair play, and let it alone for a time; then consult a good master, or one really experienced in hearing singers, as to what the future of the voice is to be. It is by no means easy always to decide at that early period whether the permanent quality of the voice will be tenor or barytone, and therefore it is folly to try and settle the question for yourself by singing, in untaught style, music which may prove to have been all along unsuited to you. Your patience in waiting till the voice really declares itself will amply repay you afterwards by the absence of the difficulties which too early a use of the voice would have created for you to overcome.

=Barytone and Ba.s.so-Cantante.=--The barytone voice is thus described in Stainer and Barrett's "Dictionary of Musical Terms:" "A voice of fuller quality than a tenor, and lighter than a ba.s.s, having a compa.s.s partly included in both.... This voice has only been distinguished by name as being of a separate character within the present century. Early writers indicate its existence by the use of its special clef. The term barytone is unmeaning unless it be looked upon as a corruption of barytenor; but it is quite possible it was borrowed from the instrument barytone or bardone, which occupied a place between the tenor and ba.s.s viols."

The derivation of the name from "barytenor" is slightly absurd, considering that half that extraordinary word is Greek and the other half Latin; whereas the name barytone is a Greek word, used by Aristotle, and meaning "deep-sounding."

The distinctive character which this voice has a.s.sumed within the present century is due, I believe, to the great change in the pitch of musical instruments which has taken place. In the last century the pitch was so much lower than that at present in use, that a "high barytone" was much the same as a "robust tenor." Consequently, music was not written exclusively for the barytone voice, its existence as a separate cla.s.s of voice not being sufficiently recognized. Gradually, as the pitch was raised, the barytone separated itself clearly from other voices, and has now a repertoire of music and a style of singing of its own; and instead of appropriating tenor music, it, if anything, has stolen away some of the property of the ba.s.s; for the raising of the pitch which placed tenor music beyond the reach of a barytone has also rendered a good deal of music originally written for a ba.s.s far more suitable for a barytone, or at all events for a ba.s.so-cantante. I am well aware that by many musicians the ba.s.so-cantante is identified with the barytone. The distinction is so slight that it is not worth while to quarrel over names; but that the two voices are distinct I am persuaded.

The ba.s.so-cantante is of fuller and rounder quality than the barytone proper; less flexible, less metallic in tone, and generally rather lower in compa.s.s. But the method of using both voices is the same, and for all purposes of amateur singers no distinction need be insisted upon.

Professionals, however, who have to deal with heavy work on a large scale, will soon find that there is a good range of music more suited to the rich voice of greater volume and less flexibility (which I distinguished as the ba.s.so-cantante) than to the bright, flexible voice which has something of the tone of a full "tenore-robusto," and which is the barytone proper. Neither of these voices is much troubled with a "break," although there is a perceptible difference between the natural quality of the lower and upper octaves of the voice when quite uncultivated. This difference, however, which makes itself felt in the region of these notes, is got rid of in practice without any of the same difficulty which is encountered by tenors or contralti in managing the decided breaks in their voices. The possessors of barytone voices may therefore be looked upon as having comparatively "easy times of it."

There is a large repertoire of music at their disposal, including much of the most popular ballad music of this century and the last; the voice is generally a favourite with an audience; the style of barytone singing is undisputed, and the singer will not find himself violently criticised by the partizans of a rival school of singing to that in which he himself has been trained, which is inevitably the fate of tenors!

[Music: F3 G3 A3]

Only let him avoid the temptation to shout, and to sing up to the very top of his compa.s.s at full pitch. Unfortunately, an English audience does like a noise, and appreciates plenty more than beauty of tone. It is tolerably easy for a barytone to be a showy singer, and therein lies the greatest danger to his chance of ever being a really good one. He must be content to go through his training quite as self-denyingly and perseveringly as any one else who is gifted with fewer natural advantages.

=Ba.s.s.=--Of the ba.s.s voice less need be said here, not because it is a less important voice than any of the others, but because it is more generally known and better understood. A perfectly pure ba.s.s voice is, however, a rare thing. This voice has no upper register, properly speaking; the whole voice consisting of "chest" notes, and not admitting of even the process of developing upper notes of extraordinary quality, which is part of the training of a barytone or a ba.s.so-cantante. Power and richness are the chief qualities of charm in a ba.s.s, while flexibility and true intonation are the qualities most rarely found in that voice. The young singer who finds that he certainly is not meant by nature for a tenor, and also that with all his efforts the upper notes of a barytone are quite out of his reach, need not be discouraged by any lightness or thinness of quality in his voice from the hope that he may develop into a good ba.s.s. The full and rich quality of this voice is later in showing itself than is the case with any other voice, and the young singer must be content to study for some time with the compa.s.s of a ba.s.s and the quality of a kind of barytone, till Nature puts him in full possession of his powers. Only he must study ba.s.s music, and not try, because his voice is of barytone quality, to sing barytone music.

Let him, on the contrary, avoid trying to extend the compa.s.s of his voice in the upper notes, and give his best attention to the lower ones.

The upper ones will be well within his command in time, and if he will be content to let them alone at first, he may become a truly "celebrated ba.s.s;" but, if he persists in shouting at them now, he will never have anything but coa.r.s.e upper tones, only fit to be heard behind a costermonger's barrow, or in "comic" songs at the Music Halls.

=Buffo.=--The last remark reminds me that I have said nothing about a cla.s.s of ba.s.s singers very useful in certain Italian and French operas--the _buffo_, or comic ba.s.s. The development of voice with these singers is of less consequence than the study of a peculiar style, a good deal of the point of their songs consisting in the entire elimination of anything like musical tone from many notes and pa.s.sages.

A clever and good buffo singer may very likely be able to sing other music well, but the style is so entirely dramatic and so utterly out of place anywhere except on the stage, that no amateur should ever attempt it, and no professional should appear _in a concert-room_ as the exponent of such music. Therefore, for those who wish to sing, any remarks on the peculiarities of a buffo ba.s.s would be superfluous; those who wish to study that line as a profession, for stage work, must learn all that they need from a regular dramatic teacher; while those who wish to execute English "comic" songs, may spare themselves any anxiety as to their voices: if they have any voice naturally, "comic" singing will soon destroy its charm, and that will not matter to them, for the last thing necessary to sing a "comic" song is the possession of a voice of any kind. Therefore, if you have a ba.s.s (or any other voice, indeed), avoid "comic" songs, and leave the "buffo" business to those who can do nothing better.

=Qualities of Voice, Good and Bad.=--It may not be unwelcome to the student to have pointed out to him those qualities of voice which are to be aimed at or cultivated, and also those which are to be avoided or overcome.

The charms of a voice are found among the following qualities: clearness, sweetness, evenness, flexibility, power, extent of compa.s.s, variety, brilliancy, firmness, persuasiveness.[1]

[1] It used to be said of Rubini that "he had tears in his voice."

On the opposite side must be ranked roughness, huskiness, feebleness (or want of power), shrillness (or want of depth), hardness and want of flexibility, dulness, or want of "ring," &c.

It is, of course, impossible for any one voice to unite in itself all these merits or all these defects; and you cannot give yourself merits which Nature has withheld; but you may marvellously improve what natural merits you have, and do wonders in overcoming any difficulties which Nature has placed in your way.

ON INSTRUCTION, MASTERS, AND "SINGING TUTORS."

The voice, and how to use it, is a subject which has troubled many minds, and no doubt this will continue to be the case; but the difficult problem will not be solved by running to pettifogging teachers, who advertise to teach all that is known of singing, and a little more, in twelve easy lessons, without previous knowledge or practice at home, for the small fee of one guinea! Let it be stated once for all: singing cannot be taught in twelve easy lessons, and can scarcely be acquired in one hundred very severe lessons. Therefore distrust at once any one who holds out so tempting a bait to you; remember that there is no "royal road" to singing, any more than there is to the acquirement of any other art; and the person who tells you that he can teach you to do without trouble that which costs great artists the study of a lifetime, proclaims himself, _ipso facto_, to be a humbug.

=Schools of Singing.=--There are several so-called Schools of Singing.

There is a French School, which for any language but French is bad, and which very seldom turns out a pleasing singer. There is a German School, which is worse, being simply the production of coa.r.s.e noise. Some people say that there is an English School. I hope there may be some day, but at present its existence is rather doubtful, unless those who talk of an English school of singing mean the Cathedral style--which for solo work is detestable--or the old school of Oratorio singing, with its Handelian traditions, which was not an English, but an Italian, and the best Italian, school.

In fact, there is but one school of singing in the world, and that is the Italian. Whatever language you wish to sing in, whatever style of music you wish to study princ.i.p.ally, you must train your voice, produce it, and learn to use it in the Italian method, if you hope ever to deserve the name of a singer.

=Masters.=--Of course, in a work of this sort, it is impossible, and would be wrong if it were possible, to mention the names of living teachers: therefore I can only give general hints. If possible, study only under a master whom you know to have lived in Italy, and to have studied there for some years under some good master or in some good Conservatoire--Naples, Milan, and Florence generally supply the best.

Possibly, for an English singer, an English master _who fulfils these conditions_ may be better than even an Italian, as he should understand better the peculiarities of English voices and temperaments, and would know at once where the chief difficulties would lie. Let me, however, correct a popular error. A good singer is not necessarily a good teacher, nor is it necessary for a first-cla.s.s teacher to be able to sing at all. Nor need you necessarily look for your master among foreigners with fine sounding names. There are two or three good teachers of singing in this country who are foreigners; but there is also some native talent equally capable of teaching singing, as it is accepted in this country at the present time. These know the English style better than any foreigner can teach it, and after all, style is the chief consideration.

=Inst.i.tutions.=--As we have no real English School of singing, it is perhaps fortunate that we have no Conservatoire. There are, however, Inst.i.tutions accessible to those who cannot afford to have masters at home or to place themselves under a private teacher. Of these, the chief is the Royal Academy of Music, in Tenterden Street, Hanover Square.

There is also the National Training School of Music, the London Academy of Music, also the Guildhall School, and there is Trinity College, London, where I believe singing lessons may also be obtained. To all these establishments singing masters, more or less good, are attached, and it is open to any one to obtain admission to the concerts given from time to time at the inst.i.tutions themselves, and to form some kind of opinion as to the teachers from the performances of the pupils. It would be well for an intending student to do this, for of course at any inst.i.tution where there are several professors, one might suit you and another might not; it is even conceivable that one professor might do all for you that you could possibly require, while another professor might be an ignorant charlatan. Therefore, hear their pupils and judge for yourself, making inquiries at the same time of musical people who are qualified to express an opinion on singing. I must not, however, withhold from my readers my conviction that private lessons are better and more effectual than those taken in schools and academies. The terms at these public inst.i.tutions are such that they preclude the possibility of more than twenty or thirty minutes being devoted to each pupil, and that is _not_ a sufficient time to bestow upon a lesson. Forty-five or sixty minutes are needed to give a good lesson; and the pupil who pays fifteen shillings or a guinea for this, does a wiser thing than the one who pays a fourth of that sum for, say, twenty minutes' attention.

=A First Opinion.=--The actual successful teachers of singing in London may be counted on the fingers of one hand, and those who are qualified to teach singing, but who are not specially successful, may be found on the remaining five fingers. Each of these professors would probably not take less than one guinea the lesson, and it would, honestly, be far cheaper in the long run to pay this sum for one good lesson in singing than it would be to have fifty lessons founded upon wrong principles, even for nothing. And for this reason: teachers of this calibre will not trouble themselves about you or your guineas unless you have a promising voice, some general musical talent, and show signs of becoming, to some degree, a credit to your _teacher_, for to these men guinea pupils are very plentiful, and it is only reasonable that a guinea from a clever pupil should be worth considerably more to a sensitive artist than the same amount from a fool. Therefore, a first opinion from one such teacher may save your spending money, time, and energy on a pursuit in which you can never succeed.

=Bad Lessons.=--Never take a bad singing lesson till you know how to sing.

You may then do so (if you care to), and learn the "how not to do it" of singing. It is commonly supposed that the earliest singing lessons may be administered by any "dabbler," and the last touches given afterwards by a "finishing master." Never was there a greater error. Pay your guineas first, and your shillings afterwards. If you cannot afford to have good instruction in beginning to sing, you will be still less able to take it afterwards, for artistic reasons. Remember that every bad singing lesson which you take hardens old faults and creates new ones, and, moreover, takes you farther and farther away from your original starting-point. So, when you begin under the right man and the right method, you have to _undo_ all this that you have expended toil and money to acquire.

=Bad Teachers.=--It is astonishing how much money is wasted by people who want to sing, through not going at once to the fountain-head for the necessary training. Because a man is a musician many people conclude that he must necessarily be able to teach singing! Such an idea is scarcely less monstrous than that of a man being a good physician and consequently competent to amputate a limb, or to take out and reset an eye. Do not follow this "mult.i.tude to do evil." Be as careful in inquiring about your singing master as you would be about your doctor.

Both in London and in the country there are "professors" whose knowledge of singing stops at professing--the cla.s.s of people who (very likely) keep a music-shop, tune your piano, play polkas and waltzes for your evening parties, and have a bra.s.s plate on their doors to this effect:

MR. HANDEL MOSCHELES IGn.a.z.iO JONES, PROFESSOR OF THE PIANOFORTE, HARMONY, THE VIOLIN, ITALIAN, AND SINGING.

All honourable professions, no doubt; but to profess to combine them all is dishonourable, and insulting to the common sense of those who know anything of any one of the subjects professed. A singing master, if he is worth anything, must be a man of one trade--singing. For the teaching of singing is a "specialty," and the man who can teach it _properly_ is not likely to be a man of all (musical) work.

=Books of Exercises, &c.=--There are numerous "Singing Tutors" published, giving rules, exercises, _solfeggi_, &c. Many of these are excellent, and some nearly perfect. But all alike are useless or worse than useless to the tyro, without a master. You might as well suppose that a child could learn to be a carpenter by having some fine wood and a box of good tools.

I have before observed that voices vary as faces do; no two are exactly alike, each voice having its peculiar merit and its peculiar defect.

Now, a good master will treat each voice on its own merit, and not place it at first on the Procrustean bed of a book of rules and exercises. He will probably write down his own exercises expressly for his pupil, and if not that, he will select certain exercises from the book, and forbid others to be attempted for a time. You must also let your master select such a book for you, so that you may have one in which the rules do not contradict those which he has already given you verbally, or else you will be perplexed with a mult.i.tude of counsellors.

It is not till a certain stage in singing has been reached, under the training of a master, that any book of exercises can be of service to you. When that stage is reached, you will find such a work of great use in a part of your labours. Among such books may be named as especially good,--Concone's Exercises, Righini's, Guercia's, Nava's, Lablache's, and Lamperti's; but, again I say, do not choose for yourself. There are some excellent rules, as well as some good exercises, in an old work of the kind by Crivelli, and also in "Singing Exemplified," a work by T.

Cooke. If you can meet with these, secure them--although I fear they may be long since out of print--for in the literature of singing the _new_ is by no means certain to excel what was written in the days of our best composers and singers of operas and oratorios.

ON THE PRACTICE OF SINGING.