User Vocal Ranges (23,998 views)

[Steingrim]

Oct 30, 2024 15:50:01 GMT kaji said:

Oct 30, 2024 5:30:35 GMT Steingrim said:

When a microphone is used, it's easy to find contemporary basses that sing C2 and below in modal voice with no graininess. Here's Avi Kaplan singing a couple of B1s. It's simply smooth : youtu.be/3oc1XuqzyGs?si=bljfV6qf3T5xdPWx&t=147

Alas, I don't hear this as smooth or clean. 

It's perhaps a tad breathy, and digitally processed.

[kaji]

Oct 30, 2024 16:06:23 GMT Steingrim said:

Oct 30, 2024 15:50:01 GMT kaji said:

Alas, I don't hear this as smooth or clean. 

It's perhaps a tad breathy, and digitally processed.

Clarity and firmness of the lower end is very important so yes, I would not consider this as smooth or clean. Any aspiration should absolutely be purely a choice (I question this choice but should be a choice regardless). With Avi I don't feel like it's always a choice. Someone like George Beverly Shea or George Younce is a better candidate for a properly produced lower end for a bass. I don't have any clips of Shea per se as I've not notewatched him in any way yes, but I know he has very clean low Cs. And as for Younce there is a compilation - www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZdfetJMkUk

[Steingrim]

Oct 30, 2024 16:14:28 GMT kaji said:

Oct 30, 2024 16:06:23 GMT Steingrim said:

It's perhaps a tad breathy, and digitally processed.

Clarity and firmness of the lower end is very important so yes, I would not consider this as smooth or clean. Any aspiration should absolutely be purely a choice (I question this choice but should be a choice regardless). With Avi I don't feel like it's always a choice. Someone like George Beverly Shea or George Younce is a better candidate for a properly produced lower end for a bass. I don't have any clips of Shea per se as I've not notewatched him in any way yes, but I know he has very clean low Cs. And as for Younce there is a compilation - www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZdfetJMkUk

Nice C2s, but I'm not sure how "contemporary" the music is.

[kaji]

Oct 30, 2024 16:26:11 GMT Steingrim said:

Oct 30, 2024 16:14:28 GMT kaji said:

Clarity and firmness of the lower end is very important so yes, I would not consider this as smooth or clean. Any aspiration should absolutely be purely a choice (I question this choice but should be a choice regardless). With Avi I don't feel like it's always a choice. Someone like George Beverly Shea or George Younce is a better candidate for a properly produced lower end for a bass. I don't have any clips of Shea per se as I've not notewatched him in any way yes, but I know he has very clean low Cs. And as for Younce there is a compilation - www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZdfetJMkUk

Nice C2s, but I'm not sure how "contemporary" the music is.

It's not classical or theatre - and southern gospel and hymnal music used to be quite popular and mainstream in his time. 

[Steingrim]

Oct 30, 2024 16:30:05 GMT kaji said:

Oct 30, 2024 16:26:11 GMT Steingrim said:

Nice C2s, but I'm not sure how "contemporary" the music is.

It's not classical or theatre - and southern gospel and hymnal music used to be quite popular and mainstream in his time. 

Yeah, but I was thinking about the current crop of pop style singers.

[kaji]

Oct 30, 2024 16:32:15 GMT Steingrim said:

Oct 30, 2024 16:30:05 GMT kaji said:

It's not classical or theatre - and southern gospel and hymnal music used to be quite popular and mainstream in his time. 

Yeah, but I was thinking about the current crop of pop style singers.

Then - where are the basses? 

[Steingrim]

Oct 30, 2024 17:24:10 GMT kaji said:

Oct 30, 2024 16:32:15 GMT Steingrim said:

Yeah, but I was thinking about the current crop of pop style singers.

Then - where are the basses? 

I was expecting you to throw in a list of "top 20 awesome contemporary pop basses" or something, but I suppose it doesn't quite work that way.

[amadeusd]

Oct 30, 2024 15:50:01 GMT kaji said:

I'm sorry but this doesn't make sense lol. 

With utmost respect, what are you even trying to say? The best basses 'smooth out' what is, inescapably, a grainy tone in those areas. Not sure what's not landing? There is nothing either "nonsensical" or even audibly wrong in this take.

[Steingrim]

Oct 30, 2024 18:48:21 GMT amadeusd said:

Oct 30, 2024 15:50:01 GMT kaji said:

I'm sorry but this doesn't make sense lol. 

With utmost respect, what are you even trying to say? The best basses 'smooth out' what is, inescapably, a grainy tone in those areas. Not sure what's not landing? There is nothing either "nonsensical" or even audibly wrong in this take.

What you just said makes sense when it comes to M0 - fry voice. J D Sumner's "Old Man River" down to Eb1 starts out crackly at the bottom but somehow he manages to even out the part starting at about 3:00. www.youtube.com/watch?v=beGecpjR_Cc

George Younce doesn't need to think about breathiness/graininess at all when he sings all those C2s in M1 - modal voice, because it's a note that he can sing with good technique, without any problems.

[kaji]

Oct 30, 2024 18:48:21 GMT amadeusd said:

Oct 30, 2024 15:50:01 GMT kaji said:

I'm sorry but this doesn't make sense lol. 

With utmost respect, what are you even trying to say? The best basses 'smooth out' what is, inescapably, a grainy tone in those areas. Not sure what's not landing? There is nothing either "nonsensical" or even audibly wrong in this take.

The type of Janis Joplin distortion has literally nothing to do with how bass notes are created though. This does not make sense. CVT by Sadolin actually talks about this form of distortion in detail. I recommend. 

Oct 30, 2024 19:07:18 GMT Steingrim said:

Oct 30, 2024 18:48:21 GMT amadeusd said:

With utmost respect, what are you even trying to say? The best basses 'smooth out' what is, inescapably, a grainy tone in those areas. Not sure what's not landing? There is nothing either "nonsensical" or even audibly wrong in this take.

What you just said makes sense when it comes to M0 - fry voice. J D Sumner's "Old Man River" down to Eb1 starts out crackly at the bottom but somehow he manages to even out the part starting at about 3:00. www.youtube.com/watch?v=beGecpjR_Cc

George Younce doesn't need to think about breathiness/graininess at all when he sings all those C2s in M1 - modal voice, because it's a note that he can sing with good technique, without any problems.

Well, the thing is... the 'fry' that is a form of distortion is not the same thing as M0 fry. Which is why I personally like to separate the two into 'fry distortion' and 'creak register'. Much clearer, especially since you see 'fry' referring to the form of distortion (eg. the 'Kim Kardashian fry') more, than 'fry' as in the creak register (M0). 

[Steingrim]

Oct 31, 2024 3:35:54 GMT kaji said:

Oct 30, 2024 19:07:18 GMT Steingrim said:

What you just said makes sense when it comes to M0 - fry voice. J D Sumner's "Old Man River" down to Eb1 starts out crackly at the bottom but somehow he manages to even out the part starting at about 3:00. www.youtube.com/watch?v=beGecpjR_Cc

George Younce doesn't need to think about breathiness/graininess at all when he sings all those C2s in M1 - modal voice, because it's a note that he can sing with good technique, without any problems.

Well, the thing is... the 'fry' that is a form of distortion is not the same thing as M0 fry. Which is why I personally like to separate the two into 'fry distortion' and 'creak register'. Much clearer, especially since you see 'fry' referring to the form of distortion (eg. the 'Kim Kardashian fry') more, than 'fry' as in the creak register (M0). 

From the following study : www.researchgate.net/profile/Ingo-Titze/publication/301202172_Application_of_Vocal_Fry_to_the_Training_of_Singers/links/5715550108ae16479d8ac920/Application-of-Vocal-Fry-to-the-Training-of-Singers.pdf

"As such, vocal fry can be distinguished from so-called "creaky voice," which is found at higher frequencies and is characterized by a perception of roughness and the presence of subharmonics in the glottal waveform."

Which reverses your proposed terminology. Including the number based terms seems to be the only way to be clear about the various mechanisms. M0, M1 etc. 

[kaji]

Nov 1, 2024 12:24:53 GMT Steingrim said:

Oct 31, 2024 3:35:54 GMT kaji said:

Well, the thing is... the 'fry' that is a form of distortion is not the same thing as M0 fry. Which is why I personally like to separate the two into 'fry distortion' and 'creak register'. Much clearer, especially since you see 'fry' referring to the form of distortion (eg. the 'Kim Kardashian fry') more, than 'fry' as in the creak register (M0). 

From the following study : www.researchgate.net/profile/Ingo-Titze/publication/301202172_Application_of_Vocal_Fry_to_the_Training_of_Singers/links/5715550108ae16479d8ac920/Application-of-Vocal-Fry-to-the-Training-of-Singers.pdf

"As such, vocal fry can be distinguished from so-called "creaky voice," which is found at higher frequencies and is characterized by a perception of roughness and the presence of subharmonics in the glottal waveform."

Which reverses your proposed terminology. Including the number based terms seems to be the only way to be clear about the various mechanisms. M0, M1 etc. 

Neat, I've not seen Titze talk about this. Thanks for this. 

[Steingrim]

Nov 1, 2024 17:48:54 GMT kaji said:

Nov 1, 2024 12:24:53 GMT Steingrim said:

From the following study : www.researchgate.net/profile/Ingo-Titze/publication/301202172_Application_of_Vocal_Fry_to_the_Training_of_Singers/links/5715550108ae16479d8ac920/Application-of-Vocal-Fry-to-the-Training-of-Singers.pdf

"As such, vocal fry can be distinguished from so-called "creaky voice," which is found at higher frequencies and is characterized by a perception of roughness and the presence of subharmonics in the glottal waveform."

Which reverses your proposed terminology. Including the number based terms seems to be the only way to be clear about the various mechanisms. M0, M1 etc. 

Neat, I've not seen Titze talk about this. Thanks for this. 

The latest videos at New York Vocal Coaching use the terms M0 "fry" about the lowest singing register and vocal fry about higher pitch distortion effects.

[amadeusd]

Oct 31, 2024 3:35:54 GMT kaji said:

Oct 30, 2024 18:48:21 GMT amadeusd said:

With utmost respect, what are you even trying to say? The best basses 'smooth out' what is, inescapably, a grainy tone in those areas. Not sure what's not landing? There is nothing either "nonsensical" or even audibly wrong in this take.

The type of Janis Joplin distortion has literally nothing to do with how bass notes are created though. This does not make sense. CVT by Sadolin actually talks about this form of distortion in detail. I recommend. 

Oct 30, 2024 19:07:18 GMT Steingrim said:

As previously, I'm having ahard time understanding what you're actually trying to say/talk about here because I've said nothing, whatever, about the mechanical details. Any frequency lower than about a D2 is 'creaky'. The register is not relevant to what I'm saying. They are all grainy. There is no examples of a non-grainy note lower than that. Your example/s sort of prove what I'm saying, whether or not you would choose this terminology. They are grainy notes. I am, in no way, trying to be facetious or combative - this is akin to hearing someone claim that raspiness isn't in Joplin's voice, to take that analogy further. It's perplexing to say the least.. 

[Steingrim]

Nov 4, 2024 18:43:04 GMT amadeusd said:

Oct 31, 2024 3:35:54 GMT kaji said:

The type of Janis Joplin distortion has literally nothing to do with how bass notes are created though. This does not make sense. CVT by Sadolin actually talks about this form of distortion in detail. I recommend. 

As previously, I'm having ahard time understanding what you're actually trying to say/talk about here because I've said nothing, whatever, about the mechanical details. Any frequency lower than about a D2 is 'creaky'. The register is not relevant to what I'm saying. They are all grainy. There is no examples of a non-grainy note lower than that. Your example/s sort of prove what I'm saying, whether or not you would choose this terminology. They are grainy notes. I am, in no way, trying to be facetious or combative - this is akin to hearing someone claim that raspiness isn't in Joplin's voice, to take that analogy further. It's perplexing to say the least.. 

I tried transposing some of the octave 1 notes that I linked, up one octave, and they sound perfectly normal to me, in terms of what I would expect at the new pitch. Especially the B1 that Miller ends The Song of Simeon on. Do you have any evidence from external sources to the effect that every note lower than D2 is per definition 'creaky'?

[icarusofsillyboys]

Vocal range is A2 - C6
Passaggio is G#4

But I wouldn't really trust myself singing below B2 or above G5 live. But I'm gaining more confidence up to A5 with a "power falsetto" sound. In my post-hardcore band our average setlist is around C#3 - F5 but in the studio I've gone down to G2 and up to A#5 in harmonies.

For funsies, onto the nonsense. With my "morning voice" I have a bottom expansion of between 2 and (very rarely) 5 notes and my whistle register goes up to like G#6 or something but that's unusable (I used to use it for Mike Patton style squeals but I stopped doing it and have lost the ability to do it with any consistency). So my silly nonsense range is E2 - G#6 (although that's a very dishonest representation of my capabilities and how I use my voice).