Hello Musico~
Let?s just jump right into the editing:
<<<Paolo Abel do Nascimento
Forewords>>>
It should read ?Forward? without an ?s.?
<<<Paolo Abel? An important and talented sopranista with a remarkable
voice for some, while just a plain countertenor for others;>>>
Opening your writing with a question is generally considered a weak
thing to do. Instead, why not just remove the question mark and make
it read: ?Paolo Abel. An important and talented?? Instead of the word
?plain,? try ?ordinary,? which better conveys the concept you?re
after, I believe.
<<<But for the vast majority the name of "Paulo Abel" gives little, if
any, associations at all. >>>
Place a comma after ?majority.? There is no need to put Abel?s name in
quotation marks. The phrase ?gives little, if any, associations at
all? could be more clear. How about ?means little, if anything at
all.?
<<<Very few have actually heard about Paolo Abel do
Nascimento. >>>
Cut the word ?about;? it?s unnecessary. Instead of the word ?do? how
about the more descriptive ?sing? or ?perform??
<<<He participated once in a "background" role as a castrato
in "Dangerous Liaisons" for a few minutes and made two commercial
recordings, before he suddenly died of an AIDS related illness at a
young age. >>>
This sentence is a little unclear. How about ?He sang the small role
of a castrato in Dangerous Liaisons, made two commercial recordings,
then died suddenly of an AIDS related illness.? The film title should
be in italics, not in quotation marks. It?s really unnecessary to
mention his ?young age,? at least at this point, since his short
career tends to imply youth.
<<<And yet, he is still considered to be of the outmost
importancy in the modern history of male sopranists. >>>
This is grammatically incorrect. How about ?And yet, he?s still
considered one of the most important male sopranists in modern
history.?
<<< Reffered by
many to as a natural castrato, this mysterious singer had
always fascinated, and continue to fascinate many of his listeners. >>>
This sentence is confusing. (And the word is spelled ?referred.?) How
about ?Considered a natural castrato by many, this mysterious singer
fascinated many in his lifetime, and continues to fascinate modern
listeners.?
<<<His
voice is like "no other", his manner of singing is often comic,
exploding, but non the less charming and touching. His voice can
easily be recognized by the characteristic, "nasal" headvoice he use
to employ from time to time.>>>
There?s no need to put ?no other? in quotation marks. Also, this
should be more than two sentences. How about: ?His voice is like no
other. His manner of singing is often?.? What do you mean by
exploding? Do you mean powerful? That would be a better word to
describe singing. In the last sentence, ?characteristic? implies that
he uses it often, not from time to time. How about: ?His voice is
easily recognized by the nasally head voice he frequently employed.?
<<< At first it may appear for some that his technique is weard, but after a
better listen, it reveals an enourmous talent of dedication and artistry. >>>
How about: ?It may appear to some that his technique is weird?? Note
the spelling of ?weird.? Also the word is ?enormous.?
<<<In many ways, Nasimento was a true master of his style. It was his
very own, unique way to sing - it was the way he chose to bring the
message of the song on to his audience, loaded up with a touch
of personal dedication and feelings. >>>
Cut the word ?on,? as in ?of the song on.? Instead of ?loaded up? how
about ?imbued with personal dedication and feelings.?
<<<Otherwise, here he is, Paolo Abel
do Nascimento, whoes background is enshrined in mystery, but
whoes voice and talents speak for themselves.>>>
The word ?otherwise? is misused here. How about something like:
?Nevertheless, however one feels about Paolo Abel do Nascimento and
his enigmatic background, his voice and talents speak for themselves.?
<<<The Biogarphy>>>
The word should be spelled ?biography.?
<<<Paolo Abel do Nascimento ( he was also sometimes reffered to as
"Paulo" and even "Pablo") was born in 1957, in at that time a small
town of Fortaleza, in the northen Brazil. >>>
There is an extra space between ?he? and the parenthesis; delete it.
?Misspelling: referred. In fact, the sentence would be clearer if it
went something like this: ?sometimes called ?Paulo? or ?Pablo?).?
?Northern? should be capitalized.
<<<His family was one among
thousands other poor families with many children to feed and take
care of. >>>
Add the word ?of? after ?thousands.?
<<<However, his family must have been unusually large, giving
the fact that he was the 15th (!) child. >>>
The use of exclamation points is almost non-existent in scholarly work.
<<<Obviously, growing up in such a
huge and poor family wasn`t easy at all. >>>
There is always a danger in writing the word ?obviously,? as you?ve
done here. It may, after all, not be obvious to some readers. In fact,
you could really cut this sentence entirely.
<<<Still, Nascimento was the
only child in his family who had a great passion for singing, and he
followed in the steps of his grandmother, who was singing in the
churches. >>>
Let?s brush this up and make it two sentences: ? Nascimento was the
only child in his family with a great passion for singing; he was
following in the steps of his grandmother, who sang in
churches.?
<<<From the early childhood his musical talents became obvious to
everyone.>>>
Comma after ?childhood.? Instead of the word ?obvious,? how about ?clear??
<<< As a yong boy, he dreamed of becoming a professional
singer. >>>
The word is spelled ?young.?
<<<He was noticed as outstanding allready in the school, and
despite the limited means of his parents, he was allowed to enter the
University of Sao Paulo.>>>
This sentence is a bit murky. How about: ?Already he stood out in
school?? Notice the spelling of the word ?alright.?
<<< There, he studied more music theory,
including composition and orchestral conducting. At the university he
met a French musicologist and conductor Roger Cotte, who was
greatly satisfied with the young singers attractive voice and talents. >>>
A comma after ?university.? Cut the word ?a,? after ?met.? Instead of
the word ?satisfied,? how about ?pleased? or ?impressed?? I think they
better express what you?re probably after.
<<<However, he got himself a bit of a surprise when he noticed that
Nascimento passed 20 and still had his infantile, high-pitched voice,
pretty well intact. At first it was thought he had a delayed puberty, but
as the time went on, "nothing" happened. >>>
This sentence is difficult to understand. How about something like:
?Cotte was shocked, however, when Nascimento passed 20, and still had
his infantile, high-pitched voice in tact. At first, he thought the
singer was experiencing delayed puberty, but as time went on,
Nascimento?s voice did not change.?
<<<During a thorough medical examination, the conclusion was therefore
clear: Nascimento had a certain endocrinological condition wich
prevented his voice from breaking, as well as some other secondary
sexual characteristica to appear, including facial hair growth etc. >>>
Cut the word ?therefore.? Cut the word ?certain.? ?Which? is
grammatically incorrect here; replace it with ?that.? When you say the
condition prevented his voice from ?breaking,? do you mean it
prevented his voice from changing? In other words, his voice never
matured? ?Breaking? means something else entirely, and refers to the
cracking of the voice, or to the switching of vocal registers. The
last half of this sentence is very unclear. How about: ??prevented his
voice from changing. It also prevented some physical maturing from
appearing, including facial hair.?
<<<In other words, Nascimento was what we call today an endocrinological
castrato. Realising the potentiality of such a case, Cotte created a
quarted with 3 tenors and one soprano part wich was song by
Nascimento.>>>
Misspelling: Realizing. The word ?potentiality? is incorrect here.
Replace it with ?potential.? ?Of such a case? is murky; how about
??potential of such a condition?: Misspelling: Quartet?actually, a
Spell the number out; it?s ?three? not ?3.? Again ?which? is incorrect
here; replace it with ?that.?
<<<This condition turned out to be extremely beneficial, as Nascimento`s
unique and captivating alto voice attracted the sponsors, who were
willing to provide whatever is neccesary in order to give Nascimento
an exceptional opportunity to get a better and more sophisticated
musical education in Europe. >>>
Cut the word ?the? before ?sponsors.? It should be ?whatever was? not
?whatever is.? Misspelling: necessary. The last part of this sentence
could be better written; how about: ?an exceptional opportunity to
receive a more sophisticated musical education in Europe.?
<<<As a result, he left his native Brazil in
the late 1970`s and went on to Italy. It was there particulary that
Nascimento finally completed his vocal technique in the true Baroque
style, and gave his first debut on the Belgian radio in 1981. >>>
Cut ?particularly.? Cut ?finally? before ?completed.? In the last
sentence, the word ?first? is unnecessary, since ?debut? means first.
Cut ?the? before ?Belgian?
<<<In the following years he performed occasionally on the stage and in
private concerts in Germany, Austira, Belgium, France, Italy and on
one occasion in the USA. >>>
Comma after ?years.? To make things more clear, how about a dash
between ?Italy? and ?and.?
<<<By that time Nascimento had developed an
obvious Baroque repertoire, and most of the music he performed were
therefore from that period. >>>
There?s that nasty word ?obvious? again ? You can just cut it out. A
little grammatical problem; try instead: ?most of the music he
performed was from that period.?
<<<This included such operas as "Xerxes" and
"Tamerlano". >>>
Titles in italics, not quotation marks.
<<<Though Nascimento was mostly active in France, where
he had his appartment in Paris, one of his most succesfull and
famous performances were in Austria and Italy.>>>
Misspelled words: apartment, successful. Just for a smoother flow and
better grammar, how about: ??was mostly active in France (he had an
apartment in Paris), some of his most successful performances were in
Austria and Italy.?
<<< He was particulary
noticed for his performances in Venice, under the city carnival of 1990. >>>
Misspelled word: particularly.
<<<Otherwise he became a great attraction for the tourists to Ajaccio,
Corsica, where he sang in the imperial chapel, and everyone thought
at first it was a child singing with a beautiful voice, but when they
looked up, they saw him, an adult with the voice of a child..>>>
?Otherwise? is not the best word here. How about ?In addition, he
became?? Cut ?the? before ?tourists.? Instead of ?to Ajaccio? make it
?in Ajaccio.? Put a period after ?chapel? and make the rest a new
sentence, something like: ?Often, people thought his voice was that of
gifted child; then they looked up and saw him: an adult with the voice
of a child.?
<<<The amusement of the tourists and other visitors were great, and the
Belgian newspaper, "L'Evenement du Jeudi", wrote later
afterwards that he "was the only vocal case in the world. He is perhaps
the only natural castrato singer of our days ". >>>
A grammatical problem; it should be ?was great? not ?were great.? The
newspaper title should be in italics, not quotation marks. No need for
commas before and after the newspaper name. Cut the word ?afterwards;?
it?s unnecessary with the word ?later.?
<<<Apart from that, as mentioned above, Nascimento settled in France
and spent most of his musical activities there. >>>
It?s unnecessary to say again that he lived in France. Instead, just
say something like ?Despite his successes elsewhere, Nascimento
preferred to work in France.?
<<<He appeared together
with the singers François Miterrand, Jesse Norman and Jack Lang, in
Lyon and Paris.>>>
Cut the word ?together.? Cut ?the? before ?singers.?
<<< Naturally, due to his growing popularity he decieded
to start making recordings. >>>
?Naturally? is a lot like ?obvious.? It?s unnecessary here.
Misspelling: decided. Comma after ?popularity.?
<<<His first commercial recordings took place
in Aveyron, France, during the fall of 1986. >>>
?Took place? is not really what you mean. Try ?were completed?
<<<Here he recorded 6
Sonates/Cantates by Domenico and Alessandro Scarlatti. The
recording was later issued, through a contract, under the French label
"Lyrinx" (LYRCD-62). >>>
It should be ?six? not ?6.? ?Though a contract? can be cut.
<<<Then, 2 years later, he was offered a role as a castrato in the movie
"Dangerous Liaisons". >>>
It?s ?two? not ?2.? The movie title should be in italics, not quotation marks.
<<<The role lasted for 2,5 minutes only, and it was
thought to be so unsignificant that his name didn`t even appear on
the main cast list. >>>
Instead of saying ?the role lasted,? how about saying ?He appeared on
film for only two and a half minutes.? Notice that you should spell
out the number. Then make the rest a new sentence: ?his role was
thought so insignificant?.? Notice the spelling of ?insignificant.?
<<<However, it was the one and only video
performance of Nascimento. >>>
Instead of ?video? the word ?filmed? would be better. ?Is? would be
better than ?was.?
<<<And it`s really amazing to see and hear
him perform one of the most celebrated Baroque Arias, namely
"Ombra mai fu" from Handels "Serse".>>>
In scholarly articles, don?t start sentences with the word ?and.? This
sentence is overly wordy; I would simplify it: ?However, it is
Nascimento?s one and only filmed performance?the celebrated Baroque
Aria ?Ombra mai fu? from Handel?s Serse.? Notice the apostrophe in
?Handle?s.? Also, opera title should be in italics, not quotation
marks.
<<<The Aria was written originally for a soprano castrato, and was first
performed by the famous Caffarelli in 1738. >>>
?Aria? shouldn?t be capitalized.
<<<Obviously, it wasn`t
without a reason that Nascimento was chosen for this role.>>>
Cut ?Obviously.?
<<< Since he already was an end. castrato, he was pretty close both physically and
vocally to these legendary singers, who flourished especially during
the period this movie was about. >>>
Don?t abbreviate ?endocrinological.? You can clean up the sentence a
bit; how about: ??castrato, physically and vocally, he had many
similarities with such legendary singers who flourished in the 18th
century.?
<<<In fact, he was carefully chosen out
of some 150 other candidates! >>>
No exclamation points ?
<<<All in all, I think he did a great
performance here, and both the costumes, scene and singing style was
especially adapted to the Baroque fashion. >>>
The ?I think? is unnecessary here, as it?s implied. Instead of ?did?
put ?gave.? Also, the word ?great? isn?t very descriptive. Did he give
a powerful performance? A strong performance? An outstanding
performance? The word ?both? is incorrect here, as it implies TWO
things, and you list three. How about: ?here, and the costumes,
setting, and singing was especially adapted to the Baroque style.?
<<<The last recordings took place in December 1990 in Lyon, France, and
lasted for two days only. >>>
You need his name here: ?Nascimento?s last recordings?? Put the word
?only? in front of ?for.?
<<<This time Nascimento attempted a
completely different repertoire - his native Brazilian folksongs. >>>
Comma after ?time.?
<<<These songs is said to have a special and nostalgic influence on him, since
they were "the songs of his childhood".>>>
?Is? is grammatically incorrect. Instead: ?These songs are said to
have had a special?? No need to use quotation marks in this sentence.
<<< However, it seems that at the
time of his last recordings Nascimento was already severly affected
by progressive HIV, and by the spring of 1992, he was compelled to
cancel all of his scheduled performances, including an
important concert in favor of the poor children of the Brazilian
slumquarters at Ayrton Senna, in London.>>>
This is a confusing sentence. How about something like: ?However, at this time,
Nascimento was already suffering from progressive HIV??
<<< Eventually, he died on
May 8, same year, to the great surprise and lamentation of the
disheartened relatives and friends. >>>
The word ?eventually? can be cut.
<<<The probably most extraordinary voice since the times of Moreschi
was now no more, but unlike Moreschi, it was enshrined for centuries
to come on discs recorded with a modern technology, thus preserving
his voice noise-free and clear. >>>
The grammar is incorrect here. I think you mean this: ?Nascimento had
one of the most extraordinary voices since Moreschi?but unlike
Moreschi, his voice was captured by modern technology, preserved
forever, clear and true, on CD.? (or records...whichever is correct.)
<<<Naturally, one would ask how far a
singer (and actor!) of his calibre would reach if it wasn`t for this highly
dramatic and sudden end of his career. >>>
Cut the word ?naturally.? No exclamation points. How about: ?One
wonders how far a performer of his caliber would have risen, if it
hadn?t been for his sudden and dramatic death.?
<<<Most certainly is it, however,
that we would have a great deal of interesting recordings, and
possibly even movies (!), influenced and inspired by Paolo Abel do
Nascimento, seen upon as a naturally gifted countertenor by some,
while as a modern castrato by others - one can but only guess, how
high his fame would be today, have he been alive.>>>
No exclamation points ? This sentence is a little confusing. How
about something like: ?Certainly we would have had a great many
interesting records, and possibly more movies, by this great artist.
Paolo Abel do Nascimento: categorized by some as a countertenor, a
modern castrato by others, but a talented singer by all.? Or something
similar. Avoid writing a sentence so similar to those in your
foreword. In fact, you don?t really need to conclude this section so
firmly, since you are following it with an afterward. If I were
writing this, I?d end this section with ?One wonders how far a
performer of his caliber would have risen, if it hadn?t been for his
sudden and dramatic death.?
<<<Afterwords>>>
No ?s? at the end of this word.
<<<Much has been said about the supposed "extraordinarity" of this
singer, as his unique and natural high-pitched voice and
his somewhat effeminate appearance gave a basis for various
speculations, and the rumors were many - some even has it that he
was a "secret" castrato, a reemergence of a breed known as "castrati"
back in the Baroque. >>>
A lot of grammatical problems here. How about: ?Much has been said
about Nascimento?s uniquely high-pitched singing and his somewhat
effeminate appearance. Many rumors have suggested that Nascimento was,
in fact, a ?secret? castrao?a modern-style castrati.
<<<The fact that his family bitterly resisted an
attempt to make an autopsy after his death, could add to that
speculation, but than again, their reasons might have been based on
religious believes, ruther than anything else. >>>
Cut ?bitterly.? Cut the words ?an attempt to make,? so that the
sentence reads ?The fact that his family resisted an autopsy after his
death could lend credence to such rumors.? Then make the rest another
sentence: ?Then again?? The word should be ?beliefs,? not ?believes.
And ?rather? not ?ruther.?
<<<Although it could be
possible, it looks much more reasonable that the condition behind his
"castrato-like" voice and appearance was on a solely endocrinological
level - inherited at birth, he was a rare case of what we today call an
endocrinological castrato.>>>
Cut ?although it could be possible.? Replace the word ?looks? with
?seems.? Then rewrite the sentence for clarity; how about ?It seems
much more reasonable that the reason behind his ?castrato-like? voice
and appearance was solely endocrinological. Nascimento seems to have
been born with a condition that made him what is called an
?endocrinological castrato.?
<<<Many have therefore asked such questions as "How much can his
voice give us an idea of the real castrato voice?". >>>
Cut ?therefore? and ?such questions as;? they are unnecessary. I would
phrase the question thus: ?How much can his voice give us an idea of
what the true castrato voice sounded like??
<<<Indeed, it is not easy
to answer this question - there is no recordings available of a single
Baroque castrato!>>>
No exclamation point. Instead of a dash, make it a semi-colon ( ; ).
Grammatically, it should be ?there are no recordings available of
Baroque castratos.?
<<<The one that actually recorded, Alessandro
Moreschi, was well past this time, and his style, not to mention his
repertoire, was totally different from that used in the times of
Baroque. >>>
Instead of ?one? why not say ?The only castrati that actually
recorded?? This is more clear. Then, replace the comma after ?time?
with a semi-colon. Instead of saying ?times of Baroque,? write ?that
used in the Baroque era.?
<<<And than again, it is almost the same as to ask who posess a
typical male or female voice - the individual variations between the
singers and their voices in general is so profund that it is difficult to
draw any certain conclusions from Moreschi recordings alone. >>>
It should be ?And then again,? not ?than.? The sentence is a little
unclear; how about: ?Then again, asking such a question is nearly the
same as asking who posses a typical male or female voice; the
individuality of singers and voices is so profound that it?s difficult
to draw any positive conclusions from Moreschi recordings alone.? I?m
not entirely sure why you need to include this at all. I would cut it,
as I don?t think it really adds to the article.
<<<However, the voice is a voice, and the only thing we can do now, is to
compare Nascimento`s voice to Moreschi`s. This is the only way we can
attempt to answer this question, though perhaps, only partly. >>>
This is unnecessary. I would cut it.
<<< We know that Moreschi was a castrato, and by
comparing these two voices, we may come further than any other
speculations based on contemporary accounts describing singing of
famous castrati.>>>
I would add a ?do,? so that the sentence reads: ?We do know that??
It?s a little unclear which two voices you are talking about, so I
would write something like: ?and by comparing Moreschi?s voice with
Nascimento?s?? The last part of this sentence is very confusing. How
about: ??we may understand castrati singing better than if we go by
contemporary accounts alone.? (If, indeed, that?s what you mean; I?m
unsure.)
<<<So, how does Nascimento compare to Moreschi? The
first that comes in mind is that Moreschi sounds somewhat more
powerful and voluminous in comparison - his voice is more "full",
while Nascimento`s is "dry".>>>
Add the word ?thing? after ?first.? Cut the word ?voluminous:? it has
too similar a meaning to ?powerful.? Start a new sentence with ?his
voice.? What do you mean by ?dry?? Do you mean less powerful? More
thin? ?Dry? isn?t a term we use in the U.S. to describe singing,
typically.
<<<With other words, regardless how powerfull Nascimento may sound
in comparison to other sopranists, Moreschi sounds even more
powerful, and Moreschi`s voice is more rich, less stressed in the high
notes, and doesn`t have that feeling of forcing in the upper range,
something Nascimento obviously had, although vaguely, as we can
hear it clearly in "Estrela e lua nova" and especially "O kinimba",
where he displayed significant forcing in reaching all those F#`` .
Moreschi, however, was able to produce a rich, unforced vibrato in
full voice even at G`` ! >>>
A very confusing passage. How about something like: ?Regardless,
Moreschi?s voice is less strained on his high notes; he doesn?t seem
to be forcing the sound in his upper range?something that Nascimento
always seemed to do. In some of his recordings, like ?Estrela e lua
nova,? and especially "O kinimba", he seems to have trouble reaching
F#.
Moreschi, however, was able to produce a rich, unforced vibrato in
full voice even at G.? >>>
<<<Obviosly, comparing these two voices together
one will discover significant similarities but allso a great deal of
differencies, particulary in the strenght and fullness of the sound. >>>
Cut ?obviously? and ?together.? Some misspellings and grammatical
problems here: ?Comparing Moreschi and Nascimento?s voices, one
discovers significant similarities? You?ve already brought up the
differences, so there?s no need to mention them again.
<<<It looks therefore like Moreschi was "more" a castrato than Nascimento,
after all!>>>
You can cut this sentence altogether. You?ve made the similarities and
differences between the singers very clear, and what you mean by ?more
of a castrato? is unclear.
<<<However the difference, Nascimento`s case was thoroughly examined
by the medics, and they found that he had a very low amount of a
male hormone called testosterone that is responsible for the
development and maintenance of secondary sexual characteristica,
such as body hairs and lowering of the voice. >>>
Some grammatical problems. Try something like: ?Nascimento?s case is
well documented by medics, however, who found he had a very low level
of the male hormone testosterone?a hormone that lowers the male voice
and maintains secondary sexual characteristics like body hair.
<<<Personally, I can not say
anything right now about the exact degree of his sexual maturation, or
abscent of it thereof. The lack of information on this sensitive matter
is strikingly obscure, and unless I will have the opportunity to access
more credible and precise info on these matters, the subject of
Nascimento`s physiology in the mean time will be left to specualtions
and pure guessings on this site.>>>
I would cut your personal observation. It?s really unnecessary. How
about something like: ?The lack of further information on this
sensitive matter is strikingly obscure, and until I have access to
more credible and precise information on these matters, I will have to
leave the subject of Nascimento?s physiology at that.?
<<<Musical Heritage
The professional musical repertoire of Paolo Abel do
Nascimento involved, as already mentioned above, everything of
the Baroque era, also known as "The age of bel canto", from the very
beginning in the times of Scarlatti, to the late Handelian period. >>>
A bit confusing. I think you mean: ?The musical repertoire of Paolo Abel do
Nascimento included Baroque music, also known as music from ?the age
of bel canto,? from the times of Scarlatti, to the late Handelian
period.?
<<<His technique was polished and refined during his more sophisticated
studies in Italy, the homeland of "bel canto" and the legendary castrati
singers. >>>
I think you need to tell us who ?he? is at this time, so we don?t
think it is Scarlatti. So it would read: ?Nascimento?s technique??
<<<However, he used to perform a lot of his own Brazilian
repertoire as well in concerts and elsewhere.>>>
?A lot? is kind of a slang term. How about ??he frequently performed
his Brazilian repertoire, in concerts and elsewhere.?
<<<These Brazilian songs were mostly a crossing of a western classical
style of late romanticism with a native Brazilian folklore, usually with
the use of a piano accompainment. >>>
Cut ?mostly.? Instead of ?crossing? use the word ?blend,? which is a
more accurate term for what I think you mean. Also, the sentence is
unclear. How about: ??.were a blend of western classical music of the
romantic era and native Brazilian folk music, usually sung with piano
accompaniment.? Notice the spelling of accompaniment.
<<<Most famous composers of this
style were Jayme Ovalee and Heitor Lobos. >>>
?Most? is inappropriate here. How about just ?Famous composers??
<<<Because of the potentiality
of his voice, Nascimento could very well attempt such a repertoire that
demanded use of full chestvoice in the soprano/alto register. >>>
?Potentiality? is incorrect here. I think you mean ?potential:?
?Because of the potential of his voice?.? Cut ?very well? and ?such?
Instead of ?demanded use of full chest voice in the soprano/alto
register,? try ?demanded full use of his chest voice in the
soprano/alto range.? The word ?register? is incorrectly used in your
original sentence.
<<<Therefore, a particular point of interest would be the recordings of his
native Brazilian folksongs, released as "Melodies populaires
bresiliennes" in 1994 (his last recordings).>>>
Instead of ?would be? write ?are?
<<<Here we can hear a completely different singing technique that we
were used to earlier.>>>
Replace ?that? with ?than? and ?used to? with ?heard.?
<<< From a narrow vibrato and even passages in
"Cantates et Sonates" and "Ombra mai fu", we now get a full and rich
vibrato, executed freely in a chest and head register.>>>
Replace ?we now get? with ?we can hear.? Replace ?a? (as in ?in a
chest??) with ?the?
<<< These recordings are in my opinion the most interesting in his
collection though,
because here Nascimento displayes the real and striking potentiality
of his voice. >>>
Comma after ?are? and ?opinion.? Add the word ?songs? after
?interesting.? Cut the word ?though.? Misspelling: displays. Replace
?potentiality? with ?potential.?
<<<While he sounds almost like an "average" counter-tenor
on "Cantates et Sonates" with it`s narrow compass, it leaves no doubt
that, as it comes to the richness, luminosity, volume and power of the
sound, he posessed a voice that was far superior to many of the
famous male sopranists, including Christofellis and Manzotti.>>>
Comma after ?Sonates.? Replace the words ?it leave no doubt? with ?the
song leaves no doubt.? Replace ?as it comes to the richness? with
?when it comes to the richness.? Cut the word ?the? before ?sound.?
Misspelling: possessed.
<<<Especially in such masterpieces as "Tamba Taja" and "Nigue Nigue
Ninhas" the song flows like a clear, silver-like fountain,
switching from mellow lower notes to sudden, loud, vibrating and
penetrating higher passages that leaves the listener stunned and
almost "schocked" by the richness and luminosity of the sound that,
after all, comes from a male person well in his thirties! >>>
Instead of saying the song flows like a fountain, I think you should
write that his voice flows like a fountain. ?Leaves? should not have
an ?s? at the end of it. Misspelling: shocked (which should not be in
quotation marks). No exclamation point.
<<<His somewhat simple, yet emotional and even vehement (such as his hand-flapping
at the end of "Abaluaie") style of performing his native Brazilian
repertoire reveals a unique talent of dedication - few could sing these
songs with more emotional understanding and involvement than
Nascimento, a native Brazilian himself, who grew up on these songs..>>>
Put the stuff in the parenthesis after ?repertoire.? Try: ?His
somewhat simple, yet emotional and even vehement style of performing
his native Brazilian repertoire (for example, his hand-flapping at the
end of "Abaluaie") prove that few could sing such songs with more
emotional understanding and involvement than Nascimento, who grew up
on such music.?
<<<Although some may find his rich vibrato in "Melodies bresiliennes" to
be ruther shrill and somewhat unpleasant though striking and
extraordinary, saying they would rather prefer "other" countertenors
instead, it must be said that they miss the whole point: >>>
Misspelling: rather, not ruther. Cut ?to be.? Dash before ?though
striking.? I would rewrite for clarity; something like this: Although
some may find his rich vibrato in "Melodies bresiliennes" rather
shrill and somewhat unpleasant--saying they?d rather prefer other
countertenors to Nascimento, it must be said that they miss the whole
point:? There?s no need to put ?other? in quotation marks.
<<<No, most "other" countertenors only uses a narrow vibrato, producing a thin
voice that is barely hearable - such as David Daniels in his version of
"Ombra mai fu" - consequently, such kind of voice cannot disturb the
ear (although there is still many who can`t stand countertenors -
prefering tenors and sopranos instead), but it can`t impress, either.>>>
No need to put ?other? in quotation marks. It should be ?use? not
?uses.? Beginning with ?consequently? make a new sentence. Rewrite for
clarity; for example: ?Consequently, such voices can?t disturb the
ear, but can?t impress, either.? Cut the stuff in parenthesis, since
it is unnecessary.
<<<In fact, little human remains in such a voice - it sounds more like a
tiny flute. >>>
Replace ?little human remains? with ?there is little humanity?
<<<But what is a single flute compared to an orchestra?? >>>
No double question marks in a scholarly piece. One will do ?
<<<Nascimento does the same thing in "Contates et Sonates", proving that
he too very well can sound as a vibratoless countertenor, although not
quite, as the sound of his timbre even here is more mellow and rich,
despite it`s very narrowness, than that of a falsettist.>>>
It?s unclear what you mean by ?does the same thing.? How about this
instead: ?In ?Contates et Sonates,? Nascimento proves that he, too,
can sound as vibratoless as a countertenor?although his timbre is more
mellow and rich, despite it?s narrowness, than that of a flasettist.?
<<<It is especially
because his first recordings, "Cantates et Sonates", are so rare and hard
to find that most of those who heard him only had his "Melodies
bresiliennes" to refer to. As such, many would be surprised how
different he sounds here. Surely, it is very hard to tell how a singer
would sound performing a
Baroque repertoire out of such songs as these - at first, trying to guess
how he would sound at Baroque repertoire, it would seem
that "Cancao do poeta do seculo" and "Cantigas" were as credible
examples, due to their relative closeness - but again, those who think
so will discover they were wrong - Nascimento sounds significantly
less powerful and even more narrow performing the Scarlatti Arias. In
fact, so powerless he sounds that I wish he added some more
"loudness" to his singing here.
>>>
This seems unnecessary. I would cut it. You?ve really already proved
all these things; I don?t think you need to mention them again.
<<<
And finally, it is ruther uncommon for countertenors to perform the
repertoire that employs full chestvoice, such as some native folklore,
Wagnerian operas and especially Neapolitan songs, mostly because of
their inability to provide a conviencing, vibrato-rich chest voice in the
soprano range. >>>
Misspelling: rather, not ruther. Let?s clean this up; how about: ?It?s
rather uncommon for countertenors to perform in a full chest voice,
like that used in some native folk songs, Wagnerian operas, and
Neapolitan songs?mostly because they cannot produce a convincing,
vibrato-rich chest voice in the soprano range.? Note the corrected
spellings.
<<<And when they do that on rare occasions, such as
Andreas Scholl in "O sole mio" and Christofellis in "Azulao" etc, they
continue to use a style that is only suited for the Baroque repertoire -
simply because they can`t do otherwise. >>>
In scholarly articles, don?t begin sentences with ?and.? Again, let?s
clean this up for clarity; how about ?When they do manage to do this
(as Andreas Scholl does in ?O Sole Mio? and Christofellis does in
"Azulao?), they continue using a style only suited for Baroque
repertoire, simple because they can?t do otherwise.?
<<<This corrupt the original message of the song - such kind of music
was meant to impress by use of a powerfull, emotional voice,
eventually with a portion of
"harshness" and "cracking" from time to time - representing a natural,
warm, human sound and display of emotions.>>>
The word should be ?corrupts.? The rest of the sentence is very
unclear. I think you mean: ?This corrupts the original message of the
song; such music was designed to impress by the use of a powerful,
emotional voice, even using occasional cracking or harshness from time
to time. In short, a natural, warm, human display of emotions.?
<<<Nascimento however, with his unique and voluminous voice, was
able to do both - his voice was endowed with a potentiality of singing
almost everything there is. >>>
Comma after ?Nascimento.? Period after ?both.? ?Potentiality? is
incorrect; try ?endowed with the ability to sing almost anything.? Or,
?endowed with the potential to sing nearly anything.?
<<<The falsettists, on the other hand, are
generally bound to the simple and polyphonic style - thin, often nasal
and forced headvoice, almost no vibrato and no chest notes - any
singer having a natural voice in such register could easily sing this
way, with a much more conviencing effect, in my opinion.>>>
Cut the word ?the? at the beginning of the sentence. Try something
like this: ?Falsettists, on the other hand, are generally bound to the
simple and polyphonic style?thin, often nasally, a forced head voice,
almost no vibrato, and no chest notes.? I don?t understand your last
sentence at all. Do you mean to say that any singer can sing like a
falsettist, only better? Or do you mean to say that any singer could
sing better than the average falsettist? Or?:?
You?ve got a very interesting article here?one that will be well
received by singers and music historians. Once you brush up the
English, you can be very proud of the article. Do be careful of your
spelling. I tried to note most of the misspellings, but there may be
others. Note that head voice and chest voice are always two words, not
one. You can check your spelling online, for free, with
SpellCheck.net, a spell checker: http://www.spellcheck.net/
In order to make this article more ?scholarly,? I would also include a
bibliography at the end. (A bliography is simply a listing of the
books or other documentation you?ve used, complete with dates,
publishers, etc. To see how to compile a bibliography, see
?Bibliography,? Oradell Public School,
http://www.intac.com/~aroldi/bibliography6.html ) Since you aren?t
using any direct quotes, statistics, etc., I don?t believe you need to
use footnotes or endnotes.
Good job! And good luck!
Regards,
Kriswrite
Research Strategy:
Researcher's personal knowledge |
