Amplification in Opera

So far the argument seems to be that if mics aren't used, pop music lovers who for some reason are being introduced to opera won't like it.

The operatic voice itself is trained so that it can carry itself throughout a huge hall and still be heard. The complaint here seems to be that such volume wouldn't be enough for someone used to extremely loud concerts.

So what? Screw them. Why should we change opera the way it has been for centuries just to please an audience that will probably never like it anyway? And just because other genres use amplification and it's been invented, we might as well use it? If we're gonna use amplification, then operatic voices won't be trained the same way; they're trained to be heard across an entire hall without amplification. I've never seen orchestras use amplification in standard halls either (outside concerts/stadiums are a completely different thing, and in those cases even operatic voices are amplified.) And just like it's been said, good amplification of operatic voices is very difficult to achieve, and even then plenty of its natural characteristics are distorted or gone. The ability to carry one's voice across an entire hall is also an indicator of its quality; amplification, for example, would erase that completely, so you could mask plenty of vocal shortcomings and deficiencies.

Amen to that!

Originally Posted by M_is_D

So far the argument seems to be that if mics aren't used, pop music lovers who for some reason are being introduced to opera won't like it.

The operatic voice itself is trained so that it can carry itself throughout a huge hall and still be heard. The complaint here seems to be that such volume wouldn't be enough for someone used to extremely loud concerts.

So what? Screw them. Why should we change opera the way it has been for centuries just to please an audience that will probably never like it anyway? And just because other genres use amplification and it's been invented, we might as well use it? If we're gonna use amplification, then operatic voices won't be trained the same way; they're trained to be heard across an entire hall without amplification. I've never seen orchestras use amplification in standard halls either (outside concerts/stadiums are a completely different thing, and in those cases even operatic voices are amplified.) And just like it's been said, good amplification of operatic voices is very difficult to achieve, and even then plenty of its natural characteristics are distorted or gone. The ability to carry one's voice across an entire hall is also an indicator of its quality; amplification, for example, would erase that completely, so you could mask plenty of vocal shortcomings and deficiencies.

Just as a note. I started this thread to give people a chance to convince me and as well as to talk about a pertinent topic. I'm also argumentative though, soo.. Just don't want anyone to have the wrong idea when I make my points.

Anyway, why should we keep opera exactly the same just to spite people that we don't think deserve it? Your argument on that end goes both ways.

Also, why should we worry about the way people are trained to sing? If they no longer need to project their voices across great chasms, why does that matter?

I think it might be a bit of a sky-is-falling idea to believe that if singers are amplified they will all the sudden turn into utter crap. Are there still great singers in musicals? Or jazz? Would you not consider anyone in the pop world to be a good singer? It's not like all the sudden everyone who wants to be a vocalist will completely abandon training and leave everything up to the Autotune plugin up in the mixing room. Some may, but I don't think it would be that hard to spot the ones that don't.

Originally Posted by JoshMc

Anyway, why should we keep opera exactly the same just to spite people that we don't think deserve it? Your argument on that end goes both ways.

It's not that they don't deserve it, it's that they don't understand and don't like it. I certainly don't see heavy metal groups trying to please opera listeners.

Originally Posted by JoshMc

Also, why should we worry about the way people are trained to sing? If they no longer need to project their voices across great chasms, why does that matter?

It matters that if they lack that training, they'll lack elsewhere as well, since the ability to project one's voice and its operatic tone are interconnected.

Originally Posted by JoshMc

I think it might be a bit of a sky-is-falling idea to believe that if singers are amplified they will all the sudden turn into utter crap. Are there still great singers in musicals? Or jazz? Would you not consider anyone in the pop world to be a good singer? It's not like all the sudden everyone who wants to be a vocalist will completely abandon training and leave everything up to the Autotune plugin up in the mixing room. Some may, but I don't think it would be that hard to spot the ones that don't.

They could be good voices without that training, but they would not be operatic voices. And opera needs operatic voices, not Broadway singers, or pop singers, or jazz singers. You don't see Placido Domingo singing Rolling Stones songs, and you don't see Mick Jagger staring in La Traviata.

Operatic voices are the way they are and SOUND the way they are because they can't rely on amplification. Make amplification the norm and in a generation or two, the operatic voice will be completely distorted.

Originally Posted by M_is_D

It's not that they don't deserve it, it's that they don't understand and don't like it. I certainly don't see heavy metal groups trying to please opera listeners.

Actually a lot of metal groups use symphonic sounds and operatic singing. But anyway, metal isn't particularly looking to woo classical fans because it doesn't have to. Metal has an extremely healthy audience which is not something that's easy to say for opera.

It matters that if they lack that training, they'll lack elsewhere as well, since the ability to project one's voice and its operatic tone are interconnected.

If that tone is not attainable without projecting one's voice then wouldn't any singer who likes that sound still learn to project their voice to create the desired tone? If people like the sound of an operatic voice then singers will try to sound operatic, won't they?

They could be good voices without that training, but they would not be operatic voices. And opera needs operatic voices, not Broadway singers, or pop singers, or jazz singers. You don't see Placido Domingo singing Rolling Stones songs, and you don't see Mick Jagger staring in La Traviata.

Actually, we have Placido Domingo singing a John Denver tune right here:
YouTube - Perhaps Love - John Denver & Placido Domingo

And then there's Pavarotti singing a James Brown song:
YouTube - James Brown & Pavarotti

And then there's.. uh, well I'm not sure if this really fits but it's neat anyway. Freddie Mercury singing something with Montserrat Cabelle that sounds a bit more operatic than rockish.. Maybe it's broadway:
YouTube - Freddie Mercury Last Performance (Barcelona)

Originally Posted by JoshMc

Actually a lot of metal groups use symphonic sounds and operatic singing. But anyway, metal isn't particularly looking to woo classical fans because it doesn't have to. Metal has an extremely healthy audience which is not something that's easy to say for opera.

If we have to distort opera just to make new fans, I really don't see the point. And metal groups don't use those things necessarily to please classical music fans. Opera might not be nearly as huge as it used to be, but it's not dying either. Huge opera companies all over the world aren't going bankrupt. There are still new talents being discovered and very successful opera singers exist nowadays.

Originally Posted by JoshMc

If that tone is not attainable without projecting one's voice then wouldn't any singer who likes that sound still learn to project their voice to create the desired tone? If people like the sound of an operatic voice then singers will try to sound operatic, won't they?

They won't be as good. In a performance of Madame Butterfly I saw (just to give an example of what can, and does happen everywhere) the tenor (whose tone, obviously, was operatic) could barely be heard at the bottom rows of the hall. And guess what, though operatic, his voice really wasn't anything special, on the contrary. The soprano, though, had an amazing, beautiful tone, and she always overpowered the tenor. If that opera used amplification, many of the tenor's flaws would have been masked.

Originally Posted by JoshMc

Actually, we have Placido Domingo singing a John Denver tune right here:
YouTube - Perhaps Love - John Denver & Placido Domingo

And then there's Pavarotti singing a James Brown song:
YouTube - James Brown & Pavarotti

And then there's.. uh, well I'm not sure if this really fits but it's neat anyway. Freddie Mercury singing something with Montserrat Cabelle that sounds a bit more operatic than rockish.. Maybe it's broadway:
YouTube - Freddie Mercury Last Performance (Barcelona)

Yeah, famous singers do those things once in a while... do you honestly like that? I personally find it very awkward to hear John Denver sung by an operatic voice.

And if you manage to find me popular music singers singing operatic repertoire, I bet it'll sound even worse.

Originally Posted by JoshMc

I wouldn't consider it a superficial characteristic. If that were true then why would so many opera-goers rally against the idea and why would people claim that it completely changed the face of musicals? Sure, it's not as important as the actual music but it does affect how the music is written and it certainly affects the experience. My point about new listeners is that it's just one more thing to kill their interest, not the only thing.

I'm saying that it's a superficial characteristic in the sense that few people like "amplified music" because it's amplified. That argument does not have any bearing on the importance of its technical and creative implications, which indeed is something I tried to be very clear about later in my post.

Originally Posted by JoshMc

I would argue that other amplified music has not developed with amplification. Rock music from the 50s onward and any music that didn't exist before then you can say that for but that leaves out plenty of genres that use amplification. Jazz, musicals, folk music all use amplification regularly now and didn't start with it. It has changed the way they developed since it started being used but they didn't start with sound systems in mind.

You would argue that other amplified music has not developed with amplification, yet you agree that it has changed the way they developed since it started being used? I'm not sure whether you agree or disagree with me. Whether Django used an amplifier or not does not in any way affect the fact that amplification is a very important part of the modern jazz guitar idiom.

Originally Posted by JoshMc

Saying opera shouldn't use amplification because it wasn't written with amplification in mind in the past is self-defeating.

I agree, and I have not said that. I think you'll find that we're actually in agreement over a lot of things here.

Originally Posted by EldKatt

I agree, and I have not said that. I think you'll find that we're actually in agreement over a lot of things here.

It does sound like we're in agreement on a lot of things.

I think the point I was making wasn't that amplification hasn't affected the development of music that started without it but that it wasn't necessarily bad that it happened that way. I think a lot of the issue with using amplification in opera has to do with which operas one is proposing to amplify. Amplifying Rameau's Platee might cause a lot of problems but amplifying new operas that have microphones and whatnot in mind doesn't seem so sinful. If that changes the way they're written or performed from now on, I personally wouldn't see that as such a bad thing. It's just another development to me.

Originally Posted by M_is_D

If we have to distort opera just to make new fans, I really don't see the point. And metal groups don't use those things necessarily to please classical music fans. Opera might not be nearly as huge as it used to be, but it's not dying either. Huge opera companies all over the world aren't going bankrupt. There are still new talents being discovered and very successful opera singers exist nowadays.

I was just having a little fun with the first part of that argument (I play devil's advocate way too much). But the second part, while opera may not be on it's death bed, it's not exactly doing all that much either. I was looking at the schedules for some major opera houses yesterday and they're littered with works that are 100+ years old. That's fine as I want to have the opportunity to see them, but I get the feeling that it was at one point the opposite as far as new vs old operas being performed. It makes it seem like opera is only hanging on because there are people that still want to see those classics but it's not thriving like it should.

They won't be as good. In a performance of Madame Butterfly I saw (just to give an example of what can, and does happen everywhere) the tenor (whose tone, obviously, was operatic) could barely be heard at the bottom rows of the hall. And guess what, though operatic, his voice really wasn't anything special, on the contrary. The soprano, though, had an amazing, beautiful tone, and she always overpowered the tenor. If that opera used amplification, many of the tenor's flaws would have been masked.

Would that necessarily be bad? You say he had an operatic tone but couldn't project. If you were at that performance and he projected just as much as the more skilled singer, wouldn't your experience have been that much better?

Yeah, famous singers do those things once in a while... do you honestly like that? I personally find it very awkward to hear John Denver sung by an operatic voice.

And if you manage to find me popular music singers singing operatic repertoire, I bet it'll sound even worse.

Yeah, they do tend to sound pretty bad trying to sing opera. Like in this:
YouTube - Pavarotti and friends - Nessun Dorma

I think I was just jumping at the opportunity to post some funny videos. There are some of Domingo's solo work too... yikes. They're too bad to link to, heh.

Originally Posted by JoshMc

Would that necessarily be bad? You say he had an operatic tone but couldn't project. If you were at that performance and he projected just as much as the more skilled singer, wouldn't your experience have been that much better?

His tone was operatic, but not good/very pleasing. The fact that he couldn't project his voice well his proof that he didn't have a very good tone. It serves as a standard of measurement. More voice projection = better tone.