boys changing voices

[DeProfundis130]

Hi Sue. I'm not sure that the term 'mutant' is used in Britain to refer to a boys voice change. We use the term breaking but I think that term is not really used in the US (can anybody confirm that).

Calling the boys mutants might not be well received

Yorkie;

Why do I keep finding myself on the same page as Yourself?
No harm intended I love it!

A Very Big Amen re; mutants!!!

Peace, Gerald.

[DeProfundis130]

In review of this submission I must clarify! In my 71yrs as USA Person all I've ever heard was breaking. Peace, Gerald.

[javerylibe]

I believe that voices 'break' colloquially throughout the English-speaking world, to children as well as to adults.

Increasingly, though, choirmasters, voice trainers and music educators—particularly if they are especially invested in building up music programmes or in getting/ keeping boys singing—are loath to use the term 'break', as it can imply to a child that there is something wrong with him (a 'broken' voice) and may prevent him from joining in with music that he might otherwise enjoy. To the more technical of music educators and researchers, voice 'mutation' is often the preferred term for the deepening of the voice into the cambiata stage, but as even that can have some negative connotations, voice 'change' is probably the language most commonly used.

Say it with me, ladies and gents: 'Voices don't break; they change... voices don't break; they change.... voices don't break...'

Anyway. Those looking to learn more about adolescent voice change might find the Sounding Edge pages at the Edge Hill University site quite interesting.

[Yorkie]

Increasingly, though, choirmasters, voice trainers and music educators—particularly if they are especially invested in building up music programmes or in getting/ keeping boys singing—are loath to use the term 'break', as it can imply to a child that there is something wrong with him (a 'broken' voice) and may prevent him from joining in with music that he might otherwise enjoy. To the more technical of music educators and researchers, voice 'mutation' is often the preferred term for the deepening of the voice into the cambiata stage, but as even that can have some negative connotations, voice 'change' is probably the language most commonly used.

Yet more lefty, mollycoddling, politically correct nonsense then if you ask me. Much more of this type over over indulgent rubbish and young people will be running wild in the streets.................My voice broke, all my mates voices broke. None of us needed hospital treatment or therapy. Are these same choirmasters also mixing the boys with girls I wonder?

[javerylibe]

Increasingly, though, choirmasters, voice trainers and music educators—particularly if they are especially invested in building up music programmes or in getting/ keeping boys singing—are loath to use the term 'break', as it can imply to a child that there is something wrong with him (a 'broken' voice) and may prevent him from joining in with music that he might otherwise enjoy. To the more technical of music educators and researchers, voice 'mutation' is often the preferred term for the deepening of the voice into the cambiata stage, but as even that can have some negative connotations, voice 'change' is probably the language most commonly used.

Yet more lefty, mollycoddling, politically correct nonsense then if you ask me. Much more of this type over over indulgent rubbish and young people will be running wild in the streets.................My voice broke, all my mates voices broke. None of us needed hospital treatment or therapy. Are these same choirmasters also mixing the boys with girls I wonder?

Doesn't that make you and your mates bigger men than those whose teachers and choirmasters put things to them in terms of 'change' rather than 'break'! Well done. Representatives of the true masculinity of a lost time. You and those mates ought to go and re-educate these flowery little muppets in school today, starting with a few choice swears and a good hard shove down. Boys will be boys, after all, and what good's a young man who doesn't come to blows with his peers every now and again? About as good as a young man whose voice changes rather than breaks, I imagine. Soft; unmasculine; pawns in and victims of the military lefto-feminist takeover!

(Alas, poor Britain!)

As for those choirmasters who talk in a language of changing rather than breaking, I wonder: do Edward Higginbottom and Andrew Carwood mix boys and girls in their choirs?

[maartendas]

My voice broke, all my mates voices broke. None of us needed hospital treatment or therapy.

Yes, but did you sing in a choir whilst this happened? Because I think that's the point here....

[Sue]

I think it's new to Libera that a whole song, like 'Te Lucis' at the moment, is completely given to the male voices, right? That's very interesting, also a little tenor-solo like Josh's one in Eternal Light. Does anyone know if Samuel Moriarty meanwhile has been a man's voice?

[maartendas]

You're right Sue, it is remarkable that the lower voices are given more attention on this tour. In light of that, I read on Lexi's blog that the lower voices will feature more prominently in the future:

I asked Josh if he was surprised when they asked him to sing a solo, and he told me that he was, but he really enjoys it. He also said that they're going to start featuring the lower voices more to add a "different texture" to the concerts. So that's AWESOME!

Always good to see the development of Libera, trying out new musical territory. Maybe boys like Ben, Josh and Liam really can't say goodbye to Libera and they had to find a way around that

Also, on a side note, it might be fun/interesting to know that in Dutch, we don't say change or break but - "getting the beard in your throat" I always found that a good - and poetic - expression.

[Yorkie]

Doesn't that make you and your mates bigger men than those whose teachers and choirmasters put things to them in terms of 'change' rather than 'break'! Well done.

Yes, it probably does - if by bigger men you mean not getting all weepy and hand wringing over a fact of nature. Boys, you're voices will break. You can sing high now but one day you won't be able to. However, you will have a beautiful new range to sing in so having your voice break and growing in to a man is a good thing. Hardly a difficult concept.

Representatives of the true masculinity of a lost time. You and those mates ought to go and re-educate these flowery little muppets in school today, starting with a few choice swears and a good hard shove down. Boys will be boys, after all, and what good's a young man who doesn't come to blows with his peers every now and again? About as good as a young man whose voice changes rather than breaks, I imagine. Soft; unmasculine; pawns in and victims of the military lefto-feminist takeover!

(Alas, poor Britain!)

Yes, I agree that is a shame that in today's world men have to be feminised and women masculinised. However, treating boy's breaking voices as something that requires hand holding, counselling and a lie down in a darkened room with the smelling salts is ridiculous. That using the term 'breaking' can traumatise a kid in to not singing is unbelievable to me and quite laughable. The kids I know are not so pathetic as to be unbalanced by a single word. Fortunately. It's actually rather amazing about how much children can understand if time is taken to talk to them; and 12 - 14 y.o.'s more so.

As for those choirmasters who talk in a language of changing rather than breaking, I wonder: do Edward Higginbottom and Andrew Carwood mix boys and girls in their choirs?

It can only be a matter of time if they also subscribe to the mollycoddling. I would be interested in reading why they think this way if you can link me to the relevant articles.

[Yorkie]

My voice broke, all my mates voices broke. None of us needed hospital treatment or therapy.

Yes, but did you sing in a choir whilst this happened? Because I think that's the point here....

The point of what? Are you really saying that boys who sing in a choir think that when their voices 'break' they can't sing again because their voice is 'broken'?

Errmm, so what are all those guys doing who sing Alto, Tenor and Bass in the same choir?

[maartendas]

My voice broke, all my mates voices broke. None of us needed hospital treatment or therapy.

Yes, but did you sing in a choir whilst this happened? Because I think that's the point here....

The point of what? Are you really saying that boys who sing in a choir think that when their voices 'break' they can't sing again because their voice is 'broken'?

Errmm, so what are all those guys doing who sing Alto, Tenor and Bass in the same choir?

The point of why it can be a sensitive issue when your voice breaks/changes/whatevers. For a boy who doesn't sing, voice change has less consequences than for one who does.

No I don't say that those boys think they can never sing again. Ofcourse you can sing different parts, and as Liam said in his speech in Epsom (and I think Josh did so too on earlier Libera shows) it can be very exciting to learn to use your new voice.
The only thing is - it's forced. You don't choose to become an alto or tenor or bass. So it's something that you need to accept, whether you like it or not. Maybe because of this you might not like your new voice at first, and then ofcourse singing is not so much fun either.

Also - puberty is the time you start to form your own identity more. When part of your identity is "I am a chorister", and suddenly that changes, that might also be tough to swallow. Maybe even more so when you are publicly recognised and appreciated because of your voice, as is the case for the Libera boys. Ofcourse every boy is different but I can imagine for a less confident boy, voice change can be a touchy subject. (Personally I think the boys in Libera are more confident than average, because they need to be able to handle the touring, the media, us crazy fans etc)

[Yorkie]

The point of what? Are you really saying that boys who sing in a choir think that when their voices 'break' they can't sing again because their voice is 'broken'?

Errmm, so what are all those guys doing who sing Alto, Tenor and Bass in the same choir?

The point of why it can be a sensitive issue when your voice breaks/changes/whatevers. For a boy who doesn't sing, voice change has less consequences than for one who does.

No I don't say that those boys think they can never sing again. Ofcourse you can sing different parts, and as Liam said in his speech in Epsom (and I think Josh did so too on earlier Libera shows) it can be very exciting to learn to use your new voice.
The only thing is - it's forced. You don't choose to become an alto or tenor or bass. So it's something that you need to accept, whether you like it or not. Maybe because of this you might not like your new voice at first, and then ofcourse singing is not so much fun either.

Also - puberty is the time you start to form your own identity more. When part of your identity is "I am a chorister", and suddenly that changes, that might also be tough to swallow. Maybe even more so when you are publicly recognised and appreciated because of your voice, as is the case for the Libera boys. Ofcourse every boy is different but I can imagine for a less confident boy, voice change can be a touchy subject. (Personally I think the boys in Libera are more confident than average, because they need to be able to handle the touring, the media, us crazy fans etc)

You said I was missing the point Maartendas but I think it is you who have missed it. Javerylibe said that the term 'voice breaking' is not being used because it puts boys off singing. If that is the level of intelligence of young people and their educators in Britain today (and watching the recent t.v.news footage I have to concede that it is in fact possible) then we might as well give up.

If a word used for hundreds of years to describe an inescapable fact of life causes such terror and confusion, this once great country has been destroyed by well meaning, but ultimately misguided, liberals.

[maartendas]

Yorkie, you're right. I must have read too quickly and missed that Javerylibe talked about how the use of the word "break" with a boy

may prevent him from joining in with music that he might otherwise enjoy.

This indeed implies that the boy in question is not already singing.
So, is that true, Javerylibe? Is it normal to avoid the word 'break' in order not to scare off boys to sing? I agree with Yorkie that that seems over the top.

[Yorkie]

Yorkie, you're right. I must have read too quickly and missed that Javerylibe talked about how the use of the word "break" with a boy

may prevent him from joining in with music that he might otherwise enjoy.

This indeed implies that the boy in question is not already singing.
So, is that true, Javerylibe? Is it normal to avoid the word 'break' in order not to scare off boys to sing? I agree with Yorkie that that seems over the top.

No problem that man. But even if it is only boys who don't already sing that Javerylibe refers to, if they are so blind, deaf and stupid to have not noticed that adult men sing it is a pathetic state of affairs.

[javerylibe]

Yorkie. You realise that you, in a quick fit of well misplaced rage, are the one inventing ridiculous images of weeping boys and 'hand holding, counselling and a lie down in a darkened room with the smelling salts', don't you? You've blown a question of evolving language usage entirely out of proportion and are making up something to be angry about.

The notion that boys' voices 'break' has had very real repercussions for the numbers and attitudes of male singers—and young male singers in particular—over the course of the past century. When otherwise well-intentioned choirmasters and voice-trainers tell boys—as they did with quite a measure of gravity in the post-war decades that also just so happened to see the decline of the beloved boy soprano and the 'flight of boys' from church choirs—that their voices 'break', they often do so with the intention of preventing boys from singing through the cambiata phase, lest they 'break' their adult voices. (Remember the well-publicised myth that singing through the voice change ruins any chance a boy might have at having as nice a voice as an adult as he'd had at a child. There's an interview with a young Aled Jones where he says as much. Happily, this myth is being debunked more and more.)

The implication in the 'stop singing when your voice breaks' advice is that there is that nobody would want to hear a 'broken' or 'breaking' voice and that there is even the threat of very real, physical harm to a boy who would carry on singing through his adolescence and a period of unsettled voice that could last for years— well beyond earliest adolescence. And swathes of boys, with that seed planted in their heads, decided that, well, they just weren't going to bother with singing, as they clearly had nothing to offer.

This, coupled with aggressively-enforced post-war notions of what made a 'real man' or a 'real boy', heralded the much-ballyhooed shying away of boys from choirs. ('So... I'm going to spend all of my time training up something that's going to break in a few years anyway, and I'm likely going to get slagged off for it whilst doing so? Not likely!') And this is at least part of the reason why educators today, faced with often staggering differences in girls' enrollment in choirs and boys', are advocating a language of 'changing' rather than one of 'breaking': not because they're part of some social conspiracy to 'feminise', 'soften' or 'sissify' boys (the very notion is absurd), but because they want to encourage them to sing with whatever voice they have at any given time.

I had no intention of starting a political conversation with my response to the earlier questions of language usage; but because you've found it somehow necessary to drag mixed treble lines into the mire, I need to say this: stop scapegoating little girls. It's disgusting and unnecessary. They had nothing to do with the original question and are not, anyway, the diametric opposite of little boys in the way that the reactionary gender police imagine. And if you're going to tell young boys that they're 'lesser men' and lesser humans for straying near 'soft' or 'girly' behaviours or activities, you had better well hope that no-one ever suggests to them that singing is somehow 'girly' if you want them to take up choral music. Keep sowing the seeds for a world where everything is rigidly either 'girlish' or 'boyish', 'soft' or 'hard'; but don't be too surprised if those seeds bear bitter fruit when boys, fearing for their reputations, decide not to join the choirs in their churches and schools.