Hi Jens,
I had a few days of holidays and holidays here usually mean nothing
works as usual :-) So I have lost track of the discussion a little.
Now, to your questions, since the topic interests me strongly:
Actually, even if I am
> personally performatorily tone deaf (can't hum Old McDonald so that
> anybody can recognize it), my main inspiration was an idea of
singing: A
> fuller vowel tends to be deeper, and a deeper tone tends to take
on a
> fuller vowel timbre.
Depends on what you mean by fuller. A skilled singer can make any
vowel deeper and fuller, but it is after he has learned control of
his voice and learned to do some alchemy between the colors of the
different vowels (that presupposes knowing the nature of the vowels,
not just theoretically, but also from singing practice). I gave it
a thought at home and tried to come up with some points from the
practice of classical singing (and from my own discoveries on the
subject, which you may find useful).
Vowels seem to be related in an interesting way in practical use by
singers. My godmother is a conductor. When her choir has to sing
an /i/ with a rising pitch, she always tells the girls to *think*
(not *do*) first an /e/, then an /a/ within the /i/. This all has
to do with an inner opening and not with an outer deformation of the
actual vowel. In the same way, in singing an /u/ with a rising
pitch, they have to think an /o/ then an /a/. Germans also practice
a change from an /ü/ to an /ö/ to an /ä/. I think you noticed the
pattern:
i-e-a
u-o-a
(ü-ö-ä)
So the vowels move from the two extreme positions of the tongue
(extremely to the front, extremely to the back) through the more
open versions of /e/ and /o/, which still keep their general
difference in being unrounded vs. rounded, towards a final a, which
should be the compromise between all those articulatory features and
could be said to be the blend between all vowels. To get an idea of
it, try to just say (continuously, but not sing) i-e-a, then u-o-a,
then try to do the same, not changing the i, just thinking the other
vowels in it. You will get an idea (and a feeling) of sound quality
in terms of depth, intensity and color and you may also get the
feeling of where each one of those series is voiced and what makes
them different. That may tell you something about the e/o
relationship you are talking about purely linguistically. Of
course, such an exercise gives more results if you have gotten to
know your voice as a singer. It will also be easier to demonstrate,
alas, I canot shout so loudly to be heard :-)))
(Gee, my brain boils, it is awfully hot here, so excuse any
inaccuracies in my presentation - I am a little out of my mind.)
The general features of the vowels, as usually pointed out in vocal
teaching discourse:
a - usually allows to uncover all layers of the voice, its full
richness in terms of metallic quality (head resonance, associated
with a lighter, clearer sound) and depth (chest resonance,
associated with a richness in overtones and volume). A "big voice"
has a lot of both and an /a/ allows all that to be heard. Hence it
is a very usual vowel in exercises aimed at simply letting a voice
show what it is able to do (in terms of color, brightness and
volume).
i - the most metallic of all vowels which "sends" the voice exactly
in the head resonator (this is some funny singer's terminology). It
is used in exercises aimed at helping the singer "find" this head
resonator and get used to the sound quality produced by it. Step
Nr. 2 in i-exercises is allowing some /u/ in the /i/, to avoid its
sounding extremely shallow and harsh. The /u/ makes the /i/ sound
rounder and deeper (but some opera singers tend to sing with too
much /u/ as you might have noticed, hehe). So if one needs to
compare the extremities, the i with the u, the difference is
basically seen in the sharpness and shallowness of the one and the
depth and hollowness of the other. They allow the voice to show its
two most basic colorings - one comparable with a violine (the i) and
one comparable with the flute (the u).
O and e are more open versions of the /u/ and /i/ and therefore used
in the singing practice to help sing a high pitch on an /i/ or
an /u/. The too concentrated front position of the /i/ makes the
sound too harsh, the /e/ involves a wider opening of the cheekbones
that gives more space for resonance in the head and adds for a sound
quality that is lighter and shallower than the /i/. The extreme
back position of the tongue in the /u/ raises the chances to press
the throat on a high pitch (btw, pressing the throat, as singers
say, simply means raising the larynx and so letting the tension of
the high pitch be borne exclusively by the larynx and the vocal
strings and not by the muscles of the lower back and lower
abdomen). So the more moderate position of the tongue in an /o/
helps avoid that. Singing an /o/ in the /u/ therefore simply means
moderating the position of the tongue (a vertical opening). Singing
an /e/ in the /i/ means opening the cheekbones (a horizontal
opening).
While the /i/ resonates most strongly in the higher forehead (and
this is already simply my own experience), the /e/ allows the
resonance to go along the cheekbones up towards the top of the
head. Therefore its extremely light quality - it is the
most "joyous" vowel of all. And since resonance in the top of the
head (the so-called dome) is also associated with singing the
highest pitches of the so-called bell-range, the /e/ can be said to
be a "joyous", bright, high pitch vowel (the latter applies also for
the i, but there the sound has less freedom, less space).
The /u/ creates a lot of tension in the head and produces the well
known howling sound (howling is a usual thing in singing practice,
hehe). I have the feeling, in /u/ the tone does not involve the
resonators in the area of the forehead so strongly. The feeling is
more like the sound moves through the back directly towards the top
of the head and goes out from there (the best explanation I can
give :-)))). Therefore, the most metallic part of the head
resonators is not so strongly activated in the /u/, the sound is not
so metallic as with the i. On the other heand, the sound is fuller,
as you say, or deeper in the /u/. The lack of dominating head
resonance allows you to hear this depth, connected with the "big
bell", the chest. An /o/ gives this inner richness some more space
and so you hear a lot of "flesh" in the voice when singing an o.
Flesh means a lot of chest resonance and a more introverted sound.
And, going back to my comments in the beginning, if you want to hear
what a voice is able to do, let the singer sing an /a/ - there you
will hear the fullest possible blend between the higher and the
lover vibes, produced by the two major resonators - the head and the
chest.
In artistic interpretation, if you want to sing a joyous /o/, you
will blend it with /a/ to compensate for the heavy quality of
the /o/. A joyous /u/ would have some /o/. A softer /i/ will need
an /e/, etc. I don't know if I have made myself at least a little
bit clear.
So now moving towards consonants and more specifically those that
interest you.
A "s" is usual with a high-pitch vowel (most naturally an /e/,
because of the similar position of all speech organs in the /e/ and
the /s/). A sasasasasa is very often applied as an exercise with a
rising pitch in order to allow your voice to open up the higher
pitches without losing its depth (the danger of singing sesesese).
The "s" always helps the higher pitches, but with front vowels you
run the risk of sacrificing some depth.
A "z" is not very usual in vocal exercises, but the so-called
sonants have a very wide application in the development of a sense
of inner resonance - naturally, because these are the consonants on
which you can virtually *sing*, they are continuous, but at the same
time involve some closing of the mouth (to a higher or lesser
degree). V,r and m are most frequently used. You may be asked to
sing on a /v/ or most typically /m/ to feel resonance and get to
know the inner sound of your own voice. These consonants are
naturally more burdening for the whole singing apparatus. You
cannot just mieow a /v/ or an /r/ with half of your voice, because
these consonants naturally bring a wider range of resonators into
play (or so it feels). More resonance means more depth, more depth
means you need more support (from the muscles of the lower back and
abdomen), so the chance that you just sing a shallow /r/ are not
very high. It will just demand some effort from you, will activate
your muscles, so to say. Going back to "you cannot just mieow", I
want to make it clear I am talking about the natural tendencies of
the consonants in question - a trained singer can do almost
everything volitiously.
So many singers are happy when a phrase demanding more depth
contains sonants - the deeper tone quality simply comes out of the
sonants. Singers are also happy when a higher pitch starts with a
fricative, since the fricative gives the higher pitch anyway. The
reason why I find the first part of Schubert's "Die Forelle" easier
to sing:
In einem Bächlein helle da schoss in froher Eil
Here you have an upward fifth-interval between the /in/ and /froher/
whereby the higher pitch comes after a frikative /f/ and a
sonant /r/. This is a case where the higher pitch simply jumps out
of the consonants. But see this second stanza:
Ein Fischer mit der Rute wohl an dem Ufer stand.
Here you have the high pitch at /Ufer/. At the hollowest and
darkest possible vowel without any help from a consonant. Don't ask
me if I love to sing this line. :-))) The solution is to use the
inertia of the previous syllables to help you jump freely on the /u/
(cause it also has to sound lighter, due to considerations of
style... no comment)
And since you talked about /s/ vs. /z/, you can try the following
(to see how sound quality changes depending on the consonant). Say
sssssssssssssssssssssaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! (choose a place
where no one can hear you and just let your voice go as high as it
wants to go). Then do the same with zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Let the inertia of the consonant bring the tone. I think even an
unexperienced "singer" will notice the enormous difference. You get
a very high-pitch and somehwat shallower tone after the s in that
the tone seems to "come out" of the dome of the head. You get a
deeper, richer and not very high pitch tone quality after the "z" in
that the tone finds an outlet in the higher forehead (by the way,
the association with the forehead or with the dome is connected with
the varying pitch and with the difference in the inner openings you
need for a higher and a lower note). A trained singer would be able
to produce the same high pitch after the /s/ and the /z/, of
course. But since the /z/ naturally produces a tone with greater
intensity, you will need more technique to sing the same high pitch
after the "z". Therefore, I am not talking about technique, but
about letting your voice go naturally where it wants after a
particular consonant. Such an exercise and the likes could already
tell you a lot about the nature of the relationship e/o, s/z,
voiced/voiceless, that you already mentioned.
I hope this is readable and I hope it helps.
Eva