Talk:Vocal range/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Tenor vocal range

Tenor: C2 - C4 ??????? That can't be right. How can the tenor reach lower that the bass? It must be a typo. Shouldn't it be C2-C5?

You're right: I made that edit in a hurry and didn't notice my mistake. I've corrected it. Thanks! -George 05:33, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm affraid You're both wrong; C2-C4 was a typo but the correct 'Full Voice' tenor range is C2-G4, (on a good day) though many tenors strugle on F4. nearly all tenors have to go falsetto to reach above a G4 and this is not counted as true tenor range.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there. C4 is middle C (on the piano), which means C2 is what's oddly called deep C on this website - I've always heard it called low C - anyway. Your proposed range would mean that your average tenor can sing every bass aria ever written and doesn't have the famed opera high C at all.
Now, if you mean C3 to G4 I still disagree. C5 is called tenor C on this website and is quite routinely reached by tenors in full voice. This famously dates back to Gilbert Duprez, as you can read under the heading "Romanticism" at this website. The correct range is certainly C3 to C5. --George 18:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Tenor C is exceedingly hard to hit and requires months for tenors to practice before they eventually hit it.--I'll bring the food 23:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
There are many, many tenors who are unable to hit a Tenor C. I only know a few who can. I once asked my voice teacher how high most tenors could hit, and he told me that to make a carreer as a solo tenor, one usually required a "Money Note" of a high B-flat (Bb4) or higher. This kind of thing is what makes it so hard to define vocal range. In this specific example, do you include the "Tenor C", which is the Holy Grail of Tenors, or do you take a more conservative approach to the definition, and label the high C as an outlier? My own preference would lean towards the latter, but it depends on what you are trying to define. Opera soloist range is radically different than choral range. Find me a choral work where tenors must sing a Tenor C. I dare you. --Scorpio3002 6:15, 23 January, 2007 (UTC)
In #10 of Carmina burana the choral tenors are written to high C. (I agree that most of them don't really sing it. Just answering your dare.) I'm pretty sure there are some big ensembles in the operatic repertoire where the tenors split and the T1s are written to C, but I can't think of any off the top of my head. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iglew (talk • contribs) 09:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Georgia Brown

I've removed the italic text below to this page for the moment. As mentioned on the whistle register Talk:Whistle_register, I searched both the 2005 edition of Guinness Book of Records and their website and found no reference to Georgia Brown or indeed to any "highest/lowest note by a female" or "widest vocal range" categories. I don't have access to a 2006 Guinness Book, so if someone could confirm it we can move the text below back to the main page. Forgive me excessive caution: This is a topic that positively obsesses some pop singers and their fans, frequently leading to overhyped and unconfirmed claims, so I'm extra careful

For females, Georgia Brown of Brazil, according to Guinness, has pitched a supersonic note beyond human hearing — 25087 Hz (G10), which is 5175 Hz higher than the average human can hear. Guinness claims to have verified this with a piano, violin, and an organ. This is up for debate, of course, because notes that cannot be heard cannot be verified against an instrument.

--George 20:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I added it back. Here's my proof. It's not listed on their site, but Guinness doesn't list everything on there. Sorry for the quality. I took the pictures in Walmart with my cellphone.
http://tinypic.com/awxkyv.jpg
It reads:
1. Greatest range (female): Nine octaves, G2-G10, Georgia Brown [Brazil], August 18, 2004.
2. Highest vocal note (female): Georgia Brown's G10 - a frequency rather than a note, verified using a piano, violin, and Hammond organ.
3. Greates range (male): Six octave, Tim Storms [USA]
4. Highest vocal note (male): D7 (four Ds above Middle C), Adam Lopez [Austrlia], March 17, 2003
Here's the second picture if anyone wants to see it: http://tinypic.com/awxlxf.jpg
It reads:
5. Highest note in classical repertoire: G6 [3 Gs abouve Middle C] in 'Popoli di Tessaglia.' a :concert aria by Mozart [Austria, 1756-91]
6. Lowest classical note: Low D [three Ds below Middle C] in Osmin's aria in Mozart's Die Entführung aus dem Serail
7. Lowest vocal note: Tim Storms' B-2, nearly two octaves below piano's lowest note
She also has a copy of her Guinness certificate on her site: :http://escravosdegeo.sites.uol.com.br/index1.htm 69.160.116.44 06:06, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Wonderful! Thanks very much. I've moved the text back and put all this info on the page. (Amusingly, the info on "Lowest classical note" is quite wrong. Silly Guinness.)
--George 20:55, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Extremes of vocal range and whatnot

I've hesitantly put in a small section about world record vocal ranges, high and low pitches, that sort of thing. As anyone who's spent any time on the Mariah Carey article knows, this can be a hot topic. Let's please try to keep it to confirmed, certified information.

Unfortunately, I can't find any high quality info on extremes of the female vocal range. If anyone has data of Guinness World Records, please contribute. George

I deleted the part about Mariah because she's not listed in Guinness for her vocal feats. Georgia Brown has, supposedly, pitched all the way up to a G10. Guinness says her range is 9 octaves (G2-G10) [That's 8, Guinness..] and that her pitches were checked against a piano, violin, and an organ. Humans can't hear past D#10. Don't ask me how they verified what can't be heard. Georgia does have an extensive range though - I've heard her get as low as G2 and as high as F8. 69.160.116.44 06:51, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
"In 2000, Tim Storms was certified by the Guinness Book of World Records for producing the lowest vocal note sung by a male. The note was pitched at 7.7 Hz (B-2), which is not audible to human ears." - If B-2 refers to the 2nd B on a piano, then it is audible? - Matthew238 01:03, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
I was actually referring to B in the negative 2nd octave. C0 is about where humans start to hear, and anything below that is considered to be in negative octaves. 69.160.116.44 09:00, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
C0 is audible and B-2, too. You should download "Bome's Mouse Keyboard". It's a virtual piano and there you can hear C0. You can also clearly hear B-2. It is audible!!! So I believe that Tim Storms hit that note...

http://www.dutchdivas.net/frames2/highC.html

Bome's Mouse Keyboard is not accurate at extreme pitches. Contains Mild Peril (talk) 18:49, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Did you remember yesterday about the "men who sing like women" page that had been put into the Votes for Deletion section?? I think we should try to think up of a name that can be used to refer to ANY singer with a sound of a given pitch regardless of gender, rather than using sexism in determining whether a singer can be called by a name. User 66.32.71.149

It seems odd to have sopranist, alto, and countertenor all listed under male voices. Precise definitions vary, but I would generally say that most male altos and all male sopranos are countertenors of some sort. I think that countertenor describes the voice type, but alto or soprano describes the voice part. Which should be the organization scheme?

guinness book 2006 page 172 mario http://www.dutchdivas.net/frames2/highC.html

Request for input

A new article claims that a young man named Tireh has a world-record-tying vocal range. Another wikipedian requested verification, and the creator provided audio samples. I have no musical expertise to judge them, and in general input to the conversation at Talk:Tireh from more musically knowledgeable Wikipedians than myself would be appreciated. Thank you — Pekinensis 05:43, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

There's other male singers who can beat Adam lopez highest note and there's evidence to show Adam Lopez beat his own record (he sings Eb8 in one of this songs)however neither of these facts have been mentioned on this page. IMO Tireh shouldn't really be mentioned here unless:
A) GBOWR acknowledges Tireh's record OR 
B) If the other singers who've beat Adam Lopez record become mentioned in the article, in which casse it would be fair to mention Tireh.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.159.15.28 (talk) 21:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC).

Classification of vocal range in classical music

Frequency should be related to Piano note name, as this is how vocal ranges are usually categorized, even on Wikipedia. - Matthew238 01:33, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Text notation of scales

I can't find an article anywhere explaining the 'C4, C5, etc' scale everyone seems to be using to describe vocal range here. It doesn't match the one on the Musical Ranges Template, and there is no indication I can find of what C# middle C is, for purposes of tying the whole question to a musical staff. Help? EloiseMason 15:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello there. The notation used here is a very common one, and it's tied to the piano. C4, for example, is middle C; it's called C4 because it's the fourth C on the piano (counting up from the low end). Thus, for example, C6 is what would commonly be called soprano high C, and F2 is the second-lowest F on the piano (the typical bass low F in opera). Hope this helps. --George 18:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Hrm. Well, if that's so, then apparently this article thinks a soprano only has one octave (and change) of range, a mezzo far more (and can sing higher than a soprano), an alto two, a tenor far more than two, and a bass slightly less than one? Now I'm really confused. Unless there's typos.EloiseMason 19:06, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I just cross-referenced to the individual vocal-range articles, and the ranges they give are sometimes radically different. Anyone know what the right values are? Put here for easy access are what the entries say now:
Soprano: C4-A5 / A3-C6
Alto: F3-D5 / F3-E5
Tenor: B2-G4 / (C3-C5, but that's an operatic tenor; no listing for choral tenors)
Baritone: G2-E4 / G2 - E4
EloiseMason 19:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
The answer to your very good question is, I fear, that people who edit these articles are bitchy. But more on that in a moment. Regarding your fear about the soprano and tenor ranges here, I think you're misunderstanding the notation. The soprano range is more than an octave: C4 is middle C; it changes to C5 at the next C up, and A5 is a sixth above that (the A two notes below "soprano high C"). Similarly, the tenor range is from the B a ninth below middle C to the G a fifth above. I think you're not noticing that the numbers increment at every C; C3 is the C below middle C, and the B2 is one note below that - for it's in the second full octave on the piano. The numbers change at each C. This notation confuses people a little at first, but it's become common. So it carries on.
As for the range differences: Well, like I said, people are bitchy. In opera terms, one tends to assume a two octave range for each voice type. So the soprano is C4 - C6 and so on for the other types. Of course that's not what one assumes in choral music, and it's quite unpredictable in popular music. At one point I had all the ranges based on opera numbers, but someone didn't like it and came along to change it. Not wanting to fight over something so minor, I let it stay. Feel free to change it back. I think it's easier my way, the opera way, but this is an open source and so anyone can change it.
Thanks for the attention to this article. It's good to know I'm not alone. :) --George 06:32, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm trying to make sense of it also. Shouldn't the "Basic Operatic Ranges" be GREATER than the "Basic choral ranges" ? The "Basic Operatic Mezzo-Soprano": (G3 - B5) bigger than the "Basic Choral Mezzo": (A3 - F5)
Perhaps a diagram like this might help: 




c d e f g a b c d e f g a b c d e f g a b c d e f g a b c d e f g a b c d e f g a b c 
 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7
  
                  |           |     |     |   |     |       |     |

             Bass |-----------|-----|-----|---|     |       |     |

                              |     |     |         |       |     |

                        Tenor |-----|-----|---------|       |     |

                                    |     |                 |     |

                               Alto |-----|-----------------|     |

                                          |                       |

                                   Soprano|-----------------------|


Johnhenryfowler (talk) 17:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

vocal range

Hi I'm a spanish singer and I work for a music magazine. yesterday we have received a promotional e-mail from the staff of an Italian singer, to visit his website to listen to his songs from his first album...I was looking for information about vocal range to start the review of the songs in his web site cause I never heard something like it but Mariah Carey, Minnie Riperton and few other cases here in wikipedia ( if I remember there is something in the "whistle register" article..but I don't remember well the names )he his a great singer with good songs but he hits sounds like F7 and higher too. what do you think about his voice and range? Maria

World records, &c.

Someone recently corrected yet another of Guinness'errors that I had just copied over politely, changing 9 to 8 octaves in the Georgia Brown record. I have to confess, I'm finding Guinness less and less trustworthy every day. Not only did they get this wrong, but as someone else has indirectly pointed out, they gave Adam Lopez certification for a C#8 here and then only a D7 in the articles photographed below. There may be reasons for all of these - typos or some such - but it's getting a bit much from a supposedly authoritative source.

Adam broke his D7 with his C#8 in June. The book was released August 15. The book was already being published and couldn't be reprinted for one record. As for Georgia, Guinness has no excuse. 69.160.116.44 05:32, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea what to do about this, so I'm happy to take suggestions. But I wanted to register my complaints now in case more nonsense comes up. --George 18:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I think it should be noted that it's eight octaves, but Guinness published it as nine. Just like the corrections you made in the article about some of the other info being incorrect, I think the same should be done with Georgia. 69.160.116.44 05:35, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

CHARLES KELLOGG: "Charles Kellogg, who claimed to have a vocal range of 12.5 octaves, could accurately imitate birdcalls, which sometimes went up into the ultrasonic range. According to Kellogg his calls could go as high as 14,000 Hz (14 080Hz is A9)." So, is that as high as he could go or could he really go into ultrasonic range? 14kHz is not an ultrasonic pitch. Tinnitus-inducing perhaps, but not ultrasonic. It would be clearly audible to most adults. A few adults and a substantial proportion of children can hear sounds up to about 20kHz, which is lower than Georgia Brown's record G10: I'm not sure whether the necessary electronic equipment to verify ultrasonic frequencies would have been available in Kellogg's day, and please correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't his claimed 12.5 octaves exceed the threshold of human hearing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Contains Mild Peril (talk • contribs) 06:15, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment placed on article page

The following anonymous comment was placed on the article page. I am moving it here.

Below: * Greatest range: Eight octaves, G2-G10, Georgia Brown, Brazil

Comment: **This may not be accurate, since the Guiness World Records does not keep this record anymore. It would not be logical to even hit the G10, since it is out of the normal hearing range. The highest of Georgia Brown's voice confirmed is a F8.

Kleinzach 12:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Vocal Ranges Listed

The vocal ranges given under "Classification..." seem to me to be too narrow. For instance it says the soprano high note is A5, but a lot of the big soprano roles go up to C6 (and tenors often to B-flat4). It says the high note for a Bass is C4, but basses routinely sing up to E-flat4 or even E4. I think we should add about a third to the top of each. This would be consistent with the ranges given under "categories: vocal range" for each voice part.

Also, the discussion talks about the Queen of the Night's F6 as being the highest note demanded in the standard opera rep, but doesn't Daughter of the Regiment also call for F's? Similarly, aren't there any Russian operas that call for a low C3? I'm surprised if not. --Ssilvers 18:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I've done some editing to the relevant section. As for what the proper range for soprano, alto, or whatever: While it's true that some sopranos are called on to reach the high C, not all of them are. It's common in opera, of course, but there are innumerable choral works tht don't call for it. Similarly, while a operatic tenor without a high B would find his available repertory tightly constrained, it's extremely uncommon for a choral work to call for high Bs except from soloists. In any case, as the article says the ranges listed here "should not be taken as a restrictive category but as a general guide." --George 23:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
These ranges are not consistent with the ranges given in the descriptions of each voice part, and a professional singer (whether opera, musicals or standards) really needs more on top than these ranges show. Even choral singers could not get away with these ranges. Bass chorus music routinely goes to e-flat for bases, at least. What if you gave the 2-octave ranges and said something like "but some music does not call for singers to reach the extremes of these ranges."? As to the vandalism, what does 2006 Guiness Book say? Instead of deleting, I would put in a tag like [citation needed]. Regards, Ssilvers 02:35, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Taking those in reverse order: The Guinness Book records are noted on this talk page in the "Georgia Brown" section. Included are pictures of the actual Guinness pages. As for the vocal ranges, the source I cited in the article is a web page of the Yale Music Library quoting the New Harvard Dictionary of Music. Because ranges vary considerably among singers and across genres, and because there are some music fans on Wikipedia who relish arguing endlessly about vocal pitch ranges, I sought a particularly unimpeachable source. --George 23:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

"Side note" on sub-basses...

The final paragraph in the "basso profundo" section is very out of place, and is seemingly contradictory. Can someone get the right info and correct this? --DanMuSciRel 02:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Personally, while the "sub-bass" section is interesting, I find it out of place. We don't devote similiar space to distinctive uses of the voice - the flageolet register, Tuvan throat singing, &c. - so I don't see having that section. Perhaps it deserves it's own little article. --George 03:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


Have you heard of Regine Velasquez, pop diva from the Philippines? Her vocal profile in the wikipedia claims she's got 4 octaves. It also says that she can hit F6 in the whistle register, her highest note, which means with 4 octaves she can go down as low as F2. F2 for a woman is impressively low even beating that of Georgia Brown's lowest, G2.

There is a flaw in Georgia Brown's Vocal Range Demonstration

Check this out: http://www.georgiabrownmusic.com.br/index2.htm

This is the page where Georgia Brown demonstrated her vocal range from G2 to G10. On that page,there is an "extended" piano keyboard . Each key of G starting from G2 is played and Georgia responds by matching the note vocally supposedly up to G10. She's able to match the keys from G2 to G7. There are NO audible vocal responses on G8 and G9. No explanation is given. But when G10 is played, Georgia responds audibly by hitting a note close to G7 only fainter. That note is audible and doesn't sound like a G but an F instead or it could be an F#8? Question. If we can hear G10, how come we can't hear G8 and G9?

Hi, I've found another discussion about georgia's G8 G9 and G10. I've copied it here:

............................

LOL yeah you've got a point but its too much work to make an article. but you dont have to lie about georgia. everyone know she caint sing. and her "G10" on her site is like a B8. she got mad at me cause i said she cant sing on youtube. Myke 08:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
so, no one will make an article about one of the greatest voices in the world cause it's too much work eheheh, it's funny ehehe but you're right, that's not your work. But I think someone should. Anyway, about georgia brown, even if she doesn't hit the G10, her range is very wide, I listened to her record in the piano keyboard in her site and you are right, I think it's around B8 or C9 or D9, but very impressive isn't it? that's way I said she is good and need a good article. if you noticed, G8 doesn't work ( to me )and G9 too, I think that's why understanding there's no G10 in her record, they inserted her highest ( around C9 ) to let people think that's the G10. I mean, her "G10" sounds like nicola's C9 ( even if nicola has recorded his exhibition in few seconds and it's clear what he sings and well audible, the most impressive I've ever heard ). So I'm little sceptical about her record, but maybe I'm wrong, do you have more info? G10 or not she is very good too, what about you said on youtube? 151.80.4.24 00:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I told her she cant sing and its the truth. Yeah I was scolded by some people on wikipedia for making articles and not wikifying them and all that but i have good pitch sence and i cant tell octaves above the 8th but the reason it sounds like nicola's C9 is because its B8. the note is a B and it doesnt sound like its a B9 cause then you would have to strain to hear it. but yeah her G8 and G9 dont work. but i hope someone makes nicola an article after all he does have the largest vocal range. Myke 11:02, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah someone should create the article. In georgia's site there's also a mistake in that page ( in the keyboard page )... there's "G2 G10 .... 9 octaves" or something like this, but that's 8 octaves...is she aware of that mistake? 151.80.4.24 00:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

.........................................

they are talking about nicola sedda, he has demonstrated to have the widest vocal range ever from E1 to A9 ( that's what is recorded, but it is said he can go higer and lower too ). In the demonstration in his site you can clearly follow all the notes he sings. It's a clip of one minute where we can hear the natural rising of the voice, it's a clearer example of the extremes of vocal range, more natural and clear than what georgia brown has done. Link: http://www.nicolasedda.com I've found a page about him on a microphone's site too. Even if georgia can hit a G10, she has "only" 8 octaves, while in that clip nicola covers 8 1/2 octaves.

While all this is doubtless very interesting, none of it matters. The Guinness Book of World Records is the arbiter of these sorts of issues. Until they make a change, Wikipedia is quite correct to cite current statistics. --George 03:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is correct to cite right statistics...but if guinness writes G2 – G10 are 9 octaves, and takes a C9 for a G10, and wikipedia writes so cause as you say “Guinness Book of World Records is the arbiter of these sorts of issues” , wikipedia is wrong. Guinness or not, Sedda has the widest vocal range, everyone with a little musical background can confirm it. Guinness is not the only “arbiter” of these things, there are more illustrious experts that can confirm who has the widest range and correct guinness book's mistakes, and this is normal. Even if Guinness Book is correct in its records wikipedia should write articles considering all possible sources, not only one.
I'm sure the editors of this article would be happy to hear from other illustrious experts on this topic. Unfortunately, I at least am unaware of any. None of the standard musical references (Grove, Oxford, &c.) keep track of such things and I know of no musicological organization that does so either. If you have other expert sources on this topic I'm sure all the editors would be happy to consider them. Until then, this seems to me little more than a series of arguments among anonymous editors - hardly the stuff that justifies editing the article. --George 21:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
You are right. Unfortunately I’m unaware of any too, I work in the classical music, I can say who has the widest range, but I’m not an illustrious person and like other millions expert readers I can’t be a “source”. You are right, there’s no other organization that keeps track of these things.

moved stuff

Someone needs to fix the part about the largest vocal ranges and highest/lowest notes hit! The information is obviously a prank, but I don't know what the correct information is.

It is important to note that singers such as Tim Storms utilize vocal fry for their lowest pitches. Vocal fry is the low clicking sound that vocal chords produce when pushed below their natural limit. It is commonly used in gospel quartets and a capella groups. Singers, such as J.D. Sumner, and Tim Storms can use this effectively to produce extremely low tones. These are only effective when using a microphone, as they have little volume, not unlike like whistle notes. Guinness is often very loose with what they categorize as a "note" so extreme vocal technique is often used to produce notes in a range that the singer could not actually sing in. Vocal fry and whistle notes are techniques effective in pop music. However, there is a distinction between these tehcniques and the normal technique used by singers in classical repetoire. Comparing whistle and fry notes to those sung by classical singers is like comparing apples to oranges.

The lowest notes that need no amplification and are produced with normal vocal technique are sung by the basso profondo or, oktavists from Russia. Such singers sing notes as low as A1 or G1. Vladimir Pasiukov of the Male Choir of St. Petersburg, and Vladimir Miller of the Valaam Choir are two good examples of true basso profondos. Such voices are almost exclusively heard in Russian liturgical music, and composers such as Rachmaninov, Gretchanov and Chesnokov employ them extensively. Some of these choral works call for notes as low as F1 although Bb1 or A1 is usually the limit of such pieces.

Perhaps something like the above should be appended to the article. Thoughts? E.W.

I dunno if it's necessary. After all, we don't go into excruciating detail in this article about the physiology of the whistle register. Why then do it for the vocal fry? I think a discussion of the various bass techniques would be entirely appropriate in the article on basses but not in a general vocal range article. --George 22:46, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I heard someone say that on the video of tim storms which this article links to, that the only note he sings which has any fry on it is the C1. I've also seen other articles saying that many russian basso profondos do use vocal fry to lower their low notes.

The main difference between tim storms voice and the basso profondo's voices is that the basso profondos are MUCH louder, tim storms needs amplification to be heard over other singers whereas the basso profondos are almost belting the first octave notes, and a solo basso profondo singer can usually be heard clearly over a small choir of tenors.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vocal_range/Archive_1&oldid=1190135915"