There is an awful lot of woofy singing in modern classical music schools and in opera houses at all levels. Larynxes are forced down in the effort to sound ever “bigger” and “more resonant”. It results in singers sounding old before their time, distorted vowels, difficulty with agility, and several behaviors layered on top of the depressed larynx in order to try to make the voice do what it could do so much more easily without the depression.
When singers attempt to “make space” to an extreme, this often results in the base of the tongue stiffening, along with the throat around it. This usually makes adduction of the folds more difficult, and so some kind of compensation comes into play to make them come together, such as constricting the throat and engaging more thoracic pressure. So, we have an artificial “oscuro” compensated for by a squeezed “chiaro”. Now we are on the modern hamster wheel of “breath and resonance, breath and resonance…” with most singers blasting their folds in order to support this system of “flow” and “resonance” within the cavern of a dysfunctionally distended vocal tract. It’s as if the larynx has been pushed out of the way and not allowed to do its job. Clarity, diction, and flexibility are reduced, but, by golly the sound is “big”.
The reasons why this happens come from good intentions. Classical singing is based on maximum resonance – acoustic loudness and projection. Loudness and projection are related, but not the same thing. A lighter voice’s full volume will never be as great as a heavier voice’s full volume. Projection, however, can be achieved by both when the sound is free of nonharmonic tones and the overtones that enhance the fundamental pitch are present. A smaller, clear sound can project as well or better than a huge woofy sound.
When training voices, one needs to get the voice moving, expand the range, coordinate the registers, strengthen muscles, and create undistorted vowels, among other tasks. Maximizing resonance should come relatively late in the process, at least in relation to these things just mentioned. Worrying about maximizing resonance when there is constriction present, or ill-formed vowels, or lack of mobility in the various parts of the vocal tract, is like letting a baby use a chain saw.
It is easy to over-lower the larynx because it makes an immediate difference in the sound, and the vertical position of our larynx is something we can control directly. However, most of the other properties of the vocal mechanism are not directly controllable. Since it’s all inter-related we must be very careful about manipulating any one part. Unintended consequences are often a result.
There is lip service paid to not depressing the larynx. “Comfortably low” is a phrase I have heard frequently. What if it’s still “comfortable” but it migrates all vowels toward “uhl”, makes a person sound old and wobbly, and requires huge amounts of air pressure to activate? It seems that a lot of people are “comfortable” with that.
Ways must be found to maximize resonance above the level of the resting larynx as well as letting the larynx remain low in the throat. The vocal tract does not only extend “downward”!
When I hear young singers trying to make an “older” sound, or purposely “darkening” their voices, it saddens me. Voices need to be free. There is not such a vast gap between Nature and classical singing.
I leave you with a fine example of a large baritone voice that retained clear vowels, easy pitch variation, and an even vibrato that did not distort the pitch. No woof here! Justin Petersen has posted some more excellent examples.