ITF, I absolutely agreed with everything you wrote except that one line.

Singers from the same family have no greater odds of blending well than equally great singers who are unrelated. Blend is more about how multiple voices compliment each other and less about how much the individual voices sound the same.

Doug wrote:
“If I have the same or very similar equipment with which to create musical sounds as my genetically related family members, it’s obvious that the blend/timbre of my harmony with them has a good chance of being superior to people who DON’T have the similarly constructed equipment.”

Doug,
A set of siblings MIGHT be able to produce very similar timbres due to physical similarities…assuming the DNA from their parents combines in a similar fashion. I wouldn’t disagree if that were the limit of your point. I disagree when you extend it to blend, though, because a great vocal blend is MUCH more than producing the same or very similar vocal timbres at different pitches.

There’s simply too many variables in play. If you put two great singers together, related or not, the blend is often LESS than the sum of its parts. Other times, when you put four average singers together, related or not, the resulting blend is greater than the sum of its parts. This is rare, but it happens.

A good blend has as much to do with CONTRASTING the other singers in the ensemble as it does with sounding similar. When Amy Grant records some of her own background vocal parts, for example, you can tell she has deliberately changed her tone so the end result will be pleasing to the ear and not sound like two Amy Grants singing a duet.

Here’s a stab at a food analogy…
When you hear the words “tomato juice” or “ketchup,” you get a certain specific taste in mind. Now, you may love tomato juice, but when you hear the word “pizza,” the mind reels with all the possible tastes that can be combined. The blend of a pizza includes bread, sauce, cheese, veggies and/or meat. You taste it all at once and react with approval or disgust.

It’s the same way with vocals.

I’ve heard a few “one man quartet” recordings. The results are typically less than stunning, because the voice is the same on every part.

If “blend that can only be accomplished by families” is a true observation, then a guy harmonizing with himself in four parts SHOULD be the absolute best form of male quartet singing on the planet.

But that’s clearly not the case. Even when it’s pretty good, it’s never much more than a novelty.

Family members have the capability of blending better than other people, but that doesn’t mean they necessarily will or that they still don’t need to work at it.

I’ve heard brothers blend very well, and I’ve heard brothers that didn’t blend as good as the cricket, piano, and Uncle Bob.

I sang barbershop in competition (entry level) for several years. In answer to DBM’s last question, I would say no. Blend is something that you learn to do. You don’t need to be related, but it certainly can help!

And now I see that Avery just did an excellent update on this post. Man! I don’t get the updates with the feedreader!

I can elaborate now.

Doug’s tactic here was to first insist that he and I were discussing two different things. We weren’t.

He then proceeds to issue a lecture demonstrating his knowledge of the one topic where I happen to be well versed…music theory.

I believe Doug is an English professor. If so, he could use a refresher in the positioning of nouns and adjectives.

Doug, within the sentence containing the phrase “level of harmony quality,” the word “quality” is the noun. “Harmony,” in coming just before “quality,” modifies that noun, and so it’s the adjective. Nice try at diverting the discussion as if “harmony” is the noun in this case. I would submit that “harmony quality” and “blend” are more or less the same.

You missed the boat when you tried to equate blend with timbre, though. At least in this context. We were obviously discussing how well a group of related voices blend.

“Blend” in that context, is NOT the same thing as timbre. A trumpet producing a single note has a distinctive timbre (or “tone color,” or “characteristic overtones”) that sets it apart from, say, a soprano or a violin producing the same pitch. “Blend,” by definition, is a combination, and you were obviously discussing how WELL two or more voices blend together. ie “quality” of “harmony.”

So, now I’ve hopefully established that I was never “confusing blend and harmony.”

In all of Doug’s hemming and hawing about genetics making people sound the same, the key line in his response that I take issue with is: “it’s not at all difficult to see that singers from the same biological family share certain physiological traits and characteristics that will naturally predispose them to create better blended sounds than nonbiological singers.”

I wasn’t discussing whether or not families are better at hitting pitches precisely. To be technical, it’s still “harmony” even if they aren’t…classic case…Happy Goodmans…two or more tones sounding at the same time is harmony, be it dissonant or consonant.

The myth you’ve perpetrated, Doug, is that family members have more natural similarities of tone and can therefore create more pleasing sounds when singing together. This is simply not true.

At best, the advantage families who grew up in the same area have is similar diction. You referenced this with the Hoppers. Pronouncing a word with the same accent and emphasis can go a long way towards a pleasing blend.

Consider the Ruppes compared to the original LordSong, though. When Kim Lord formed a group with her husband and a third unrelated singer, they had a quality of blend that happened right out of the gate. Kim’s ability to blend didn’t take any hit in quality whatsoever during the years she wasn’t singing with her mother and sister. By the time Amber joined the group, LordSong was starting every concert a cappella with “Lord Of The Dance,” proving they could blend with terrific results.

Sure, the Ruppes always sounded great together and I’m sure the reunited siblings who now make up LordSong sound great together, too. I haven’t heard LordSong since the changes, but regarding the Ruppes, it was never a unique TYPE of blend that came from them being related. Their sound was unique due to the fact that they are all, individually, great singers.

Regarding the Martins, It wasn’t simply a situation where vocal singing styles were better matched. I didn’t say it as precisely earlier, though what I meant was clearly implied…the blend of vocal tones was better with Lancaster.
————–
By the way, is genetics ever touted as being the reason why barbershop quartets blend so well? More so than Southern Gospel even, barbershop is a genre where the quality of vocal blend is a paramount defining factor in determining whether a quartet is any good or not. I don’t follow barbershop enough to know if this myth has been pushed in that genre or not. I’m just curious.