John Dalmas writes:

>Wasn't that the convention back then, the so called "white" voice that
>allowed for subtle inflection of the melodic line? I know it's not for
>everybody's ears, but it must have suited its time and place.  Where
>are the HIP defenders on the list?

The mythical idea that the English Cathedral style of singing (from
which the Tallis Scholars derive) has any connection to pre-Baroque vocal
technique is one of those silly notions people like to repeat amongst
themselves until it sounds good enough to believe.  The notion has been
effectively exploded by John Potter in his _Vocal Authority_ text, although
that will not stop it being repeated forever.  What Potter calls "the early
music voice" is a post-Restoration invention.  Earlier singing was a lot
grittier, and marked especially by wide regional variation.

I am not one to say performances *have* to be HIP.  People can like
what they like, and in fact they do.  Pre-Baroque HIP vocal technique is
basically in its infancy, and is usually unpopular.  The Tallis Scholars
are simply applying the English Cathedral style in which they were trained
(a style with its own history) to some earlier music, even using women in
treble parts for boys.  Some people like the sound, and the Tallis Scholars
want to cultivate *their* sound, not worry about HIP technique.

Todd McComb
[log in to unmask]