Why Classical Singing Isn’t the Universal Foundation

A lot of singers are told that classical training is the safest, smartest starting point—that if you can sing classically, you can sing anything. But the truth is more complicated. In this episode, we’ll sort through what classical singing actually is, what traits define it, and why it isn’t the universal foundation many assume.

Classical singing has long been touted as the epitome when it comes to singing. It has designated itself as the starting point for anyone wanting to sing better. As a result, it has had a monopoly over the voice training industry, and remains the go-to when training is desired. This is because classical singing believes it is seated on the best technique, one that will protect the voice from harm and ensure a long and successful life of singing.

On today’s Voice Science Podcast, let’s talk about what is commonly believed about classical singing and identify what is and isn’t true. Here we go.

First, we must deal with the term “classical.”  It is perhaps the most familiar and over-used word when talking about Western music history. When you encounter the word “classical,” you have to ask how it is being used.

The most generic use of the adjective describes all music before the early 20th century. It’s a way of differentiating between old music, i.e., classical, and new music, i.e., popular. Narrowing the word a bit, “classical” can also refer to art music, a cultivated form of musical composition, in contrast to folk or indigenous music. The most specific and perhaps the most accurate use refers to the time period, from around 1750-1820, known as the Classical period in Western music history. The general public has some acquaintance with this period largely because three of the best-known Austro-German composers of all time–Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven–rose to fame during it.

I would be remiss if I didn’t comment on another possible meaning of the word “classical.” Some use it to convey superior value. The word has long been synonymous with traditional, exemplary, and respected. Although permissible, just because something is long-established does not necessarily make it of higher quality. Art music is not by nature superior to folk music, or vice versa. They are different entities and deserve to be appreciated for what each uniquely brings to the performer and listener. To judge them against each other is to miss the point.  

When “classical” is attached to singing, we again have to comb through all the possible meanings. Without a doubt, when most people hear the words, “classical singing,” they automatically think opera. Although an accurate association, the world of classical singing is much broader. Underneath this vast umbrella term is: medieval chant, Renaissance motets and madrigals, Baroque cantatas, Classical masses and requiems, Romantic lieder and oratorios, modern art songs and experimental music. It is a smorgasbord of vocal music, covering over a 1000 years, needing anywhere from just one singer or a legion of them. To place all this under the singular term “classical singing,” is simplistic, if not misleading.  

Here’s why: classical singing isn’t a singular voice quality. It should be loosely thought of as a vocal aesthetic of some considerable diversity, able to be applied across a variety of genres. We will cover what are some of the production considerations, I call them traits, that contribute to this aesthetic in a minute. I just want to urge us to resist a one-sound-fits-all mentality about classical singing. Classical singing has evolved over centuries and we should expect it to continue to do so. Not all classical singing is the Wagnerian soprano spear in hand with horns on her head! 

To better understand classical singing, we need to take a moment and think of it not in terms of time periods or genres, but as a way of singing, resulting from choices the singer makes in producing the sound. Before getting into the nuts and bolts of the style, let’s talk about what informs the singer’s choices. 

Let me begin with a profoundly obvious statement: the type of classical singing a singer uses depends on what they are singing. As simple as it sounds, it is often ignored. When I say what they are singing, I am asking the singer to do some research. Do you know who composed it and when? Do you know the type of space in which it would have been performed? Do you know the occasion for which it was written? Answering the who, when, where, and why is like reading the instructions on the side of the Kraft Mac and Cheese box. Following the directions is always the best choice.

Answering these questions will enable the singer to take the best of what we know about singing at that time in history and make an educated choice about the sound to make. Now you may be asking, “How do we know what singers sounded like when Mozart lived?” It’s a fair question. This is where we count on music detectives, a.k.a musicologists, to discern what they can through contemporaneous writings. Not until the advent of recorded sound in 1888 with Edison’s Phonograph did we have definitive examples.

One thing we do know for certain is that the sound of so-called classical singing was strongly influenced by the size of the space in which the singing was being done. Why? Audibility is essential in singing and how a singer organizes the source sound with the filtering influences of the vocal tract effect a singer’s amplitude. If a singer is performing in a small chamber of the prince’s palace, a modest dynamic will do. The early opera singers performed in what we would consider small houses, 300-400 seats of stacked boxes, making the distance from the apron of the stage to the farthest seat a reasonable distance. This means early opera singing required less of the full-barreled sound we today associate with opera singing. So, whether the performance space was a private salon, the opera house, a church, or the public concert hall, the size of the space informed what the singer needed to do to produce a sound sufficient to the needs of the moment.

Here’s another contributing aspect a singer has to consider: the size of accompanying forces. Again, this raises the issue of audibility since being heard when accompanied by a piano does not compare with the challenge of singing with a large orchestra. 

Both the size of the performance space and the size of the accompanying forces help a classical singer to gauge what amount of projection is necessary. Fortifying the sound of the voice with additional projection is created through selective vocal tract resizing and reshaping. The concern over projection reminds us that for most of its period of evolution, classical singing has been a purely acoustic experience. No microphones. Period.

Now, let’s look at a list of traits, distinguishing characteristics, that contribute to producing a basic sound of classical singing. Keep in mind this is a list of possibilities and not all are requisites. Again, it all depends on what is being sung. 

Before I do, just keep in mind that for the purposes of this episode, all of these observations apply to both solo and choral singing.

Breath and support. Someone singing classical compositions will likely face the necessity to sing long musical phrases. This will require excellent breath management skills, which is all about torso flare and anchor to control a slow exhalation. We dive farther into breath and support in episodes 1 and 6 of the Voice Science Podcast.

Vowels. Classical singing favors round, pure vowel sounds curated by a vertical mouth shape and cavernous oral cavity.

Nasalance. By and large, classical singing does not welcome any nasalant presence in the sound. Ridding the voice of nasalance is accomplished by lifting the velum or soft palate. Check out episode 25 on the nose.

 Vibrato. Depending on the era of composition and/or the texture of the composition, vibrato may or may not be required, optional, or discouraged.

Legato. Classical singing overall loves an endlessly flowing vocal line. This skill demands the dovetailing of vowel to vowel to create a seamlessness in the sound. You can learn more about legato in episode 13.

Vocal tract elongation. A warmer timbre is a classical singing feature. It is achieved by lengthening the vocal tract through laryngeal lowering and lip protrusion.

Agility and ornamentation. As dictated by the score, classical singers may be asked to meet the challenge of vocal agility and expressive ornamentation.

Chiaroscuro. This Italian term literally meaning “light-dark” is a hallmark of classical singing. It is the combination of the rounder, warmer timbre mentioned above plus the addition of Singer’s Formant, 2500-3500 Hz frequency, producing brightness in the singer’s voice. 

Projection: To ensure being heard, singers will enhance their sound with brighter resonant frequencies. Overlapping Singer’s Formant mentioned before, twang boosts acoustic energy at the 3000-5000 Hz level. Check out episode 4 on Ring & Twang to learn more.

So far, I’ve attempted to reduce the mystery around classical singing. Now, I want to address some things that classical singing isn’t.

Some teachers insist that classical singing is the foundation for all singing styles. Although learning about singing in a variety of styles has merit on its own, and I would never suggest someone miss such an opportunity, to claim that classical singing is essential exposes a severe self-serving bias. There are three reasons I disagree with this premise. 

First, the production requirements for classical singing style is not directly transferable to current popular styles of singing, ex., contemporary commercial music. In truth, many of the traits we discussed earlier, if applied when singing contemporary commercial music, will not be helpful and will lead to frustration. 

Second, I find it curious that one would suggest classical singing style as a gateway. When one surveys all the voice qualities available to a singer, classical style is the farthest from modal or speech quality production, which is the basis for all singing. Before one sings, one speaks. Remember the list of traits and note how many of them are quite a departure from the average person’s everyday speech mode. 

Third, when I observe the styles of singing available, it is my opinion that classical singing style is the most cultivated of them all. When I say cultivated I’m not referring to the noun form which is a synonym for refined. I mean cultivated as a verb: to acquire or develop. Granted, learning any new singing style requires a period of nurturing. Yet, I would argue that anyone wanting to become proficient in classical singing style must prepare for a lengthy pursuit. 

The list of traits mentioned earlier form a checklist of options available to a singer wanting to perform in a classical singing style. Becoming proficient in a classical style is merely knowing what are the aesthetic values, how to create them, and applying them as necessary. 

There is another bit of mythology I need to discuss. Despite all the promises we’ve heard, there is no evidence that proves that a classical technique is safest and healthiest and guarantees a long life of performing. Vocal misuse, overuse, and abuse are present in every style of singing. Yes, even in classical singing. The reason we don’t hear much about classical singers suffering with vocal issues is because they are ashamed to report it. To do so is dangerous because it can cripple, or even end, a career. Reporting would also raise some uncomfortable questions about classical singing’s claim that its technique is superior to all the rest.

Just one more point before closing this episode. I want to be transparent with you, the listener or reader. The writer of this podcast is a classical singer. That’s how I was trained eons ago. I love classical singing and value all my years of classical vocal training. Yet, when I needed to sing anything other than classical literature, I was unprepared. I realized that my technique was specific to a sound, molded in service to a style. When I was singing classical repertoire, I was prepared. Outside that realm, I felt utterly clueless as to how to enter other singing styles.

That is why, as a voice trainer in the 21st century, I urge my students to become skillful in making an array of sounds with their voice. I want them proficient with all of them so they can experience a level of flexibility that it took years for me to find. Flexibility leads to freedom.

Let me leave you with these thoughts:

• Classical singing is a somewhat clumsy term for describing a highly diverse style of singing.
• Classical singing is not a singular voice quality.
• Classical singing can be identified by a number of traits that result from choices the singer makes at the source and filter levels. 

Thank you for listening to The Voice Science Podcast. Today’s episode was written by Timothy Wilds and recorded by Drew Williams-Orozco. Until next time, keep singing and singing smart.