On May 6, 2012, ten finalists will appear before a panel of distinguished judges and a live audience in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

The First Prize winner chosen by the judges on that day will receive a career development grant of $3,000 and a solo performing opportunity with The Bach Choir of Bethlehem and Greg Funfgeld, Artistic Director & Conductor, in a future season.

In addition to the first prize, up to three additional cash awards of $500 may be awarded to other finalists, at the judges’ discretion.

Judges at the Finals on May 6, 2012, will include
•  Greg Funfgeld, Artistic Director and Conductor of the Bach Choir of Bethlehem

•  Other distinguished Bach performers and specialists, to be announced

The Competition is open to citizens of the United States who were born after May 6, 1982.
(As of the finals on May 6, 2012, you must not yet have reached your 30th birthday.)

Preliminaries:

• Preliminary application is by audio recording only (details below).
• From these preliminary applications, ten finalists will be chosen.
• Application Deadline Friday, March 30, 2012.
• All applications must be received by the Competition Administrator on or before this date.
• All applicants will be notified no later than April 10.

Finals:

• The ten finalists will sing in Bethlehem, PA, on Sunday, May 6, 2012, 12:30–3:00pm.
• Location: Peter Hall, Moravian College, Bethlehem, PA 18018.
• At the finals, each singer will present two Bach arias of his/her choice, with piano accompaniment. Piano accompanist will be provided. Finalists may bring their own accompanist if desired.
• Finalists must provide their own transportation to Bethlehem for the finals. By car, Bethlehem is 90 minutes north of Philadelphia and ca. 2 hours west of New York City. (Google Map)
• The nearest commercial airport is the Lehigh Valley Airport in Allentown, Pennsylvania. (Airport website)

The finals occur at the conclusion of the first weekend of the 2012 Bethlehem Bach Festival. Finalists may request complimentary tickets to any concerts they wish to attend for this weekend of the Bethlehem Bach Festival. (Concerts take place on Friday and Saturday. There are no Festival concerts on Sunday. Ticket availability may be limited.)

Please visit the Bach Choir of Bethlehem’s website www.bach.org to view the Bethlehem Bach Festival schedule or email office@bach.org to request a Festival ticket brochure.

HOW TO APPLY

Don't worry, we'll put you in the Twitter seats... Yes, that's a real thing now...

I adore Louis CK. He is a comedian, has been working his butt off for decades, and is enjoying a successful career. His stand up acts are observational in nature, peppered with obscenity (but not defined by it), and just strange enough to pull you into the rabbit hole of his mind. His stage persona is a sort of “out-of-shape-everyman,” but he is best known within the entertainment industry for being a dedicated worker (like George Carlin, he famously refuses to repeat material), and he is brilliant at writing sketches that function on multiple levels simultaneously. And… he has gone into business for himself, cutting out the middle man, distributing a new DRM-free video comedy special directly through his website for $5. He made his first million dollars in under two weeks.

It is exciting to see someone in the arts take a chance and elegantly use the Internet to distribute their work. That his sales pitch includes digs against the corporations that usually underwrite, manufacture, and distribute these stand-up specials is revelatory, I think. (Read this quote from his blog.)

…they would have charged you about $20 for the video. They would have given you an encrypted and regionally restricted video of limited value, and they would have owned your private information for their own use. They would have withheld international availability indefinitely. This way, you only paid $5, you can use the video any way you want, and you can watch it in Dublin, whatever the city is in Belgium, or Dubai. I got paid nice, and I still own the video (as do you). You never have to join anything, and you never have to hear from us again.

As I look at this model, my mind tries to pull it apart and figure out how it could help performers in the classical music business. What I keep coming back to is that “old media” institutions played a direct role in Louis CK rising to a level of popularity that allowed him to use “new media” so effectively. I heard about his special because Terry Gross interviewed him on Fresh Air (a National Public Radio program). Louis CK has a (super funny and well made) show on FX, has had several Comedy Central specials, and has been a fixture of late night talk shows.

Of course, he also has something else, namely a solid product. In his case the entertainment industry actually propelled a qualified person to the top of their field. As a sidebar, this is a good lesson for young singers (and performers of all stripes). You will never be treated ‘fairly’ in this industry. You will, in fact, only ever advance (to a better paying circle of ensembles, opera companies, &c…) once it is beyond obvious that you are better than your current colleagues. In other words, do not waste time complaining about your current situation. Put that energy toward being the obvious choice for advancement as future situations form.

I see many classical musicians using tools like Kickstarter to raise funds for the sorts of projects that used to be funded by old media companies. Recordings – even live performances – are now being funded directly by backers rather than legacy institutions. In a way, this is how we wish the arts could be funded, by putting more ticket-purchasing butts in (virtual) seats. Perhaps the Internet has simply expanded the audience base by allowing the music lover in San Francisco to participate in performances by a New York-based group. A $10 donation is certainly cheaper than an airplane ticket.

I have a few thoughts, though, that give me pause, albeit insufficient pause to suggest that classical musicians stop doing this! Obviously any tool that gets people interested in supporting the arts is fantastic.

• Will the entrepreneurial nature of Kickstarter change the sort of person who can be successful in the arts? In other words, do we need to change our conservatory curriculums to include not only “Clever Twitter Posts 101: Turning Your Every Thought Into a Music Career,” but also “How to Write a Grant Proposal Attractive to the Common Man 202: Wear a Nice Shirt in Your Kickstarter Video?” Again, the benefit of raising money clearly outweighs any downside, but I do wonder if the types of personalities that have historically succeeded in the arts (an environment that somewhat shielded stars from public interaction) will continue to rise to the top.
• Part of having a successful career as a musician is projecting the image that you are successful. Conductors like to know that other conductors are hiring you, basically that you are a valued commodity. If you are simultaneously asking for money online, can this facade be sustained? Is there a conflict at all?
• Will Kickstarter function as a sort of “farm league” for the old media companies, or will it create a second caste of performers not taken as seriously?
• Will legacy institutions start to use this sort of new technology (what major opera company isn’t on Twitter at this point?), pushing out the under-staffed, young and talented, not-yet-famous artist?
• Will Kickstarter only be good for a short time? As more and more people become involved in proposing projects, will it become impossible to sort through them to find the good ones? We have seen other new technologies (YouTube c. 2007) create a brief window of excitement only to become bogged down with mediocre content. For every amazing rendition of your favorite Handel aria, there are now seven videos of people singing it to their cat. Is YouTube a great tool, yes. Is it the answer, no.

Please do not misunderstand, I think that these sorts of new media tools have great value whether they actually permanently change anything. Here are my questions for you:

• If you are a producer of art music, what sort of experiences (positive & negative) have you had with raising funds through new media? Do you think this is a viable way to reshape the funding climate in the arts, or just another tool to put in your belt? Please feel free to post a link to classical music Kickstarter projects that have worked well. Alternatively, post classical music projects that you are surprised to find on Kickstarter; projects that you would have thought a legacy institution would have funded.
• If you are a supporter of the arts, whether you are wealthy or not, do you give equal weight to funding pitches from new media outlets as you do to legacy arts institutions? Does giving to the former mean that you are losing faith in the latter?

P.s. If you are looking for a quality art music project to fund, look no further than here. I can personally vouch for this group of brilliant musical colleagues (and genuinely nice people).

I want to re-share our top five most popular articles from 2011.  Maybe you missed them the first time around, maybe you will enjoy re-reading them now that some time has passed. Given how many active singers read this blog, I am not surprised that these articles are all practical pieces on how to be a better singer! I hope that you will look through all of our pieces from last year. Just click the category links in the menu bar.

To all our readers across the internet world, happy new year, and best wishes for 2012.

Now go practice.

Seriously… go now…

We have been hibernating for the past month or so, but will return in force mid-January with more articles and reviews!  Many thanks to those of you who have posted and responded to comments on our articles (Todd Gregory, I might be looking at you…)

You will find a little present in the form of my latest piece about performing, Some Thoughts on the Nature of Stage Fright, a.k.a How to Stand and Deliver.  I hope that it gives all you singers something to think about over break, and renews your commitment to the art of live performance.

As always, facebook and twitter shares are better than gifts this year .

Sincerely,

Ian

"WSUK... All day talk radio in my head... I suck!

“There are tricks that calm the body and mind, but it is difficult to rationalize your way past the bio-chemical experience of The Fear.”For the many ways that the Matrix movies do not bear repeated viewings a decade on, their ability to distill eternal wisdom into whoa-esque one liners remains untarnished.  Most issues related to technique and performance are solved when we step back from the actual point of struggle and frame the question correctly.   (Yes Neo, when you are ready, you won’t have to dodge the bullets.)   Stage fright is just such an issue.  Debilitating and confusing, yes.  Can we fight it in the moment?   There are tricks that calm the body and mind, but it is difficult to rationalize your way past the bio-chemical experience of The Fear.   The Fear laughs and sends another cold shot of cortisol through your tummy.   However, change your thinking toward the act of performance and the roles that both you and the audience play in that extended series of present moments, and the brain’s natural defense mechanisms will have no need to kick in.  In this article, I will unpack this idea and offer a few real world techniques for de-energizing the thought patterns that elicit the stage fright reaction.

Nobody’s Perfect

After a few months off from performing, I find myself in the middle of a run of two of the highest quality annual North American productions of Handel’s Messiah.  Top notch musicians and conductors, high expectations, large spaces and audiences, and reviewed by major outlets, these are gigs that one must mentally and vocally show up for.   The strange thing is, as I commuted to New York City from my home in Philadelphia last week, I felt more nervous in the car than I did on stage later that evening.  There is something important to learn from that experience.  We feel fear when in a state of anticipation.   At that moment, everything could go wrong; there is no evidence that anything has yet gone right, because it has not actually started!   This is a natural sort of fear, the result of the brain’s tendency to constantly plan and predict.  The trouble begins when we actually perform in a state of anticipation, rather than actively doing, manifesting, or creating our part of the music.

What do we anticipate?  I would argue that we spend a useless amount of energy worrying about whether we are giving a perfect performance.   Any musician of my generation (to say nothing of the Glee generation soon to hit our conservatories) has likely heard and been shaped by more hours of edited, recorded music than live performances.   These hyper-perfect, alternate reality views of what a piece of music can sound like (always in tune, the singer gunk free and audible, nary a clam nor split entrance) present unattainable models for young singers. Rest assured that most professional singers cannot sing a piece of music live with such perfection. In fact, having performed and recorded with a few truly outstanding artists, I can report that it is a solid “B game” and an expressive approach that perpetuates great careers, rather than the occasionally outstanding “A game” moments.

Singing for perfection brings two counterproductive elements into a singer’s process.   Firstly, to evaluate your own success or failure in the moment requires intense self-monitoring.  As I presented in An Organizing Principle for Singers, one cannot simultaneously focus on the past and the present.   The voice functions best when we consistently send a specific intention to do something in the present moment.   Every other complex, yet coordinated conscious physical motion organized by the brain follows the “mental impulse = physical result” process.   Singing is no different.  A constant backward view distracts from your present moment intention and robs you of your best tool for vocal success, namely, the brain’s ability to take that intention and coordinate multiple muscle groups into one fluid motion.  Secondly, compelling art is not based on the absence of error.   More than ever, a classical singer must think critically about the content of their performance, not just whether they make a beautiful sound the whole time.   “Compelling art is not based on the absence of error.”In Chanticleer, we coined the term “be-oring” to describe beauty that persists for so long that it becomes boring.   Expressive singers make ugly sounds from time to time!  Ninety-nine percent of audience members cannot hear the minor imperfections that drive your critical ears crazy.   The fact that you are standing in front of them doing something amazing and athletic with a body part that they themselves possess is what preoccupies them.   Audiences do, however, pick up on caution, tension, and whether you appear to think that the composer should have bothered to write the piece of music in the first place.

Love is all You Need… and Gigs… and Active Thoughts

A colleague of mine from my Master of Music program gave me great advice for mitigating stage fright. At the time, having recently left the supportive and often vocally obscuring environment of Chanticleer (it is nice to be one of twelve sometimes), I was having problems standing on my own without caving to The Fear.   She suggested that I decide that I loved my audience and wanted it to be happy, and that it loved me in return.   Not, I caution, because you need the love of your fans to give your life meaning.   Rather, at its root, reciprocated love is the formalized acceptance of one another’s flaws.   Contrast this with lust, in which we desire characteristics that we either project onto or cherry pick from another.   To feel reciprocated love for your audience means that you know they do not care if you make a mistake.  And in truth, they do not.  Audiences want their performers to succeed.   Audience members bathe in their own flawed humanity everyday.   All they want is someone to show them a slightly less flawed version of what a person can be.   So when you are standing up to sing (or waiting during your orchestral introduction), actively think that you love the audience members and want them to be happy, that you are entering into a relationship with them, and that you are about to spend some meaningful time together.

Do it. Do the Music to their Faces.

So how does this impact what you do as you sing?   The audience does not care if you are perfect, and that depressurizes the moment of performance, allowing you to make the following conceptual leap: When you perform, you are doing something specific in real time.   The performance is not happening to you (the helpless bystander), it is something you do.   By vibrating the air that reaches a listener’s ear, you are touching them – albeit indirectly – in much the same way that a violinist’s bow connects the motion of their arm to the string, or hot water brings the heat of a fire to our skin. This is a remarkably intimate act, one made more enjoyable for all by touching them with a specific intention.   Think of all the ways that you might caress a loved one.  Perhaps the worst way is to touch them while preoccupied by something else.

I think of singing an aria as passing through the narrow part of an hourglass with the entire audience and orchestra in tow.  Ahead of us all lay wide possibilities, but in any given moment we are all experiencing one specific choice together.  Singing live is something that you quite literally “do” to the audience members.   Look at them, not the back wall of the hall.  Challenge them to hold your gaze one by one, phrase by phrase.   Feel the emotion of the next line before you sing it.   When you are sitting on stage before your aria, in addition to feeling love, actively think, “come on, when will it be my turn?”   When you stand up, actively think how grateful you are for the chance.  These sorts of active thoughts do not drown out The Fear; rather, they reorganize your singing process so that The Fear never begins.

“Performance is like meditation: breathe in, breathe out, repeat with intention.”Human beings, especially modern westerners, are just awful at the dimension of time.   We are constantly distracted, incapable of sitting in one place for more than a few seconds before our minds encourage us to stand up to do the five tasks we are actively trying to remember to do.   People sit down to hear live music because they want their brain chemistry to change.  Take the sacred trust the audience places in you by showing up, and create something worthwhile with their time.  Over the course of two hours, their minds will wander, but look…!   There you are sustaining a specific intention through time.   You serve not only to entertain, but to remind audience members that they too could experience such sustained intention in their own daily lives.  Performance, for me, is very much like meditation: breathe in, breathe out, repeat with intention.

Some Technical Thoughts

“…singing before others does not, in fact, kill you.”Most important, of course, is to learn your music.  There is nothing like being prepared to calm your nerves.   If you are working up to a recital, make an excuse to give multiple performances of it, perhaps at a casual house concert for your friends.  Repetition in both the practice room and on stage breeds comfort, if for no other reason than because you amass more proof that singing before others does not, in fact, kill you.   Also, build your practice regimen in a manner that examines the process of breathing and onset as honestly as phonation. I cover some of these thoughts in my article, An Organizing Principle for Singers. Basically, if you have practiced taking an efficient breath, you can recall that physical act in the moment of performance, setting up an internal environment of familiar actions. Good technique, I believe, is build on a series of repeatable physical actions that each ends where the next needs to begin.   When the voice is trained in this manner, singing (even in public) becomes a predictable, dependable, and deliberate act.

Sing Like a Tennis Player

My final thoughts on stage fright have to do with recovering from errors.   Rest assured, in your (hopefully) long career, you will mess up.   You will mess up crash-and-burn-train-wreck-big-time-kack-the-high-c style.  It is the law of averages.   Live theater is a complex, multi-variable environment that you cannot hope to control.   I like to think of a performance like a tennis match, not in that the tenor must “lose” for you to “win” the concert; rather, it is a long game that you can “win” even if you make mistakes along the way.  I was fortunate to have been watching the French Open a number of years ago while in the multi-day, multi-round process of a competition.   Tennis players at that level make awful mistakes, yet they leave those mistakes in the past.   There is only ever the next serve, the next volley, and the step-by-step slog to the next point.  In the performance that ended up winning the competition, I made a big old mess of the first phrase.  What could I do, however, but take another breath and hit the ball?   Mistakes are out of your control before you even perceive that they have taken place.  Leave them in the hall.

Now go practice.

I think that this article by Bryan is extremely relevant to all you aspiring singers (and especially countertenors) out there. I myself, having sung with Chanticleer for four seasons, worked very hard to extricate myself from the world of ensemble singing, at least partially to justify my choice to leave the group. Throughout graduate school, I focused on cultivating a soloist’s vocal qualities. The irony is that I have made quite a good deal of money and had meaningful musical experiences singing one- (or two-) to-a-part versions of Bach’s Passions and Motets, Monteverdi’s Vespers, Purcell’s Odes and Verse Anthems, and the like. Had I not honed my ensemble skills in Chanticleer, I would not have been prepared for the solo career that followed. – editor

I recently won an audition for a well-known Bach cantata series. For part of the audition, I was asked to read music with a few singers in an ensemble setting.  The conductor knew I could sing an aria, but wished to know more about how I collaborated with other singers and instrumentalists.  Did I, in other words, play well with others? This past season, I was a featured soloist and ensemble member in a local Bach Festival, and all of this has had me thinking about the notion of a being a soloist versus a choral singer.  So often I hear young singers-in-training complain about ensemble and choral singing, boldly stating that they are only interested in solo opportunities. I must admit that I held very similar opinions. Studying to be a solo singer (which can be much more lucrative a career than being a chorister) requires confidence commensurate with the risk you are taking. It is a bold statement to say that you are worthy to stand in front of an orchestra and offer your take on an aria, and I understand that a young singer might want to define themself as only a soloist to help justify that risky choice. In looking back, however, I feel as though I’d missed the point.

There is a contingent of voice teachers at most conservatories who warn against the evils of choral singing, and the dreaded straight tone in particular.  Many undergraduate performance programs are filled with such teachers, who find themselves constantly at odds with the choral department.  At fault as well are young singers, who have been conditioned to think that their value lies in having a voice that is too big or too unique to healthfully withstand the constraints of ensemble singing.  Yet, I believe that there is more at play here than simple ego, as many young singers truly do not know how to sing healthfully in a choral setting.

At the risk of preaching to the choir (pun intended), I especially caution young countertenors to avoid thinking that they are above ensemble singing.  Not only because the skills you acquire singing as a chamber musician will serve you when you sing as a soloist, but also because it is more and more common for orchestras to expect you to do double duty. Due in large part to the interest in historically informed performances of the music of J.S. Bach (among others), the practice of soloists singing with the vocal ensemble has become quite prevalent.  Whether it is for scholarly or economic reasons, this trend is catching on, spreading from the small world of Early Music specialists to mainstream and modern ensembles.

Despite the long-standing debate among scholars as to the size of Bach’s ensembles, it is generally agreed that concertists (vocal soloists) would have sung the choral parts (with the ensemble-only ripienists).  In his article, “Bach’s Chorus: A ‘Brief Yet Highly Necessary’ Reappraisal,” Andrew Parrott suggests that this was common practice in German and Italian choirs from the time of Praetorius well into the 18^th century.  Although the practice of soloists in concerts and operas serving double-duty seems to have fallen into disuse through much of the 19^th and early 20^th centuries, it is important to remember that Bach’s music was written for the church and not the stage.  In a sense, the tradition was never lost, as church choirs have continuously employed section leaders to bolster their performing forces and sing the solo passages.  In recent years, there has been a desire to produce authentic performances of music spanning multiple centuries.  Although the value (and accuracy) of such authenticity is debated (Rilling’s Oregon Bach Festival Orchestra has played on modern instruments for the past three decades, for example), at its core, historically informed performance practice seeks to present music in a close approximation of the original circumstances. The thinking being that a performance that sounds as Bach would have heard it best contextualizes the compositional choices that he made.

So what does this mean for performers, and how do scholarly advances in historically informed performance practice affect the way in which we approach our own singing?  One thing we can glean from such scholarship is the sense that J.S. Bach and his contemporaries did not necessarily see such a wide gap between solo and ensemble singers.

In recent decades, the American ideal for a baroque music singer has gone through many mutations. At the start of the early music revival, singers prided themselves on a leaner, more European sound.  Simply put, they sang with less vibrato, and were generally quieter than their opera singing colleagues (think early Dame Emma Kirkby). In more recent years, we have seen the acceptance of a more full-throated approach to singing baroque music, and what you will come across depends as much upon the personal taste of the conductor as anything. If you work for someone who asks you for a straight tone (typically more common among organists and choir directors as compared to orchestra conductors), whether you agree with the aesthetic or not, you are going to have to figure out how to give them what they want. Generally, when a conductor dislikes vibrato, what they really dislike is bad or wobbly vibrato.  I have found that the fastest way to make a healthy (and healthy sounding) vibrato-less (yet vibrant) sound is to simply sing quieter, as natural vibrato can be said to increase in intensity in proportion to amplitude – if you have been practicing your messa di voce exercises, this should be no problem. In other words, the muscular quivering that causes a healthy vibrato is the body’s way of dealing with the increased stress placed on the vocal folds when singing loudly. While it is, of course, possible to sing with healthy vibrato at low volumes (and often quite aesthetically beautiful), it is not always necessary. Keep the rest of your technique the same, just sing with a quieter tone.

As is the case with singing in any context, the onset of tone is perhaps the most important element.  The ease of onset will indeed determine the ease with which you sing a phrase.  It is important that the vocal folds come together gently – this is to say that there should not be an excessive expelling of breath preceding the tone, nor should there be excessive pressure built up beneath the adducted vocal folds.  A pressed, flattened, or held tone is not only unpleasant, but can also be harmful to the vocal tract.  Conversely, a free and easy “straight tone” maintains a shimmering quality and allows the folds to properly vibrate.

How pleasant an experience this is for you will depend on a few things, notably the quality level and number of your colleagues. A one to a part ensemble will be freeing in a way that 3, 4, or more to a part is not, especially if you have a good set of ears and the kind of temperament that encourages you to ‘help’ your weaker colleagues. As we progress as aspiring solo singers, we hope to work with smaller and smaller groups of higher quality performers.

I would argue that a healthy technique should not only include the physical facility to produce a clean yet spinning tone, but also the mental aptitude to be a good chamber musician. You must know your role in the overall sound at all times. Successful ensemble singing comes down to common sense.  One must be vigilant to remain a collaborative part of the whole without contorting the voice in service of a uniform vocal sound. Perhaps more than anything, an open and eager approach to ensemble repertory will yield the best results.  Understanding the harmonic function of each part is key, particularly in contrapuntal music.  And when you think about it, all music-making is a collaborative process – whether it be with a pianist, a continuo section, an orchestra, or a choir. In this way, singing as a member of an ensemble will only serve to better inform your performance as a soloist.

From South Africa, Christopher Ainslie, First Prize

From America, Andrew Rader, Third Prize

You may remember the story we posted several months ago announcing a new competition for countertenors. This ‘first of its kind’ competition just took place in Lugano, Switzerland from Sept. 8-11, 2011.

The Gianni Bergamo Classic Music Award was created to discover and encourag new young talent in various sectors of classical music. Gianni Bergamo, a retired CEO of various import/export, real estate, and finance companies in Switzerland and Italy, was originally a conducting and composition major in Milan at the Catholic University. After 30 years spent building a business career, he returned to his musical roots. In 1990, he began the Cultural Association “Gli Amici Cantori,” an orchestra and chorus which performs sacred repertory throughout Italy. In 2007, he started the Gianni Bergamo Classic Music Award to be “a reference point and a solid support for talented young musicians from all over the world.” The competition alternates between composition, instrument/voice, and chamber music as its thematic category in any given year.

Countertenor hopefuls from around the globe sent in a rather demanding forty minute live demo DVD in hopes of claiming a portion of the 25,000 Euro in prizes.  Gianni and his jury panel of two German countertenors, Daniel Gloger and Kai Wessel, and a director from Opernhaus Zürich, Gudrun Hartmann, viewed the DVD submissions and selected twelve of these applicants to participate in the semifinals in Lugano, Switzerland.

These semifinalists came from all over the world, including parts of North and South America, Europe, and Africa. Most striking about this crop of countertenors was “the level of musicianship and variety of programming,” as Gianni remarked at the end of the competition. A wide variety of countertenors were represented, in terms of vocal color, technique, and repertory. Some countertenors sang predominately lieder and mélodie programs, others more contemporary programs or music pre-1700, while others preferred sacred or operatic works. Whatever one’s preference in a countertenor or their repertory, this competition revealed a rich cross-section of what the young countertenors of the world currently sound like. Sadly these proceedings were not well attended, perhaps not well advertised. Nonetheless, those who traveled to see (or sing in) this competition were in for a sonorous feast.

The Semifinals required each contestant to sing a public performance of 20-35 minutes in length. The program was chosen by the singers, but with at least 2 pieces composed before 1900 and one piece composed specifically for countertenor after 1900.  Both a pianist and a harpsichordist were provided – pretty unique as competitions go! Most countertenors used both players for different pieces, depending on the stylistic demands. A few even chose to sing pieces a capella. These countertenors, displaying a resourceful nature, programmed music of fascinating variety. One would think that they would hear “I know a bank…” from Britten’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream in well over half of these programs, but the contestants pulled from modern repertory as widely varying as Argento, Adams, György, and even Japanese songs by Takemitsu and Yamada. The pre-1900 repertory was delightfully diverse as well, chosen from such rarely performed composers as Broschi (Farinelli’s brother), Pistocchi (a 17th century Bolognese composer), Frescobaldi (rarely known for his vocal music) and Vivaldi (rarely performed only because of the lack of readily published vocal music). A few countertenors followed in the footsteps of Croatian countertenor Max Emanuel Cenčić, programming pieces by Rossini – the typical pants role characters of Tancredi and Semiramide, but also Maometto II, which is rarely performed.

After two days of performances, the judges chose six finalists to perform a second program of similar length with no repertory restrictions. Third prize went to the American, Andrew Rader, a graduate of the Early Music Institute at Indiana University. Andrew sang an impressive program, predominately art song, with clear, crisp diction (especially his German), and a full resonant sound. His voice preferred the higher repertory. He also blogged his way through the competition.  Second prize went to the young Polish countertenor Jan Monowid (not pictured, needs a website!) – who possesed a rather full alto voice well suited to the early Baroque – singing the impressive scena-like aria “E pur io torno” from Monteverdi’s l’Incoronazione di Poppea. First prize went to South African countertenor Christopher Ainslie, who is already enjoying a career in Europe and America. Ainslie possessed a full voice capable of great drama. He sang a wide variety of music, from Dowland’s “In Darkness let me dwell” to the aria “Dawn, still darkness” from Jonathan Dove’s Flight.

In recent years, the countertenor voice has gained increasing acceptance in mainstream singing competitions. This was the first time, however, that a competition focused entirely on the countertenor voice-type, and we at The Countertenor Voice say it’s about time!

The prize-winner’s final programs:

(FIRST) Christopher Ainslie:

J. Dowland: In darkness let me dwell (with harpsichord)
G.F. Handel: Furibondo from Partenope (with harpsichord)
W.A. Mozart: Vadasi…Già dagl’occhi from Mitridate, re di Ponto (with piano)
G. Mahler: Ich atmet’ einen linden Duft (with piano)
J. Dove: Dawn, still darkness from Flight (with piano)

(SECOND) Jan Monowid:

G. Frescobaldi: Cosa mi disprezzate (with harpsichord)
C. Monteverdi: E pur io torno from L’incoronazione di Poppea (with harpsichord)
G.F. Handel: Vanne, sorella ingrata from Radamisto (with harpsichord)
Baird: Jakze podobna zimie jest rozlaka (with piano)
G. Rossini: O patria…di tanti palpiti (with piano)

(THIRD) Andrew Rader:

All selections with piano

Thomas: Me voici dans son boudoir from Mignon
Zemlinsky: I. Die drei Schwestern from Sechs Gesänge nach Texten von Maurice Maeterlinck
D. Milhaud: I. Chant de Nourrice from Poèmes juifs
E. Wolf-Ferrari: III. E tanto c’è pericol ch’io ti lasci from Quattro rispetta
T. Takemitsu: Chilsana Heya de
F. Schubert: Der Tod und das Mädchen
R. Strauss: Zueignung

I have been hesitant to post clips on this blog of myself singing (this is for me an academic rather than PR outlet), but this often programmed piece, Pergolesi’s Stabat Mater, is a great example of what Bryan Desilva mentions in his recent article, The Vocal Soloist as Ensemble Singer. Notice how both Yulia Van Doren and I constantly modulate our vibratos to best serve the drama of the ensemble’s interpretation. Movement twelve, Quando Corpus from Pergolesi’s Stabat Mater featuring the Seattle Baroque Orchestra.

~Ian

Full of sound and fury, signifying something?

Facebook, Twitter, blogs, YouTube; all of these social media streams offer an unprecedented level of connectivity for the budding classical singer, connecting artists to other artists, and artists to their audiences. In the Wild West days of YouTube (all of 2006…), I was the first countertenor to upload a concert video (take that Andreas Scholl!)  I had a bustling Yahoo fan group, and the very real sense was that the Internet was going to fundamentally change how the classical music industry functioned and how future stars were selected.  Fast forward a handful of years, and we seem to have taken the a step back to counter our two steps forward. Promoting your classical singing career through an online presence is now a requirement (gigs – especially when you are a last minute replacement – can be won by virtue of your website alone), but a fabulous online presence does not offer an end run around the basic “it’s all about who you know/climb the ladder” nature of the classical music world. The marketing director of an opera company I recently worked with went so far as to suggest that social media is almost more of a development tool than a public relations tool.

If you accept that premise, the next logical question is, “Ok, if everyone is doing it for moderate long-term gain at best, how can I use these tools as intelligently and efficiently as possible?” It is noisy out there in social media land; how can we best compete in this Darwinian arena, especially when the ‘level’ playing field includes wealthy corporations and legacy arts institutions? I was fortunate enough to pose these questions to an expert in this field, the San Francisco Bay Area’s online PR Guru, Maura Lafferty.

Maura Lafferty hails from a classical music background, with experience in marketing, customer service, community management, audience development, and PR. Her Twitter feed has generated a dedicated following upwards of 2,000 musicians, artists, marketers, and PR colleagues. Maura blogs at Là ci darem la mano, She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Oboe Performance from the University of Maryland, and you can follow her on Twitter at @mlaffs.

IH: Can you talk a little bit about what social media really is, and what we have to understand to use it effectively?

ML: The new communication streams, commonly called “social media,” are simply tools. Success and failure on these platforms are bound by the same rules of communication, marketing, and publicity that have always been true: know the audience, offer something that the audience wants, and communicate why new consumers should want the product. Musicians and performing artists tend to forget that they are subject to the same market forces facing any entrepreneur, small business, or new product, especially since the identity of the struggling, misunderstood artist was a badge of honor for many years.

The distinguishing feature of social media is that strategy means more than institutional size or popularity. Social media tools and other software (often available for free) equalize opportunities for smaller organizations, artists, and management teams to reach out, as long as they have the time to dedicate to creating and providing smart content.

IH: Speaking of smart content, how do you see Facebook and Twitter being different from an email list (such as MailChimp, Constant Contact, etc.), and different from each other?

ML: Each communication stream – be it Facebook, Twitter, email marketing, etc. – has different strengths and weaknesses, and should be used for different purposes. As a fan or friend of an artist, if I subscribe to each channel, I don’t want to have the same content pushed to me on three platforms. The fan page should provide a different incentive than the Twitter stream, and content that compels me to keep up with the brand/product. Cross-posting across platforms is an indication to me that the user doesn’t know how these channels work and is too lazy to put forth the effort to get to know the distinct users and their preferences.

Obviously, more recognized names and institutions are going to have more resources to devote to creating a footprint in this space. Marketing budgets once used for print advertising can be re-purposed to create gorgeous YouTube videos, for example. Larger staff means extra hands to maintain the constant demand for content, and to monitor Internet/social culture.

However, there are many resources to help smaller businesses/teams simplify and streamline the workload. Free or very cheap software packages, the availability of powerful technology in accessible packages like the Flip cam, and the plethora of consultants and bloggers writing about best practices can help the enterprising artist make an impact. It isn’t just about your resources; we’ve seen several case studies of large institutions with great resources completely bomb their attempts at using social media effectively.

IH: So what sort of online content are you looking for from an artist or arts institution?

ML: There has been discussion of arts institutions using a personal voice to make their social media accounts more accessible. I honestly think that is less important than offering compelling content that the audience wants. Jokes are fun, but social media experts have shown that links and content are the best way to build mindshare [consumer awareness or popularity]. Just like with traditional print media, the hook that will get attention is a compelling story. Social media allows us to tell different kinds of stories, especially if we can get backstage with an artist or inside the head of someone we admire.

IH: That makes me think of Renée Fleming’s backstage segments on the Metropolitan Opera Broadcasts. I wonder how much easier it is for a singer to share a piece of themselves when a large and respected institution is the one asking the questions. What about a singer at the beginning of their career? How can they craft a story that is interesting without sounding like, well, they are bragging? In my own Facebook network there have even been some debates regarding whether it is appropriate to post a positive review to your personal wall?

ML: The important thing is to find a story that fits the artist, the audience, and the intended goals. Personal stories from star singers at major institutions work because everyone wants to know how to get there and what makes that singer stand apart from the others. However, there are lots of ways for any musician to stand out, whether it’s a particular interest in repertoire (Brian Thorsett has a great story about his interest in the music of Britten, and the rep to back it up), a unique perspective on a character (Brian Jagde likes to play Pinkerton as a more sympathetic character in the first act of Butterfly), or shedding new light on a less-popular instrument (Jennifer Stumm champions solo viola repertoire in chamber and orchestral settings). The story is the artist’s unique perspective, which enhances the technical and physical attributes they bring to stage.

Bragging is unbecoming for any artist, regardless of which stage of their career they are in. Unfortunately, many artists struggle to understand what their unique perspective and distinguishing feature may be, and turn to third-party validations (like a review) to bolster that image. Posting a review is not always a bad thing, but it’s important to do so in an appropriate context, where the message is adding value and communicating something more than just “look at me.”

IH: Has the Internet actually democratized music, or have we returned to the gate-keeper model where a well-placed person (recording company executive, manager, or conductor) is required to make a solo artist’s career?

ML: The focus on the story reflects the way that the music industry itself is shifting. The Internet has driven some of these changes, enabled by technology, but the democratization of success has to do with young, creative minds, the huge talent pool we see today, and the way that energy is being channeled into creating new opportunities. The Internet’s democratization of access to media and content creation has certainly flooded the market, forcing entrepreneurs, creators, and anyone who wants to be successful to work harder and smarter.

Other factors contributing to this include the high rate of students graduating from conservatory-style programs, the struggles that traditional institutions are experiencing, and the younger generation’s refusal to wait for a gatekeeper to let them in to the “halls of power,” or settle for something lesser in the meantime. Projects that demonstrate this subversive attitude include many of the new music ensembles around the country, projects like Opera on Tap, and the many fringe, underground, and self-started theater and chamber music projects.

IH: I like that phrase, “democratization of success.”  (I wrote an article on this site that suggests how to think about the words “success” and “career,”) and it has much to do with setting smaller, realistic goals. I think that many young singers (definitely post-graduate school) flail about for a definition of the word success. I suppose that you are right that new definitions are emerging every day. There has to be something between “singing waiter” and “La Scala regular.”

ML: There has to be a balance between long-term goals and short-term goals to help anyone keep things in perspective. We don’t get a lot of guidance in conservatory about how to pursue this vocation, or what the steps to “success” look like. There are plenty of musicians who settle into a livelihood of playing regional houses, teaching, and/or playing pick-up gigs (i.e. Freeway Philharmonic). There are others who create their own projects, and take on the responsibility of seeking out donors and audience members to make the music sustainable. Others pursue the traditional track, working their way up through the ranks of local and regional houses, young artist programs, and auditions. The important thing is to have reasonable measures for success – can you spend all your time pursuing your craft? Do you have enough money to pay rent? Can you afford to take lessons on your income? Are you working with people that you like, whose presence onstage makes you a better artist? Is the work feeding you physically and emotionally? There are obviously managers, agents, and coaches who can better speak to these issues, but that’s my 2 cents.

IH: Getting back to your point about younger musicians creating their own opportunities, I suppose that there is a definite generational element to the use of social media. There are established singers of a certain age who will probably never write a blog, singers (like Joyce DiDonato) whose blogs we read specifically because they already were brilliant artists in the public eye, and younger singers who we initially get to know because of their online presence.

ML: There are plenty of young artists who have recognized blogs and/or social media presences, but they still have to work their way up the traditional way. Robin Flynn gained plenty of buzz for her blog “The Athletic Performer,” but has still been working her way through young artist programs, and has recently killed the blog. Composers like Timo Andres and Dale Trumbore have used social media to build relationships that have led to new opportunities, but their work must stand on its own merit for the ensembles to present their music. Social media is simply a tool in the belt of these enterprising young artists, which helps to supplement their other activities. There are plenty of folks with social media presences whose careers aren’t going anywhere, and there are plenty of young artists building careers without the use of social media.

IH: Is something lost if a solo singer is “too available” to the public? I am trying to imagine what Maria Callas’ tweets would have been like.

ML: There is no such thing as a performer being “too available” to the public. The traditional social values on which many institutions and conservatory training programs were founded no longer apply. Performers have nothing to fear from audiences, “selling out,” or telling their story to the media. Publicity is a good thing – the more people who know about your art, are excited about your story, and talk about your work, the more tickets and CDs you will sell! Money allows you to keep making your art, which is sort of the whole point.

IH: One last question. You’re omnipotent for a day. How do you change the way that the world uses social media to promote awareness of classical music/what could we be doing better?

ML: The biggest thing I would love to see change in classical music’s use of social media is for my colleagues to get more sophisticated about their approach. Many musicians and arts organizations have rushed to get on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media channels without taking the time to understand the user base, their target audience, or basic principles of communication strategy. Every interaction that audiences/consumers have with our art informs how they think of us, which always makes me cringe when I see people using social media poorly. Rather than desperately posting “Tickets available now!” talk to me about the story behind the show, tell me something interesting about the performer, or demonstrate how this art ties into something modern, interesting and relevant. Consistently telling this story will produce more results than a multi-million dollar ad campaign.