NY Times, vocal range

[hsu@uicsrd.CSRD.UIUC.EDU (William Tsun-Yuk Hsu)]

After visualizing on an imaginary keyboard how wide 8 octaves is, I too
agree that it's possibly humanly impossible (or at least highly improbable)
to have an 8 octave range. When I studied basic 4-part vocal harmony
(writing, not singing) we were supposed to stick to a low of two F's below
middle C for the basses and two G's above middle C for sopranos. That's
pretty wimpy, but even if you extend the range another octave in either
direction you don't come close to 8 octaves. 

I've accompanied a truly awesome amateur bass and *he* can't hit 3 F's
below middle C.

One of the NY Times that came out around the 6th has three best of '86
lists from Robert Palmer, Jon Pareles, and somebody else. Interesting
items include Atomizer and Evol. Palmer's article is a surprisingly sharp
(tho subtly so) criticism of pop music consumers who complain about
the blandness of top 40 while not bothering to take a more active role
in their search for new sounds. Something we've bitched about for a long
time, of course, but it's good to see it in mainstream press, and from
a writer I've badmouthed enough in the past for timidity and conformity.

Bill