Operatic analysis of the Voice and what happened to it......
Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 7:54 amSome of you may have seen this blog since it was posted in late September, but I just found it and wanted to share it.
THIS is why Steve was so special.....among other amazing qualities .... (sorry, the clips at the end of the piece aren't there anymore, but probably available on Youtube.)
"September 28, 2008
Steve Perry — a bit confusing, frankly
A slow recognition is beginning to coalesce around former Journey vocalist Steve Perry as one of the great voices of the 20th century. It’s matched by a slight giddiness on the part of his fans, as to be frank, rock hasn’t generated many of these. Whatever one’s opinion may be, Perry is also one of the more difficult to classify.
Considering range and technique presents us with a problem. In his range — high tenor and a very solid mezzo-soprano, the only possible conclusion to draw is that he is a countertenor. However, his technique is not at all that of most counters: he hasn’t a hint of owly, woodwind quality to his lower register as he’s not producing sound the same way, and he has no baritone register.
He rarely employs falsetto except in his extreme upper register and so is not a sopranist either. This leaves only male soprano as a classification, but it stretches belief well past the breaking point to classify him along with Michael Maniaci, who also does not employ falsetto. However, there is more than a passing similarity between Perry’s speaking voice and Maniaci’s, far more than between Perry and Daniels or Scholl (clip links given below). To complicate things further, there is no reason to suspect that Maniaci’s rather unique laryngeal situation applies to him. (Maniaci does not have an “adam’s apple,” while Perry does.)
And lastly, without similar classical training, there is no way of knowing what operatic label might have applied to Perry’s voice had he opted to go the route of “Giulio Cesare” and not “Raised on Radio.” The universe in which La Fenice staged “Crusader in Egypt” thirty years earlier with an Armando named Stephen Pereira robbing the production of its breeches role is not the one in which we live.
Perry is perhaps best considered as part male mezzo and part his own creature, and as he inhabits the worlds of rock and pop, which require far less stringent classification of voices (since labeled parts need not be assigned to equally labeled vocalists), strict classification may be outside of necessary consideration for him — although I imagine voice enthusiasts will continue to debate.
No articles that I’ve found focusing on vocal training or quality exist for Perry, and most interviews concentrate on the somewhat acrimonious breakup between him and his former bandmates. Other interviews mention only in passing the difficulties of performing as a quasi-operatic vocalist for 180+ sets a year for nearly a decade, well beyond that which is euphemistically called “punishing” or “grueling” in the operatic world and firmly in the realm of larynx-shredding insanity. The only accommodation of these pressures that I have found is Perry’s habit of not speaking at all between the time he came off-stage after one performance and 4pm the following day. With few other performers in rock music who had to make that sort of accommodation and to whom he could be compared, Perry acquired the reputation of being distant and unapproachable.
Also unmentioned in anything but first-person detail are the psychological performance pressures widely understood and even anticipated by operatic vocalists but of which Perry, his bandmates, and his management seemed entirely unaware at the time. The problems caused by this apparently took them all by surprise, when any such vocalist in the classical world would have anticipated and permitted for them years in advance. Having originated from outside all three common sources of high-performance vocalist (classical/operatic, musical theater, and gospel), Perry was left quite on his own in dealing with these issues and both he and his voice suffered for it.
There are no implications whatever that these pressures were acknowledged even by Perry until years after his first “sabbatical.” Due to the fact that neither the rock music industry, his management, his bandmates, nor Perry himself apparently had any profound awareness of how to caretake voices of that caliber or the vocalists who own them, what should have been a luminous 35-year career was effectively burned through in what amounted to only one decade of active recorded performance. Like the largely self-taught Titta Ruffo, the great baritone of seven decades prior, Perry “did not have a voice, he had a miracle” — a brilliant, crystalline creation unmatched in the history of popular music — and it was squandered by an industry that had no idea how to manage it or the singer to whom it belonged. Granted he may not have lost his voice, he clearly lost his taste for sharing it.
The fact that Perry’s genre has very little experience with vocalists of his caliber goes a long way to explaining why, three decades after he began singing with the band most closely associated with him, both the public in general and the world of fine voice are at last beginning to realize the magnitude of what he accomplished. Rock music has never been seen as a reliable point of origin for vocalists on Perry’s level. Instead, popular music prefers to take its most distinguished voices from the three springs previously mentioned: classical (Benatar), musical theater (Streisand), and gospel (Vandross), none of which were Perry’s point of origin. As a result, there was no community of like vocalists to advocate for him or function as points of comparison. Thus very, very few people realized just what the vocally “tribeless” Perry had achieved, despite decades of solid popularity and a long succession of platinum-selling albums.
As there are no articles or interviews examining vocal issues, I’ve linked only to clips here demonstrating range and clarity, the evolution of Perry’s voice as his preposterous early touring schedule took a far greater toll on it than it should have, the occasional leaps over his second passaggio, and his somewhat more male-sopranolike speaking voice.
Clips illustrating Perry’s singing voice:
“Wheel in the Sky” — countertenor territory particularly with the high “ring” and almost eerie champagne clarity his voice was known for early on, and includes a leap into falsetto territory at 2:30. Strong hints of mixed voice as opposed to modal, which upsets classification of him as a simple high tenor. Late 70s.
“Homemade Love” — multiple accurate leaps back and forth over the second passaggio. Also late 70s.
“Sweet and Simple” — good downward movement across the passaggio at 2:53 in what amounts to a short cadenza.
“Open Arms” — performed live in Houston in 1981, and a clear example of the sort of vocal performance that, while thrilling, could not be reasonably sustained for nearly 200 sets a year.
“You Better Wait” — a good artistic use of the “burr” that developed due to the too-strenuous performance schedule illustrated by the previous clip. Still fairly clean in the high end. Mid 90s.
Clips illustrating Perry’s speaking voice:
Absolutely delightful blues jam session — band instrumentalists only, with Perry introducing them and the blues greats who are joining them on stage. Late 70s.
Interview on Japanese television reminiscing about a performance in Chicago. Again, compare to Maniaci’s speaking voice and that of Daniels and Scholl. (It should be noted that if he were touring to perform, he would have taken care to speak very lightly in order to safeguard his voice.) Mid 90s."
YEAH. Go Steve!! You were a GENIUS even if Rolling Stone didn't get it.
THIS is why Steve was so special.....among other amazing qualities .... (sorry, the clips at the end of the piece aren't there anymore, but probably available on Youtube.)
"September 28, 2008
Steve Perry — a bit confusing, frankly
A slow recognition is beginning to coalesce around former Journey vocalist Steve Perry as one of the great voices of the 20th century. It’s matched by a slight giddiness on the part of his fans, as to be frank, rock hasn’t generated many of these. Whatever one’s opinion may be, Perry is also one of the more difficult to classify.
Considering range and technique presents us with a problem. In his range — high tenor and a very solid mezzo-soprano, the only possible conclusion to draw is that he is a countertenor. However, his technique is not at all that of most counters: he hasn’t a hint of owly, woodwind quality to his lower register as he’s not producing sound the same way, and he has no baritone register.
He rarely employs falsetto except in his extreme upper register and so is not a sopranist either. This leaves only male soprano as a classification, but it stretches belief well past the breaking point to classify him along with Michael Maniaci, who also does not employ falsetto. However, there is more than a passing similarity between Perry’s speaking voice and Maniaci’s, far more than between Perry and Daniels or Scholl (clip links given below). To complicate things further, there is no reason to suspect that Maniaci’s rather unique laryngeal situation applies to him. (Maniaci does not have an “adam’s apple,” while Perry does.)
And lastly, without similar classical training, there is no way of knowing what operatic label might have applied to Perry’s voice had he opted to go the route of “Giulio Cesare” and not “Raised on Radio.” The universe in which La Fenice staged “Crusader in Egypt” thirty years earlier with an Armando named Stephen Pereira robbing the production of its breeches role is not the one in which we live.
Perry is perhaps best considered as part male mezzo and part his own creature, and as he inhabits the worlds of rock and pop, which require far less stringent classification of voices (since labeled parts need not be assigned to equally labeled vocalists), strict classification may be outside of necessary consideration for him — although I imagine voice enthusiasts will continue to debate.
No articles that I’ve found focusing on vocal training or quality exist for Perry, and most interviews concentrate on the somewhat acrimonious breakup between him and his former bandmates. Other interviews mention only in passing the difficulties of performing as a quasi-operatic vocalist for 180+ sets a year for nearly a decade, well beyond that which is euphemistically called “punishing” or “grueling” in the operatic world and firmly in the realm of larynx-shredding insanity. The only accommodation of these pressures that I have found is Perry’s habit of not speaking at all between the time he came off-stage after one performance and 4pm the following day. With few other performers in rock music who had to make that sort of accommodation and to whom he could be compared, Perry acquired the reputation of being distant and unapproachable.
Also unmentioned in anything but first-person detail are the psychological performance pressures widely understood and even anticipated by operatic vocalists but of which Perry, his bandmates, and his management seemed entirely unaware at the time. The problems caused by this apparently took them all by surprise, when any such vocalist in the classical world would have anticipated and permitted for them years in advance. Having originated from outside all three common sources of high-performance vocalist (classical/operatic, musical theater, and gospel), Perry was left quite on his own in dealing with these issues and both he and his voice suffered for it.
There are no implications whatever that these pressures were acknowledged even by Perry until years after his first “sabbatical.” Due to the fact that neither the rock music industry, his management, his bandmates, nor Perry himself apparently had any profound awareness of how to caretake voices of that caliber or the vocalists who own them, what should have been a luminous 35-year career was effectively burned through in what amounted to only one decade of active recorded performance. Like the largely self-taught Titta Ruffo, the great baritone of seven decades prior, Perry “did not have a voice, he had a miracle” — a brilliant, crystalline creation unmatched in the history of popular music — and it was squandered by an industry that had no idea how to manage it or the singer to whom it belonged. Granted he may not have lost his voice, he clearly lost his taste for sharing it.
The fact that Perry’s genre has very little experience with vocalists of his caliber goes a long way to explaining why, three decades after he began singing with the band most closely associated with him, both the public in general and the world of fine voice are at last beginning to realize the magnitude of what he accomplished. Rock music has never been seen as a reliable point of origin for vocalists on Perry’s level. Instead, popular music prefers to take its most distinguished voices from the three springs previously mentioned: classical (Benatar), musical theater (Streisand), and gospel (Vandross), none of which were Perry’s point of origin. As a result, there was no community of like vocalists to advocate for him or function as points of comparison. Thus very, very few people realized just what the vocally “tribeless” Perry had achieved, despite decades of solid popularity and a long succession of platinum-selling albums.
As there are no articles or interviews examining vocal issues, I’ve linked only to clips here demonstrating range and clarity, the evolution of Perry’s voice as his preposterous early touring schedule took a far greater toll on it than it should have, the occasional leaps over his second passaggio, and his somewhat more male-sopranolike speaking voice.
Clips illustrating Perry’s singing voice:
“Wheel in the Sky” — countertenor territory particularly with the high “ring” and almost eerie champagne clarity his voice was known for early on, and includes a leap into falsetto territory at 2:30. Strong hints of mixed voice as opposed to modal, which upsets classification of him as a simple high tenor. Late 70s.
“Homemade Love” — multiple accurate leaps back and forth over the second passaggio. Also late 70s.
“Sweet and Simple” — good downward movement across the passaggio at 2:53 in what amounts to a short cadenza.
“Open Arms” — performed live in Houston in 1981, and a clear example of the sort of vocal performance that, while thrilling, could not be reasonably sustained for nearly 200 sets a year.
“You Better Wait” — a good artistic use of the “burr” that developed due to the too-strenuous performance schedule illustrated by the previous clip. Still fairly clean in the high end. Mid 90s.
Clips illustrating Perry’s speaking voice:
Absolutely delightful blues jam session — band instrumentalists only, with Perry introducing them and the blues greats who are joining them on stage. Late 70s.
Interview on Japanese television reminiscing about a performance in Chicago. Again, compare to Maniaci’s speaking voice and that of Daniels and Scholl. (It should be noted that if he were touring to perform, he would have taken care to speak very lightly in order to safeguard his voice.) Mid 90s."
YEAH. Go Steve!! You were a GENIUS even if Rolling Stone didn't get it.
Didn't we just have a "wtf happened to Perry's voice" thread about a week ago? Surely we're not due again until at least after Thanksgiving. 
