Short unreleased bit of Sixteen Going on Seventeen Reprise

Only the vocals to the opening of the title song were cut. I'd have loved to hear Julie sing them, but I think it was the right choice.

kjlsdkfsklfj

See here's the thing. I adore Julie. I know her work inside and out, and for me her voice is the paramount best of her talents. I generally prefer her voice from the 70s on because she finally started to play around with the balance of emotion versus technique, and got steadily better at finding that middle ground, instead of just singing clean-cut all the time. This means that I don't often listen to her film soundtracks anymore because so much of it is contained to the characters she is portraying and thus is really very limited (though excellent), and she's done later renditions of nearly everything I enjoy that are eons better because she had the freedom to be the artistic master that she is.

But, damn. I forget how mind-blowingly pristine her voice is. This song is one of two or three that always reminds me of it.

I used to prefer her soundtracks and early solo albums, and every now and then it is really great to go back to them (For some reason I laugh like a madman at Tom Pilibi....), but I like it when she makes my heart hurt, haha, and she got reeeeeal good at that later on. If I was still singing, I'd be listening to her early technical stuff day in and day out, though, I definitely agree with you there. That flawless diction and perfect pitch makes it so easy to learn from her. 

I will say, though, it reminds me of how Madame Stiles-Allen wouldn't let her sing emotional pieces because she got too wound up and she didn't want Julie to wreck her voice. I would be interested to hear her discuss how she balanced that later on in her career as a singer.

Just took another listen to the song. It's her vibrato that makes everything sound so pristine

Hahaha, I left out her Broadway recordings for a reason. Those, I think, are more representative of what she was capable of as a singer and actress together (particularly Camelot), which carried into her later singing, and they are definitely overall Broadway gold standards. While I prefer the more mature timbre in her voice that she has for the Camelot OBC (which mirrors how she sounded vocally for the next decade), I definitely agree with you about the MFL OBC recording being a good representation of her younger, thinner soprano. I know people who prefer the OLC recording of MFL, as does Julie, because the recording quality was far superior by then, and following my own logic, I should like it better too, especially because it's so obvious that she knows Eliza now, but I can hear just how wrecked her voice had become at that point from all the strain, and it pains me to listen to it, particularly "Just You Wait" and "I Could Have Danced All Night." I prefer not to, and generally stick with the OBC recording.

As wonderful as that prelude is, ringing with such truth (haha, puns), to my critical editor's eye, it's redundant and basically gives you the song before she sings the song. If it weren't for the fact that they blocked this song as a heartfelt conversation between mother and daughter, it might work, but when what follows the initial stanza is so much deeper and richer (and honestly, less frivolous) while also telling a very personal story, that is most likely why it was cut. It feels non-sequitur, and to my view, unnecessary, and more suited to something a bit more, I dunno, precious. One of the greatest things to TSOM's credit in my opinion is that when push comes to shove, they show way more than they tell, and what's told is carefully considered, even in song. Never forgetting that they did their utmost best to remove as much saccharine content as possible. I would say that first stanza qualifies.

Just my two cents.

I remember reading a biography of Julie some years back, in which she was quoted as saying she had a very white voice. It took me a while to understand what she meant, but I think she meant that she has a voice which is far more typical of a Caucasian person than, say a negro or African-American.

I assume this is because when she sings, her larynx resonates with very few frequencies, thus giving it a 'clear'sound, the 'pristine' effect you talked about above, whereas African-Americans tend to have a broader range of frequencies, giving them a mellower sound, like Ella Fitzgerald or Nina Simone.

Your expert comments?

Same as what utility_singer said. Julie talks about this extensively in her autobio (apparently to the point of boredom and cluelessness to non-singers, but I wouldn't know... I thought it was excellent) and basically what she's saying when she says that she has a "white" voice is that she has a very clean, crisp sound, so she doesn't have the ability to sustain something like an operatic role, which plenty of Caucasians succeed at. I think the best illustration for how she describes her voice would probably be the difference between a handbell and say, the Liberty Bell tolling (or any classic church bells, for that matter). She has a very singular, sharp sound with a tiny bit of vibrato, but nothing near the depth of tone and vibration that you can get from a totally different singer.

That's interesting (although a little confusing to someone like me used to the term 'white noise', which is anything but clear and has LOTS of overtones!)

This may help-----a handbell, a flute, a clarinet, a trumpet, a piano, a violin and a human voice can all produce the same note----it is the 'color' that allows you to identify which instrument it is. That's very a simplistic, but basic, way to think of it.

Not sure I would agree with "powerful", as even Julie herself spoke of not being able to tackle operatic pieces because her voice lacked the power required. But the rest seems accurate, and the two octave slide can be heard in Le Jazz Hot.

I'll come back to comment more later as I'm on my phone, but I have to add that Julie herself would contest that she could move about her registers with ease. It took her serious work and training to pull off what the rest of us consider effortless, especially if she hadn't been singing for a while. She was once on record of asking Barbra Streisand how she could sing so well, and Babs said, "Oh, shit, I just do it!" and Julie couldn't wrap her head around being able to sing without a struggle. Kind of ironic that her greatest gift has always been somewhat of a bear for her.

the "technical term" for the quality that distinguishes between different "tone colors" is timbre. I'm not really sure how to explain it well but I'm sure if you google timbre someone will explain it far better than I can. however, I do visualize music quite distinctly in terms of both color and texture; as I said, it's a synesthetic kind of thing, and I'm sure it's different for everyone, and that's why it makes so much sense to me that julie describes her voice as white.

as for that study, bluesatinsashes , I actually have a difficult time wrapping my head around that. as far as I understand it, timbre is mostly a result of all the frequencies (most of which are overtones) in the sound, with the actual pitch that we hear determined by the peak frequency. with this in mind, it seems to me like the beginning of the note (which is more of a characterization of the physical properties and appropriate technique of whatever instrument is being played) would help, but you should still be able to tell from the middle of the note. buuuut I've never taken any kind of acoustics class so keep in mind this is just my general understanding/thoughts

anyway, back to the topic at hand - yes, I believe julie's description is mostly meant to describe her voice as being somewhat thinner and lighter than what is required for most opera. put her next to most any professional operatic singer and you'd definitely understand what she meant

BlueSatinSashes, I'm afraid my computer skills are no match for yours and I cannot get a link to work. However, try this website:

www.divadevotee/2011/09/julie andrews vocal range profile. Have fun!

I had to search high and low for the proper word to "start sound". The proper term (terms in this case) is "attack and release". The paper can be found here: jrm.sagepub.com/content/23/1/35.abstract



Unfortunately, it's only the abstract. I tried to get a hold of the full paper through my university's library website but my login expired. The downside of not being a student anymore!

So it looks like it was not only the attack that was removed removed from the recording, it was also the release that was removed. When a single note is played, we can map it out as such: 1) the attack (start sound) 2) decay 3) sustain 4) release

One time I tuned into the radio and entered midway through a piece (this is a classical radio station, btw) where a note was being held. I initially thought it was a singer holding their note but when the musician continued on with the rest of their piece, I realized it was an oboe that was playing the whole time  

END OF NERDY MUSICAL RAMBLING

Rats! It doesn't work! I tried entering www.divadevotee/2011/09/julie andrewsvocalrangeprofile but that didn't work either.

I thought it was an F6 that she hit in Polonaise Mignon? Anyways, close enough. It's quite astounding that a 12 year-old can reach that high with such clarity (and the notes in that cadenza were disjunctive!)

Whistle range...I don't think it means actual whistling. Honestly, it doesn't even sound like singing anymore. It almost sounds like the singer is squeaking. Mariah Carey does it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistle_register

Mariah Carey whistle range compilation: www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF6hEhJwhxk

Oh dear, we've really gone off on a tangent...