Talk:Bel canto

Call for summary

This page is heavily linked to in Wikipedia, and lacks a clear summary definition. The current summary jumps right into the details of every and all interpretations, and so does the rest of the content. It's clear that there are several definitions of the term. They do have an overlap and this overlap should be given in the summary. The it.wiki page does this successfully by opening with a simple:

It's defined as ... a style of virtuoso singing characterized by a homogeneous movement from lower to higher notes, agile ornaments and phrasing and seeing human voice as a musical instrument.

I suggest a consensus general definition be found that accommodates all tastes, and be put in the summary. At the current state, the page just spells details on so many different interpretations that no useful explanation is available out of it. The page really deserves it, especially given its weight on Wikipedia.--Mijio (talk) 22:12, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Comments

This is just meaningless nitpicking, but would "soprani" be correct for two women? If you're going to use the Italian plural form, then shouldn't you also use Italian gender agreement, and call them "soprane"? Or is there precedent for "soprani" that I couldn't find? --The Amazing Superking 06:08, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it would be nit picking. If we were writing in Italian, you could say Soprani, I guess, but not being fluent in Italian I wouldn't know. As we are using English, one Soprano, two Sopranos is standard current English useage. Robauz (talk) 01:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

This article could include a subsection on the method of Alan Lindquest which is based upon bel canto but more personalised and often used for recouperative purposes. KP 22:12, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

"Some have credited the 17th century composer Pietro Cavalli with introducing bel canto, but his smooth and flowing melodic lines belong to a different style from a different era." - This sounds like weasel words to me. Who are these "some"? On what authority do we claim Cavalli "belongs to a different style"? Anonymous 20:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 08:01, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Belcanto — Belcanto → Bel canto – Bel canto is the more accepted (and common) English name, and is the one used in the authoritative source, the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Belcanto seems to be a German invention. — Makemi 18:36, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

---

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support as nominator. Makemi 18:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. David Kernow 20:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. --GuillaumeTell 21:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Kleinzach 22:18, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments

• Compare [1] and [2] for pages only in English. Makemi 18:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• And Google asks us if we meant Bel canto, too! --GuillaumeTell 21:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• Also, clicking on What links here on the Belcanto page gets you here: Special:Whatlinkshere/Belcanto, where it is immediately apparent that far more pages are linked to the Bel canto redirect than to the page itself. --GuillaumeTell 18:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Please, see it.wiki

The current meaning of the term "belcanto" is a big historiographical mistake. I have no time to translate. If somebody here knows Italian language, see my article at it:Belcanto. Thanks --Al Pereira(talk) 03:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Photograph

The original photo accompanying this article was of Virginia Zeani (b. 1925) - Virginia_Zeani.jpg. That photo has disappeared. There is a copy(in gif format) accompanying the article on Zeani. It is a studio portrait with a very dubious copyright tag. "This image is ineligible for copyright and therefore is in the public domain, because it consists entirely of information that is common property and contains no original authorship." It has no further information about the photographer or date of publication. The photo was clearly taken after 1923 and by a professional photographer. To be on the safe side, I did not use this as a replacement, and have instead added a PD photo of Mathilde Marchesi, a bel canto teacher, listed in the references. Voceditenore 16:42, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

bel canto is Not a technique.... it is a style of singing this article as it stand is extremely incorrect and missleading

Lengthy discussion

Many great bel canto teachers and singers have vastly differing technical beliefs. As well, many of our bel canto legends sang with extremely different techniques and sang wonderfully together, ie Marilyn Horne and Joan Sutherland. It drives me crazy that this Jacocks character is making up all this stuff and throwing in bits of truth and misconstruing this noble art form. He self-published 2 very scant strange books on bel canto where he rambles about bel canto origins and frankly none of it is supported in fact. Every great bel canto treatise.... Manuel Patricio Rodríguez García, Mathilde Marchesi, Julius Stockhausen, Francesco Lamperti, and his son Giovanni Battista Lamperti all speak about focusing the voice into the mask through diction. Breathing and many other variables are very different. __________________________________________________________ Encyclopedia Britanica says: "STYLE of operatic singing that originated in Italian singing of polyphonic (multipart) music and Italian courtly solo singing during the late 16th century and that was developed in Italian opera in the 17th, 18th, and early 19th centuries. Using a relatively small dynamic range, bel canto singing was based on an exact control of the intensity of vocal tone, a recognition of the distinction between the “diapason tone” (produced when the larynx is in a relatively low position) and the “flute tone” (when the larynx is in a higher position), and a demand for vocal agility and clear articulation of notes and ENUNCIATION OF WORDS" http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/59021/bel-canto#tab=active~checked%2Citems~checked&title=bel%20canto%20--%20Britannica%20Online%20Encyclopedia The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition says: "A STYLE of operatic singing characterized by full, even tones and a brilliant display of vocal technique." Notice it says vocal technique, NOT bel canto technique. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bel%20canto __________________________________________________________ WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University says: "a STYLE of operatic singing " _________________________________________________________ Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) -says: "a smooth, cantabile STYLE of singing. [Origin: 1890–95; < It: lit., fine singing, equiv _________________________________________________________ Virginia Zeani, who is mentioned in this article says "It's impossible to write a book on the technique of bel canto, as every body, throat, and face are different and therefore everyone needs different technical advice. Bel canto is a skill which uses technique, not a technique itself." _________________________________________________________ We can go on and on, BEL CANTO is a tradition or style of singing NOT a technique I recommend replacing the article with: __________________________________________________________ Mathilde Marchesi (1821-1913), a famous teacher of bel canto For other uses, see Talk:Bel canto (disambiguation). Bel canto (Italian, "beautiful singing"), an Italian musical term, refering both to the tradition of singing which originated in Italy during the late seventeenth century and reached its pinnacle in the early part of the nineteenth century, and to the repertoire for which it was employed. Rossini (1792-1868), Bellini (1801-1835), and Donizetti (1797-1848) were the promonent composers of this repertoire. Bel canto singing characteristically focuses on perfect diction and evenness of tone throughout the voice, skillful legato, an easily produced brilliant upper register, tremendous agility and flexibility, and a certain lyric, "sweet" timbre. Operas of the style feature extensive and florid ornamentation, requiring much in the way of fast scales and cadenzas. It must be pointed out that many great bel canto singers came from different lines of technical belief, such as those of Manuel Patricio Rodríguez García, Mathilde Marchesi, Julius Stockhausen, Francesco Lamperti, and his son Giovanni Battista Lamperti. Therefore there is no one bel canto technique, but a series of skills which must be mastered to successfully sing the repertoire also known as "bel canto". While historians typically date the bel canto period to the early 19th century, the term itself did not come into common usage in its current sense until the middle of the 19th century. At that time composers such as Wagner began to call for larger, more dramatic voices, "but he intended for those voices to retain the bel canto approach; to sing his operas as one would sing Bellini's Norma. However, the tradition at Bayreuth was to declaim, and because the public demanded it, the singers complied." Opponents of this trend complained, with Rossini, "Alas for us, we have lost our bel canto." The sopranos Maria Callas (1923-1977), Joan Sutherland (1926- ) and Montserrat Caballé (1933- ), and the mezzo-soprano Marilyn Horne (1934- ) probably best exemplify the bel canto singers of the post-war period. (Virginia Zeani (1925- ) and Leyla Gencer (1928-2008), both bel canto sopranos of equal abilities, made fewer recordings and thus their fame suffered by comparison in America.) In more recent years, June Anderson has had considerable success in Europe and the United States, focusing almost exclusively on soprano roles in the bel canto repertoire. Video Examples Edita Gruberova, Bellini's I puritani Mariella Devia, Donizetti's Lucia di Lammermoor Salvatore Fisichella, Bellini's I puritani Notes References Bel Canto: A Theoretical and Practical Vocal Method. Mathilde Marchesi. Dover (1970) ISBN 0-486-22315-9 Bel Canto. James A. Stark. University of Toronto Press (2003) ISBN 0-8020-8614-4 Bel Canto: Principles and Practices. Cornelius L. Reid. Joseph Patelson Music House (1950) ISBN 0-915282-01-1 "Extracts From Vocal Art" by M. Augusta Brown, in The Congress of Women, Mary Kavanaugh Oldham (ed.), Chicago: Monarch Book Company (1894), p. 477. Available online from the University of Pennsylvania Digital Library (accessed 26 April 2007) ______________________________________________________________________________ Everything in this is easily verifiable and accurate....... the term bel canto is in jeopardy of becoming the new "organic", a term with no real meaning. the Kendrick Jacocks stuff is NOT accurate or varifiable!!!!!!!! I have shown his books to several of the most prominent voice teachers and otolaryngologists in New York. They were all shocked by them. He is trying to give himself and his odd, awfully received books, credibility. That is not what wikipedia is about. My very real concern is that this will infiltrate impressionable young singers. They don't need this kind of misinformation. Already this page is coming up on search engines like dictionary.com. Please fix it!!!!!! ) SingingAngel (talk) 04:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC) I think you are a bit hysterical about the alleged shortcomings of the existing article. I have no investment in this article, but your edits and suggestions need a bit of polishing. Two immediately obvious spelling errors are "refering" "promonent"; I then gave up. One of your main complaints seems to be the claim that bel canto is, or is not, a technique. Well, the Italian ("una tecnica di canto virtuosistico"), German ("bezeichnet in der Musik die Gesangstechnik") and Spanish ("una de las técnicas del canto lírico ") articles say so, and the French article is only slightly less specific ("préoccupés par la mise en valeur de leur technicité personnelle"). Frankly, your protestations seem like a storm in a tea cup to me. Formally, if an edit removes the <references/> tag (or the equivalent {{reflist}} template) while there still are references in the article, such an edit is a strong candidate for reverting. Speaking of references: if you are so opposed to a certain person named "Jacocks" (whom I don't know from my elbow), why did you still leave that reference in your version? Suggestion: formulate a sober and sourced article on the subject. I recognise the shortcomings of the current article, but we won't get anywhere without replacing it by something better. Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC) Response I can see what SingingAngel is getting at. Bel canto (when it refers to the actual singing as opposed to the repertoire) is not a single "techinque" as the current article seems to imply. It is more of a "art" or "skill". That skill or art has a variety of components: an impeccable production with equalized registers, fine legato phrasing, beautiful tone, flexibility, etc. And as the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Opera points out, the term in that sense is an imprecise one. This is more or less the same view taken by Stark 2003. I also agree with SingingAngel's assertion about Jacocks, who incidentally heavily edited this article and others to include reference to his self-published book and his idiosyncratic notions. (See Special:Contributions/Jacocks5671 and especially this version of the article Ancient vocal method, which Jacocks created.) The Bel canto article has also been edited by another self-published author to add yet more idiosyncratic interpretations of the word as some sort of "lost technique" and a reference to his book: Ciampa, The Twilight of Belcanto. The Rossini quote ("Alas...") would be better referenced to The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, p. 420 than Jacocks. This article definitely needs work (as does SingingAngel's proposed revision). I'm going to flag this up at the Wikipedia Opera Project for some input which I think would be helpful. Several of the members have access to the online version of Grove and/or the actual book. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:29, 18 September 2008 (UTC) I think Voceditenore's assessment is accurate. I will further add though, that the bel canto era did influence vocal pedagogical thought and practice; thereby significantly altering the way in which vocal technique was taught. That is not to say that there was a uniform opinion among all teachers of vocal technique during the bel canto era, but that there were developments in thought and practice within vocal pedagogy that have become associated with bel canto singing. For example, teachers during the bel canto period started to decribe the voice as possessing three registers where chest voice was identified as the lowest and head voice the highest of three vocal registers: the chest, passagio and head registers. Prior to the bel canto era the terms chest and head voice were used but with different meanings and the term "throat voice" was used and passagio not at all. The term passagio of course came to mean something else over time but regardless, this just demonstrates the fact that a lot of the concepts used within teaching vocal technique developed during the bel canto era and are closely tied to bel canto singing. Also, 20th century vocal pedagogical research by people like William Vennard challenged many of the ideas formed during the bel canto era, causing a shift in thought and practice among voice teachers and their methods in the last fifty years. In reading vocal pedagogical journals sometimes the term "bel canto technique" is used to refer to the common thought and practice among voice teachers of the bel canto period to diffentiate it from ideas developed more recently. I don't think this usage of the term "bel canto technique" was meant to redefine bel canto as a technique but use it more like a descriptive adjective for technique used during the bel canto era. Make sense?Nrswanson (talk) 09:12, 18 September 2008 (UTC) Yes, it does make a lot of sense and a referenced paragraph to that effect would be very useful to the article. Nevertheless, I think it would be better to avoid defining the term as a "technique" in the lead and use a term like "tradition" or "style" instead. Voceditenore (talk) 09:44, 18 September 2008 (UTC) I completely agree. I am busy on here right now with other projects but I will try and get back to this page and put together something that will address how vocal technique was influenced and developed during the bel canto era. I have some good resources that address the topic. In the meantime, I have copied Grove's definition word for word here: User talk:Nrswanson/sandbox. Perhaps we should move towards something along these lines. Nrswanson (talk) 09:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC) Thank You! Thank You! Thank You! Thank You! Thank You! Both Ciampi and Jacocks have thrown a huge amount of misinformation into this article. It must be pointed out that both of them are completely self-published, and they do not have the support of the vocal research community. Ciampi's book is interesting because there are 60 pages of interview with Zeani, but it is clearly edited to support his beliefs and speaks very little about her understanding of bel canto. Ciampi's experience is as a rehearsal accompanist, organist, and voice lesson accompanist, but for whom? Why does he believe that is sufficient experience to write a book about bel canto? Ciampi and Jacocks support each other. They are both published by the same self-publishing firm AuthorHouse, and highly recommend each other. They have no support from the vocal community at large, and for good reason. I have noticed that great voice teachers, like Zeani, say "I teach bel canto" not "bel canto technique". I also notice that teachers who say they teach bel canto technique are those with few credentials and hope that will generate business for themselves. It merely points out there lack of eduction. My suggested revision, is not complete, by any means. I was only removing the incorrect portions of the existing article. I spoke to Viginia Zeani about all of this. She was surprised that any of this was becoming an issue. In fact, it is not an issue in serious publications, but only in self-publish rubble.... and hopefully not here in Wikipedia. I would be happy to help in anyway possible. SingingAngel (talk) 13:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC) The main problem with the term "bel canto" is that it hasn't a serious historical basis. I know that it's commonly used, especially in the anglosaxon countries, but the idea that it "flourished from approximately 1805 to 1830" is false. If you see the following paragraph of the article, the description of the "bel canto style" ("Bel canto singing characteristically focuses on perfect evenness throughout the voice, skillful legato, a light upper register, tremendous agility and flexibility, and a certain lyric, "sweet" timbre. Operas of the style feature extensive and florid ornamentation, requiring much in the way of fast scales and cadenzas.") can be perfectly suited to an earlier tradition. In fact, you can find sources which place the end of the "bel canto" in the Rossini's operas (and one could ask what of his operas, since there are important differences) --Al Pereira(talk) 17:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC) I have to say, the section describing vocal technique makes no sense and is mostly self referential. After reading it I have no idea what bel canto means only that some people disagree as to what it means. None of the possible meanings are actually discussed.

Question

Would Victoria de los Angeles also be regarded as a practitioner - like Caballe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.217.172.37 (talk) 21:52, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Disch novel

Bel canto and attempts to recreate it figure into Thomas Disch's novel On Wings of Song. I have no idea how historically accurate it is. I had thought (due to having read that novel many years ago) that one of bel canto's defining characteristics was the vocal sound of male castrato singers, which is why the style died out. It's not mentioned in this article though. 67.117.145.149 (talk) 05:59, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Quotations

Hi!

I'd like to suggest that the text can be enriched with quotations, preferably historical ones (!); since this can give better insight into the views of people on this topic. A great resource for finding such quotations is archive.org or books.google.com. Let me give two example, that I've just located:

• Bel-canto not a school of sensuously pretty voice-production.
  [...]
  It has come to be a generally recognised thing that voice, pure and simple, by its very composition, or "placing", interferes with the organs of speech; making it impossible for a vocalist to preserve absolute purity of pronunciation in song as well as in speech. It is because of this view that the principle of "vocalising" words, instead of musically saying them, crept in, to the detriment of vocal art. This false position is due to the idea that the "Arte del bel-canto" encouraged mere sensuous beauty of voice, rather than truth of expression.
  – David Ffrangcon Davies: The singing of the future (1907, c1905)

• "Bel-canto" (of which we read so much) meant, and means, versatility of tone; if a man wish to be called an artist, his voice must become the instrument of intelligent imagination. Perhaps there would be fewer cases of vocal-specialising if the modern craze for "voice-production" (apart from linguistic truth) could be reduced. This wondrous pursuit is, as things stand, a notable instance of putting the cart before the horse. Voices are "produced" and "placed" in such wise that pupils are trained to "vocalise" (to use technical jargon) the words; i.e., they are taught to make a sound which is indeed something like but is not the word in its purity. "Tone" or sound is what the average student seeks, ab initio and not verbal purity. Hence the monotony of modern singing. When one hears an average singer in one role, one hears him in all.
  – David Ffrangcon Davies: The singing of the future (1907, c1905)

The above quotations, for example, immediately make it clear that Bel Canto is about culture and expression, and that this should be regarded as the basis for technical-vocal aspects. (Bel Canto is thus not some technical hocus pocus that makes singing suddenly beautiful or meaningful.) The quotation also makes clear, that Bel Canto is often misunderstood, or misinterpreted. Bel beller (talk) 22:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

sound clips needed

This is really meaningless without some sound clips. How is bel canto really different in sound from opera, or from the way a pop singer like Celine Dion sings? Without sound clips, it's hard to figure out what is being discussed here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skysong263 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Did you even read the very first sentence of this article or any part of the article at all? The very first sentence states "Bel Canto is an Italian opera term." It's very obvious from the text that bel canto is a term used to describe a kind of singing used specifically within opera/classical music. Further, given the debate over the term's definition over several centuries I doubt recordings could help much here (particuarly since some writers have argued that true bel canto singing disappeared after the mid 19th century which was before the advent of recording technology). Further, good recordings of 20th century/contemporary artists singing works from the bel canto literature are all copyrighted. Short 8-12 second clips could be added under fair use, but I don't think such limited clips would be useful as an illustration of the bel canto style.4meter4 (talk) 15:44, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree with 4meter4 85.178.208.14 (talk) 10:42, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

This seems a little on the biased side, and perhaps overly impassioned for a Wikipedia article. The whole section reads very much like an opinionated account of the history, with Wagner as one's greatest enemy - we don't all love Wagner, but it's out of place nonetheless. Any ideas on how to still describe this vocal style from a more objective standpoint?

"To make the situation worse, during the 1890s, the directors of the Bayreuth Festival began propagating a particularly forceful style of Wagnerian singing that placed such an undue emphasis on the articulation of the individual words of the composer's libretti, the all-important musical component of his operas was compromised. Called "Sprechgesang" by its proponents and the "Bayreuth bark" by its opponents, this hectoring, text-based, anti-legato approach to vocalism spread across the German-speaking parts of Europe prior to World War I. It was totally at odds with the Italian ideals of "beautiful singing"."

EmpressEcho (talk) 12:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Typos ...

It appears that the left parenthesis is mismatched at the paragraph that begins "(Today's pervasive idea that singers should refrain".

Tagged for neutrality check

I've tagged this page as needing a revision for NPOV, with particular reference to section 1.3 Bel canto and its detractors. Describing an aesthetic choice as "hectoring", for example, is a little too impassioned perhaps! The purpose of the article is to inform, not (necessarily) to persuade. EmpressEcho (talk) 13:06, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

• Agree. I've now (tentatively) removed the tag after trying to address the concerns raised (within that particular section). 86.186.168.226 (talk) 14:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)