Every parent eventually faces the question, “Why is the sky blue?” from their kids. I heard it this past weekend from my 14-year old daughter.
Since she’s now in high school I figured I’d better have a scientifically plausible answer, so I mentioned how the atmosphere breaks up the sunlight into its component colors, and the longer, redder lightwaves usually pass right through, unseen, while the shorter bluer rays, hitting the air molecules, are scattered more in the sky and that’s what we see.
Anyway, now I’m wondering if I can’t use the whole “longer wave/shorter wave” idea for today’s Soundcheck Smackdown, a silly one even by our standards, on which is better – high singing voices or low. (And yes, for everyone now leaving comments on the page to the effect that we need both types of voice and both have their own advantages and beauties, I agree. Thanks for not playing our game…)
As far as I can tell, there’s no contest: deeper voices are simply superior. It’s just science. Lower soundwaves are the ones that, like red lightwaves, pass through. Higher notes, with shorter soundwaves, get bounced around. So when your neighbor’s stereo is on, you hear the thud of the drums and the throb of the bass through the wall, but probably not much of the voice – unless it’s Barry White or someone like that. So those deep voices are getting through – they hit you in a more direct way then those inadequately-sized, tiny-waved upper voices.
It’s just science, people.
Plus, every guy knows that a girl with a husky voice, say, a girl just getting over a cold, sounds undeniably, scientifically sexier.
Tell us: do you prefer high singing voices or low?
Leave a comment.
John Schaefer has hosted Soundcheck since the show’s inception in 2002. He has also hosted and produced WNYC’s radio series New Sounds since 1982 (“The No. 1 radio show for the Global Village” – Billboard) and the New Sounds Live concert series since 1986.
Comments [1]
Not only do I prefer a lower singing voice, I prefer listening to a lower speaking voice, especially on TV. I will change the news from the shreaky voice Katie Couric to the silky lower voice of Diane Sawyer to hear the exact same information from a person who doesn't give me a physically irritating reaction. I believe that all sound physically impacts our bodies in a soothing or stressing way and for me, my upper rib cage tenses like I am in a high stress situation when I have to listen to high speaking voices.
When I listen to lower speaking voices, I "hear" them at my solar plexus and react with an instant relaxation.
Psychosomatic? Perhaps. But next time you go to listen to the nightly news, switch channels, close your eyes and feel rather than listen to the information. Which reporter would you rather hear bad news from?
And as for music, While Mariah was soaring in the sound rafters, her music was (thankfully) grounded and listenable by the addition of bass tones to offset the dog range ear piercers. YouTube some Julie London or even the new artist- Jane Monheit and fall into the river of butterscotch tones.
Leave a Comment
Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.