Perceptual Findings on the Broadway Belt Voice

Transcription

1 Perceptual Findings on the Broadway Belt Voice *Wendy DeLeo LeBorgne, Linda Lee, Joseph C. Stemple, and Heather Bush, *Dayton, Ohio, ycincinnati, Ohio, and zxlexington, Kentucky Summary: The present study required raters (casting directors) to evaluate the belt voice quality of 20 musical theater majors who were proficient in the singing style referred to as belting. Two specified vocalizes and six short excerpts from the belting repertoire were used for rating purposes. The raters were asked to judge the belters on a set of seven perceptual parameters (loudness, vibrato, ring, timbre, focus, nasality, and registration breaks), and then report an overall score for these student belters. The four highest and lowest average scores were used to establish the elite and average student belters. A correlation analysis and linear regression analysis provided insight regarding which perceptual judgments correlated most highly with the elite and average scores. The present study found the perceptual ratings of vibrato and ring to be most highly correlated to the elite student belter. In addition, vibrato and ring were found to highly correlate with perceived loudness. Key Words: Belting Perceptual judgments Singing voice Aesthetics Vocal beauty. Accepted for publication February 17, This research was presented at the 31st Annual Symposium: Care of the Professional Voice; June 5 9, 2002; Philadelphia, PA. From the *The Blaine Block Institute for Voice Analysis and Rehabilitation, Dayton, Ohio; ythe University of Cincinnati, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorder, Cincinnati, Ohio; zthe University of Kentucky, Division of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Lexington, Kentucky; and the xuniversity of Kentucky College of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, Lexington, Kentucky. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Wendy DeLeo LeBorgne, The Blaine Block Institute for Voice Analysis and Rehabilitation, 369 West First Street, Suite 408, Dayton, OH wleborgne@dhns.net Journal of Voice, Vol. 24, No. 6, pp /$36.00 Ó 2010 The Voice Foundation doi: /j.jvoice INTRODUCTION The term belting evolved after singers, including Ethel Merman, Barbara Streisand, and Patti LuPone introduced Broadway audiences to a new and exciting sound over 60 years ago. Unlike the ingénues of the past, belting (in the music theater arena) was considered emotionally edgy and verging on the brink of sounding out of control. It is this unique quality which so many singers have attempted to emulate in the last 60 years, with sometimes detrimental and career-jeopardizing effects. From a pedagogical standpoint, the term belting has often been associated with an unhealthy use of the vocal mechanism, and many classically based singing teachers find this style of singing offensive. 1 4 However, unlike the extensive literature base on the classical voice, a consensus on the perceptual parameters of the belt voice has not been adequately established. Miles and Hollien 5 suggested that it is difficult to experiment on belting because it lacks a clear definition. These authors further suggested that it would not be possible to formulate a reasonable definition until at least some relevant objective data became available. 5 Semantic confusion resulting from a lack of perceptual definitions for chest, belt, pop, and mixed singing (which may or may not be synonymous) is evident in the few studies that have examined the belt voice. 3 In their attempt to define this method of singing, Miles and Hollien 5 attempted to describe perceptual characteristics of the belt voice based on a historical literature review and a survey of 24 voice teachers, laryngologists, and phoneticians. These authors concluded that belting is a type of singing which requires four vocal characteristics to be present simultaneously: (1) unusual loudness, (2) heavy phonation, (3) little to no vibrato, and (4) a high level of nasality. 1 A challenge to objectively evaluate this definition was given by these authors at the conclusion of their article. The characteristics of the belt voice described by Miles and Hollien 5 have been widely expanded by other authors to include: extension of the chest voice beyond the typical frequency range, limited dynamic range, high level of physical effort (increased laryngeal muscular tension), vocal breaks, more precise articulation than classical singing, open vowels, bright quality, more forward placement than classical singing, brassy, twangy, articulatory clarity/text-based emphasis, lateral or bell-shaped lip spread, and diaphragmatic breath support Much of this descriptive terminology requires further explanation and scientific evaluation, as limited research exists in defining these terms perceptually. Establishing accepted perceptual terms to describe the characteristics of the elite belt voice may enable the voice scientist to objectify these terms from acoustic, aerodynamic, and temporal perspectives. Current research documenting acoustic observations of the belt voice is limited in both the number of subjects and the consistency of information reported. Preliminary acoustic measures of the belt voice suggest findings unique to this type of vocal production. 3,11,12,16,17,20 There is no denying that the belt voice has established itself as a vocal quality that is desired in the professional arena. As such, belting deserves investigation into its unique production and perceptual output. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE/RESEARCH QUESTIONS The purpose of the present study was to define specific perceptual markers of the aesthetically pleasing elite student belt voice using suggested parameters by Miles and Hollien 5 and other researchers/teachers of the belt voice. Before objectively evaluating the belt voice, one must first be able to identify the unique perceptual qualities that define this style of singing. Therefore, this investigation attempted to define the elite student belt voice based on a given set of perceptual guidelines. Those singers who possessed the desired qualities were selected, and compared with those who did not. The following questions were posed to both the raters (casting directors) and the participants (belters): 1. Does the perceived average vocal loudness during song differ between the elite belt voice and average belt voice?

2 Wendy DeLeo LeBorgne, et al The Broadway Belt Voice Does the perceived presence and use of vibrato differ between elite belters and average belters during song? 3. Does the perception of a ring in the voice differ between elite belters and average belters during song? 4. Do expert listeners perceive a difference in timbre between elite and average belt voices during song? 5. Does the perceived tone focus differ between elite and average belters during song? 6. Do expert listeners perceive a difference in the average degree of nasality between the elite belt voice and the average belt voice during song? 7. Does the perception of a noticeable passaggio differ between the elite belt voice and the average belt voice? METHODS Subjects Twenty female student belters participated in this study. Subjects ranged in age from 18 to 25 years, with a mean of 20.5 years (standard deviation [SD]: 1.91). Belters were defined as singers who primarily perform in the musical theater style known as belting. Singers participating in this study were enrolled in a musical theater curriculum at the university level and had been performing or studying the belt style for at least 1 year, with a mean of 6.7 years of training (SD: 3.44, range: ). Subjects were recruited from the University of Cincinnati, College Conservatory of Music and Wright State University, Music Theatre Division. The subjects included in this study were all undergraduate students pursuing a bachelor of fine arts (BFA) in musical theater. Unlike vocal performance degrees, which typically offer education as high as Doctoral Degree, there are few schools that offer higher than a Bachelors Degree in musical theater. Additionally, information obtained from department administration and dialogue with the participants indicated that musical theater students from these institutions generally have professional experience on enrollment and/or acquire professional employment within 1 year of graduation. Currently, the University of Cincinnati, College Conservatory of Music has five musical theater graduates in leading roles in five different Broadway shows. All subjects completed a questionnaire regarding current vocal health (Appendix A) and personal perception of belting (Appendix B). Subjects who reported a past history of vocal problems were included in this study. However, if the subject reported that they were currently experiencing any of the following problems, they were excluded from the study: significant excess breathiness in singing voice; significant hoarseness of singing voice; and/or significant pain with singing. Furthermore, if the subject reported that her vocal status would prevent her from auditioning or performing at the time of the study, she was eliminated. Subjects were selected without reference to information regarding nicotine use and others obtained via the questionnaire described in Appendix A. This information was obtained solely for informational purposes. After the explanation of the study, each subject signed an informed consent form. Subjects participating in this study committed to a 20- to 25-minute audio-recording session. No subject was aware that the study was designed to compare perceptual characteristics of elite and average student belters. Procedures Audio Recording of Subjects. All subjects performed segments of the following belt songs in the original key: I m the Greatest Star (m ); I Got the Sun in the Morning (m ); Someone Like You (m ); Rose s Turn (m ); I ll Be Seeing You (m ); Cabaret (m. 9 28). Finally, each subject was asked to perform the vocalizes found in Figure 1. The first vocalize was completed on the pitches A 3,F 4, and E 5. The second vocalizes spanned the range D 4 A 5. The range of notes for the second vocalize required the singers to traverse the typically reported passaggio of the female voice. All subjects were provided with music and vocalizes 1 week before the recording session. All recording sessions took place in a sound-treated room with the ambient noise level not exceeding 55 decibel (db) sound pressure level (SPL) (range: dbspl). A mouthto-microphone distance of 30 cm was the designated recording distance using a mounted microphone. The microphone height and distance were adjusted for each subject so that the center of the microphone was 30 cm directly in front of each subject s mouth. The apparatus used to mount the microphone may be seen in Figure 2. The apparatus included a snare drum carrier (with the drum and bottom mounting removed), a pinewood measured at 12 in a boom-style microphone stand, and a TOA condenser Microphone (model KY, TOA Corp. Ltd., Surrey, UK). The total weight of the drum carrier apparatus was 5.7 lb. All singers maintained a comfortable stance during the vocalizes and song trials. The TOA condenser microphone was used for recording all singing tasks. Microphone specifications included: a gold-vaporized diaphragm with a thickness of 2 mm, a smooth frequency response from 20 to Hz, low noise, and low distortion, marketed for digital recordings. The microphone was patched into a Mackie MicroSeries 1202-VLZ 12-channel mic/line mixer (Loud Technologies, Inc., Woodinville, WA). All settings on the mixer board were the same for all subjects. No vocal or intensity enhancements were made. The mixer was patched to a Sony 670 DAT recorder (Sony Corp., Park Ridge, NJ). After the completion of all audio recordings, the DAT recordings were randomized and recorded onto high-quality cassette tapes for rating purposes. FIGURE 1. Vocalizes performed by all subjects.

3 680 Journal of Voice, Vol. 24, No. 6, 2010 FIGURE 2. Microphone apparatus. Perceptual rating of belters A panel of three expert judges trained in the belt style of singing (casting directors for musical theater productions) independently rated an audiotape of each singer s song and vocalize productions. Each of the musical theater-casting directors had over 10 years of experience casting musical theater productions. All judges listened to the same tapes using an AIWA CD carry component system (Model CA-DW635, Sony Corp., Park Ridge, NJ) at the same intensity setting. Before rating the 20 student belters, each judge listened to a training tape that provided verbal explanation and audio examples of the rating parameters. After the completion of the training tape, each judge was asked to rate a practice singer on the given parameters. If any questions arose following the practice trial of ratings, the judges were able to inquire about the rating definitions only at that time. The author was present for all judges ratings. The perceptual judging was completed in a quiet conference room with no interruptions. The first portion of the rating was a perceptual judgment of noticeable voice breaks during the vocalizes (Appendix C). On completion of the first portion of the ratings, each judge was instructed to take a 10-minute break. The second portion of the ratings included the rating of the song segments by each subject using the rating scale in Appendix C.The rating scale (Appendix C) was based on perceptual parameters of the belt voice identified by the Miles and Hollien 5 survey. To determine the highest-rated (elite) and lowest-rated (average) student belters, the three judges rated all 20 student belters on seven perceptual measures (Appendix C) in their overall song performance. These ratings were based on an equal-interval 11-point scale with 0 being too little, 5 being appropriate, and 10 representing excessive. Finally, an overall score was given to each subject based on the judge s willingness to hire that particular singer for a belt role based solely on the vocal quality of the singer. In addition to rating subjects, each rater completed a questionnaire on his or her perception of the belt voice before and after their ratings of all subjects (Appendix B). The information obtained in Appendix B for both subjects and raters was solely for the purpose of interpretation of results of this study. STATISTICAL ANALYSES AND RESULTS Judges ratings The overall scores for each singer were averaged across the three judges. The four singers with the highest overall scores were considered elite student belters, whereas the four singers with the lowest overall scores were considered average student belters. Further investigation into the rankings by the judges revealed that subjects 6, 12, and 17 were consistently ranked as most elite by all three judges, whereas subjects 5, 8, 10, and 20 were rated as the most average belters by all of them. These results demonstrated that the judges unanimously chose the singers who would be most aesthetically appropriate in a belt role and who would not. Further statistical analysis aimed to look at the reliability between the judges ratings of all 20 belters. Kappa statistics did not yield good correlations between the judges. These findings indicate that although each judge underwent training related to perceptual parameters and all of them were consistent in choosing the most elite and average belters, they were not able to agree on what specific parameters constituted a good or bad performance. Further correlation measures between judges showed that judges 1 and 2 correlated most strongly on their ratings of intensity, vibrato, and ring, and judge 3 did not correlate well with 1 or 2 on any perceptual parameter except vibrato. Linear regressions were performed for each of the judges individually and then as a combined group. Results are discussed later. Finally a cluster analysis was used in an attempt to further

4 Wendy DeLeo LeBorgne, et al The Broadway Belt Voice 681 TABLE 1. The Type and Amount (in Number of 8-oz Glasses) of Fluid Consumption for Each Subject (S) Per Day Elite Average Beverage S2 S6 S12 S17 S5 S8 S10 S20 Water per day Coffee per day < Alcohol per month Soda per day <1 0 0 Juice per day differentiate the perceptual parameters of the elite and average belters. Whisker plots revealed elite belters tend to rate higher in the areas of ring, timbre, and focus and intensity. posed to the subjects regarding their personal opinions on belting were directly related to the parameters on which they were rated. Subject characteristics No subject in the elite group reported any difficulty with either the speaking or singing voice, based on the 11 questions regarding vocal status. One subject in the average group reported that she often did not know what would come out when speaking or singing and another subject in the average group reported that she had trouble talking on the phone on a regular basis. Subjects in the average group reported no other problems. Hydration among both groups was moderate. The results of hydration reported by the subjects can be found in Table 1. None of the subjects in either group reported any present or past history of smoking or recreational drug use. Two of the subjects in the average group reported that they were currently taking prescription medication. One subject was on synthroid for hypothyroidism and had been on the medication since 12 years of age. One subject reported that she was currently taking Prilosec (Astra Zeneca) for reflux disease. She reported that in addition to the Prilosec, she currently follows through with all dietary and lifestyle recommendations for reflux. None of the two subjects on medication reported adverse effects of the medication with respect to the voice. In addition to completing the questionnaire on vocal health, each subject completed a questionnaire on belting (Appendix B). The results of this questionnaire were for the purposes of discussion only and can be found in Appendix D. The questions Analysis of vocal attributes Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were calculated for perceived loudness, vibrato, ring, timbre, focus, and nasality. The correlation coefficients can be found in Table 2. The overall score was significantly correlated to two of the perceived vocal attributes. Ring was highly correlated to overall score (r ¼ 0.943) as was vibrato (r ¼ 0.887). Ring and vibrato were highly correlated to each other (r ¼ 0.946). Finally, loudness and ring showed a moderate correlation (r ¼ 0.724), and loudness and vibrato showed a moderate correlation (r ¼ 0.776). The results of the linear regression for each of the judges indicate that judge 1 found vibrato and ring to be most consistent with the elite belter. These results are shown in Table 3. Table 4 indicates that judge 2 had more difficulty identifying which perceptual characteristics corresponded to the elite belter. It appears that ring, focus, and nasality are the most likely perceptual correlates for judge 3. Finally, Table 5 shows intensity, vibrato, and timbre as the most important perceptual characteristics for judge 3 s ranking of elite belters. When all three judges were combined in the regression analysis (Table 6), vibrato, ring, and nasality were most highly associated with the elite belt voice. Whisker plots (Figure 3) for the elite and average belters indicated ring, timbre, and focus to be the most distinguishing TABLE 2. Correlation Coefficients: Overall Score as They Relate to Perceptual Score OS T F L N R V OS * 0.887* T F L y 0.776y N R * V 1.00 Abbreviations: OS, overall score; T, timbre; F, focus; L, loudness; N, nasality; R, ring; V, vibrato. * Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). y Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed).

5 682 Journal of Voice, Vol. 24, No. 6, 2010 TABLE 3. Judge 1 Regression Analysis Variable Parameter Estimates Label DF Parameter Estimate Standard Error t Value Pr > jtj Intercept Intercept rintensity rvibrato rring rtimbre rfocus rnasality Abbreviations: DF, degrees of freedom; Pr, prevalence ratio. characteristics for elite belters. Within these plots, all 20 subjects are included, with the middle group representing the belters who did not fall in either the elite or average group. Within the whisker plots, the scores have been recoded to differentiate the groups more easily. Within the original scale set forth for the judges, 5 was the best possible score for each perceptual characteristic, with 0 and 10 representing the extremes. Therefore, scores of 10 and 0 were recoded as 1; 1 and 9 as a 2; 2 and 8 as a 3; 3 and 7 as a 4; 4 and 6 as 5; and 5 as 6. DISCUSSION Attempts to define the perceptual characteristics of the belt voice are limited to one earlier study. 5 Miles and Hollien 5 reviewed the limited literature that defined characteristics of belting, including surveys of voice teachers and other voice professionals. They concluded that there were four recurring perceptual judgments of belting (loud, heavy phonation, little to no vibrato, high degree of nasality). The authors challenged other researchers to investigate their findings. The present study responded to the Miles and Hollien challenge, and required raters to evaluate the belt voice quality of 20 musical theater majors who were proficient in the singing style referred to as belting. The raters in the present study were asked to judge the student belters on a set of seven perceptual parameters (loudness, vibrato, ring, timbre, focus, nasality, and registration breaks) and then report an overall score for these student belters. A correlational analysis revealed ring and vibrato to be the most deciding perceived events to characterize TABLE 4. Judge 2 Regression Analysis the elite belt voice. Loudness also showed a strong correlation to ring and vibrato, perhaps influencing the overall perception of the elite student belt sound. Although the correlational analyses did not find statistical significance regarding timbre, focus/ clarity, nasality, or registration in defining the elite student belt voice, perceptions reported by singers and raters are provided for informational purposes. Perceptual judgments of loudness Miles and Hollien 5 reported that the most frequent perceptual reference to belting included the term loudness. When raters and singers in the present study were asked to define belting with respect to loudness, all three judges reported that it tends to be loud. The singers were divided on this issue. Three of the singers reported belting as being loud and five reported that not all belting was loud. The opinion of the latter singers can be found in the work of Schutte and Miller. 17 These authors suggested that belting reflects speech-like characteristics. As such, variation in vocal intensity may be found in belt singing. A position statement by Mary Saunders, distributed at the National Association of Teachers of Singing (NATS) 2001 winter workshop on belting, describes the relationship between speech and song as it relates to increased and decreased vocal intensity reflective of the emotional state of a character: The musical theater singing voice is an acoustical and emotional extension of the speaking voice and, while something similar might be said of the operatic singing voice, I would argue that opera seeks to transcend speaking. But musical Parameter Estimates Variable Label DF Parameter Estimate Standard Error t Value Pr > jtj Intercept Intercept rintensity rvibrato rring rtimbre rfocus rnasality Abbreviations: DF, degrees of freedom; Pr, prevalence ratio.

6 Wendy DeLeo LeBorgne, et al The Broadway Belt Voice 683 TABLE 5. Judge 3 Regression Analysis Variable Parameter Estimates Label DF Parameter Estimate Standard Error t Value Pr > jtj Intercept Intercept rintensity rvibrato rring rtimbre rfocus rnasality Abbreviations: DF, degrees of freedom; Pr, prevalence ratio. theater is a vernacular forum and owes its credibility to its ability to touch the prosaic. So it is important that its singing voice, rather than transcend the spoken, amplify and extend it without distorting or transfiguring it. The musical theater song s classical first cousin is the soliloquy not the aria (handout). In the present study, perceived loudness did not correlate with the overall score of the student belters. Rather, findings reflect that the perceived ring and vibrato correlated greatly with the overall score of the elite singer. However, perceived loudness showed a moderate correlation to both ring and vibrato. This finding indicates that the student belter s use of ring and vibrato may result in an increased perception of loudness. There are no reports in the previous literature on belting, which indicate expected intensity levels, vibrato rates, or consistency of the singer s formant for comparison. Perceptual judgments of vibrato The opinions regarding the use of vibrato in belting by raters and singers provide an interesting basis for discussion. All singers and raters believed that belting uses vibrato; however, the reported nature and use of the vibrato varied. Several singers and one judge felt that the use of vibrato in belting was no different than what is used in classical singing. The literature reports a high correlation of a consistent, even vibrato, with overall vocal beauty in the classical singer. 21 One judge and TABLE 6. Judge 1, 2, and 3 Combined Regression Analysis Based on Overall Score Variable DF Parameter Estimate Parameter Estimates Standard Error t Value Pr > jtj Intercept rintensity rvibrato rring rtimbre rfocus rnasality Abbreviations: DF, degrees of freedom; Pr, prevalence ratio. four singers felt that the use of vibrato in belting was different from classical singing. The judge who reported that he did not feel vibrato used in belting was different from the classical singer qualified his answer by stating that the use of vibrato in belting was a stylistic choice and that there was a wide range of acceptable vibrato. Further comments by singers and judges in the present study regarding the vibrato use in belting may be found in Appendix D. The literature on belting reports that little to no vibrato is an essential characteristic of belting. 5 Results of the present study are in contrast to Miles and Hollien s findings. Rather, the present study reports that the use of vibrato in belting may be more similar to the use of vibrato in jazz singing (which is also considered nontraditional music). Jazz is reported to mix straight tones with vibrato by altering the rate and amplitude of the vibrato. 22 An objective analysis into vibrato use in the belt voice is warranted. Perceptual judgments of ring Debate about the presence of a singer s formant in the belt voice is ongoing. 2,11,12,17 The lyrics of musical theater songs are required to be understood on the first hearing, because they are essential for plot advancement and emotional content. Therefore, it has been postulated that the formants that define the vowels (F 1 F 2 ) and the subsequent higher formants are paramount for text comprehension, whereas the ability for the voice to ring may be of secondary concern in belters. 2,12,13 Although professional classical singers typically cultivate and promote training of the singer s formant, allowing them to be heard over an orchestra without amplification, the reported lack of a singer s formant in belting may be the result of body microphone use in most professional productions. Interestingly, an article in Opera Monthly reported that professional opera singers had difficulty being heard and understood when singing in a specific musical theater production. 23 Most of the student belters and judges in the present study believe that belters possess a consistent ring in the voice. More specifically, the degree of ring was thought to vary throughout the range, and the use of ring is (like vibrato) a stylistic choice. This perceptual judgment lends itself to the possibility that the individuality of the singer (with respect to the use of vibrato and ring) is what makes the voice interesting. This is in direct contrast to reports on classical singing, where the consistency of the singer s formant was reported to be vital to the perception of

7 684 Journal of Voice, Vol. 24, No. 6, Analysis of overall_score 6.0 Analysis of intensity Overall_Score Intensity Worst Middle Best 4.0 Worst Middle Best 6.0 Analysis of vibrato 6.0 Analysis of ring Vibrato Ring Worst Middle Best 4.0 Worst Middle Best 6.0 Analysis of timbre 6.0 Analysis of focus Timbre Focus Worst Middle Best 3.5 Worst Middle Best 6.0 Analysis of nasality Nasality Worst Middle Best FIGURE 3. Whisker plots for elite and average belters based on perceptual parameters. vocal beauty. 21 Perhaps it is the individuality of the belt technique that makes this style of singing so difficult to quantify. Perceptual judgments of timbre The literature reports that belting is often associated with a bright timbre. 5,8 10,17,18 The degree of brightness in the singing voice is an aesthetic choice in most cases. Typically, the operatic voice is considered darker and rounder compared with the musical theater quality in belting. 2,11,12,17 It is also noted in the literature that to traverse the passaggio, male singers in the operatic tradition cover (slight darkening of tone) as they ascend in frequency. 24 Without covering, a noticeable break is often noted at the natural passaggio. Belters do not seem to use this strategy as they ascend in frequency; hence, the perception of a bright voice may be justified. All of the singers and judges in the present study reported that belters

8 Wendy DeLeo LeBorgne, et al The Broadway Belt Voice 685 needed a bright vocal quality to be considered elite. One singer reported that belters who have found different colors in the voice have voices that are acoustically interesting. These judgments are consistent with the findings of Miles and Hollien. 5 Perceptual judgments of focus/clarity A unanimous consensus of both judges and singers that elite belters maintain a more focused tone than average belters was reported on the questionnaire. The literature provides two possible definitions of focus/clarity. 11,12,14,20,24 26 The first connotation of focus refers to the brilliance of a given sound. Forward focus/placement is the term associated with the perceived feeling a singer experiences for a bright vocal quality. The second connotation of the word focus relates to the removal of excess breathiness from the sound, and is created by the degree of glottic closure. Clarification of definitions of focus/clarity was not provided to either the raters or singers. Therefore, it is unclear as to which definition they were referring in their response. Perceptual judgments of nasality Although the degree of nasality in belting has never been evaluated objectively, the literature on belting reports that one of the characteristic perceived parameters of belting is a high degree of nasality in the tone. 1 12,17,18 The judges and raters in the present study were divided on this issue. The judges felt that belters should not be perceived as nasal, but may use strategies to produce a forward sound that results in a slightly nasal quality. Some of the singers felt belting is characterized by a bright, but not nasal sound; others felt that nasality was a perceived (not actual) event that occurred as a result of attempting to maintain brightness. Finally, one belter reported that because of the nature of the desired brightness, the listener may perceive a sound as nasal, when in actuality, it is not. Perceptual judgments of registration It has been hypothesized that belters use laryngeal elevation. This places stress on the thyroarytenoid muscle, and maximal strain will eventually result in a registration break. 5,10,22,27 Six of the eight student belters in the present study reported they felt a noticeable registration break. One singer in the elite group and one singer in the average group felt they did not have a noticeable break. IMPLICATIONS Today s stars on Broadway can belt high E s and F s, and it may be the emotional commitment they make to that vocal production which keeps audiences returning for more. Defining this something which makes the belt voice what it is has posed a problem to voice pedagogues, scientists, and singers for years. Quantifying art rarely provides clear-cut results, and perhaps, it is for this reason many choose not to delve into such research. Consensus on a perceptual definition of the belt voice is closer to being a reality, but semantic differences continue to present a stumbling block to the scientist. Based on the limited findings of the present study, both teachers and singers should continue to work toward training a voice in which the use of vibrato is consistent. The placement of the tone should be slightly brighter and more forward than the typical classical sound. Despite the use of personal amplification on the musical theater stage, a ring in the voice is desired. The correlational findings from this study suggest that if the ring of the voice and vibrato are optimal, the overall vocal intensity may be perceived as loud. If, in fact, the belter can attain a perceived desired vocal intensity by optimally using her vibrato and resonance, she may be preserving the laryngeal mechanism. This theory warrants further investigation. Because the nature of belting appears to be based out of speech, and speech-like inflections, the voice teacher and voice pathologist must ensure that his or her singers are making optimal use of the speaking voice. Specifically, belters need to be able to support the speaking voice with adequate breath and inflection. As such, training appropriate breathing techniques, phonation strategies, and resonance within the speaking voice is the first step in maintaining a healthy belt voice. Balancing the three subsystems of voice (respiration, phonation, and resonance) will enable the belter to experiment and use dynamic control and timbre choices. Vocal health in the belter continues to be a source of debate. Although classical singers may also cause laryngeal trauma from inappropriate sound production, if belters do use a longer closed phase of the vibratory cycle in conjunction with increased amplitude of vibration, then these singers may theoretically be placed in a high-risk category for potential vocal injury. 20 It is hypothesized that repeated impact during vocal fold vibration may cause injury to the basement membrane zone (BMZ). Titze 22 reports, The effective impact seems to be cumulative, based on the number of collisions per unit time (p. 49). Additionally, in a study examining the effects of vibration on the BMZ, Gray 28 reported cellular abnormalities in both canine and human larynges. The voice teacher and voice pathologist must remember that it is often the unique voice that gets hired. It is interesting to note that two of the average student belters in the present study were recently hired for professional work and signed with agencies in New York. This further supports the fact that it is not just the voice quality of these performers that makes them marketable, but rather the entire package they offer. This package may include physical attributes specific to a role, and other skills, such as the ability to dance and act. It becomes the job of the voice teacher/pathologist to teach them how to use the vocal mechanism in the healthiest manner possible, striving to achieve a sound that is hired in the Broadway houses. Voice pedagogues, singers, and scientists who are most intimately involved in the belt voice need to continue to work toward defining some basic terminologies associated with this voice type. Perhaps the next step is to evaluate perceptual characteristics of the original great belters based on original cast recordings, and compare them with the great belters of today. The aesthetics related to belting may have changed with time, which may help explain why some vocal teachers and coaches have differing opinions of optimal quality. Perhaps, there are very few commonalities among these singers, and it is simply the shear uniqueness of a voice, a look, or particular talent that got them where they are. Further objective analyses by voice

9 686 scientists into the belt voice among professional musical theater performers (Actors Equity Association) and established Broadway artists are warranted to yield the true definition of the desired vocal parameters. REFERENCES 1. Edwin R. Belt yourself. J Sing. 2004;60: McCoy S. A classical pedagogue explores belting. J Sing. 2007;67: Popeil L. The multiplicity of belting. J Sing. 2007;64: Spivey N. Music theater singing. let s talk. Part 2: examining the debate of belting. J Sing. 2008;64: Miles B, Hollien H. Whither belting? J Voice. 1990;4: Colla R. To belt correctly or not to belt that should be the question. NATS J. 1989;49: Doscher B. The Functional Unity of the Singing Voice. (2nd ed.) Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.; Edwin R. Belting 101. J Sing. 1998;55: Edwin R. Belting 101, part two. J Sing. 1998;55: Estill J. Belting and classic voice quality: some physiological differences. Med Probl Perform Art. 1988;3: Stone E, Cleveland T, Sundberg J, Prokop J. Aerodynamic and acoustical measures of speech, operatic, and Broadway vocal styles in a professional female singer. J Voice. 2003;17: Björkner E. Musical theater and opera singing why so different? A study of subglottal pressure, voice source, and formant frequency characterizstics. J Voice. 2008;22: Henderson L. How to Train Singers. West Nyack, NY: Parker Publishing Company; Howell E. Chest voice and belting. Presented at: the Voice Foundation 22nd Symposium: Care of the Professional Voice; 1993, Philadelphia, PA. 15. Leyerle W. Vocal Development Through Organic Imagery. (2nd ed.) Mt. Morris, NY: Leyerle Publications; Robison C, Bounous B, Bailey R. Vocal beauty: a study proposing its acoustical definition and relevant causes in classical baritones and female belt singers. NATS J. 1994;51: Schutte H, Miller D. Belting and pop, nonclassical approaches to the female middle voice: some preliminary considerations. J Voice. 1993;7: Sullivan J. How to teach the belt/pop voice. J Res Singing Appl Vocal Pedagogy. 1989;13: Sundberg J, Gramming P, Lovetri J. Comparisons of pharynx, source, formant, and pressure characteristics in operatic and musical theatre singing. J Voice. 1993;7: Hoffman-Ruddy B, Lehman J, Crandell C, Ingram D, Sapienza C. Laryngostroboscopic, acoustic, and environmental characteristics of high-risk vocal performers. J Voice. 2001;15: Ekholm E, Papagiannis G, Chagnon F. Relating objective measurements to expert evaluation of voice quality in western classical singing: critical perceptual parameters. J Voice. 1998;12: Titze I. Principles of Voice Production. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; Stone E. The emperor s new voice (can opera singers sing Broadway?). Opera Monthly. 1994;November/December: Hertegard S, Gauffin J, Sundberg J. Open and covered singing as studied by means of fiberoptics, inverse filtering, and spectral analysis. J Voice. 1990;4: Vennard W. Singing: The Mechanism and the Technic. New York, NY: Carl Fischer, Inc.; McKinney J. The Diagnosis & Correction of Vocal Faults. Nashville, TN: Genevox Music Group; Björkner E, Sundberg J, Cleveland T, Stone E. Voice source difference between registers in female musical theater singers. J Voice. 2006;20: Gray S. Basement membrane zone injury in vocal nodules. In: Gauffin J, Hammarberg B, eds. Vocal Fold Physiology. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group; 1991: Appendix A. Subject Questionnaire Initials Subject # Age Years of Formal Vocal Training Are you currently experiencing any vocal problems that would prevent you from auditioning? Yes/No Do you have trouble speaking loudly or being heard in noisy situations? Yes/No Do you run out of air and need to take frequent breaths when talking? Yes/No Do you often feel that you do not know what will come out when speaking or singing? Yes/No Do you get anxious, frustrated or depressed on a regular basis because of your voice? Yes/No Do you have trouble using the telephone on a regular basis? Yes/No Do you have to repeat yourself often in order to be understood? Yes/No Do you feel that you have to strain to speak or sing on a regular basis? Yes/No Do you feel that you use an abundant amount of effort to produce voice? Yes/No Does your voice give out on you on a regular basis? Yes/No Does your voice prevent you from engaging in social situations? Yes/No Current Medications: Smoking History: Do you presently smoke (cigarettes/cigars/recreational drugs)? Yes No B If Yes, How much? How Long? Have you ever smoked on a regular basis in the past? Yes No B B If Yes, When did you quit? How much did you smoke? How Long? Hydration: cups of coffee per day cups of soda per day cups of water per day cups of juice per day alcoholic beverages per day/week/month/year (circle one) Appendix B. Opinions on Belting Journal of Voice, Vol. 24, No. 6, Do you believe that elite belters have louder voices than average belters? 2. Do you believe that belters use vibrato? If yes, is their use of vibrato different than the classical singer? In what ways? 3. Do belters possess a consistent ring in their voices? 4. Do elite belters possess bright voices (excluding nasality)? 5. Do elite belters maintain a nasal quality when singing? 6. Do elite belters maintain a more focused tone than average belters? 7. Do you feel that you have a noticeable break /passaggio? If yes, where does it occur?

10 Wendy DeLeo LeBorgne, et al The Broadway Belt Voice 687 Define Belting in terms of : 1) Characteristic sound (bright, dark, twangy, etc) 2) Use of Vibrato 3) Loudness 4) Placement 5) Other comments Appendix C Judges Form Part 1 ARE THERE AUDIBLE REGISTRATION BREAKS ON ANY/EACH OF THE FOLLOWING SUNG SEGMENTS? (CIRCLE YES OR NO FOR EACH SUBJECT) Soft-Loud-Soft LOW PITCH MID-PITCH HIGH PITCH YES NO YES NO YES NO SCALES /i/ as in eat /a/ as in father /u/ as in food YES NO YES NO YES NO Appendix D Judges Form Part 2. Rate each belter based in the Musical Theater Tradition. Consider ALL SIX SEGMENTS in your score. DO NOT RATE EACH SEGMENT. Rather, give an OVERALL SCORE. You will hear each subject sing the same six excerpts from the following six songs: I m the Greatest Star (Funny Girl); I got the Sun in the Morning (Annie Get You Gun); Rose s Turn (Gypsy); Someone Like You (Jeckle & Hyde); I ll Be Seeing You (Right This Way); Cabaret (Cabaret) AVERAGE VOCAL INTENSITY (PERCEIVED LOUDNESS ACROSS THE ENTIRE PIECE) too soft appropriate too loud USE OF VIBRATO no appropriate too much vibrato vibrato RING no ring appropriate too much ring TIMBRE (EXCLUDING NASALITY) too dark appropriate too bright TONE FOCUS too appropriate too pointed spread NASALITY denasal appropriate hypernasal Does this singer demonstrate a noticeable break? YES NO *****OVERALL SCORE (BELT STYLE)******* : Elite (Would definitely hire for a belt role) 80 89: Good (Would most likely hire for a belt role) 70 79: Fair (Would possibly hire for a belt role) 60 69: Poor (Would most likely not hire for a belt role) Appendix E. Reponses of Judges and Subjects With Regard to Their Opinions on Belting 1. DO YOU BELIEVE THAT ELITE BELTERS HAVE LOUDER VOICES THAN AVERAGE BELTERS? Judge #1 No Judge #2 Yes Judge # 3 Yes #2 EH (elite) Yes #6 AB (elite) Yes, they have been doing it longer and know how to do it healthy #12 MM (elite) Not necessarily #17 KV (elite) Yes #5 EW (avg) No #8 AB (avg) No #10 AA (avg) No #20 LM (avg) No 2. DO YOU BELIEVE THAT BELTERS USE VIBRATO? IF YES, IS THEIR USE OF VIBRATO DIFFERENT THAN THE CLASSICAL SINGER? IN WHAT WAYS? Judge #1 Yes. No, it is usually a matter of stylistic choice as to how much vibrato vs. straight tone is used. Good belters vibrato is more overt. Wide range of acceptable vibrato within the belters Judge #2 Yes, but not sure is it is different from the classical singer

11 688 Journal of Voice, Vol. 24, No. 6, 2010 Judge #3 Yes. Their use of vibrato is different from the classical singer at times. It is wider than the classical vibrato #2 EH (elite) Sort of. It is a forward vibrato and adds spin to the voice #6 AB (elite) Yes. Yes. It is more in the chest and in the face #12 MM (elite) Somewhat, yes. Yes. Use of vibrato is not as apparent as classical singers #17 KV (elite) Yes. Yes. Classical singers use a looser, wider vibrato #5 EW (avg) Yes. Not too differently. Belters can control their vibrato more and completely stop it without stopping support #8 AB (avg) Yes. Not different than classical singing #10 AA (avg) Yes. Yes. Belters use vibrato for a source of power #20 LM (avg) Yes. N/A 3. DO BELTERS POSSESS A CONSISTENT RING IN THEIR VOICE? Judge #1 More so than legit singers. But again it s a matter of style and interpretation. Good belters can modulate the degree of the ring Judge #2 Not consistent. It tends to be more present in certain parts of their range Judge # 3 Yes #2 EH (elite) Yes #6 AB (elite) Not as much as classical singers #12 MM (elite) They should, if placed healthfully #17 KV (elite) If they are doing it correctly #5 EW (avg) Not always #8 AB (avg) They should #10 AA (avg) Yes #20 LM (avg) Yes, but believes that is a ring rather than all ring. It must be coupled with correct vowel placement and the ring. It should be specific to you, not modeled after someone else 5. DO ELITE BELTERS MAINTAIN A NASAL QUALITY WHEN SINGING? Judge #1 Not necessarily, there is often a forward sound that may include nasality. More so than in purely legit singing Judge #2 Not what I would consider nasal Judge # 3 Yes & No #2 EH (elite) Yes #6 AB (elite) Some think to keep it in their nose, but most just keep it lower in the body #12 MM (elite) Some do #17 KV (elite) To a certain extent #5 EW (avg) Yes, but they do not do it on purpose it comes naturally as a result of the sound production #8 AB (avg) More bright than nasal #10 AA (avg) It varies #20 LM (avg) No. The best belters have good placement which is sometimes overtly correlated into nasality 6. DO ELITE BELTERS MAINTAIN A MORE FOCUSED TONE THAN AVERAGE BELTERS? Judge #1 Yes Judge #2 Yes Judge # 3 Yes #2 EH (elite) Yes #6 AB (elite) Yes #12 MM (elite) Yes #17 KV (elite) Yes #5 EW (avg) Yes #8 AB (avg) Yes #10 AA (avg) Yes #20 LM (avg) Yes 4. DO ELITE BELTERS POSSESS BRIGHT VOICES (EXCLUDING NASALITY)? Judge #1 Yes Judge #2 Yes Judge # 3 Yes #2 EH (elite) Yes #6 AB (elite) Yes, it depends on the person and quality of the voice #12 MM (elite) They can #17 KV (elite) Yes #5 EW (avg) They can, but not always #8 AB (avg) Belting should be bright not nasal #10 AA (avg) Yes #20 LM (avg) Some do. Feels the best belters are ones who have found colors (bright and dark) in their voice. 7.DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU HAVE A NOTICEABLE BREAK /PASSAGGIO? IF SO, WHERE DOES IT OCCUR? Judge #1 N/A Judge #2 N/A Judge # 3 N/A #2 EH (elite) Yes, C-D #6 AB (elite) Yes, G-B #12 MM (elite) Yes, B-C #17 KV (elite) NO #5 EW (avg) Yes G #8 AB (avg) Yes E (high) #10 AA (avg) Yes (not sure) #20 LM (avg) No

12 Wendy DeLeo LeBorgne, et al The Broadway Belt Voice DEFINE BELTING IN TERMS OF CHARACTERISTIC SOUND (BRIGHT/DARK/TWANGY/ETC); USE OF VIBRATO; LOUDNESS; PLACEMENT; ANY OTHER COMMENTS Judge #1 Judge #2 Judge #3 Bright, pointed, brassy tone. A good belter is judicious in use and control of the vibrato, bad belters wobble and push. Vibrato is used differently depending on the style of music. Typically they maintain a dynamically narrower range of volume, often louder than the pianissimo legit. Placement is forward and nasally sounding Bright and open tone. The use of vibrato is more present towards the end of longer notes, but relaxed and not fast. Belting tends to be loud and the placement of tone is forward focused Bright with a heavy use of vibrato at times and increased overall loudness #2 EH (elite) Bright tone with very little vibrato, it is usually loud and has a forward focus #6 AB (elite) Dark & deep feeling. The vibrato use is used to sum up a long note. With respect to loudness, belting is a way to produce a loud sound when needed within a song. Placement is very deep with a relaxed mouth #12 MM (elite) Strong, supported tone with more straight tones than vibrato. Medium-loud in dynamics and the placement is in the mask #17 KV (elite) Bright, full tone with a relaxed vibrato. Normal loudness level with a forward placement. #5 EW (avg) Heavy, but with a light availability as needed. The vibrato is strong but completely controlled. The loudness is controlled and supported. The placement is out in the lips and as you go up high the focus moves to the nasal area, but not into the nose #8 AB (avg) Bright sound with consistent use of vibrato. You are typically louder on higher notes and the placement is very forward #10 AA (avg) Bright tone with a unique use of vibrato. Thinks that belters are perceived as louder, but doesn t necessarily believe that they always are. Placement should be in the cheeks and forward part of the face. Sometimes belting seems like yelling #20 LM (avg) Warm sunlight tones. Vibrato is the result of continued airflow and the loudness varies from performer to performer