Talk:Fach

This article needs references. The assignment of well-known singers to particular fach categories seems to be haphazard, and the description of the Fach system needs the attention of an expert or scholar of the system. Ssilvers

I disagree with the anonymous comments above and with adding the expert tags. The assignment of well-known singers is in no way haphazard. It is accurate. The article itself is a very good explanation of the German fach system. (It is possibly a translation from the German Wikipedia.) I am therefore removing the tag. (I do agree that references would be desirable but that of course does not require the expert tag.) - Kleinzach 14:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I neglected to add my signature, which I have now added. What makes you think that the assignment of the singers to the fach categories is "accurate"? Certainly, some of them are recognized to be assiciated with one or another of the fach categories, but others are, at best, the article writer's opinion. Thanks for adding the new sources. How closely does the article follow the two sources that you just added? I have consulted some voice teachers at a nearby music school who are suspicious of the reliability of the facher assignments and some of the descriptions. I am not an expert in this, and I think the entry could use the attention of an expert. Ssilvers 04:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The onus is on you to identify any specific inaccuracies so that these can be corrected. That's the way WP works. It's all linked as well. You can check whether the examples are correct easily enough. However I think you will find it is all correct. Also note that Fach is only one system of distinguishing voices. - Kleinzach 08:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that's not the way WP works. Any unsourced information may be deleted (WP:v); the burden of proof is on the one who wants to keep it. (I'm not Ssilvers, BTW - see my IP info). --194.145.161.227 13:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you do not think this entry needs the attention of an expert (what harm could the tag do?), why should there be separate articles on fach and "vocal weight?" Ssilvers 12:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indiscriminate tagging is a form of vandalism. I don't put tags on articles about molecular biology or baseball because I don't know about molecular biology or baseball. For the purposes of this article - having made more than 6,000 edits on the subject, I guess I would count as an expert. As for your question about Fach and vocal weight. Please read the articles. They are on different subjects. - Kleinzach 12:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such definition of vandalism, and Ssilvers doesn't seem to be totally unacquainted with music. You are being somewhat arrogant. --194.145.161.227 13:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Complete Rewrite

This article is incomplete, contradictory and provides misleading information as expanded in the comment below. There's urgent need to rewrite this entire thing properly with proper references. Some descriptions are repeating, indicating that at least some of them are wrongfully placed there, while many other descriptions are left blank. The information about notes the voice types can reach is completely wrong and exclusive (no mention of whistle register, for instance).

I deplore anonymous comments and editing and disagree entirely with the comment above. Whistle register is not a term used in the Anglo opera world - let alone the German one. This article is complete and referenced and is largely a translation of the German Wikipedia article. I am reverting the tag. If you have some specific comments or critcisms of the article please go ahead and make them, sign your comments and the article can be corrected. Please do not use a blanket smear of the text or it will appear that you are motivated by anti-German feelings which are completely inappropriate from a NPOV. Remember this is not the only way of classifying voices - it is the German way. - Kleinzach 12:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-German feelings?! Having abandoned Macedonian, Serbo-Croatian, Jewish, and Russian history-related topics, I don't believe I am encountering nationalist hysteria even in such as peaceful area as music! --194.145.161.227 13:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

good article

I should point out i do not have a problem with the article's text, i do think it's very well written and much better sourced than anything else on the English 'pedia about this subject, my problem is however that the other articles clearly might be better off being merged with this one. I won't do it just like that (I believe a massive rewrite of the other articles which are lacking and dire needs to be done first). Vocal weight is exactly the same thing, by not having it all in one article we create a segregated wikipedia German/English/Italian and so on it should all be covered in one article with redirects. This should be covered in brief under "singing" as well though, and it's not which is frankly - awful. And why does the baritone/bass/tenor (i can go on) article not mention German Fach? The wiki is awfully biased towards the poppy SLS crud and it seems to be perverting the entire thing. --I'll bring the food 01:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bass-baritone

The article references two versions. My book talks of the Bass-Bariton. However there are two versions, one in the bass section, one in the Baritone section. My hunch is that they are one and the same, and that somebody has worked the obvious out - the bass baritone comes in a form capable of a very lower E at mild volume and the type capable of higher G# max but no lower e. I suggest we look at the original sources and consider this one out, as this is going to be confusing for the reader.--I'll bring the food 02:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the article section on "Heldenbariton / Hoherbass" was wrong. This is not a bass-baritone role, it is a full dramatic baritone role. In contrast is the "Kavalierbariton / Dramatic Baritone" is a light dramatic baritone. At least this is my guess. However the ranges for hoherbass before and the role ideas were completely wrong and seem to have been made in respect to the name hoherbass. It seems an assumption was made on the bass part. This was incorrect guesswork by whomever did it. Hoherbass means dramatic low voice. It does not however refer to the bass-baritone. That is a dramatic and (even) lower voice.--I'll bring the food 20:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article section as above is actually wrong in that the two words mean different things. Heldenbaritone is an exciting hero baritone, hoherbass is a bass baritone. Tsk.--I'll bring the food 22:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Graphics

I just added some graphics for the ranges. The article said something about the ranges in sheet music, and I was dismayed to find that there were no graphics to illustrate the ranges. After reading the talk page, I see there is some contention about some things, so if they should need to be changed for whatever reason, just let me know, and I'll make the necessary changes. Eventually. — Music Maker 20:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parsifal

Parsifal is a very heavy heldentenor role on a par with Tristan and Siegfried. I myself have read over all of Wagner's heldentenor roles. Tristan is the heaviest with Siegfried coming second and Parsifal third. Kundry might not have a massive amount to sing but the final parts of the second act are among the most heavy music ever written for soprano.Emperor7 17:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]