I was wondering what makes a voice "good"? So many people seem to say that a person might have a decent voice, but not one for a career on stage, which seems to imply that there's more than just technique involved. Does it depend on the genre (i.e. for opera, you probably need to be built in a way that you have a lot of natural resonance)? There must be some subjective aspects, but if there are objective ones, I'd be really interested in knowing what they are.

Thanks!

P.S. This question is ignoring other aspects of performance/musicality that someone must have or develop, since obviously just having a "good voice" isn't enough!

Interesting question. And, I think, one of those "piece of string" ones.

Taking as read that the voice has had sufficient training for whatever it is doing, and is able to put that training to effective use, then it really depends entirely on what is being sung.

It's the same way that being a "good actor" or a "good driver" can encompass many different things and require many different skills, depending on the situation (a good Shakespeare performer won't necessarily be able to do slapstick farce; the skills required for ferrying busloads of children to school are vastly different from those required for driving a F1 racing car).

It doesn't work any better if you try to talk about it in terms of "vocal beauty". Again, just as there are many different aspects of beauty (and no two people will ever agree entirely about it anyway), what works in one context is no good in another. And beauty (whatever that actually is) is not necessarily always wanted, depending on the genre and song.

The concept of "fitness for purpose" comes a bit closer - the voice does what is required for the job in hand (as a personal example in that case I can describe my own voice as "good" for art song, operetta, folk and blues, and "not good" for rock, pop and heavy opera).

In the end I think almost the only constant is a sense of communication - a feeling that the message of the song (be it a Schubert Lied, a jazz standard or a rock riff) gets across and that the performer has transmitted something to the listener.

Sorry - sounds a bit new-age airy-fairy but I really don't think there is anything more objective than that...

This is an excellent question and it does come down to how people perceive beauty.

Most people want to hear a voice with a rounded tone. Nothing to strident, yet with enough harmonics in it to make it interesting.

This is the case whether the singer is a folk singer, singing musical theatre, pop, or classical music.

Most listeners can also tell when someone is in tune or not.

The amount of vibrato is up to personal taste and should suit the music.

How you tell if you have a decent voice? - Listen to what people around you say. If you are a teenager the opinions of adults are probably more reliable as petty jealousy can mean derision when actually the teen sings very well.

People with good voices normally have a decent range in terms of dynamics, pitch and expression. They will instinctively know how to use this to a certain extent. What lessons can provide is that bit of extra help to maximise the potential. Teachers can explore a singers register and smooth things out, sort out breathing techniques, often add notes and build a voice in such a way that with a singer who is naturally expressive, they now have a greater range of techniques they can employ to depict character and emotion.


I have tried to write this as genre neutral as I can. Another thing you can do is think of all the people whose voices you particularly admire and list the reasons you particularly like them. There will be common elements. This will go part way to answering your question.

As the one who brought this up in another thread, I'd like to say that when it comes to the stage career, it's exactly those points you mentioned in your P.S. that are the icing one the cake, and they usually set apart the decent singer from the successful stage performer.

If, of course, the instrument doesn't have what is considered 'industry standard' in the first place, you can be as much of a stage animal as you like, you still won't get there. There are differences regarding this in different musical styles though, and they are not as subjective as people might think.

Opera is the most restrictive one: Impeccable tuning (this doesn't mean that Opera singers don't have bad days!), good projection, singing with the correct technique/set-up, vocal flexibility (even in dramatic singers), enough range and an even tone throughout to name just a few. Listen to Opera singers, and find what they have in common. If you like an individual singer's tonal colour is a different subject - that's entirely subjective. They all have common ground though, and that's quite objective actually.

The next one down is probably Musical Theatre. You have more room for "vocal tics", but it is still very restricted as to what you have to be able to do, and what voice qualities are preferred. These days, you can't be an MT singer anymore without being able to switch between Legit, Belt and Pop qualities, and that's very demanding vocally (not to mention having to be a triple threat).
For Legit singing, you need almost the same abilities as an Opera singer (slightly toned down).
As a Belter, you need to be able to sing Broadway (or West End) Belt, which is a distinctly different quality from Pop Belt, and in an audition, you will be immediately out the door if you e.g. use a Pop Belt when they want to hear a Broadway Belt.
If you know you have problems producing all MT qualities, you might still get jobs (there are quite a few Ingenue type Sopranos around who don't/can't belt, and you also get Belters who can't do anything but), but you will always be restricted, and it will be much harder to make a living.

The 'softer' styles (with regard to what is allowed) are the Popular styles (Pop, Rock, even Jazz and Latin). It's not so much about the good voice here, it's more about style. What one person considers a good voice might not be considered a good voice by someone else. In fact, a lot of Pop and Rock voices would be considered 'bad' voices in the Opera world, because they don't fulfill the criteria (sometimes not a single one): They don't project without microphone, they are inflexible, don't have enough range, are pitchy and so on.

If you like a voice or not is subjective. If it is right for a certain musical style most of the time isn't (especially not in classical and MT singing).

Just my opinion of course, but backed by years of work in theatres (both classical and MT).

Thank you so much for your detailed and thoughtful answers - they were very helpful.

Out of curiosity, when you get a new student, can you tell relatively quickly whether they have the potential to sing the more restrictive genres, or, as Dugazon put it, have "industry-standard instruments?" Or does it take a while working with someone (or is it more a matter of being willing and able to put in the time and effort on the part of the student, rather than having a brilliant instrument)?

Thanks again!

That's a very interesting reply. I have a lot of experience as a choral singer, but not MT.

I have attended a number of choral summer schools over the years. One interesting experience was that the summer school had a reasonably well known youngish baritone from an opera company in to take master classes etc. He also sang the bass solos in the concert at the end of the week.

The universal conclusion of the men at least after the concert was that he'd never get a job singing oratorio type roles with a choral society. Why? Big voice, could project and fill the room, but was not accurate in either rhythm or pitch.

And he took the master classes?

Some interesting comments on what constitutes a good voice.......and how does that compare with what is measured by the Grade exams?

I don't think the Grade exams measure that at all - they measure what is done with the voice. With a 'good' voice maybe it is easier to show more and to get more marks but I have students with very ordinary, small, young voices that get Distinctions in the early grades just because they show accurate musicality. I am not in a rush to enter them for Grades above 4 though.

The RSCM medals have vocal technique criteria in their marking scheme.

So does Trinity Guildhall.