COLLEGE CHOIR DIRECTORS’ AND VOICE INSTRUCTORS’ TECHNIQUES FOR CLASSIFYING FEMALE VOICES Ellen M. Pagan A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF MUSIC May 2009 Committee: Vincent J. Kantorski, Advisor Mark Munson © 2009 Ellen Pagan All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Vincent J. Kantorski, Advisor The purpose of this study was to determine college choir directors’ and studio voice instructors’ techniques for classifying female voices. Three groups of respondents completed an online survey: college faculty members who were (a) choir directors only, (b) voice instructors only, and (c) both a choir director and a voice instructor. The survey was comprised of four sections. The first three sections consisted of closed ended questions and the fourth section consisted of two open ended questions. One hundred and thirty-four of the 496 e-mail recipients returned the survey for a response rate of 27%. The state with the highest response rate was Ohio (52.7%), followed by Michigan (28.7%), and Indiana (18.6%). The respondent group with the highest response rate was voice instructors only (51.9%), followed by respondents who were both a choir director and a voice instructor (24.81%), and choir directors only (23.26%). The results showed that associate professor was the most common academic rank. The top ranked aspects that respondents consider when classifying female voices are, in descending order: tessitura, vocal timbre, range, vocal health, quality of extreme ranges, voice studio classification, needs of ensemble, former classification, and a student’s voice classification preference. Many (36.92%) choir directors reclassify their female choir students every year, and one fourth (24.73%) of voice instructors reclassify their students every semester. More than one third (37.74%) of choir directors indicated that they moved the reclassified females at the beginning of the next semester. There were 85.71% of voice instructors who immediately recommended new repertoire to their students. Implications for music education included iv listening to tessitura as the top aspect to consider when classifying a female’s voice and noting immaturity of the voices in the classification process so that the choir director or voice instructor can be aware of the possible need to reclassify the voice as it develops. Suggestions for further research included conducting a case study of several females who are being reclassified in order to closely examine the process of reclassification and writing a handbook for pre-service and novice secondary school choir directors and novice voice instructors that presents classification techniques that can be used by both types of educators. v DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to my family, Jeanine and Steve Pagan my parents, Melissa Giboney my sister, and Steve Pagan my brother, all of whom were my first teachers and have supported me in this project from its inception a year ago to its completion. Their support of my music education throughout my life has been immeasurable, and I appreciate all of their time, energy, and insight over the years. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thank you to Dr. Vincent J. Kantorski, first for his exceptional guidance on this project and, second, for all of the lifelong lessons I have learned from him throughout my graduate work at Bowling Green State University. His plethora of musical experiences, expertise in music education, and professional flexibility has made working with him a time I will never forget. Thank you to Dr. Mark Munson for bringing his expertise in choir and the singing voice to this project as well as for teaching me the importance of high quality repertoire when working with choirs. His research pertaining to the singing voice, extensive knowledge of choral repertoire, and passion for music education have inspired my continued desire to pursue music education and research. Thank you to all of the college choir directors and voice instructors who gave their valuable time to this project by responding to the survey. Without your input I could not have completed this thesis. Thank you to my graduate student colleagues Gail Lowther, Janet Fu, Chris Baumgartner, Sarah Wussow, and Violet Talbot for their assistance in the editing process of this thesis. Thank you to my current and former choir directors, especially Dr. Marty Hook, my high school choir director, who was the first choir director who emphasized to me how free the voice sounds when it is used in a healthy manner. Finally, I give the biggest thank you to my family and friends for their guidance throughout my musical and academic career. Without their support I would have never reached this point in my education. A special thanks to Mama, Tim, Melissa, Clark, Boy, Elliott, and my vii musical families everywhere, especially to Jane and Wally Frank, Sutu Forte, and Jim Poletti. You are the ones who have supported all of my musical endeavors for the past 21 years. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................... 1 Need for the Study .................................................................................................... 2 Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................. 3 CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ....................................................................... 4 Primary Classification Techniques in the Choral Setting…………………………. 4 Timbre……………………………………………………………………… 4 Range, Tessitura, and Passaggio…………………………………………... 6 Multiple Classification Techniques in the Choral Setting………………………….. 7 Classification Techniques Used in a Solo Voice Setting…………………………… 9 Female-Specific Considerations for Healthy Singing………………………………. 10 CHAPTER III: PROCEDURE.............................................................................................. 13 Respondent Selection and Survey Distribution......................................................... 13 Components of the Survey........................................................................................ 14 CHAPTER IV: RESULTS.................................................................................................... 15 Closed Ended Questions ........................................................................................... 16 Respondent Demographics ........................................................................... 16 Choir and Studio Demographics ................................................................... 20 Choir Demographics ......................................................................... 21 Studio Demographics........................................................................ 23 Voice Classification Techniques............................................................................... 25 ix Top Aspect That Respondents Consider When Classifying the Female Voice ................................................................................................ 25 Top Three Aspects Respondents Consider When Classifying the Female Voice ................................................................................................ 28 Frequency of Reclassifying Female Voices.................................................. 30 Cross Tabs ........................................................................................................... 34 Cross Tab I .................................................................................................... 34 Respondent Group by Highest Academic Degree Earned ................ 34 Cross Tab II................................................................................................... 35 Academic Rank by Respondent Group............................................. 35 Cross Tab III ................................................................................................. 35 Top Classification Aspect by Respondent Group ............................. 35 Cross Tab IV ................................................................................................. 36 Top Three Classification Aspects by Respondent Group ................. 36 Cross Tab V................................................................................................... 37 Frequency of Reclassification by Respondent Group....................... 37 Cross Tab VI ................................................................................................. 39 Changing Reclassified Voices to New Choir Section or Assigning Vocal Repertoire by Respondent Group.......................... 39 CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION............................................................................................... 40 Closed Ended Questions ........................................................................................... 40 Respondent Demographics ........................................................................... 40 Choir and Studio Demographics ................................................................... 41 x Choir Demographics ......................................................................... 41 Studio Demographics........................................................................ 42 Voice Classification Techniques............................................................................... 42 Top Aspect That Respondents Consider When Classifying the Female Voice ...............................................................................................