Folia Phoniatr Logop 2005;57:246–254

DOI: 10.1159/000087078

Breath Management: Gender-Based

Differences in Classical Singers
Scott McCoy
Westminster Choir College of Rider University, Princeton, N.J., USA

Key Words
Breathing  Breath support  Breathing and gender  Breathing techniques

Abstract
Fifty-five subjects (38 female, 17 male), consisting of professional operatic
singers, singing teachers and advanced classical voice students, were surveyed
to explore gender-based differences in breath management strategies for sing-
ing. Respondents evaluated extent and significance of thoracic and abdominal
movement for inhalation and for control of singing extended phrases. Females
were found to concentrate breath efforts lower in the body than did men (hypo-
gastric vs. epigastric regions). Both groups relied heavily on low thoracic activ-
ity to provide an antagonistic mechanism for control. Results corroborated a
review of standard pedagogical literature, which showed variations in recom-
mended breathing methods that strongly correlate to the gender of the author.
Copyright © 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel

Breath management is without doubt among the most examined elements of

singing pedagogy and voice science. Breathing is a central tenet of nearly every book
and treatise ever written about the art of singing, and countless articles and studies
on the topic have appeared in scholarly journals. Nonetheless, consensus on optimal
breath management technique proves elusive. Viewing a single performance at a
major opera house will confirm that successful singers do not all employ the same
breathing strategy. Wide variations exist in the actions of the shoulders, thorax, ab-
domen, back, pelvis and buttocks. Noted pedagogue Richard Miller explored some
of these varied breathing techniques in his book on National Singing Schools, citing
significant differences based on region and country of origin [1]. Most pedagogues,
however, tend to ignore these differences, holding fast to their personally preferred
technique as the best viable option. Few alternatives generally are presented for
people with varying physical characteristics, including gender.

© 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel Scott McCoy, DMA

1021–7762/05/0576–0246$22.00/0 Westminster Choir College of Rider University
Fax +41 61 306 12 34 45 Crescent Drive, Princeton, NJ 08540-8422 (USA)
E-Mail karger@karger.ch Accessible online at: Tel./Fax +1 908 281 5342
www.karger.com www.karger.com/fpl E-Mail mccoy@voiceinsideview.com, smccoy@ider.edu
 While consensus might be elusive on exactly how breathing should be managed
(breath support), there are significant points of agreement on what must be accom-
plished. It is generally acknowledged that breathing must carefully be regulated to
avoid either too much or too little subglottal pressure, and that the physical system
for regulating this pressure involves antagonistic relationships between muscles of
inhalation and exhalation. Most variations in breathing technique can be traced to
differences of opinion as to which muscle groups and regions of the body are involved
in this regulatory process.
A brief survey1 of pedagogical literature finds three primary schools of thought
about breathing and breath support. Writers in the first group tend to speak about
breathing as an activity centered in and controlled by actions of the thorax, epigas-
trium and/or middle-back. A partial list of representatives of this school must include
Richard Alderson, Oren Brown, Manuel Garcia II, Joseph Klein, Lilli Lehmann,
Louis Mandl, Mathilde Marchesi, James McKinney, Richard Miller, Cornelius Reid
and William Vennard. The following are representative of recommendations from
this school:

[The] shoulders and chest should remain motionless, and the diaphragm and abdomen
should move. It is true that a sagging abdominal wall is poor posture, but while it need not relax
at the bottom, the top of the abdomen must make way for the motion of the diaphragm [2].
[One] hand should be placed between the navel and sternum, lightly touching the surface of
the body, the other hand resting between the navel and the pelvis … There will be some outward
motion in the epigastric-umbilical area (between sternum and navel) but little movement in the
hypogastric (pubic) area between the navel and pelvis [3].

Pedagogical writers in the second group tend to speak about breathing as an ac-
tivity centered in and controlled by actions of the lower thorax, hypogastric region,
lower back and pelvis. A partial list of representatives of this school would include
Meribeth Bunch, Barbara Conable, Barbara Doscher, and Clifton Ware. The follow-
ing are representative of recommendations from this group:

… [the] pelvic floor descends as the diaphragm descends (unless it’s tightening). When the
diaphragm ascends the pelvic diaphragm ascends because the pressure from the viscera is taken
off it. In this way, the pelvic diaphragm and the abdominal wall are similar in their response to
the ascending diaphragm [4].
[The] actions of the abdominal and pelvic muscles, combined with dynamic balance and
alignment continued from inspiration, ensures a steady expiratory flow of air, while the subglot-
tic pressure regulates intensity of sound [5].

Significant differences of opinion exist between the first two schools identified
above, specifically relating to the importance of lower abdominal and pelvic muscles
in breath support. In general, writers from the first group find little or no value in use
of these muscles during breathing, while all of the authors in the second group cite
them as centrally important. It is worth noting at this point that all but two authors
from the first school are male; the exceptions are women whose corsets effectively
prevented them from engaging their lower abdominal musculature. By contrast, 75%
of those cited in the second school are female.

1
This survey was intended to be representative, not exhaustive. Readers might find some of their per-
sonal favorites missing.

Breath Management Folia Phoniatr Logop 247

2005;57:246–254
 A third school of thought is found primarily among voice scientists and research-
ers. Writers such as Ingo Titze, Leanderson and Sundberg, Marilee David, and
Thomas Hixon (together with his numerous collaborators) tend to observe patterns
in breathing without stating pedagogical preferences.

[In] the first approach, the primary emphasis is on keeping the rib cage high and stable. The
theory is that with minimum contraction or expansion of the rib cage, the softer tissues under-
neath the rib cage do the pumping of air … In the pear-shape-down approach, less emphasis is
placed on rib cage movement (or position), but more emphasis is placed on maintaining stable
abdominal pressure [6].

Professional singers themselves vary widely in their descriptions of breathing

techniques. On the one hand, Luciano Pavarotti spoke of breath support as pushing,
like a woman giving birth; on the other, Fiorenza Cossotto warned against women
breathing too low for fear of damaging ‘a delicate part of their body’ [7]. The obser-
vations of professional singers, however, were called into question by Watson and
Hixon [8] in their study of breathing patterns in classical singers, who found that:

… [one] might think that highly trained singers, in particular, would be in touch with what
they are doing with their respiratory apparatus during singing … To the contrary, it demonstrates
that singers … generally do not have accurate knowledge of the mechanisms associated with their
singing performance.

Few writers have addressed the possibility of fundamental differences in breath-

ing techniques based on the gender of the singer. Marchesi [9] made references to
the problems of corsets inducing ‘lateral’ breathing in women. Alderson [10] speaks
to issues of posture and potential reluctance of young women to engage adequate
expansion of the chest due to embarrassment. Keenze and Bell [11] addressed po-
tential variables in teaching breathing to singers of different genders in a recent ar-
ticle from the NATS Journal of Singing. They informally surveyed teaching col-
leagues, only 2 of whom reported approaching men and women differently; several,
however, reported teaching to body type [11]. Specific ways in which teachers altered
their strategies under these circumstances were not cited. Keenze and Bell [11, p.
376] indicated that women tend to have different postural issues than men, often
standing with locked knees and poorly aligned upper body. Beginning female stu-
dents were found to use more upper chest and clavicular movement during breathing
than did men.
Miller [12, 13], while acknowledging common anatomical differences between
men and women in the spatial relationships between the tenth rib and the top of the
hipbone, nonetheless describes breathing in essentially the same manner for both
sexes. Furthermore, Miller questions the efficacy of low abdominal involvement as
recommended by some (mostly female) pedagogues, arguing:

… [such] an action has nothing to do with the actual breath cycle; by so doing, one is simply
pushing in and out on the viscera. In fact, when the lower abdominal wall is forced outward, the
costal area tends to move inward, thereby inducing more rapid lung volume reduction. This
proves the fallacy of lower abdominal distention as a viable ‘breath support’ method for singing
[13, p. 26].

248 Folia Phoniatr Logop McCoy

2005;57:246–254
 The question of possible gender-based differences in breathing methods has
been explored objectively in investigations by Watson and Hixon [14]. Parallel stud-
ies of male and female opera singers concluded that no significant differences ex-
isted across genders [14]. It must be pointed out, however, that their conclusions
were based on measurements taken only from two locations, which were the same
for male and female subjects: the midpoint of the sternum and a point slightly above
the umbilicus. In these positions, it is unlikely that activity in the hypogastric and
pelvic regions, as cited by people such as Doscher and Ware, would have been de-
tected.
As we all know, physiological differences exist between males and females. On
average, the female pelvis is larger and wider, and has a greater area that must be
filled by the muscles of the pelvic girdle. The internal reproductive organs occupy
different amounts of space in women and men. The male thorax tends to be larger
in circumference, resulting in increased average total lung capacity over women.
Women are more likely to have a short waist, with the bottom rib nearly in contact
with the hipbone. Some of these physical differences might translate into altered
breath management strategies, which could be objective or subjective in nature.
(Based on discussions with my female colleagues, I have come to the conclusion that
women and men often have different sensations of what they are doing, even when
the observed physical action is the same.)
Of course, great physical variation exists within each gender as well, including
categories of endomorph (overweight), mesomorph (muscular) and ectomorph (as-
thenic). A study of female singers by Cowgill [15] demonstrated statistically sig-
nificant tendencies in breath management based on these categories, or somato-
types. Cowgill [15] found that subjects with endomorphic body types tended to
expand lower in their bodies for respiration than did women in the other catego-
ries.

The Current Study: Self-Perception of Respiratory Events

The present study examines singers’ self-perceptions of physical actions related

to breath management. Subjects (38 female, 17 male) responded to a questionnaire,
keyed to anatomical drawings (fig. 1), to determine the significance of respiratory
movements in different regions of the body. Respondents ranged from 20 to 72 years
in age and included professional singers and teachers (n = 25), graduate voice per-
formance and pedagogy students (n = 19), and undergraduate voice performance and
music education students (n = 11).

Expansion for Inhalation

Using a 6-point scale, singers rated the importance of expansion at and adjacent
to the locations indicated on the drawing in figure 1 (6 = most important). Distinct
trends were seen by gender: expansion in areas above the umbilicus was consistent-
ly rated as more important by men than women; expansion in areas at the umbilicus
and below was rated as more important by the women (fig. 2–4). The increased sig-
nificance of the area below G in the male subjects can be attributed to several men
who stated a preference for breathing techniques that incorporate use of the gluteal
muscles.

Breath Management Folia Phoniatr Logop 249

2005;57:246–254
 Fig. 1. Anatomical reference points.

1.34 Female 1.34

above A above E Female
1.82
Male 1.53 Male
2.15
A
2.82 2.37
E
2.29
2.86
A–B
3.65
3.95
4.42 E–F
B 4.18
4.53

5.08 4.71
B–C F
5.12 5.12

C 4.92
4.82 4.89
F–G
4.58
C–D 4.21
3.18
4.00
G
3.42 3.29
D
2.88
1.89
below D 2.34 below G
1.76 2.47

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 3

Fig. 2. Perceived inhalation significance, areas A–D.

Fig. 3. Perceived inhalation significance, areas E–G.

250 Folia Phoniatr Logop McCoy

2005;57:246–254
 1.39 1.75 Female
above H Female above A
1.76 1.53
Male Male
2.16 2.03
H A
2.71 1.94
3.45 3.14
H–I A–B
3.76 3.00
4.47 3.20
I 4.76 B 4.18

5.08 5.80
I–J 5.35 B–C
4.29

J 5.05 C 4.94
4.35 4.23

J–K 4.21 4.81

C–D
3.52 4.23

K 3.34 4.11
D
2.29 2.29

below K 1.87 2.34

1.76 below D
2.05

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 5

Fig. 4. Perceived inhalation significance, areas H–K.

Fig. 5. Perceived exhalation control, areas A–D.

1.44 1.75
above E Female above H Female
2.00
1.47
Male Male
2.08
H 2.76
1.83
E
2.29
3.17
H–I 3.47
2.47
E–F 4.28
3.17 I 4.71
4.17 4.92
F I–J
4.70 4.82

J 5.08
4.67 4.20
F–G
4.41
J–K 4.75
3.29
3.86
G
3.47 3.50
K
2.53
2.14
below G below K 2.56
2.29 1.41

0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 7

Fig. 6. Perceived exhalation control, areas E–G.

Fig. 7. Perceived exhalation control, areas H–K.

Breath Management Folia Phoniatr Logop 251

2005;57:246–254
Fig. 8. Perceived significance vs. percent change.

Control of Exhalation
Singers used the same 6-point system to rate the significance of the areas indi-
cated in figure 1 for the control of exhalation (breath support). Again, women tended
to place greater importance in lower areas of the body than did men (fig. 5–7). (Based
on the ratings for activity in areas A–D, one might conclude that women actually
pay greater attention to control of exhalation throughout their bodies than do men.)
The perceived significance of the area labeled D is particularly interesting: women
rated its importance as 4.11, versus a 2.29 rating by the men. As was the case for
inhalation, a small group of men who rely heavily on activity in the gluteal muscles
skews the results in the region labeled ‘below G’.

Physical Action versus Perceived Significance

The next step in this study involved comparing subject’s perceptions of impor-
tance to the actual range of respiratory movement. Measurements were taken of the
circumference of the body, at rest and maximal expansion, in the locations indicat-
ed as B, between B and C, C, and between C and D. Female subjects rated the im-
portance of these areas on the 6-point scale as 3.2, 5.8, 4.94, and 4.8, respectively.
Percent change in these areas did not correlate to perceived importance. The area at
level B (the circumference of the thorax measured at the bottom of the sternum) was
rated only 3.2 in significance, but generated the largest total change in dimension at
4.83%. By comparison, the area between C and D was rated 4.81 in significance, but
only managed a dimensional change of 1.34%. Comparisons of all regions are pre-
sented in figure 8.
Male subjects showed a somewhat more direct relationship between perceived
respiratory significance and actual ranges of motion. Areas labeled B through C–D
varied within a range of 0.11 from least to most significant (compared to a total range
of 2.6 for the females). The area between B and C, which was indicated as the most
important with a rating of 4.29, was also the area with the largest dimensional change,
measured as 3.71%.

252 Folia Phoniatr Logop McCoy

2005;57:246–254
 Up-and-In versus Down-and-Out
The final portion of this study looked for patterns in breath management that
might fall under the strategies commonly labeled up-and-in (elevated thorax, con-
tracted abdomen) and down-and-out (relaxed thorax, expanded abdomen). Subjects
reported movement of their thoracic, epigastric and hypogastric areas while singing
a long phrase, divided into its first, middle and final third portion. Possible re-
sponses were limited to expanded, neutral (relaxed) or contracted. Survey data
proved inconclusive as to preference for one breathing strategy over the other. It is
interesting to note, however, that self-reported results varied little by gender. The
only significant differences related to movements of the epigastrium: during the first
third of the long phrase, 41% of men reported relaxation in this area versus 68% of
women; during the final third of the long phrase, 76% of men reported contraction
in this area versus 57% of women. Assessment of thoracic and hypogastric movement
never varied by more than 10% between genders.
In light of previously cited conclusions by Watson and Hixon [8], who reported
singers often misrepresent their actual respiratory actions, informal steps were taken
to validate the results of this portion of the study. Following completion of the sur-
vey, respondents from the group of graduate students were divided into pairs. At
moderately loud amplitude, one student sang the numbers 1 through 15 at a tempo
that exhausted the breath supply, while the other student monitored respiratory ac-
tivity by touch. The exercise was repeated by each of the pair 3 times, monitoring
thoracic, epigastric and hypogastric movement during the first, middle, and final
third of the exercise. Self-reporting of the singer agreed with the findings of the mon-
itor approximately 65–70% of the time.
An odd number of male and female participants resulted in one mixed-gender
pair for this test, which yielded interesting – albeit serendipitous – results. In the fi-
nal trial, the female monitoring the hypogastric region of her male partner was heard
to exclaim: ‘There’s nothing going on down there!’ The remaining students immedi-
ately regrouped themselves into mixed pairs for further comparison. In every case,
hypogastric muscular activity, confirmed by touch, was relatively strong in the wom-
en, but was minimal or absent in the men.

Conclusions

Relatively few pedagogues address the issue of gender in breath management.

Nonetheless, men and women – including writers, voice teachers, singers and scien-
tists – tend to describe breathing differently. For men, muscular activity for breath
support tends to be concentrated in the lower thorax and epigastrium. Women en-
gage these areas as well, but also find the pelvic floor and hypogastric regions to be
very important. The possibility exists that male and female classical singers actually
manage breathing in similar ways; anatomical differences in the pelvis, trunk and
thorax, however, might result in different sensations of control. Additional studies
are recommended that objectively measure breath-related activity both above and
below the umbilicus in male and female singers. In my own teaching, I will earnest-
ly seek to address breathing and breath management in terms that are meaning-
ful – and perhaps different – for both men and women.

Breath Management Folia Phoniatr Logop 253

2005;57:246–254
 References

1 Miller R: National Schools of Singing: English, French, German and Italian Techniques of Singing Re-
visited. Latham, Scarecrow Press, 1997.
2 Vennard W: Singing: The Mechanism and the Technic. New York, Fischer, 1967.
3 Miller R: The Structure of Singing. New York, Schirmer, 1986.
4 Conable B: The Structures and Movement of Breathing. Chicago, GIA Publications, 2000.
5 Bunch M: Dynamics of the Singing Voice. Vienna, Springer, 1982.
6 Titze I: Principles of Voice Production. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, 1994.
7 Hines J: Great Singers on Great Singing. New York, Limelight Editions, 1984.
8 Watson PJ, Hixon TJ: Respiratory kinematics in classical (opera) singers. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1985;
28: 104–122.
9 Marchesi M: Bel Canto: A Theoretical and Practical Vocal Method. Reprint, New York, Dover Publi-
cations, 1901.
10 Alderson R: Complete Handbook of Voice Training. West Nyack, Parker, 1979.
11 Keenze M, Bell D: Teaching breathing. J Singing 2005; 61: 373.
12 Miller R: Training Soprano Voices. New York, Oxford University Press, 2000.
13 Miller R: Training Tenor Voices. New York, Schirmer, 1993.
14 Watson PJ, Hixon TJ: Respiratory kinematics in female classical singers. J Voice 1990; 4: 127.
15 Cowgill JG: Breathing for Singers: A Comparative Analysis of Body Types and Breathing Tendencies;
doct diss Florida State University School of Music, 2004, available online at http://etd.lib.fsu.edu/
theses/available/etd-11122004-205451/

254 Folia Phoniatr Logop McCoy

2005;57:246–254
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.