forms of stress except the radical, which is too abrupt. It must be remembered that equal and unequal waves accompany this important particular.

66

Discrete and concrete force may now be touched upon. Discrete force may be termed a whispered utterance, and should be practiced in low, middle, and high pitch, using but one inflation for each degree you illustrate, whether it be an element, as ā, e, i, o; a word, as “gag,' “dull,' 'splash;" or a sentence as, "Sam Slick sawed six, sleek, slim, slender saplings for sale." Care should be taken to articulate distinctly, thereby strengthening the breathing-power and the vocal organs, which cultivates articulation quickly and thoroughly. Alliterative sentences are especially good practice for this mode of force.

In concrete force, sustained tone is employed, increasing from very soft to very loud and vice versa. This produces that beautiful quality of singing or carrying tone so essential to a flexible voice.

Begin with a low, soft pitch and rise gradually, taking, successively, various notes of the middle scale, as adapted to the natural speaking-voice. After several minutes' practice upon the elements ä, ē, ō, ù, or liquid lä, lē, lō, lũ, use the voice in a staccato or skip movement, touching lightly upon each note up and down the scale. Practice both slide and skip from octave to octave successively, aiming at pureness of tone rather than height or depth of pitch. Delicacy and evenness of the vanish of tone is greatly to be prized. The wave or sliding from low to middle and then to high pitch and back again prepares the voice for the expression of compound stress, that form used in doubt and in surprise.

Systematic, daily practice of the above hints will produce a melodious voice, which will more readily re

spond to the varied degrees of force. Beauty of tone must be acquired through a course of developing exercises, physical and vocal, before reading is attempted, if the student desires success.

A knowledge of temperament is of vital importance to the teacher. Inherited or acquired defects are the lot of human nature. It is the teacher who uproots and destroys these abominations, nourishing the tender shoot which finally rewards his efforts. poet, creator, or teacher is one who puts life into his creations, writes Ruskin; hence, that which is best adapted to the student should be one of the first considerations. Judicious suggestions will promote individuality and prevent imitation, which dwarfs rather than expands. The wise teacher confers a great blessing upon humanity if he keys the delicate instrument -the speaking-voice-tunefully, and makes it an element of daily expression.

Pitch may be defined as the distinction of sound relative to letters, syllables, words, and phrases. Melody is the combination of skips, slides, and waves, the last-named of equal or of unequal length and ranging from very low to very high according to the degree of excitement. In this connection, movement becomes a factor, in that it is in the same ratio to the thought as force and pitch. All light, delicate ideas require upward skips, slides, and waves; while stronger ideas are expressed by downward inflections. The length and the force are determined by the importance of the idea. Equal waves are used to express additional dignity or importance. When united with compound stress they express sarcasm, irony, or contempt. Unequal waves usually express ludicrousness.

There is one defect that the teacher has great difficulty in eradicating, and that is the singsong manner of recitation. The tenacity with which

tant; second, pause after it, that this importance may be observed. The greater the importance the longer the pause. The utter disregard of this silent link is astonishing, and is owing to too great haste in telling the story. Natural expression and natural laws are overlooked; interpretation is merely superficial, and the result is a pitiable exhibition of defects. It follows, naturally, that the teacher should be one well versed in art, history, literature, etc., in order to preserve that fine distinction which the soul governs unconsciously, with no regard to mechanical rules, although it must be remembered that to understand the beauty depicted by an author, poet, painter, or sculptor, one must understand himself.

I

MME. LENA DORIA DEVINE,

New York.

SEE from the December No. of your valuable magazine that its columns are still open to the discussion of the above subject. Some writers in your December issue deplore the fact that the discussion on the part of the teachers consisted largely of an expression of disbelief in the value of what science had done for the art of singing. Perhaps there might have been less reason for such complaint had each participant been allowed to take the side of his choice, and not had it thrust upon him, as one would in an amateur debating-society. For surely, as far as the question, "What Have the Laryngoscope and Photography Done for the Art of Singing?" had reference to the work of Prof. Hallock and Dr. Muckey, it does not seem probable

that every teacher would have placed himself or herself on the negative side.

Previous to the meeting of The Werner's Society I had already published an article in which I expressed the opinion that these investigators had given us a rationale of the modus operandi of a few leading principles of the old Italian method. If they have done so, and thus given us at last a scientific basis for our empirical knowledge, they have certainly accomplished inestimable good. It is not at all detracting from the honor that belongs to them to say that they have come to no conclusions which were not already included in the fundamental principles of a long-established method of singing. What more can science expect to do for art than to establish the why and the wherefore of what the artist has already grasped by intuition.

Dr. Muckey remarks that many teachers claim to aim at relaxation of the throat, and yet produce forced voices and tired throats. The fact is that vocal teachers are not different from average humanity as regards what they preach one day and put into practice the next. A teacher's results do not depend alone upon his acquired knowledge of facts, but upon his inborn talents and conscientious, painstaking work. When come to carry principles into practice art begins.

we

As far as relaxation of the throat is concerned, we must stop to consider that it is dependent upon and only made possible by proper breathmanagement, something to which Dr. Muckey does not seem to attach much importance. Anyone may sing ah, and after a little practice keep the palate up or down without much. thought about breath; but when we come to execute phrases-that is real singing the extrinsic muscles will not stay relaxed unless the breath is thoroughly under the control of the abdominal muscles.

Vice versa, breath-management and voice-placement "upon the breath," as it was taught by the elder Lamperti and the great Italian masters before him, leads to singing without effort or tension about the throat. Such tension at once manifests itself in forced tones and in that pushing out of the voice which is in direct violation of what the old Italian masters exacted.

The problem of how to cultivate voices that shall possess resonance, purity, and endurance is not solved. by training the soft-palate to stay down. It is a question of more thorough fundamental work in abdominal breath-control and voiceplacing. As long as even "firstclass" teachers continue to allow beginners to practice at home, and to teach them songs after two or three weeks' study, so long will even "first-class" teachers claim to aim

at relaxation and freedom about the neck, and yet produce forced voices and tired throats.

EDMUND J. MYER, New York.

It is not in accord with my wish or desire to indulge in personalities in a magazine discussion or controversy. I deplore the necessity which compels me to do so here. I want to make it clear, at the start, that everything herein is said in good faith, with the best feeling for all concerned, and in the interest of the truth alone. In the discussion of this question: "What Have the Laryngoscope and Photography Done for the Art of Singing?" there seems to be, on the part of certain ones, wilful misunderstanding or woeful ignorance. There is no doubt that it was generally understood that this discussion was on the art of singing, and not on the science of voice. thermore, it was in the interest of the truth in relation to the art, and not especially for the purpose of exhibiting or confirming the discoveries of any one individual or set of individuals. Yet Dr. Muckey, in his article in the December No. of WERNER'S MAGAZINE, apparently laments the fact that the vocal profession will not accept his theories, and are seemingly unwilling that he should help them.

Fur

He says, "Our object is to help vocal teachers and singers," and he objects strongly to those who differ from him. One of his followers said, "Arrayed on the negative side was a mighty host of singing-teachers with elaborate papers on the apparently popular side of the question. The affirmative was represented by two thoroughly scientific gentlemen. Among men of science there are no doubting Thomases but how different with these practical members of The Werner Society."

Now, for some of Dr. Muckey's misstatements. He says, with regard to those who differed from him, "They one and all agree that the less they know about the vocal apparatus, about the action of the vocal cords and the muscles which manage them, the use of the resonance-cavities and the muscles which control them, the more successful are they in producing singers. They all state positively that the laryngoscope has been of no service and never can be of any service to the science of voiceproduction." In the first place, I do not believe that one on the negative side of this discussion ever said that the less he knew about the vocal apparatus, etc., the more successful he is in producing singers. In the second place, I am sure that not one of them stated that "the laryngoscope has been of no service to the science of voice-production." Dr. Muckey should remember that the discussion was not on the science of voice-production, but on the art of singing. The science of voice is one thing, the art of singing is a very different thing. Had the discussion been on the science of voice, I, for one, would have agreed very materially with many of his statements. Scientifically, his theory, to a great extent, is in the right direction, and I agree with him in many particulars; but I do not at all agree with him in regard to the application of it to the training of the voice.

Again, he says: "Prof. Hallock has perfected an apparatus for measuring the height of these air-waves, at the same time that it registers the number and the relative strength of the different partial tones of which any tone is composed. Photography enables us to get a permanent record of this." Referring to the form and the action of the parts, the air-current, etc., he says, "Why should not an apparatus of this kind be of service to singing-teachers if they

will only take advantage of it?" I will tell him why. First, as experiments from a scientific standpoint, they are interesting to all students of the voice; but to claim that there is anything especially new in these experiments is claiming altogether too much. Many of these same ideas have been given to the world by other scientists, and have been known for years by all students of the voice, but they have no practical form or value in studio work. Secondly, no singer has ever been made by their use in the studio, and never will be. This accounts for the fact that the practical teachers of The Werner Society are opposed, not to Dr. Muckey's theories, but to his application of them.

He says that "the resonance-cavities have nothing whatever to do with the pitch of the tone, as that is determined entirely by the vocal cords." Does he forget that the form and the size of the resonancecavities change continually with the pitch of the tone? Does he not have different-sized metal resonators for different pitches? He also takes exception to my statement that there are two distinct ways of reenforcing tone-the first, by increased muscular effort or tension, the wrong way; the second, by the added resonance of the inflated resonance-cavities, the right way. He also takes exception to "increased muscular effort or tension," yet he admits farther on that, under certain conditions, we have to "depend upon increased tension alone. This means increased effort as the pitch rises." Is not that muscular effort? He further says that "it is an impossibility to inflate a resonance-cavity." Does he not know that certain resonance-cavities of the voice are flexible, pliable, changeable under right production; but under wrong production are often pinched, contracted, or entirely closed?

Again, in quoting from my article with regard to the true conditions of artistic tone, etc., he says, "Yet he [Mr. Myer] tells us that the less we know about these parts and their adjustment, the surer are we to get the right adjustment." Dr. Muckey Dr. Muckey ought to know that this is a serious misrepresentation. He can find no such statement in my article, in any of my works on the voice, or in anything I have ever written or said. He says: "Mr. Myer also speaks of 'the body as a keyboard upon which the singer plays,'" and complains that he can not understand this expression. Is it possible that Dr. Muckey is so tied to his scientific facts that he can not understand a figure of speech? We sing with the body, all effort and action is of the body. We sing through the throat, not with the throat; through the throat by flexible, bodily action. Hence, I say that the body is the keyboard upon which the singer plays.

In like manner, I might go on correcting Dr. Muckey's misstatements, if I had but the time and the inclination; but it seems like a waste of time, as his arguments are evidently based upon the science of voice, while the argument before The Werner Society was upon the art of singing.

school of singing. This local-effort school of singing has been tried and found wanting. It has been and is a failure. The best thinkers and teachers of the day are deserting it. The day is not far distant when it will be known and acknowledged that a scientific and artistic training of the voice is actually a flexible, artistic training of the human body. All correct voice-production is the result of flexible, pliable, bodily movement, and automatic, spontaneous form and adjustment of the parts at and above the organ of sound.

I should like to enlighten Dr. Muckey as to what "true conditions of tone" and correct form and action of the parts are, but that would undoubtedly take more space than WERNER'S MAGAZINE Would be willing to give. I can simply say to him that these conditions and this automatic, flexible form and action are not secured by direct local effort, by the study of the parts under the laryngoscope, by vocal photography, or by any ingeniously devised machine. In artistic singing, certain things occur automatically because we sing correctly, because the desire is to produce certain effects. could not sing-beautifully if they did not occur; but "the local-effort school of singing" and "the physiological school of singing," to which I am afraid Dr. Muckey belongs, attempt to produce tone by locally making or compelling certain things. to occur. They are everlastingly getting the cart before the horse.

Dr. Muckey says: "We do not teach voice-production, therefore we are not fighting for pupils, but for the truth." This fact was very evident to all who heard his pupil's attempt to illustrate his theories before The Werner Society. In singing E, he darkened it, made it thick and sombre, by locally spreading the pharynx. When he produced the