The idea for this thread was fueled by a post in another one, where it was said that female flautino and male falsetto are merely the same, while whistling is something different.

What did you learn at Uni, in your research etc. about voice registration?

I believe that the problem is not really a functional one (how is the voice produced?), but a terminological one (we call the same thing differently or we call something that is different the same).

My point of view, open for discussion:

The voice has 4 registers: vocal fry, modal, falsetto and whistle. Whistle is sometimes also called flageolet, and I think the word "flautino" points into the same direction considering the roots of the word.

So vocal production in falsetto (which is, as I know it, not exclusive to the male voice) and whistle is different. The fundamental difference in my understanding is that in whistling, the vocal folds and the epiglottis are actually almost completely closed (the latter making it so difficult to actually see what's going on with a laryngoscope) and the sound is actually not produced by vibration, but rather by air circulation through the last tiny opening (therefore "whistle", because the sound production is quite similar to what happens in a whistle), In falsetto, the edges of the vocal folds still vibrate.

I think this should be enough for a start to open the discussion whether or not flautino/whistle/flageolet should be used for the same thing or whether flautino should be used for female falsetto. The latter seems odd to me, but maybe not to others (maybe it's also a language thing), so I'm genuinely interested in other people's views ...

To see if I'm singing in Falsetto, which is what I think I'm doing by the feel of things or whistling, I would need a laryngoscope observing what is going on as I go past a top D and into the stratosphere. I'm pretty certain there would be vibrations there as there is too much control of the note for it to be whistle register.

It would be intersting to have Rosfrog et al comment to see what they think before anyone subjects me to a laryngoscope for a once and for all answer to find empirical evidence wether my hypotheseis or Mezzos is correct.

Hi jod, it's not so much suggesting that you are whistling up there (which I don't think you necessarily do since your voice seems to be very high) but rather a terminology question:

Is falsetto and flautino (as you call it) the same, as you suggest in the other thread, and whistling something completely different? My pov is that flautino/flageolet and whistle are actually the same, while falsetto is something different.

Not sure though we'll resolve the terminology question here (others before us tried and failed ) , but we would probably get a bit closer to it if everyone gave their opinion about how sound is produced in the different registers, which I tried to make a start on ...

Thanks Mezzo,

Yes, I do have a high voice, yet it has low notes too. I happily perform down to G below middle C, and have a few notes in reserve strictly for practice and teaching purposes only!

I've also noted in my case the standard case of women not being able to sing differnet vowels on notes above g sitting on top of the treble clef is not the case, you have to get to b before that happens. Compared with my students average passaggi, mine are in funny places too. True each singer passagi are unique, but put a cluster diagram on a page and mine do not tend to correspond to the standard clusters.

I still think that if Rosfrog and AnnC would join us, this would stimulate an interesting discussion.

This IS interesting! I have several students who can sing very high. Two in particular, both post grade 8 standard and coloratura, who sound very different from each other. Both get to F#, but one has similar, only slightly less vibrato up there, and the other has a definite whistle sound above above Eb. In fact it's a startling change of timbre. This lady (24) also has stunning strong low notes, whilst the one who maintains the vibrato hasn't (she's 22).
I can also get F# (but it wouldn't be reliable in performance) but can't make the whistle sound. My passaggi are on both Fs. The lowest note I would do in performance is A below middle C. I can reach E on a good day - but only for my ears!

I consider there to be three essential vibratory patterns in the true vocal folds - thick fold vibration, thin fold vibration and falsetto (or raised fold) vibration - each based on the way the folds open and close, the depth of closure and the length of the closed phase.

In research carried out with laryngeal imaging, we've seen that what most good classical singers consider to be 'whistle' is in fact a very high falsetto - so essentially, research would suggest that falsetto, flautino and whistle are all the same thing, with differing resonances (flautino having a clearer headier resonance than pure falsetto, for example, based on the way the epiglottis is organised).

What RnB singers call whistle is often due to very damaged vocal folds - swollen and red (morning voice) that make complete closure difficult to attain, thus creating an octaver built into the voice. It's of course very unhealthy, but the likes of Mariah Carey etc have made this style very popular and desirable. It's difficult convincing young singers to approach high notes differently. This kind of whistle gives a very one dimensional sound, lacking in overtones found in the classical version. The only people I've seen in research (my own and that of others) that can consistently produce this sound have damaged folds.

That's actually quite interesting, and maybe one of the reasons why I still think that falsetto and whistle are not entirely the same, even if the vocal folds react in a similar way (are there videos somewhere? Would be interesting to see).

Although I still have a question: Do the folds actually vibrate in whistle? I always thought this was the only register were they actually don't.

Another thing that makes me think: As far as I know, the epiglottis is actually closed when whistling, while it isn't in falsetto. Thus the sound is fundamentally different, although the vocal folds might even have a similar set-up.

So as a conclusion, can we really say that falsetto and whistle are the same?

Yes - the resonance makes each thing feel different to the singer, so that could account for it. Also, the fact that in the very high part of the voice, the falsetto vibration (raised folds) adds extra length to the already stretched folds (due to thyroid tilt) gives a nice easy access to the really high notes.

As for vibration, the folds don't actually vibrate at all, they open and close really quickly. In many examples of falsetto, the chords are also pulled apart from the mid-line, letting air flow through too. This is due to rigidification of the Thyro-arytenoid muscle, which subsequently only allows the outer layer of the folds to make the sound rather than the whole body of the fold. We can, however, raise the vocal fold plane and be in falsetto without this rigidification, just as we can apply the rigidification without being in falsetto (as do singers when they add extra breath to the voice, irrespective of the vocal fold pattern). So whilst we can say that the majority of singers will use rigidification when singing in falsetto, it isn't necessary and with training one can sing in falsetto with the folds meeting in the middle, like in any other register. This accounts for the counter tenor singing in falsetto, but making enough sound to fill a cathedral!

When you say you thought the epiglottis was closed in whistle and not in falsetto, did you mean the glottis (the space between the vocal folds)? The epiglottis (the leaf like cartilage attached to the top of the thyroid cartilage) is only ever truly closed when swallowing, but can be partially closed to help with formant creation.

If you meant the glottis - then the space between the vocal folds will most usually be open when people sing in falsetto as they are also apply rigidification, but may also be closed if the singer has good enough technique to do so (cf the countertenor example) - so we can identify a breathy falsetto and a non breathy one too. It's much harder, though, to maintain glottal closure in falsetto as one descends through the range, making blending falsetto into modal quite hard, unless the falsetto is made from a thin fold to begin with (thyroid tilt), so the pattern in a non trained singers would usually go Thick fold - break - Thick fold based falsetto with raised plane and rigidification. When descending the folds have to 'click' back in to modal and we have a great deal of difficulty to blend the two. In a trained singer, though, we may hear : Thick folds - Thin folds (with thyroid tilt) - extra length obtained by raising vocal plane without rigidification. Coming down it will drop the raised plane, then the thryoid tilt and end up back in modal with no trouble.


I think the people at Vocal process have some of the research vids for sale on their site - certainly there are some laryngeal videos showing the change between falsetto and thick fold singing (or modal).

Cor this is a brilliant discussion!

I know, but we are all using it (including yourself *lol*) - it's just easier to say "vibrate" than "open and close"



I actually really meant the epiglottis, but I only worded it right in my first post where I said "almost closed". Sorry for being sloppy. So what I thought (I might be wrong though) was that in whistle, the epiglottis closes down considerably more than in falsetto or modal, that's why it is so difficult to see the folds with a laryngoscope while whistling (I tried it once with my doc because I wouldn't believe it, but I did afterwards. Maybe it's just the way I whistle though. Anyway, not really fond of laryngoscopy ).

So, to make confusion complete: If thick fold is what people call modal, thin fold should actually be falsetto as the next one up, and whistle, not falsetto, would be raised fold, (not that I say I call it like that, but the registration theory always caused confusion, and it probably always will). Vocal fry doesn't count, because that's just bubbling anyway
Then you get the people who only call it falsetto in male voices and whistle in female (again not my opinion). I just really think that there should finally be one terminology to stop confusion, because often, people mean the same thing, but call it differently. Other times, they call it the same but mean something different. So I sort of like the idea of thick/thin/raised. The next step would be to get old and new terminologies together, so people actually MEAN the same, even if they use different words. But I think that's hopeless

Ah, right - got you! Sorry! In either case, as long as there is a sound, they must be opening and closing in some way. Whether they pull apart at the midline or not, they are still maintaining a closed and an open phase, albeit only with the cover in rigid states.


Ah I see what you mean. Really high falsetto requires a partial closure of the epiglottis in order to create a back pressure and stop the folds blowing apart. Other than the position of the epiglottis, though, the folds are still in falsetto state. I know what you mean about laryngoscopy!



Right - so what we're talking about here is rigid vocal fold body, rather than actual falsetto - you're actually in what you call modal when doing this, but with a rigid TA muscle. You're right, it's really rotten to listen to and somewhat dangerous for the voice.


Right, so what we have here is thin fold versus raised fold. Both easily accessible in that range.


Right on - bringing it lower, it gets really hard to keep it non breathy - that's a defining characteristic of raised plane, or falsetto singing. The different sound you experience in your head voice is due to resonance (primarily pharyngeal I'd guess) and the fact that the folds are not raised, and so are vibrating in a thin fold configuration, rather than a falsetto one.



Well, the problem we get is that people refer to different things by the names modal, head, falsetto etc - which is why I prefer to talk about the state of the vocal folds, then we know we're all on the same page and there can be no confusion (if everyone is up to date on the sme vocabulary).

When we're dealing with fold thickness and state, Thick folds are used for speaking, there is no CT activity - often this can be called modal or chest voice, Thin folds is primarily used for crying and is CT dominant - the folds are longer and thinner, but still maintain a modalesque closure, which enables us to pass from thick to thin with no break whatsoever. Then we add on raised plane which, depending on whether we have epiglottic action and thyroid tilt or not, people refer to as falsetto or whistle. It's direct and light sounding and quite hard to do vibrato in.

Or, we can see it like this : Thick folds can be used in all the voice, but the sound will be very strained at the top and it will be hard to avoid constriction. Thin folds can be used in the entire voice without any difficulty, although it may take a bit of extra effort to avoid losing the thyroid tilt in the lower part and it will be slightly quieter on the bottom than thick folds but this can be remedied with partial epiglottic closure to back thicken the folds. Raised plane can be used almost anywhere in the voice, but is very difficult below the natural yodel point as the chords can't shorten to make the sounds and therefore they become slack and can drop into a fry pattern.

So I teach Thick - Thick with Cry - Thin - Thin with Twang and (optionally) thin and raised with twang.

I discourage use of raised fold as a default pattern in the high part of the voice (it's a battle sometimes with the pop singers) and rigidification unless done very cautiously.

I love the fact that we can discuss this for hours without ever really reaching a conclusion! Brilliant!

I totally agree that getting all voice professionals to use the same terminology (and preferably, from my own personal point of view, a quantifiable one, rather than an image based one) would be such a huge step forward in assuring quality of teaching and making sure that a student can go from one teacher to another without confusion (and if we adopt physiological terminology such as thick and thin fold - from a teacher, to a voice specialist and speech therapist) - all with the same words. That would be wonderful - but I also agree that it's not likely to happen!

That said I'm working with the French national health authority at the moment to train their speech therapists to work with singers who need vocal reeducation - they're really interested in learning how to apply their training to the singing voice! Maybe there is hope.

Thanks Allan, you've confirmed what I thought was going on when I got onto those very high notes, and when I try to speak up there it really does sound like minnie mouse on helium!

The terms I use for female voice registers (classical) are chest, middle and head with coloratura sopranos going into flautino for the stratospheric notes.

I spoke to a ENT voice specialist, and his general comment was that with adults one persons idea of a good sing was very different from another.

As a singing teacher I believe it is my job to make sure that the passagi are as even as possible and the thyroid and crychoid cartilages are held as low as possible to allow the throat muscles to be relaxed, the soft palate raised and the maximum space for natural resonace so the vocal folds can do their work most efficiently.

My idea of a good sing is one of two things either a really lyrically controlled session with beautiful round notes, or vocal gymnastics where I practice my coloratura throughout my range. Either excites, and both satisfies.

However my students are not capable of that so I choose repertoire for them that brings them pleasure and helps bring on their voice to their natural potential.

The voice of common sense!

Who me?

Surely not!

This is a really interesting thread! Sorry not to be able to offer any further insight (I'm a pupil, not a teacher, but a very interested one...)

This clarifies a lot of the things my teacher is going over with me (sometimes her technical English and my technical Italian don't meet so we have to work with metaphors or anatomical diagrams).

Now I'd like to ask another related technical queston: about passaggio ...specifically what (biologically) it is, how it works, how different voice types differ...

Is that best discussed here or shall we open another thread?

Fantastic question!

The passage is simply a shift of configuration in the larynx from the thicker, shorter fold of the lower notes, to the thinner, longer fold of the high notes. It only exists in styles where it's important to have a consistent timbre from the bottom of the range to the top.

For example, I teach in my model of the voice, that we can make several sounds that configure the larynx in certain ways, I call them Parole, Pleur, Falsetto, Appel (roughly, word, crying, falsetto and shout-out) - each of these sounds makes a certain thing happen in the larynx.

If we take rock singing, for example, it may be perfectly acceptable to use only the call and word configurations - but this would leave a big gap in the middle and would make the high notes sound very different timbre wise to the low notes. In light soul, a cry configuration would be acceptable over the whole voice and as such, the passage no longer exists as we don't change configuration.

In classical singing, balance across the registers is needed without a change in timbre, so shifts are made between the configurations in order to keep the timbre consistent - these shifts are what the classical school calls the passage.