Classical music fans - to warble or not to warble?

[jtaylor]

Does anyone else share my personal dislike for warbling sopranos?
It seems that there's a tendency for the best sopranos to use excessive vibrato, to such an extent that their accuracy is poor, and wobble around the note?
It seems established that this is the good style, and a pure sound without vibrato is amatuer?
Anyone else share my preference for a pure sound, with carefully used vibrato to accentuate certain points where needed??

J

[Deb GP]

Vibrato certainly seems to be not the done thing at the moment. The conductor of my choir goes spare when the sopranos and tenors get sloppy and do it. I've even heard recent orchestral recordings where the strings don't do it. Apparently it requires a lot more discipline. Personally I prefer the younger, brighter sound that it creates and now can't stand choirs that wobble around their notes.

[Richard Ruck]

I completely share your dislike. Vibrato that seems to deviate a tone or so either side of the desired note makes me plug my ears.

It may once have been heresy to say so, but I find listening to certain famous and well-loved sopranos such as Maria Callas unbearable.

Luckily we are seeing a lot more considered vocal styles these days. I'm not much of a fan of grand (particularly Italian) opera, I admit, but I do like a lot of baroque and classical works. For example, the performance of Mozart operas now seems to attract a much less vibrato-laden style of performance than would have been the case say 40 or 50 years ago, and thankfully the days when Wagnerians such as Irmgard Seefried could crash their way unabashed through, for example, a piece by Handel, have long gone.

[eloisec]

I was never a singer, indeed always failed the oral tests in music exams, but the same also applies to instrumentalists. My teacher at the Guildhall went spare when I introduced vibrato at the wrong moment in a piece! Although doing vibrato on a bassoon is quite tricky anyway (lip or diaphragm?).

Vibrato should generally be avoided!

[DavebytheSea]

Vibrato should NEVER be used by the amateur, but almost invariably is. It does something to disguise the imprecise pitch of the untrained singer, but otherwise has little to commend it. For choirs it is anathema; the sound of a wobbly soprano is the most dire thing about many amateur groups. No wonder your conductor goes ballistic!

However, the important thing is the style of the piece or the musical genre. Just as portamente ("scooping!") is eschewed in baroque singing but yet is invariably used in folk music, so there is a place for vibrato in the bel canto of classical opera. Even here it is used only sparingly and with due consideration by the professional singer and NEVER by the chorus! My wife hates the penetrating soprano vibrato of opera and invariably switches off the radio when I am trying to educate myself in this. She excuses herself by saying some such thing as "How can you bear to listen to that awful noise!". Though designed to crush, such a comment is duly countered by the even more crushing "Well my dear, to the untrained ear, I suppose it must be somewhat difficult to appreciate!"

And this is the nub! If you seek a sound judgement in anything, you should go to the trained exponent of his art. Just as you would not go to an unqualified practitioner to make a diagnosis in say, medicine, so you should not seek the opinion of the untrained amateur in music or art. What is "good" in a painting or a performance is best judged by an acknowledged expert in the field. The idea that beauty "lies in the eye of the beholder" (perhaps in this case the ear), is seen to be absurd when set against this standard and furthermore destroys the clarity of communicable ideas. If we cannot agree to accept that there is a "correct" meaning to the words we use (even where aesthetics are concerned) then we might as well give up any pretence of understanding any form of human communication at all!

[Richard Ruck]

Vibrato should NEVER be used by the amateur, but almost invariably is. It does something to disguise the imprecise pitch of the untrained singer, but otherwise has little to commend it. For choirs it is anathema; the sound of a wobbly soprano is the most dire thing about many amateur groups. No wonder your conductor goes ballistic!

However, the important thing is the style of the piece or the musical genre. Just as portamente ("scooping!") is eschewed in baroque singing but yet is invariably used in folk music, so there is a place for vibrato in the bel canto of classical opera. Even here it is used only sparingly and with due consideration by the professional singer and NEVER by the chorus! My wife hates the penetrating soprano vibrato of opera and invariably switches off the radio when I am trying to educate myself in this. She excuses herself by saying some such thing as "How can you bear to listen to that awful noise!". Though designed to crush, such a comment is duly countered by the even more crushing "Well my dear, to the untrained ear, I suppose it must be somewhat difficult to appreciate!"

And this is the nub! If you seek a sound judgement in anything, you should go to the trained exponent of his art. Just as you would not go to an unqualified practitioner to make a diagnosis in say, medicine, so you should not seek the opinion of the untrained amateur in music or art. What is "good" in a painting or a performance is best judged by an acknowledged expert in the field. The idea that beauty "lies in the eye of the beholder" (perhaps in this case the ear), is seen to be absurd when set against this standard and furthermore destroys the clarity of communicable ideas. If we cannot agree to accept that there is a "correct" meaning to the words we use (even where aesthetics are concerned) then we might as well give up any pretence of understanding any form of human communication at all!

Is that a "yes" or a "no", then?

[eloisec]

Vibrato is a relatively modern trend in classical music, introduced widely in the 1900s. Music from the Baroque to the Romantic era (roughly 1650-1900) is frequently played with vibrato by modern performers, although at the time it was composed, vibrato was used only as a type of ornament.

Vibrato is usually used inappropriately, and by players trying to cover up poor technique.

[BTaylor]

I'm a big fan of the lesser spotted variety.

[Richard Ruck]

Vibrato is usually used inappropriately, and by players trying to cover up poor technique.

....and by brass bands. Although players in brass bands often have an excellent technique, I find the constant use of vibrato very off-putting.

[eloisec]

Vibrato is usually used inappropriately, and by players trying to cover up poor technique.

....and by brass bands. Although players in brass bands often have an excellent technique, I find the constant use of vibrato very off-putting.

excellent technique doesn't include playing vibrato when it shouldn't be played

[Richard Ruck]

Vibrato is usually used inappropriately, and by players trying to cover up poor technique.

....and by brass bands. Although players in brass bands often have an excellent technique, I find the constant use of vibrato very off-putting.

excellent technique doesn't include playing vibrato when it shouldn't be played

Yes, but brass band technique, I think, includes copious amounts of wobbling about. Oop North it's reckoned to be "good technique"...

[Deb GP]

Ahhh.. the North-South divide.... So many possible comments. I daren't be that rude though...

[eloisec]

my brother's a brass player, and I remember him saying vibrato was commonly used on the cornet and euphonium, but not the trumpet given the already shrill notes being played. brass bands tend to use a very fast vibrato, whereas for e.g. a saxophone section in a big band would use a slower vibrato (but only as a soloist, not when in unison!).

and just for info we're from Horsham, not 'up North'! but I think my info on brass playing is up-to-date!

[Richard Ruck]

Ahhh.. the North-South divide.... So many possible comments. I daren't be that rude though...

Which reminds me - when I was in the CH band one of the euphonium
players was from Yorkshire. Now he REALLY loved his vibrato. Plus he used to play on the stereotype a bit, coming out with comments like "eee, it were reet grand, were that" etc.

I think he joined the Marines as a bandsman.

[eloisec]

just looking up vibrato, and found this (bit irrelevant, but never mind!)

Arthur Pryor was in every sense a 'phenomenon'. From 1895 to 1903 he was trombone soloist and assistant conductor of the famous Sousa Band. Pryor was a musician as well as a technician. Along with his phenomenal tonguing ability and lightning fast slide action, he was equally well known for his beautiful tone and expressive style. In fact he actually preferred playing slow lyrical ballads and operatic arias to the fast, spell binding pieces that Sousa often insisted he perform. His clear unforgettable tone was marked with a constant vibrato, the result of a boyhood accident when a mule kicked him in the face, resulting in partial paralysis!