Berzan Önen (2,088 views)

[Goober]

I kind of disagree, This guy is great at executing second/first octave throat sung notes? (Evil G, Pagan Pantheon). The only issue is when he's climbing up a scale (i.e "Far Beyond the Astral Door"), and in the case of such notes... there isn't much else he can do? He very intentionally starts at C2 and ends at C4, it's impossible to go up that scale without something being off (whether it's jumping from Eb2 to G3 or jumping from G2 to C4). Same goes for when he's quickly sliding from a throat sung E2 to a B4, I have yet to hear someone pull that off without skipping over several notes when switching techniques (I'd be happy to be proven wrong tho). Would these notes sound convincing as second/first octave when put in a melody that is say C2 - Eb2 - G2 - C3? For example the Burn it All E2 sounds very convincing as an E2 to me. The reason the notes in "Far Beyond the Astral Door", "Children of the Grave" Etc. might be perceived as third octave is due to them being put in melodies that third octave is usually used in, but on their own these notes easily pass as second octave imo. These melodies are a pretty unique scenario though, at least to me, so for consistencies sake I'll probably include such notes as the notes I perceive them as in the immediate, unless I'm met with a copious amount of backlash

Hopefully I didn't just attack a straw man lol 

[amadeusd]

I don't think intention matters. If you 'want' it so sound 'like' a B1, but you're hitting a B2, what you want is irrelevant.

[Electric Mami]

I disagree, if you know what you're doing with your voice and that you intend to produce a subharmonic technique, you know you're going for the lower octave through a specific technique

[EddieCheivz]

Oct 13, 2024 20:46:16 GMT Electric Mami said:

I disagree, if you know what you're doing with your voice and that you intend to produce a subharmonic technique, you know you're going for the lower octave through a specific technique

Yeah but the thing is, if that undertone you're intending and producing is not satisfactorily well connected to make us validate it as that, then it won't anyways, no matter the intention if the result is not the expectation, that's the point.

In that case on my dreams I hit growled C0s and whistles E8s just because in my mind I went for it, even when I actually I did nasty, doubtful and unpitchable pipes.

[Goober]

the undertone he is producing is satisfactory for what he is intending

[EddieCheivz]

It may be satisfactory for what he intended yeah (musically talking) but for counting a note that's irrelevant, his intention was only make a noticeable lower sounding there. No neccesairly make it "one legit octave down" and yeah, he did an minimum convincing lower sound, but that does not allow us counting it as that just for the intention 

[amadeusd]

Why are we even arguing about notes not sung? The note sung is what should count. Not sure why appearance is being considered a defining attribute. Intentional deception doesn’t, to me, seem a defence of any kind.

We should then count overtoned screams which sound, convincingly, an octave higher on this account. I don’t think that’s correct myself

[Electric Mami]

Again, overtones screams are enhancing something that was always there and the subharmonics are creating something that doesn't normally exist, which is the whole point of counting the latter and not the former

[Steingrim]

Oct 14, 2024 19:32:18 GMT Electric Mami said:

Again, overtones screams are enhancing something that was always there and the subharmonics are creating something that doesn't normally exist, which is the whole point of counting the latter and not the former

The reason why we perceive a note as modal instead of falsetto has a lot to do with overtones. With a modal note the overtones merely enhance our perception of its fundamental. With a decent subharmonic my brain tends to perceive two different notes at the same time, one octave apart. If it's at the end of a descending melody line then I will perceive a G1/G2 subharmonic note as lower than the preceding modal C2, for instance. So it does create an impression of something more than the G2 in that combination.

Here Castellucci starts on a G#1/2 sub, goes to a C#1/2 sub then sings from a G#1 in fry voice. My brain perceives both the mentioned G#'s as at the same pitch, just the second seems more even. That's an inherent problem with subs, they will never sound particularly even, whereas decent fry notes can be relatively rattle free. www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ys4Q1PO5ek

Here he descends through a B1 to an E1 sub, this time I perceive it as being less uneven and as having good tone, so to me that would be a boldable sub : youtu.be/l8Sxh5E2u_g?si=-JDKJD03LiFNSOW0&t=190s

[amadeusd]

Oct 14, 2024 19:32:18 GMT Electric Mami said:

Again, overtones screams are enhancing something that was always there and the subharmonics are creating something that doesn't normally exist, which is the whole point of counting the latter and not the former

I'm not quite sure exactly what you're trying to say, because it seems that what you're saying just isn't relevant (and, i think, even true). I may be fully misunderstanding, but I'm powering on regardless - I just want this to be in mind if it seems off or whatever. 
In neither case is the 'presented' note, let's call it, actually sung. That's the entire concept of overtones and subharmonics. They are not the note being sung - they are both incidental harmonics of something that's actually being sung. 
However, clearly they can be utilized in a way similar to modal notes. True polyphonic singing shows this far more than any of the singers we've actually crossed for this. But, that logic would apply to both ends of hte spectrum. Overtones and subharmonics aren't fundamentally different things. They would both need to be captured by the same rule, as far as I i'm concerned. 

Though, perhaps this is part and parcel with my want for consistency. 

[amadeusd]

Oct 14, 2024 0:50:03 GMT Goober said:

the undertone he is producing is satisfactory for what he is intending

Perfect example of why you simply can't apply different logic to both forms. This phrase above applies exactly as well to, honestly, the majority of overtone screams. If this is a defence of inclusion, Mike Patton's probably got seven octaves. 

[Goober]

Alright I don't want this thread to be clogged with an overtone vs subharmonic discussion that is probably going to lead nowhere, I will direct you to this thread, which you may have already seen. The similarities and dissimilarities between overtones/subharmonics are explained very well I think. For future reference please keep this thread on the topic of Mr. Berzan Onen

[amadeusd]

Suffice to say there are no rational reasons given in that thread to count one and not the other. The descriptions are exactly hte same, and then an opinion is given. Exactly what's trying to be avoided.

Do not count this guys subs as their deceptive pitch. That's my take. Don't count anyone's subs as the deceptive pitch.

[Electric Mami]

Btw the false folds do produce the perceived pitch as far as I'm aware, and you either fumble completely on it and never really manage to maintain the sub, or you manage to hold it and dominate the vocal folds engagement that are doing the higher octave note like Berzan does in most cases. Since we agreed the growls are legit 1st octave, please take note that his throat singing is also engaging false folds to produce the note you're hearing just like his growls do, and therefore, that disqualifying his throat sung notes but not his growled notes literally makes no sense from a technical point of view. The thread that Goober shared treats of "normal" subharmonics, which are another technique that do not use false folds like throat singing or growls do

If the issue is what it seems to be, that is, arguing over the quality of his technique, then we can just agree to disagree because no one is moving from their opinion that his technique is either amazing or not good enough, which is totally fine

[amadeusd]

That's not really the issue I have. If we were going on how well-presented something is, dude is the absolute epitome of an extreme range-wanker.
As it stands, I cannot see what you're seeing. What do you think produces the pitches in an overtone? Or in Khoomei? They are incidental not magical :P I'm jesting, but i'm sure it is clear that my issue is not his skill, it's the tech. Nothing that isn't sung should be counted in a singers singer range, OR it all should be. That's all i'm saying.
THe idea that growls and subharms are comparable in this arena is bizarre to say the least, but I understnad the point you're mkaing in terms of criteria. Expel them all. Particularly for Berzan! Burn it down!

[Platypus]

I was gonna do a boring technical spiel here, but who fucking cares at this point, leaving it in the spoiler for prosperity

SPOILER: Click to show

{Spoiler}In Khoomei, the overtone is created by forming your mouth to create a specific resonance Chamber to amplify certain overtones. The overtone is not changed by adjusting Your voice, but rather adjusting Your mouth to create a different resonance.

As for overtone screams, they are either unintentional (due to recording quality or vocal damage), exist independently of the fundamental (as in, the overtone has no harmonic relation to the fundamental note), or they are made using distortion to amplify the overtones that already exist.

Both subharmonics and kargyraa (throat singing) are different in this regard in that they
a) both create the undertones, they aren't just amplifying the ones that already exist
b) both are produced with the vocal cords and have a harmonic relation between fundamental and overtone

From a technical standpoint, throat singing is like doing modal singing and growls at the same time. So for example, modal A2 + growled A1 = Throatsung A1.
Subharmonics is some black magic shit, but basically Your vocal cords are producing two pitches at once that creates an undertone 1 octave below the fundamental

I personally am pretty conservative about counting that stuff, but I think that there are definitely times where it makes sense to do so. Alternatively, we could nuke Patton back to G1, but I don't think anyone wants that

In terms of like, deceit, I'd argue singing itself is an illusion. Notewatching is, in a way, systematic categorization of deceit. There is no such thing as a 'real' A1, only air pressure that creates the illusion of A1 in our heads. And even in the driest of rooms, a subharmonic A1 is going to give that A1 illusion, which is a criteria that very few overtone screams will fulfill.

If you wanna think of notewatching in terms of "the fastest and slowest frequencies a singer can flap their vocal-porkchops together, and the songs in which they've done so" that's okay. Depends on what you're out to categorize. Do you want notewatching to be a transcribed breakdown of the exact hertz values a singer has been documented to produce through normal use of their vocal cords? Or do you you want to know what range of notes a vocalist is capable of singing? Because I think those goals are slightly different.

[Goober]

Oct 15, 2024 23:41:05 GMT Platypus said:

In terms of like, deceit, I'd argue singing itself is an illusion. Notewatching is, in a way, systematic categorization of deceit. There is no such thing as a 'real' A1, only air pressure that creates the illusion of A1 in our heads. And even in the driest of rooms, a subharmonic A1 is going to give that A1 illusion, which is a criteria that very few overtone screams will fulfill.

This reeks of a future TRP copypasta

[avi]

1) Love how goober linked a more relevant thread to be having this discussion on and we all went on talkin here

2) "Singing itself is an illusion. Notewatching is, in a way, systemic categorization of deceit" goes hard asf and I want it on a t-shirt

[mushymarionette]

I wasn't expecting this thread to become such a warzone, makes Ukraine look tame. Damn it Berzan!

[Goober]

gonna ask how we feel about counting the D1 here

[EddieCheivz]

We can't even agree yet on whether to count the other low notes we have pending lol

[Electric Mami]

I feel like Goober has stated his stance confidently and clearly enough to move on and honestly it doesn't seem unreasonable to just agree to disagree at this point

[EddieCheivz]

I don't see the point then to ask for more opinions with another lowest note when most of previously aforethere opinions stated the other ones shouldn't count either and we've cannot proceed with them.

[Goober]

They are two different techniques? I don't think anyone is really contesting the growls?

[amadeusd]

Oct 19, 2024 2:55:13 GMT Goober said:

They are two different techniques? I don't think anyone is really contesting the growls?

I certainly am. I have no clue why this forum randomly includes techniques that aren't singing. 

But, that's the forum for you! This one at least seems consistent across all threads, so I have no issue agreeing to disagree, though.