Talk:Fach/Archive 1

Good article

I should point out i do not have a problem with the article's text, i do think it's very well written and much better sourced than anything else on the English 'pedia about this subject, my problem is however that the other articles clearly might be better off being merged with this one. I won't do it just like that (I believe a massive rewrite of the other articles which are lacking and dire needs to be done first). Vocal weight is exactly the same thing, by not having it all in one article we create a segregated wikipedia German/English/Italian and so on it should all be covered in one article with redirects. This should be covered in brief under "singing" as well though, and it's not which is frankly - awful. And why does the baritone/bass/tenor (i can go on) article not mention German Fach? The wiki is awfully biased towards the poppy SLS crud and it seems to be perverting the entire thing. --I'll bring the food 01:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Expert tag

This article needs references. The assignment of well-known singers to particular fach categories seems to be haphazard, and the description of the Fach system needs the attention of an expert or scholar of the system. Ssilvers

I disagree with the anonymous comments above and with adding the expert tags. The assignment of well-known singers is in no way haphazard. It is accurate. The article itself is a very good explanation of the German fach system. (It is possibly a translation from the German Wikipedia.) I am therefore removing the tag. (I do agree that references would be desirable but that of course does not require the expert tag.) - Kleinzach 14:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I neglected to add my signature, which I have now added. What makes you think that the assignment of the singers to the fach categories is "accurate"? Certainly, some of them are recognized to be assiciated with one or another of the fach categories, but others are, at best, the article writer's opinion. Thanks for adding the new sources. How closely does the article follow the two sources that you just added? I have consulted some voice teachers at a nearby music school who are suspicious of the reliability of the facher assignments and some of the descriptions. I am not an expert in this, and I think the entry could use the attention of an expert. Ssilvers 04:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The onus is on you to identify any specific inaccuracies so that these can be corrected. That's the way WP works. It's all linked as well. You can check whether the examples are correct easily enough. However I think you will find it is all correct. Also note that Fach is only one system of distinguishing voices. - Kleinzach 08:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that's not the way WP works. Any unsourced information may be deleted (WP:v); the burden of proof is on the one who wants to keep it. (I'm not Ssilvers, BTW - see my IP info). --194.145.161.227 13:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you do not think this entry needs the attention of an expert (what harm could the tag do?), why should there be separate articles on fach and "vocal weight?" Ssilvers 12:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indiscriminate tagging is a form of vandalism. I don't put tags on articles about molecular biology or baseball because I don't know about molecular biology or baseball. For the purposes of this article - having made more than 6,000 edits on the subject, I guess I would count as an expert. As for your question about Fach and vocal weight. Please read the articles. They are on different subjects. - Kleinzach 12:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such definition of vandalism, and Ssilvers doesn't seem to be totally unacquainted with music. You are being somewhat arrogant. --194.145.161.227 13:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Complete Rewrite

This article is incomplete, contradictory and provides misleading information as expanded in the comment below. There's urgent need to rewrite this entire thing properly with proper references. Some descriptions are repeating, indicating that at least some of them are wrongfully placed there, while many other descriptions are left blank. The information about notes the voice types can reach is completely wrong and exclusive (no mention of whistle register, for instance).

I deplore anonymous comments and editing and disagree entirely with the comment above. Whistle register is not a term used in the Anglo opera world - let alone the German one. This article is complete and referenced and is largely a translation of the German Wikipedia article. I am reverting the tag. If you have some specific comments or critcisms of the article please go ahead and make them, sign your comments and the article can be corrected. Please do not use a blanket smear of the text or it will appear that you are motivated by anti-German feelings which are completely inappropriate from a NPOV. Remember this is not the only way of classifying voices - it is the German way. - Kleinzach 12:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-German feelings?! Having abandoned Macedonian, Serbo-Croatian, Jewish, and Russian history-related topics, I don't believe I am encountering nationalist hysteria even in such as peaceful area as music! --194.145.161.227 13:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bass-baritone

The article references two versions. My book talks of the Bass-Bariton. However there are two versions, one in the bass section, one in the Baritone section. My hunch is that they are one and the same, and that somebody has worked the obvious out - the bass baritone comes in a form capable of a very lower E at mild volume and the type capable of higher G# max but no lower e. I suggest we look at the original sources and consider this one out, as this is going to be confusing for the reader.--I'll bring the food 02:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the article section on "Heldenbariton / Hoherbass" was wrong. This is not a bass-baritone role, it is a full dramatic baritone role. In contrast is the "Kavalierbariton / Dramatic Baritone" is a light dramatic baritone. At least this is my guess. However the ranges for hoherbass before and the role ideas were completely wrong and seem to have been made in respect to the name hoherbass. It seems an assumption was made on the bass part. This was incorrect guesswork by whomever did it. Hoherbass means dramatic low voice. It does not however refer to the bass-baritone. That is a dramatic and (even) lower voice.--I'll bring the food 20:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article section as above is actually wrong in that the two words mean different things. Heldenbaritone is an exciting hero baritone, hoherbass is a bass baritone. Tsk.--I'll bring the food 22:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Graphics

I just added some graphics for the ranges. The article said something about the ranges in sheet music, and I was dismayed to find that there were no graphics to illustrate the ranges. After reading the talk page, I see there is some contention about some things, so if they should need to be changed for whatever reason, just let me know, and I'll make the necessary changes. Eventually. — Music Maker 20:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parsifal

Parsifal is a very heavy heldentenor role on a par with Tristan and Siegfried. I myself have read over all of Wagner's heldentenor roles. Tristan is the heaviest with Siegfried coming second and Parsifal third. Kundry might not have a massive amount to sing but the final parts of the second act are among the most heavy music ever written for soprano.Emperor7 17:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The original German article, now apparently called 'Stimmfach', doesn't give Parsifal as an example. It is true that the big voices (Lauritz Melchior et al) have sung the riole but it is also the case that Jugendlicher Heldentenor have undertaken it, for example Jess Thomas. Helge Rosvaenge, and Torsten Ralf. Maybe James King is a good example. He sang Parsifal, Siegmund, Florestan, Lohengrin but not - as far as I know - Tristan, Siegfried or Otello.

If you check the internet, you'll see that http://www.operone.de and http://www.cantabile-subito.de classify the role as 'Heldentenor/Jugendlicher Heldentenor'. Regards. - Kleinzach 10:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As there were no objections to the points I made above, I have gone ahead and removed Parsifal from the examples of full Heldentenor roles. - Kleinzach 23:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Extremely inaccurate ranges

First, why are the coloratura sopranos seperated from other sopranos? Coloratura is not a vocal range but rather a writen style, and there also mezzos and alto who sings coloratura. Now, More to the point - since when are high-dramatic sopranos required to reach as low as F? Isolde reaches A perhaps once, Turandot barely reaches C. The only case I can think of is Salome, who is asked to sing a G-flat, but in pppp, it should be growled rather than sang (as nilsson did). otherwise Salome dosen't ecceeds A.

There many other wierd mistakes, but the worst is concerning altos: A dramatic alto is usually required to sing a high A-flat (more than an octave and a half above the middle C), for example - Erda, Ulrica and Marfa. Again, I don't know why are Erda and Ulrica seperated, but the both are dramatic, and there are enough cattegories of altos which are not mentioned, such as coloratura and lyric. AdamChapman 15:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have some important points to make. Why not register properly (i.e. not leave anon. messages) and take part in the editing of this article? - Kleinzach 23:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I have your permission to do so;) AdamChapman 12:13, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

? . . . ? Did you write the paragraphs above? If so please sign. (You can use four tildes.)

Please bear in mind that this article is about the German Fach system. There is an established rule on WP that we write from to a Neutral point of view. In this conext it means describing the German system - not trying to improve on it. By the way, there is another article about Vocal range linked to individual articles on Tenor etc. .- Kleinzach 13:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with the German fach-system, but still the given ranges are wrong! I have made several corrections, and willing to do some more if nobody objects... AdamChapman 15:57, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do go ahead and correct the ranges - though obviously you have to provide supporting info. There are still a lot of problems here because people make arbitrary changes without understanding the concept of fach. I have just been restoring the Richard Strauss links which someone has been changing! Also some of the examples of roles/singers recently added are wrong. - Kleinzach 03:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Singers not covered on WP

A lot of names are being added of singers who don't have their articles on WP. I don't think this is helpful. Can we write the articles (or at least start stubs) first - and then add them if they are sufficiently notable? - Kleinzach 01:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Treble clef images

8 of the 12 treble clef images for female voices don't match the text descriptions. For instance, Fach#Dramatischer Koloratursopran says "Range: From B below middle C to the F two-and-a-half octaves above middle C", but the treble clef to the right shows a middle C instead of a B (the F is correct). I don't know how to create my own treble clef images, but if this is a German/English translation problem, the image at the top of the Clef article shows how the treble clef is ordinarily read in the U.S. Art LaPella 03:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 fixed, 6 clefs still mismatched to the text description. Also Hoherbass has 2 conflicting text descriptions. Art LaPella 03:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

De-Germanizing a text about a German subject: Fach not Vocal range

I see someone (people) have been progressively de-Germanizing this article into one about vocal range. This is unfortunate because it is supposed to be about the German system, hence the title Fach. The international/anglo system is covered by the article called Vocal range as well as the individual articles on Soprano, Tenor etc. What is the point of trying to make all these articles have the same content? --Kleinzach 02:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was me. The thing is that the German Fach system is what we currently use to classify roles and singers, and it all has standard English equivalents. I also saw so many unusual male voice types that I looked on the German page, and they're all red-linked categories. I just went ahead and changed things because the lists were so long and the voice type Descriptions sometimes unhelpful that I thought this page was neglected. Operalala 02:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now restored the original sections - a number of which had been completely deleted (e.g. the Charaktertenor - which is an important category! The German system is not used internationally as much as the Italian system and it is different. (There is also a French system). As I have said in the edit summaries, you are perfectly entitled to expand your ideas on voice categories but can you do it in the article on Vocal range? This article descibes the German system (which is rather more rigid than those used elsewhere)! Thank you. --Kleinzach 02:56, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction template

The treble clefs don't match the text descriptions for Dramatischer Koloratursopran, Jugendlich Dramatischer Sopran, Hochdramatischer Sopran, Koloratur-Mezzosopran, Dramatischer Mezzosopran, Dramatischer Alt, and Tiefer Alt (I now count 7, not 6.) Hoherbass has 2 conflicting text descriptions. More details at #Treble clef images above. Art LaPella 06:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you recommend? I've fixed Hoherbass.-- Kleinzach 07:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, since you know more about opera in general and Fach in particular than I do, which is correct? Does a Dramatischer Koloratursopran's range, for instance, start from a B or a C? If it's a B, then let's fix the treble clef image. If it's a C, then let's fix the text.

Next, if someone like you can tell me authoritatively that the treble clefs are wrong, I have already left a message on User:MusicMaker5376's talk page (see #Graphics and User talk:MusicMaker5376#Fach). Perhaps he can correct the treble clef images. If neither MusicMaker nor anyone else knows how to correct the images, then let's remove them - the treble clef images are pretty but we shouldn't display false information. Art LaPella 18:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(I'm not an expert when it comes to the technicalities!) The ranges differ according to the system (French, German, Italian) and are usually based on a typical role - hence the widespread confusion. According to Oxford, a Koloratursopran (Zerbinetta or the Queen of the Night) goes from g to f. I can't find a reference for a Dramatischer Koloratursopran. I can't find anything in the opera Grove. Perhaps someone else can find something? -- Kleinzach 01:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why the French or Italian systems matter here, because this article is about "The German Fach...", to quote the article's first 3 words. The German Wikipedia version de:Stimmfach uses Handbuch der Oper as a reference, so can you get a copy of that? De:Stimmfach gives the same ranges shown in the treble clefs, with these exceptions: Hochdramatischer Sopran is missing, and Dramatischer Alt and Tiefer Alt differ by one octave for the highest note (the de:Stimmfach notes are presumably correct because they are more consistent with the rest of the article). Even if there is no universally agreed on set of voice ranges for German Fach, it seems clear to me that we should present one answer to the public, perhaps qualified like "from about Middle C to about the F 2 1/2 octaves up", but not two contradicting answers. Art LaPella 05:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds about right. The German article says C to F "selten auch tiefer" (rarely deeper). (I don't have the Handbuch der Oper). -- Kleinzach 09:12, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so if no one can provide any more information, here is my proposal:

1. A word like "about" should be added to the text describing each voice range in the article, whether or not they contradict their respective treble clef pictures.

2. When the text description disagrees with the treble clef picture (with the exception in point 3), we should change the text to match the treble clef picture. That will also match the German Wikipedia article (except Hochdramatischer Sopran which is missing). Wikipedia doesn't allow us to use Wikipedia itself as a reference, and we don't even know if the Handbuch der Oper specifies voice ranges, but using the German Wikipedia statistics is better than using somebody's unverified say-so - although a good case could be made for deleting the unverified voice ranges altogether.

3. The Dramatischer Alt and Tiefer Alt treble clefs are obviously wrong - I know more about ordinary church choirs than about opera, and all the other ranges look much too wide for amateurs, except these two which are much too narrow. A normal amateur female singing voice is higher than that. So if nobody still here knows how to produce corrected treble clef pictures, I propose that these two treble clef pictures be removed.

4. That would resolve all the contradictions, so the contradiction template would be removed. Art LaPella 18:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I missed this earlier but that all sounds reasonable, though I would look at the 'unverified voice ranges' again before deleting any of them. -- Kleinzach 09:12, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be the first to admit that I know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about this subject. I just surfed on in somehow and was dismayed at the lack of notation and added it based upon what the text said at that time. I'm not around here much, but, like I said, if you leave a message on my talk page, I'll eventually see it. If we can get the text to an acceptable version (that, godwilling, will stay put...), I will happily re-do the graphics. Even if we say something along the lines of "from C4 to between F#5 and A5", I'm sure I can get a graphic to reflect that. — Music Maker 5376 07:31, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's almost 1 a.m. local time, but what I would like from you (MusicMaker) is to raise the upper note one octave on your treble clef images for Dramatischer Alt and Tiefer Alt, and when I get some time I'll fix the rest as described above. Art LaPella 07:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestions still don't match the current text. Why doesn't someone get the text correct and delete the staves that don't match the text -- prod them as long as they aren't used elsewhere. I'll re-do all the graphics once we're at that point -- they, seriously, don't take me that much time. — Music Maker 00:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I made the change. I also changed Hoherbass to match the treble clef, so this is a good time to object to that change. I didn't prod the 2 images because I think the new images are likely to use the same file names, as the images have the right notes in the wrong octaves. I don't know if that matters, because despite my 8xxx total edits I've never uploaded an image. Art LaPella 02:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should be able to get to these over the next couple of hours. I thought that I had saved the originals, but I guess I didn't. No matter. However, the Hoherbass still doesn't jive -- the text says it goes to an F#, but the graphic shows an F-natural. — Music Maker 06:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never fear -- I found them! And I didn't do separate graphics for each Fach, I just did one for each range. Since the Dramatisch Mezzo and Dramatich Alt have the same ranges, just use the same graphic.... — Music Maker 06:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about Hoherbass, so I made it F natural. Art LaPella 22:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tenore leggiero

I have removed this section because Tenore leggiero is not a fach. This is about the German system. I suggest it would be a good idea to start an article on the Italian system in which this section would be a proper part. Thanks. -- Kleinzach 04:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lyrischer Tenor

The verbal description of the range and the depiction of the range (in musical notation) don't match - the lower note is missing a ledger line. - Nunh-huh 23:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Playing the lists

Please don't 'play' the lists. This type of article always seems to suffer from listcruft with inexperienced editors adding names, shuffling them around from 'fach to 'fach', delinking, misspelling etc etc. The names are supposed to be examples here - of the most typical singers in their group. If you disagree with particular examples and where they are placed please leave a note here to see if other people agree with you. Thanks and best wishes to all. --Klein zach 09:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

low alto

It says here "This is one of the two voice types, along with the Basso Profundo, in which a bad wobble is all too often, unfortunately, the defining feature". Is this appropriate in wikipedia? AdamChapman (talk) 20:32, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. Please edit it out! --Klein zach 01:45, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ranges

I have noticed that each group has the vocal range of each group written in text, but it is very inconsistently displayed in musical notation. Is there any way to fix this? I read the talk page before I posted this and it didn't answer my question. 76.26.90.17 (talk) 01:42, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]