Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for musicians, students, and enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
I once heard that Percy Grainger claimed the alto saxophone was the instrument most akin to the human voice; I've heard other claims that the cello is similarly close. Are there any scientific data to back this up, whether from a timbrel/sound envelope perspective or otherwise?
Perhaps it's simply the range and the relatively soothing timbre (as opposed to, say, the viola). It's always struck me as a little pseudo-scientific, but now I'm wondering if there is in fact any evidence to support it.
I heard that claim of close similarity to the human voice for so many instruments, that I lost track, whether any one is missing: violin, viola, clarinet, even for an instrument I have never encountered before: Sarangi. Mostly these statements were from players or strong supporters of that instrument, so it is obviously considered a positive or even important property. I'm unable to agree, since the inability to transport text overshadows any similarity of sound. The Liszt transcriptions of Lieder from Schubert are masterful, but evoke quite different impressions. There are also some interesting recordings substituting the voice by a cello (e. g. by Mischa Maisky).
A somewhat scientific page is here on the basis of formant analysis.
I think Percy Grainger was perhaps referring to the range of the saxophone. Depending (very often) on gender people's singing voice more than not falls into the alto (like sax/viola) or tenor (sax/cello) range.
Wether or not they actually sound the same has to do with the timbral characteristics of the sound spectrum. Personally, I don't really think that sax sounds the same as a human voice. Of the cello, I have heard this, as is also discussed here. Although there are most certainly differences, the characteristics that seems similar appear to be: "rate and extent of vibrato, degree of aperiodicity, accuracy in pitch control, and the possibility of forming continuous streams of notes (phrases)", according to this article. If you are interested in seeing some frequency graphs, the above would be a good article to read.
I don't think it's a particularly scientific thing. Just that the sax sound is very "bendable" and can do the same sort of tricks as a human voice can. I don't personally see the same similarity in cello, though it certainly has a very beautiful, expressive sound.
It is not about if they actually sound like the human voice. They're alike because of its harmonics, both are so harmonically rich as the human voice. As a classical singer, I would say that are (again, harmonically) close as an educated voice, rather than the standard spoken voice. If course, there are some people that have a very rich voice in their natural speaking.
That's the reason.
