Female singers singing in false voice.

cacm · Post by **cacm** » 30 Mar 2008, 08:25

Dear Nick,
I agree with what you have written. It is one of those "sticky wicket" situations to coin a cricketing analogy not easy to explain properly in a forum of this nature. Thanks for the input. vkv

money · Post by **money** » 30 Mar 2008, 22:23

GM says all female playback singers use false voices, so there may be something he is expressing which I have not understood.
There may be another aspect which may be giving the impression of a different voice of the singer.It is something which is generally not adopted in cm recordings.
The music directors do tamper with voices in film music by equalising and mastering techniques,so that they get the timber of voice they are looking for. ARR is a pastmaster in it.Some singers sound quite different .This can also happen inadvertently due to the sound engineers attempting some audio corrections which may end up in different tonal texture.
The cm recordings are more straight forward with less ofvoice tampering and so we may not be
experience it here.

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 30 Mar 2008, 23:18

Happily less common in Carnatic music --- but I have one BMK album which is unlistenable, and I notice echo or reverb being used on others.

GM says all female playback singers use false voices, so there may be something he is expressing which I have not understood.

That is what I was wondering too.

cacm · Post by **cacm** » 31 Mar 2008, 00:35

REG: false voices & "tampering by sound engineers:
I have great difficulty in understanding what is exactly meant by "False Voice"; For example 1) I suggest we do not know most if not all of the singers to know what their"Real Voice" is. Both types of voices come & are generated by the same person.
2) To get to high pitches like S.G.Kittappa which were considered desireable at least in the days without amplification & higher pitches tend to propagate further etc. As a matter of fact THE LEGENDARY CARUSO himself had certain techniques which he had developed- it has been described in books etc- which enabled him to do what he did on stage & certainly it was not his"Natural Voice" in the sense that was the voice with which he would address his non-stage situations. One can see why because enormous EFFORT as well as TECHNIQUE based on practice is needed to generate the music to the best he can.
False voices fortunately are not needed in Classical Carnatic Music tho' some critics have observed Late Great Maharajapuram Santhanam with using false voice etc. I feel such criticisms are superficial as well as not correct as it is not obvious what is false and what is true voice, Ultimately it is the sruti alignment &swarasthanam which appeal to even a lay listener & I submit cine singers are better in this regard than many classical vocalists especially now a days. vkv

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 31 Mar 2008, 00:43

Good points VKV. Extending your point but in the opposite direction, the legendary classisist and traditionalist Sri. MDR may be said to have sung in a 'false' voice since his normal speaking voice is a kattai or so higher than his singing voice. (His lec-dem is the evidence for that.) And we all know that there is nothing 'false' about MDR.

cacm · Post by **cacm** » 31 Mar 2008, 00:51

Dear Vasanthakokilam,
In a lighter vein what if the kattai is higher or lower between friends?!......You have made the point better than I am capable of. Do you teach how to be concise & precise?. I certainly would attend such a course!...vkv

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 31 Mar 2008, 04:36

VKV,
Surely, you scientists do a lot better than some of us! and VK is a pro at that.
As for M. Santhanam, it was more 'crooning' than singing in a false voice, I would think. May be it came across as such because of his powerful voice which was quite a contrast to the mellow effect he was after?

cacm · Post by **cacm** » 31 Mar 2008, 06:41

Dear Arasi,
I agee with your descrption M.S. "crooned" but I still would like to know what a false voice is? Every one else seems to know what it is....vkv

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 31 Mar 2008, 07:10

I think what people are referring to is the fact that the singing pitch is MUCH higher than the talking pitch. An example I know is Vani Jayaram - when she speaks (I think that this voice/pitch is assumed to be 'true'), the pitch is MUCH lower than her singing pitch (which is assumed to be 'false').

cacm · Post by **cacm** » 31 Mar 2008, 09:00

Dear rshankar,
Thanks very much for clarifying; Why should the talking pitch and the singing pitch be the same? Is it mandatory that they be the same?It looks like an arbitrary requirement to me.....
Various famous musicians esp. GNB used to sing at different kattais at different concerets & various parts of their career; MMI for example preferred to sing at a higher pitch when the accopmpanist was MSG. In general Vocalist tend to sing at lower sruthi at later years in their career. It appears to have very little effect on their ability to captivate & communicate. In cases like Vani Jayaram I suspect she was preserving her voice- I believe higher pitch requires more effort- for good reasons. vkv

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 31 Mar 2008, 12:03

The western classical 'voice' is something brought about by much training. Even popular artists who sing 'normally' may very well undergo training in diction, clarity, projection and breath control.

Isn't such training a part of Carnatic music also?

I know someone who used to sing very nicely, the only trouble was that you could not hear him from more than six feet away. His singing was great for his own meditation, but not much good for performance. He has been learning with TVG for some years now, and all that has changed; he has learnt how to sing with some strength, projection, and sing out to an audience.

thenpaanan · Post by **thenpaanan** » 31 Mar 2008, 18:12

nick H wrote:The western classical 'voice' is something brought about by much training. Even popular artists who sing 'normally' may very well undergo training in diction, clarity, projection and breath control.

Isn't such training a part of Carnatic music also?

I know someone who used to sing very nicely, the only trouble was that you could not hear him from more than six feet away. His singing was great for his own meditation, but not much good for performance. He has been learning with TVG for some years now, and all that has changed; he has learnt how to sing with some strength, projection, and sing out to an audience.

Systematic training in Carnatic music by which I mean the practice of teaching sarali, janta, sthayi, and thaatu varisais, is equivalent to practising the scales in Western Music. Alankarams are the practice of the various standard thalas (though the majority of those thalas are not used in practice) of which I dont know the equivalent in Western Music. Geethams are the introduction to ragas and note embellishment techniques which may be considered equivalent to primers used in Western Music (though I dont know if there is one standard in WM corresponding to the more or less standard set of geethams that everyone seems to learn in CM). Varnams are full-fledged pieces in their own right and I don't understand the logic of teaching varnams in CM _before_ keerthanas, the former can be quite long, complex, and formidable for the novice student.

Diction and clarity training vary from one school to the next. Some schools (the Dhanammal school for instance) are noted for paying minute attention to the actual curves of note embellishments. Other schools (notably some Andhra schools) are very particular about diction, splitting words correctly, and so on.

However I am not aware of *systematic* methods of teaching projection or breath control. The overwhelming method of teaching in these respects is simply imitation and each teacher approaches the question in their own way. Particular teachers may have ideas on how to create better voice for particular students but there does not seem to be a collection of such ideas or a syllabus of practice that would go towards building a systematic approach. I have never been to a music college : do the CM colleges that exist today have particular courses or exams for voice production? I think they only test your intellectual prowess but I may be mistaken.

I would be extremely interested to know if there are such schools in CM that have systematic methods for projection, range, and generally, voice mechanics. If someone can say more about what TVG teaches for voice projection and strength, please do so. That would be valuable information indeed.

-Then Paanan

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 31 Mar 2008, 21:10

Thank you, that is fascinating. On the one hand, I am amazed that so many singers sound as good as they do, and on the other I am sadly not surprised at the dependence on the microphone of carnatic performers.

Some carnatic performers have really strong voices that seem to come from deep within their chests; I had always assumed that this was a matter of training. I've noticed that weaker teachers tend to have weaker-sounding students, and, of course, the opposite.

I've noticed too that some have a slightly nasal back-of-the-throat delivery; again I'd thought this down to the training of their particular school.

I guess I've misinterpreted a lot. But I guess one has to do some learning, before one can really appreciate what's going on, and, of course, that I have never done.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 31 Mar 2008, 21:26

does nick mean to say that WM singers are mic independent. what I have observed mostly is they chose to sing in those days in a perfect ambience for music and a hall structure perfect for musical performances. especially the opera.

Unfortunately, you dont find that here in Carnatic. they sing every where ..in temple. ,in a school class room. ,
in marriages amidst the cacophonous conversations, even in the roads with a small pandal where the vehicleas pass by,

but comparatively HM performance are more choosy and strict about the place they perform .

Nick H · Post by **Nick H** » 01 Apr 2008, 00:17

Not at all, G_M, not at all. I meant that remark in isolation, not in comparison.

It's true that our world would have to be a little more ideal before we could do away with the mic --- the audiences would have to learn to shut up, for a start!

I'm sure also that there are pro arguments; maybe if a singer doesn't have to work so hard just to be heard, they can put more into the subtlety of their performance.

It is a big subject, amplification, its pros, cons and quality. We've done it in other threads; I'm sure we'll do it again, but I certainly didn't mean to derail this thread by mentioning it.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 01 Apr 2008, 12:40

Dear nick and all ,

Actually the word false voice was not coined by me , it is been around for some time and we continue to use it since i think there is no equivalent to it . let me knwo if there is one for that .

Actually, I bought a varnam teaching CD somtime back for my cousins where the teacher asks the students to give up using false voices. ( and of course I have heard it a few other times also . ) / The equivalent fo this in tamil is Kalla kural .

Ask any fairer sex to sing a song ( those not carnatic trained ) amd u would notice that they take off with a shrill voices and the prevailing idea is singing in shrill voice is sweeter for the general public. the more shrill the more sweeter ( actually the more irritating) this shrill voice as the ideal voice by virtue of cinema influence.

My athai woudl sing any song in shrill voice alone and takes pride to say that is how her voice is . ( god given shrill voices)

I think by now I have thrown some light about my esoteric term FALSE VOICE.

compare these 2 songs by susheela one sung in 1949 and another 18 years later and listen for yourself the the shift in pitch . it has actually raised where in the place it has to lower by age.

( incidentally , I love susheela's voice and hence you can understand my idea that i am not trying to comment derogatory of their voices but only trying to say that there exists 2 completely different voices and one is not natural but artificially kept alive even as one ages . )

listen to these 2 songs of susheela the first of which sung in 1949 and the other 18 years later. the pitch has gone up actually.

http://www.musicindiaonline.com/p/x/q4m ... As1NMvHdW/

http://www.raaga.com/playerV31/index.as ... 664&bhcp=1

These are by Lata Mangeshkar.

the following was sung in 1949.

http://www.musicindiaonline.com/p/x/_5I ... As1NMvHdW/

the following was sung around 70. this is my all time favorite of lata ( Nick sure shoudl listen to this once whether he likes it or not)

http://www.musicindiaonline.com/p/x/-qf ... As1NMvHdW/

this was sung in 1995 that is 46 years after her first hit . but she takes strain to keep the pitch higher . It is for popular demand and they have to struggle as they age.

http://www.raaga.com/playerV31/index.as ... 078&bhcp=1

( end note: if you ask me, though I feel that this is an artificial voice I liked and listened to many of them . they manage d to emulate so well without any strain to the listeners ears. but I am afraid, these days female play back singers mostly sing in ear piercing shrill voices sometimes. Lacks the versatality of Janaki or Lata or susheela.

by the by some body if you find time please try to find what raaga this cine song is . a lovely song.

http://www.raaga.com/playerV31/index.as ... 259&bhcp=1

VK RAMAN · Post by **VK RAMAN** » 01 Apr 2008, 19:25

shrilled and or muffled may be two other terminologies for kalla kural

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 01 Apr 2008, 20:40

And 'poik kural' for 'kaLLak kural' has been in use too.

cooldudesaksham · Post by **cooldudesaksham** » 01 Jul 2008, 22:56

I dont know much about singers of the south, for I'm basically from the north, but from my exposure, S Janaki and Vani Jairam use head voice and falsetto much more often than their northern counterparts.
About Asha and Lata, its not that they never use falsetto/ head voice. Nor is it that they always use it. One thing that is certain is that Asha uses it much much more often than Lata, who resorts to head voice or falsetto very very rarely (something like 1 in 5000). Lata had a better upper range than Asha, which is a well known fact!

srikant1987 · Post by **srikant1987** » 02 Jul 2008, 07:43

I always when I was younger wondered that Y there exists 2 type of voices for female.
There are many types of voices. Even the shruti alone varies quite a bit â€” just like among men. Not many men sing at MDR's pitch for example. (I can't even sing his Shadjamam without difficulty.)

One so thin and another flat. I thought the ladies with thin voices opted cinema and the flatter voices opted classical music.
In Carnatic music, there isn't so much stress on natural pitch and other voice characteristics, as long as you have control over more than two octaves â€” regardless of where the two octaves start measuring from.

But higher-pitched voices tend to be preferred in movies especially for females â€” the extent of this preference has varied over time, but it's always been there.

False voice always existed or was it post 50????. y shoudl female play back singers always sing in false voice? y a good and sweet voice has 2 norms , one for cinema and one for classical singing.
Please write "why".

No, it is not false voice that playback singers sing with. It is virtually impossible to sing for minutes together on a "false voice".

It maybe that film music has chosen higher-pitched singers preferrably, but it chooses NATURALLY high-pitched singers. No one is made to sing artificially unless the situation of the song in the movie calls for it. For example, singing for a child.
---
And like nick H says, this preferrence could originate out of there being many more instruments in film music, and some of these instruments may have very limited pitch range, so the singer's voice needs to fit in.

cooldudesaksham · Post by **cooldudesaksham** » 02 Jul 2008, 11:52

No, it is not false voice that playback singers sing with. It is virtually impossible to sing for minutes together on a "false voice".

This aint true! Sunidhi Chauhan has sung many songs in a false voice, solos and duets. While performing live too....

It maybe that film music has chosen higher-pitched singers preferrably, but it chooses NATURALLY high-pitched singers. No one is made to sing artificially unless the situation of the song in the movie calls for it. For example, singing for a child.

Many a times, it is to match upto the male co-singer's scale. Otherwise, the composer wants the singer to sing the song in the scale which he had imagined while composing it. Sunidhi naturally has a heavy, husky voice apt for item numbers and fast, disco songs. Her false voice is thinner and thus, 'sweeter,' apt for romatic numbers.

ganesh_mourthy · Post by **ganesh_mourthy** » 02 Jul 2008, 13:47

oops this topic has revived again. a bone of contention. it shows more the love and craving for the singers than analysing notions. ok at least people who say that it is natural voice of female singers . can you at least accept to the fact that pitch lowers as you age. y has it never lowered for female singers ever . probably they are exceptional mortals gifted to sing in the same pitch from 20 to 80.gosh. listen to some of the music india links that I have given links to compare. I have listened to kuch na kaho ( 1942 a love story) of lata mangeshkar where she sings in screaching voice where she has to match young manisha. lata fans excuse. when they try to sing with the same high pitch when they dotage it is awkward. excuse my language.

quite often children at home ask " why that akka singing has such a old voice" . Jiya jale for preeti zinta in dil se and konja konja neram in shivaji for nayan tara are 2 instances where kids got those doubts. singers struggling to match the voice of those 20+ heroines. probably kids cannot understand and extol anything legendary singers do.