Sign in to follow this  
elvis isnt dead

What dose falsetto mean?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Well I always though it was a breathy tone, but I hear so many storries and not just that from youtube videos and people off the net but people I meet in person, all giveing there own version of what it means

The Cambridge dictonary "italian to english" says the following

falsetto [noun] (music) an unnaturally high (singing) voice in men, or a man with such a voice

 

But still in doubt!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Elvis, Welcome to the forum.

 Falsetto (the word) is something that means different things to different people even in the professional singing community.

Basically falsetto is the "Sound" and "Configuration that produces it" made by a man who is pretending to sound like a woman. The technical configuration is that the 2 vocal folds are not making contact when vibrating as in normal speech and the vocal folds are "Thinned" out. 

 The BEEGEE's are the most common example of someone singing in "Falsetto".

Another example of "Falsetto" is the sound of "Mickey Mouse". If you are familiar with Cartoon Characters, A voice to compare Mickey  to is "Sponge Bob Square Pants" who has an "Edge" or Sharpness to the sound (because of the vocal folds making contact) compared to "Mickey Mouse" who has a Hollow Flutey sound (Because the vocal folds are NOT making contact).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks MDEW

Dont know about Micky M. but  The BEEGEE's staying alive is on my set list. and I have covered it to the original as best as I can and it is indeed a breathy tone.

Breathy tone where by all the air used is not being used to sing. So by your understanding of Falsetto is the same as mine a breathy tone

the sound of  made by a man who is pretending to sound like a woman. I have heared that one to. but it dose not sound right to me, I do not sound like a woman when using Falsetto

 

 

Found this video which says Falsetto is not breathy

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2019 at 1:22 PM, elvis isnt dead said:

the sound of  made by a man who is pretending to sound like a woman. I have heared that one to. but it dose not sound right to me, I do not sound like a woman when using Falsetto

You do not HAVE to sound like a woman when using falsetto. That is just the easiest way to describe HOW to produce falsetto. The configuration of the vocal folds is only one aspect of making sound. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest claudeman1

I can't say how much I disagree with this definition. It particularly loses credibility with so many pitch intonation issues. Vocal Folds (chords) adduct (close) in varying thickness with varying degrees of sub-medial or sideways pressure. This pressure incidentally is what engages the diaphragm and give is less or greater support. That is what breathy or tuneful sounds are about. The degree of support. Head voice has the folds meeting, but in a thinner portion. Period. Falsetto is indeed a different portion of the Folds vibrating. Best thing I can recommend is that you back off on the "umph" when you move up the scale. Practice getting softer WITHOUT getting breathy. Good luck!  Claude Stein, Natural Singer Workshop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Standardizing terminology should be a remote project for the music industry.

Meanwhile, when giving advice or opinions to individuals, all you have to do is give examples of the the sound that YOU mean, state the method that YOU recommend, and why you recommend it.

Then the student can listen to everybody's examples, choose which sound is the one they are looking for. Then among those sounds, the student can choose which method they prefer. How they come to their decisions should be up to them.

Trying to standardize anything is always going to lead to conflict, each established pedagogy or methodology wanting to be the big kahuna driving the discussion towards their own established perspective. It takes a select body of representatives to sort that kind of thing out, not a free-for-all on an internet forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Guest claudeman1 said:

I can't say how much I disagree with this definition. It particularly loses credibility with so many pitch intonation issues. Vocal Folds (chords) adduct (close) in varying thickness with varying degrees of sub-medial or sideways pressure. This pressure incidentally is what engages the diaphragm and give is less or greater support. That is what breathy or tuneful sounds are about. The degree of support. Head voice has the folds meeting, but in a thinner portion. Period. Falsetto is indeed a different portion of the Folds vibrating. Best thing I can recommend is that you back off on the "umph" when you move up the scale. Practice getting softer WITHOUT getting breathy. Good luck!  Claude Stein, Natural Singer Workshop

So are you saying sir

Falsetto is a breathy or non breathy tone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, kickingtone said:

Standardizing terminology should be a remote project for the music industry.

Yer yer yer, dose discovering the seoncd bridge and passagio on your forced and squeezed siren rekindel any memories walter mitty?

 

32 minutes ago, kickingtone said:

. It takes a select body of representatives to sort that kind of thing out, not a free-for-all on an internet forum.

Well considering how much you have spent on traning, your the last one to talk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These were the same type of debates I was talking about in that other thread. Standardizing vocabulary in the professional realm means nothing to beginners and novices. Not to mention coaches who use their own terminology for their students. We are a world forum and need to communicate with each other through any means necessary. This includes slang that may only be understood by the person asking the question and the one relating an  answer. Once the understanding is reached THEN a more appropriate  vocabulary can be introduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, MDEW, I may be confusing you with somebody else, but I seem to have a recollection that you work in I.T. If so, you may recall the standardization "wars", like the "browser wars", database connectivity battles, etc. Microsoft was often accused of strong-arming competitors into compliance with its standards. What you really need in these situations is a formal consortium, like W3C (not to be confused with WC3!) that oversee the standards of the world wide web. Once a standard exists then it will enforce naturally.

But in vocal pedagogy I do not think that there is any overall consortium. So, terminology will remain fragmented. It is better for everyone to be aware that the same term is used to mean different things, than to be confused when they encounter a different usage from the one they have been told is "the one correct usage", or waste a heap of time before they realize they are talking at cross-purposes with another person..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, kickingtone said:

Hey, MDEW, I may be confusing you with somebody else, but I seem to have a recollection that you work in I.T. If so, you may recall the standardization "wars", like the "browser wars", database connectivity battles, etc. Microsoft was often accused of strong-arming competitors into compliance with its standards. What you really need in these situations is a formal consortium, like W3C (not to be confused with WC3!) that oversee the standards of the world wide web. Once a standard exists then it will enforce naturally.

But in vocal pedagogy I do not think that there is any overall consortium. So, terminology will remain fragmented. It is better for everyone to be aware that the same term is used to mean different things, than to be confused when they encounter a different usage from the one they have been told is "the one correct usage", or waste a heap of time before they realize they are talking at cross-purposes with another person..

Exactly, In the vocal world you will always have people who never looked into the professional terminology and will always speak using words familiar to themselves.

To communicate you have to feel each other out,so to speak, and find words familiar to both of you. 

Just now, kickingtone said:

But in vocal pedagogy I do not think that there is any overall consortium.

There sort of is a consortium or at least there is a peer review process in the research field. All that M1, M2, M3 .... was to replace problem terms like Falsetto, Headvoice, chest voice, fry and such. I think that also led to more confusion which I may go into in that other thread(if any one is interested of course). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this