Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Dear Mr. Postman...

On Sunday I received an email from George Hanson, criticizing my post about Mikhael Rawls. First, George takes issue with the label, 'countertenor.'
First, the term countertenor is very inexact, and is often used as a catch-all for many different voice types or fachs.  Countertenor is perhaps most appropriate for male singers who use falsetto (often without vibrato) to sing early or baroque music.  Many singers -- who perform operatic repertoire, i.e. David Daniels -- prefer the designation male alto.  The distinction is well deserved.

George is absolutely correct that there are different labels for different types of male sopranists, as shown by this chart at Trrill. But Nick points out that labels have been fluid in the last 100 years, so 'countertenor' has become acceptable for any male voice singing in the alto range, despite the repertoire, style, or means of singing. Anglican/Episcopalian Men and Boy choirs call their male falsettists 'countertenors,' whether they are performing Monteverdi or Mauridsen. And most importantly, Mikhael refers to himself as a countertenor, so we should respect his opinion in this.

George's other quibble is with my suggestion that countertenors would not blend well with female mezzos. I am happy to accept that I could be wrong in this. I am not trained as a choir director. My own experiences in choir are limited to being a boy soprano in a boy's choir until I was 14, and singing as a baritone in my high school choir. The timbres I experienced in these two choirs were very different, something that I thought a choir director may want to avoid if possible. In Mikhael's case, he was denied singing in the All-State Choir, a group that probably only rehearses for one or two weeks before performing. With such limited time, blending becomes even more of a challenge so auditions may be looking for homogenity in timbre rather than for distinctively strong voices. But again, IANACD. What are your thoughts?

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Any Good Carnival Has Llamas

The Llama Butchers are hosting this week's Carnival of Music.
Sorry for the delay, I was distracted by theories of phenomenology, cornetti, timbre cognition, and Kind of Blue. I'll be putting up several posts this week on Virtual Listeners and Virtual Composers, Beethoven's Anvil, a response to my post on the Texas Countertenor, and a new installment of the iChing.

I'll be hosting next week's Carnival, so send those entries to me.

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Episkey! Episkey!

I finished the latest Harry Potter book last night. I think it is the best of the series yet, with the kids acting like mature-yet-realistic teenagers and the grownups actually listening to the kids. I'm still pondering about the significance of the biggest plot point, thinking that perhaps things aren't as they seem. But then again,
Want to Get Sorted?

I'm a Ravenclaw!

Monday, July 18, 2005

The Podcast Carnival

CoMBanner.gif

Prent Rodgers, the master of the 30-second soundbite, has posted this week's Carnival of Music, so go enjoy the rides.

Saturday, July 16, 2005

Off to the Movies!

Alert! Movie spoilers lie ahead.


Last night the whole family packed into the minivan and went to a local drive-in. It's a step back through time, where kids in PJs snuggle up with their parents to watch a fine moral film about four superheroes that kick the bejeesus out of a supervillain. I actually thought The Fantastic Four was well done, except for the machine that could turn off their powers. If Reed could make it once, why not redo it with more power so Ben could transform back and forth whenever needed? Part of the classic tragedy of the Thing is that he has no way to turn back to normal, which is somewhat lost with this plotline.

The second movie of the night was Mr. and Mrs. Smith. This was much less believable. A married couple cannot flip back and forth from trying to kill each other to saving each other, with very little emotional cost. And the idea that (MAJOR SPOILERS HERE)


the two assassination companies had set up the Tank hit in a Byzantine way to get rid of two employees who were too close is ludicrous. If they wanted to get rid of John and Jane, each company could plant a bomb in their respective office, or pay one of the other employees to shoot them, or send a whole squadron after the house, which is what they ended up doing anyway after the targets were on alert. And if these companies are so big and powerful, the ending should not have been the ending. The Smiths should still be running, not having another session with the same marriage counselor.

Thursday, July 14, 2005

How to teach inversions

Marcus Maroney has a blistering reply to Kyle Gann's proposal to do away with figured bass. I completely agree with Marcus, but teaching a brief introduction to Hindemith's harmonic theory today reminded me of another way to teach inversions.

Hindemith divided all possible chords into six categories:

I - chords with no seconds, sevenths, or tritones (only major or minor triads)
II - chords with tritones, but no minor seconds or major sevenths (dominant sevenths and half-diminished sevenths, some secundal chords)
III - chords with no tritones, but does have seconds or sevenths (or both) (lots of options)
IV - chords with tritones and minor seconds or major sevenths (lots of options)
V - chords with no tritones but indetermininate root (augmented triad and quartal chord)
VI - chords with predominant tritones, indeterminate roots (diminished triad, fully diminished seventh chord)

Within each category except V and VI, there are subdivisions for inversion: Root position = 1, any inversion = 2. (Hindemith had a theory of interval roots that he used to identify roots of chords, which is only confusing with very complex chords.)

I think Kyle would like this system, as it has only two categories to remember for inversion, and no pesky figured bass symbols, simply "1" or "2". Unfortunately, it does nothing to show the dissonance of a 4/2 chord (seventh chord in third inversion) as compared to a 6/5 or 4/3 inversion. Kyle gets all worked up that the second inversion triad is significantly different from the first inversion triad, but the second inversion seventh chord is not. I disagree, as a V 4/3 chord can have an upwardly resolving seventh that the V 6/5 never could (in functional tonal music). But more importantly, these inversions are distinctly different from the third inversion, which has very specific rules of resolution, just like the second inversion triad.

As for using figured bass instead of "1", "2" and "3", figured bass allows indications of many things besides chord inversions. It indicates chromatic alterations in a chord, including the ever-important Ti in minor keys that first-years often forget. Figured bass also provides an easy way of indicating all the different types of suspensions -- including double and triple suspensions and retardations -- and can be used to describe types of sequences (see the new Laitz text for this). What other method of chord labelling provides such power and is more memorable (7th inversions are simply counting down from 7: 7, 6/5, 4/3, 2; all figured bass is about describing intervals up from the bass note)?

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

Tripping on Webber?

My brother sent me a New York Times article about musical hallucinations. I was going to blog about it in detail, but BrainBlog and Mind Hacks have beat me to the punch. I would be curious to see how these hallucinations compare to subjective tinnitus, as both are about the sensation of sound without physical cause.