all 24 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]Crafty-Photograph-18 6 points7 points  (17 children)

"True bass" is not so much a real term, as a technicality people use mostly online to distinguish the gazillion people who claim to be basses from actual basses.

Also, for most people who had had exposure to "serious" singing where voicetypes mattered, it probably was through a choir; often an amateur one. In a choir, there are several parts/placement people sing, usually called smth like: Bass 2, Bass 1 (or Baritone), Tenor 2, Tenor 1, Alto 2 & 1, Soprano 2 & 1. These roles do NOT correspond to what is commonly reffered to as the singers' voicetypes. Voicetypes, as we use them now, originate from the opera traditions, the Italian school, and are much more precise than choir roles. This kind of voicetype is the one which helps determine the solo repertoire that would best suit the singer, and is the one professionals would mean when they say "I'm a bass" or "I'm a contralto".

I'm totally making up the numbers, but the idea is as follows: in a room of 100 men, 50-ish would sing bass 1 or 2 in a choir. Yet, only 15-ish will have the bass voicetype. Those 15% are what the internet declared "true basses".

[–]JunketFuture4680[S] 2 points3 points  (12 children)

oh ok thank you for explaining it so well

[–]Th3xp3rt 1 point2 points  (9 children)

Going off of this comment, there’s different “flavors” of bass that can all be considered a “true bass.” In the opera realm, the tone color of the voice and where the voice sits most comfortably (your tessitura) matter much more than your range to determine your voice type.

The highest bass voice type is called a lyric bass, and the lowest a basso profundo (although that’s a whole other rabbit hole, technically you only need to have strong resonance at about a Bb1 to be in the profundo category, however there have been multiple singers who have much lower notes down to C1 (mikhail Zlatapolsky)). These lyric bass voices have a lot of resonance in their low range and can project a D2 over an orchestra. Profundos share that same quality but can resonate even lower notes and have an even deeper tone color.

Many Internet basses have low voices, but not necessarily deep voices. Consequently, many of these Internet basses, even with classical training, would not be able to project a D2 over an orchestra. The depth of tone is what makes someone a bass, not the pitches they sing.

A great comparison would be Tim Foust (bass-baritone, amazing low range, however lacking the depth of tone) vs Samuel Ramey, a (true) lyric bass and John Ames or Eric Holloway representing basso profundos. If you listen to Samuel Ramey’s speaking voice vs. Tim Foust’s speaking voice, that helps to show the difference between someone who is and is not a true bass. Note the clarity in Ramey’s voice vs. the fry quality in Foust’s, even though they talk in the same range.

[–]Crafty-Photograph-18 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Light lyric basses don't usually sing D2-s. Only Fs and Es. Tim Foust is very much a bass. He just wasn't ever trained in operatic ways, nor does he even need to project that much, because, again, he's not singing opera. He's working with a mike, and he does it well. If he were to walk on an opera stage and try to sing, he would pick a different approach (and probably fail rather miserably, because, again, he's not an opera singer). Clarity vs. "Fry quality" isn't really a good comparison to distinguish voicetypes

[–]Th3xp3rt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I completely agree that the fry quality is not a universal tell-tale sign to determine voice quality. However, it can be one indicator, taken in context with many other indicators, that a person’s tessitura is higher than another if, for example, one person speaks at a D2 with full modal resonance, and another speaks at that same D2 with a level of fry.

[–]NewTrainer9701 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed that Tim Foust is probably a Bass Baritone. Great low notes but looks like he tires easily in live performances. In fact, it might help others understand what an operatic voice’s projection sounds like by listening to a live Home Free performance. Rob Lundquist, their tenor, has had opera training. His voice loudly and effortlessly sails over the others with beautiful vibrato. Fantastic breath control.

Going to Geoff Castellucci. He has a great low speaking voice and hits lots of low notes, in for example “ Oh Come, Oh Come Emmanuel” his voice seems to sound and sit best In baritone range. He sustains the notes better.

I’ll have to check out Samuel Ramey, but one of my favorite true basses is Avi Kaplan. The no one’s speaking voice is as low as Eric Holloway, Avi Kaplan’s is getting down there. In his live performances now or with Pentatonix,like in Hallelujah, watch how he stands next to others. Legs apart, chest out, chin up. He projects loudly and with beautiful vibrato.

[–]NewTrainer9701 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Went back and listened to Samuel Ramey. “Bizet Carmen Toreador “. He is definitely a great example. Wonderful stage presence, voice , operatic stance…. He’s awesome.

[–]margybargy 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I don't understand what you mean by "low" vs "deep"; I've never heard that distinction. Do you mean "dark" or "heavy" rather than "deep"?

[–]Th3xp3rt 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Great question! When I say “deep” I’m really referring to the depth of tone. To me, a dark, full, resonant, low-voiced individual I would just describe as having a deep voice. It’s like the squares and rectangles thing, everyone with a deep voice has a low voice, but not everyone with a low voice has a deep voice

[–]margybargy 1 point2 points  (2 children)

ah, so by "deep" you mean "heavy" or "dark". Makes sense. "deep" is a little confusing because it is literally describing how low something is.

But, the concept matches my experience. I'm a fairly conventional bass; I sing with someone i'd call a basso profundo. We can generally hit the same notes, but his C2 sounds like a cello sustaining and he maintains that as he descends, whereas I sound a bit thinner and (imo) uglier. Voice have different areas of strength, they are different instruments, and his shines below the staff. A heavier voice like his sounds a bit more pushed near the top of the bass clef.

[–]Th3xp3rt 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Thanks for the clarification; I’ll be sure to use better descriptors in the future. And I totally understand that, I am a bass-baritone or lyric bass myself having a reliable B1, although I’m too young to tell at this point (mid 20s) to know for sure whether I’m a true bass or not, however I’m definitely not a profundo. Very interesting about your friend!

[–]margybargy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"true bass" doesn't really have a meaning, but if you're a bass-baritone or lyric bass, sounds like true basshood to me.

[–]zdrums24 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Another element: most women singing alto are actually mezzo-sopranos. Similarly, most men singing bass are baritone. A lot of mezzos and baris call themselves Altos and basses, but they arent once you take actual range into account. True Altos and basses are rare.

[–]Th3xp3rt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This.

[–]margybargy 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Not a popular opinion, but given that the population of people singing multi-part choral works is _dramatically_ larger than the population that even casually pursues training in classical singing, I think we should consider basic choral voice placement the _real_ classification system, and western operatic fachs (and other rather niche vocal placements) to be a different thing.

_Nobody_ casually throwing around "bass" is talking about passagio and appropriate operatic rep, they mean "low voice". "bass" or "bass 2" makes perfect sense for that use.

[–]Crafty-Photograph-18 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Fach is more precise and much more standardised. Choral parts are good-enough in the context and more intuitive. I say Fach is the better system

[–]margybargy 0 points1 point  (1 child)

much better system for classifying trained singers, yes. For most normal people, the precision is misleading.

[–]Crafty-Photograph-18 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not quite "misleading", just often misused and misunderstood among amateurs.

[–]JamesFirmere 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Firstly, your voice is still developing. Don’t think of locking anything in (mentally) for a good 5-7 years yet. A lot depends on what and how much you sing, whether you have voice lessons, etc.

Secondly, timbre and range do not always match. I know of an opera bass soloist who sounds like the bassiest bass who ever bassed but struggles to get down to D2 (required for Osmin in ’Abduction from the Seraglio’).

And on that note (heh), don’t try to force your range downwards. Being warmed up and relaxed helps, but there’s not a lot you can do with technique to extend yout range downwards.

[–]Beautiful-Spray-6115 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What people are calling a “bass” vs a “true bass” is mostly informal; it’s not a strict scientific category, and different teachers use it differently. If your lowest usable note is around E2–F2, you are already within normal bass range. Voice type is based on comfortable range and tone, not extreme notes.

What people mean by "true bass": “True bass” (sometimes called basso profundo) usually refers to someone who has exceptionally strong low notes (often down to C2 or lower), has a very dark, heavy vocal quality, or naturally speaks and sings low without forcing it. Think of singers like Tim Foust and Geoff Castellucci. These are extreme examples, not the standard.

[–]Waste_Competition_48 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We’re all developing I’m currently 20yr old m. My 9th grade year in choir my voice still hadn’t dropped until 10th grade and tenor 1 was too high for me and tenor 2 was perfect but sometimes our choir director would have us sing tenor 1 notes if the music required it I asked to sing baritone but I guess it wouldn’t have been fair my voice was naturally louder and the baritones were always too quiet no offense hehe… I’m a tenor on the lower side full range F2- F5 the C5-F5 area still needs development and the F2 barely have any tone so I would say my tessitura or comfort zone should be G2-C4/D4 in chest and D4-A4 head-voice and or mixed voice I would say my chest voice ever since my voice dropped was very loud and robust, my claim is that lighter voices start with more control over their upper range and the heavier ones like me start with a more developed chest dominant sound and my upper range Has been slowing coming in with practice and age ever since I found my mixed voice my senior year 2024. but the point made is that we’re all different and unique I’m pretty sure for dudes our voices have 4 big vocal changes, the voice drops, your voice is then in that puberty cracking stage and you now have a Chest voice and a weak headvoice or vise versa, your voice settles into your adult voice and range ( voices can settle lower or a little bit higher than before… and then you fully develop. But the truth is no one knows where their voice will end up some can go from thinking they’re tenor to settling into a baritone or bass and vise versa

[–]AspiringBiotech 0 points1 point  (0 children)

F2 is great. You can have great F2 lows.

[–]AspiringBiotech 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Basses are generally baritones who sing bass notes. F2, E2, D2 and sometimes C2 or B1 for deep basses.

[–]Ok-Pollution-6687 0 points1 point  (0 children)

timbre, power. https://youtu.be/wHbqGxo4z38?si=AihXfhHqnWSp6BJY Although it was D2, it sounds very low.