Chapter 12: Improving Choral Blend Blend in choral singing can be defined as se oo) aetna He voices into one uniform- i i end as “an ensemble s ca ig ensemble, voices cannot be separately discerned by a listen ound in which individual eee Searching for ways to Orvdliee better Conductors and production, rhythm, desired choral eee Vowel fl ing, use of falsetto, voice m i Bean : atching, and positioning are some of th i be considered to achieve blend. the strategies that can ercei Perceived homogeneous sound. N Fi eae ee discuss how to select voices for a choral ensemble that 2008; Noble ae blend with others (e.g., Bassinger, 2006; Eskelin, clude ae i y The presumption is that conductors should not in- ones na o do not fit their tonal model. The reality is that most should not a SHOT eae cannot pick and choose voices—and ! All s: : of ensemble Snore ingers can and should benefit from the experience The : BR Mela mast fully articulate proponent of a blended choral sound was about blend eee director of the choir at St. Olaf College. His ideas ®nunciation ate influenced many conductors, including ideas about precise is ae consonants and consistent production of vowels. Nonetheless, Not alwa to choral blend tended to produce.an artificial sound that was s well received by audiences. Latimer and Daugher'y (2006) de- i: rt of the St. Olaf Choir that 7 ele the sound of the female choir members as “SO impersonal in er that it suggested the voices of boys” (Downes, 1927, p- 17). n both to use covered VOW- vibrancy in their roduction). Not only is this Such a ; al Produc is often produced by asking women > Singing ction (see Chapter 5 on vowels) and t0 eliminate arti ale use a “straight tone” method of Pp’ Not one also es unreflective of the full tonal quality of Ser i ay Mal Pedagog > YOCal tension. Indeed even in Christiansen $ ka ae Bogues argued that his approach to choral singing “C™ 191oe eS ee eee en 192 Vocal Technique: A Guide for Conductors, Teachers, ang Singers sary and unhealthy tension in the vocal mechanism” (Latimer & Daughery 2006, p. 19). Many credit the Robert Shaw Chorale for “opening the door toa much er range of possibilities for choral tone” (Basinger, 2006, p, 4), Non less, some choral directors continue to attempt to achieve blend by alteri the production of individual voices, which fuels the argument p, e voice teachers that developing voices should not participate ; (Ekholm, 2000). We maintain that blend can be achieved without sacrificing individual Vocal integrity. Recent research supports the move away from the technique of requesting all singers to sound the same or sacrifice individual tone quality and individuality to achieve choral blend (Knutson, 1987). The techniques in this chapter are intended to assist all singers in moving toward a good en- semble sound without “neutralizing idiosyncrasies of individual singers’ (Smith & Sataloff, 2006, p. 182). Wid. Y some In. choirs Conductors’ concepts of desired choral sound can have a substantial effect on how they go about achieving blend. One school of thought strives fora homogeneous sound from the highest through the lowest voices. Another point of view is to work for blend largely within vocal sections but with dis tinctive colors for each section. A third perspective is to use both concepts varying the blend of the ensemble based on the repertoire sung. Assubscrib- er to this theory may seek to create a wall of even sound on an eight-pat chord in, for example, an Eric Whitacre piece, while still capturing the Lad tinctive warm, resonant quality inherent in the soloistic bass and alto oe in repertoire by Brahms and others. As noted in Chapter 4 on resonance quality of sound can be subtly influenced in a number of ways, allowing voice parts to maximize or minimize their inherent differences. Le Keys to a blended sound : : a ee oe Smith and Sataloff (2006) suggest the following as essential elements ° blended sound: fae see Color (no individual voices identifiable, distinctive color for each tion, distinctive color for the ensemble as a whole) «Balance (individual sections are balanced within the ensemble)\ Improving Choral Blend 193 4 Tuning \ ¢ Diction (vowels and consonants performed uniformly) \ this is a helpful set of issues to keep in mind, but we thi for blend are more numerous and multifaceted. The foll \ ommendations for improving and refining blend. ink the ingredients lowing are our rec- \ Uniform vowel production within sections ty Robert Shaw cites “distortion of voweling” as making sectional unison im- at possible to achieve (Blocker, 2004, p. 87). As noted in Chapter 5 on vowels, if ‘ty singers within a section are producing vowels differently, the first and se- cond formant frequencies can be excessively different, leading to a lack of “ty uniformity in sound. Remember, however, it is not necessary for every sing- ‘er to look exactly the same on the outside—it is the inside that counts, Sing- oy ers can obtain a good tonal and physical reference when conductors take time in the warm-up to establish the desired vowel colors and the preferred method of achieving them. Providing singers with this reference will make uniformity of tone quality in the repertoire much simpler. J Uniformity of vowels is important for all singers in a choir, but we especially emphasize uniformity within a choral section. When sections are called upon to sing notes near the top of their range for instance, those sections will need an) modify their vowels to produce an appropriate sound that is neither s! pressed nor bright and brassy. Singing a slightly modified vowel in these sec- i tions will not harm the sound—it will actually contribute to better blend, Provided all singers have the same concept of the desired modification. iff Precise, quick consonants ty Weston Noble (2005) describes what he calls “the ‘original sin’ of the -— i) “Ur vocalist” (p, 57)—closing on the vowel by anticipating the oe sé, ‘Rat follows, shortening the length of the beauty of the vowel. Also, if some is" choral group members are lazy in their production of consonants, a eee ohesive sound will result, with some singers appropriately ovine ae the next vowel while others are creating consonant noise. al a "6 on consonants for strategies and exercises to improve Im! ivi Sup production of consonants. Precis, © rhythms of blend is ce line EB ing “The bottom ver arrive the vowel and n¢ d?” (p- 57)- N ae (2005) quotes Robert Shaw as saying thm! You directors work so hard at unifying Vowel together—how can you achieve blennen TT 194 Vocal Technique: A Guide for Conductors, Teachers, and Singers Often, the underlying problem is not the production of a consonant but ra. ther the singer's perception of time or rhythm. Singers need constant en. couragement to watch the conductor and to find ways of physically incorporating the pulse and subdivisions of that pulse. Long, sustained pitches are particularly difficult. It does not take long for singers to lose the sense of where they are rhythmically if they are not paying close attention. Try subdividing sustained pitches, either audibly or mentally. Sing a passage on a neutral syllable and rearticulate each subdivision (da-da-da-da on eighth notes, for example). Another technique is to tap the pulse (or a subdi- vision of it) with your toe or finger. Avoid tapping the foot as this can be dis- tracting to others. Highly rhythmic passages can also cause difficulties. A lack of blend will oc- cur if choral singers are moving at different times. In such cases rehearsing to the rhythm without the pitches can be helpful. Either chant the passage in a high pitched, sing-song tone quality (more easily linked to the singing voice than regular speaking) or sing it slowly on one con- stant note. After a couple of repetitions sing the correct pitches and increase the speed so that muscle memory does not occur at a slow tempo. This can be difficult to correct! Rather, practice shorter sections up to performance tempo and systematically add more notes as facility increases. Then sing the passage as written. Precise cutoffs All singers have experienced poor cutoffs, particularly when they involve noisy consonants like [s]. Sometimes singers fail to watch the conductors indication of a cutoff and sometimes conductors fail to indicate clearly cutoff. A singer’s individual perception of the passage of time may a fault a5 well, Regardless, conductors should endeavor to explain et where final consonants should be placed or where the sound should wr They should show it with their gesture as clearly as possible, and oe : should practice efficient releases to produce blend right through the © of phrases. Attention to dynamics same oY: Blend is improved when all singers within a section produce the ress namic level. If some sing much louder than others, especially with a or heavy style of production, those singers will stand out, resulting of blend.>» Robert Shaw emphasizes the perils of oversingi i “distortion of voweling” and “disturbances Singing, noting that both inci of vocal color” of singing too loudly (by some or all singers), He ern eis “impede sectional unison—which is the sine qua non erage ey discipline” (Blocker, 2004, p. 87). > Many blend problems related to dynamic level disappear if si ar if listen to each other. Indeed, when singers are in eae ee ee each other they will naturally adjust their dynamic level, as well as pitch and formant frequencies (Titze, 2008a). : Ofcourse balancing of dynamic level across the entire choir is also important when the same dynamic level is indicated in the music for each section. Sopranos and dynamics Remember that sopranos sing at pitch levels in a range where the human ear is keenly sensitive, thus chastising them for their louder perceived volume is unproductive. If sopranos are asked to reduce their volume, a reduction in sound quality, intonation, as well as blend may result. If this is the case, con- sider encouraging the other sections to sing out more. Developing singers and soft dynamic levels ina choral setting Developing singers are encouraged by their voice teachers to sing with a full sound to facilitate the development of supported, resonant singing. Singing softly is, simply put, a more advanced skill. Offering helpful techniques and Teminders about soft singing can be beneficial. Also, more often than not, allowing a comfortable level of production is important. Learn very soft pas- Sages at a slightly louder dynamic than you might ultimately perform them So that singers can have the mechanics of the rhythms, pitches, and words under control before attending to extreme dynamic levels. We also recom- mend more frequent stagger breathing. T . he role of covering en siiete oko sand 7 i easi- a conductors favor a slightly darker tone because darker voices are ne ine blend—brighter voices tend to stick out. We favor a natu ee Z imi a mix of darker and brighter resonance, but there Is j 8¢ of tonality that is acceptable to audiences. : os jon i chieve blend when @ i spect @ Sovered method of production is one way to 8 ec 7 in the low- fer ei Part stands out too much. For example, if most Pe ae is asked to i rtion of their range during a piano section but one seyt 196 Vocal Technique: A Guide for Conductors, Teachers, and Singers ascend the scale, it may stand out too much. If this is the case, You can ask singers to use a covered approach to production, particularly if a bright vowel such as [i] is being sung (e.g. sing [i] with the mouth formed to sing [0] or [>]: Acovered method of production is ultimately an unhealthy method of pro duction if sustained and should be used sparingly because an improper alignment of the vocal tract relative to the vowel to be sung will produce un. desirable tension. The role of falsetto to produce PSUR ote] Tenors are frequently asked in the choral literature to sing a high tessitura, Many untrained tenors (especially younger singers) will find it difficult to sing A,-flat or even Gs and above in modal voice without breaking or with- out a pressed mode of production. In such cases asking them to use falsetto may help to blend their sound with other sections. This is particularly true for quiet passages. For this to be effective, they need to practice falsetto periodically to improve its quality, otherwise it will be too grainy or incon- sistent to employ as an effective blend device. (Professional singers should not need to use falsetto for this purpose because they should have devel- oped the ability to sing reasonably softly at higher pitches in the modal upper register.) ‘The need for basses to use falsetto is rare, because they are more likely tbe the anchor in the chord structure. Falsetto can be helpful, however, when bass es must sing E, and above for an extended period or ata soft dynamic level. Voice positioning ~ orus can def horus cal e ecently f vari Conductors know that the arrangement of singers within a nitely influence blend (Smith & Sataloff, 2006). Nonetheless, only " has research been conducted to ascertain scientifically the benefits ° ous approaches to the positioning of singers. ible: There are two levels of consideration when arranging a choral ensem 1) placement of sections 2) placement of individual singers within sections Section placement pass Chapter 10 on intonation discusses some of the benefits of placing a. SOE FoImproving Choral Blend 197 and sopranos in near proximity. A common arrangement of si passes behind sopranos and tenors behind al Singers puts Itos, wit j diately in front of the sopranos/altos. ith the conductor imme- Po Another standard arrangement puts singers within their sections in columns that run from the back of the ensemble to the front. Soprano columns are placed on the left, followed by bass, tenor and alto columns. Conductors of choirs with fewer male singers favor this arrangement, which again allows good contact between the outermost parts (sopranos and basses): Mixing singers in quartets (SBTA) throughout the choir is a popular ar- Tangement in ensembles with strong, independent singers. This ae Ment takes advantage of an improved self-to-other eae 39) 5 allows singers to hear themselves and others better (Daugherty, 1999): Day, jon” is another arrang aiggn®"¥S (1999) “circumambient formation” is ace ary (ch mproved self-to-other loudness ratio. Sot empty ‘ulder to shoulder) on risers with on ement that .d two feet between | >»ee ee Guide for Conductors, Teachers, and Singers 198 vocal Techniqu rows. Both audience and singers prefer this formation to closer formations | and singers feel a greater freedom of production. However, this amount e | | | spacing can be impractical with larger groups. i Interestingly, studies have identified few acoustical differences among thi formations. That said, singers and conductors definitely perceive aaa these formations differently and have preferences (Aspaas, McCrea, Morr & Fowler, 2004). Singers sing more or less freely and confidently depending on where they stand, which has a potentially significant impact on can | blend. How often have ensembles gone from rehearsal to a performance | venue that necessitates a different standing formation, only to find that their careful work on blend was all for naught! Our conclusion is that conductors can use these formations as a guide to good possibilities, but each ensemble needs to find its preferred arrange- ment for positioning of sections and to practice being flexible as perfor- mance spaces may demand. Positioning singers within sections Positioning singers within sections is another important way to achieve blend without altering healthy vocal production. Noble and others advocate elaborate voice-matching trials (Ekholm, 2000). One approach starts with 7 anchor, “ideal” voice (based on conductor preference) or with a pair of vole es that have a natural blend. Singers then perform a simple vocal exercise together. One by one, other singers are added, removing those whos son dows not have a favorable effect on the whole and keeping thos? e blend. Jordan (2007) uses the visual image of a comb to illustrate ae matching, Combs vary in their thickness and spacing of teeth. As oe . combs can interlock. Put another way, the formant amplitudes and cies of some singers fit together better than others. Singers wow 4s? amplitudes and frequencies do not mesh well can create a combin that is too loud, out of tune, strident, etc. he is should am Eventually all singers are placed within a line or plock. This Show” 1 sib the freedom ip “ied aes | section to sound blended and to give individual singers taile | naturally, See Noble (2005) and Jordan (2007) for more de | tions of approaches to voice placement. al ant se il d Although this method is impractical for large choruses becaus singe’ wv en f consuming, it does take into account factors of blend tee naive me as tone color, vibrato, pitch, physical height, size of Lae erceivee fist ception/execution of rhythm. All of these factors can e 1) su dl conductor when hearing voices together. Gardiniere’seb nye fo Improving Choral Blend 199 horal conductors’ perceptio: than 100 c ; : ‘Ptions of the blend rodi ‘ methods of voice matching led to the conclusion that meee Noble’s we benefit that “transcended individual taste or preference” ee gkholm, 2000, p. 125). A recent study by Killian and Basinger (2007) fi rhe verifies the utility of voice matching. urther ce sla Rud es) Conductors need to consider carefully their aesthetic goals for blend in their ensembles. Whenever possible, they should choose ways to achieve these goals that are founded on proper vocal technique. Indeed, many technique- related tools are available to achieve blend: efficient consonant production, uniform vowel production within sections (with appropriate vowel modifi- cation for higher pitches), precise rhythms, precise cutoffs, and balanced dynamic levels among sections. Placement of sections and voice match- ing/placement of singers within sections are also possibilities. All of these techniques allow for creation of a more natural, blended sound that elimi- nates the need to use more artificial methods such as extensive or “straight one singing.” Conductors can achieve blend goals without compromising individual voices and singers can use healthy methods of vocal production— win-win!