Vocal Range - Some Thoughts

Looking at my new All Woman Jazz book, the tessitura or vocal range of the songs is from E below middle C to top Eb (two octaves). 

If I were to look at a Soprano compilation book, the range would probably be from G below middle C to top C or even D or above  (just over 2 octaves, but set higher).

Why?

-Do jazz ladies sing lower than other lady singers because more jazz singers smoke?

-Are jazz singers more relaxed because of their enhanced creative freedom, thus enabling lower notes to flow?

-Are jazz songs lower cos they're traditionally sung by men?

-Can black ladies sing lower for some reason?
Eg. were white ladies more likely to be classically trained, and did classical training teach ladies that 'low notes are for the boys'?

-Is the Classical industry infused with glass ceilings of gender stereotypes, pigeon holes that don't suit, thus someone decided that all women should only sing from G and above, regardless of their individual range?

-Did the invention of electronically amplified sound (ie the microphone) enable previously quiet lower notes in ladies to be heard better?

Hmmm!

A friend has said to me that when we train classically, our range can get smaller. I silently didn't like this idea and now, I have decided I openly disagree with it.

I have a radical theory.

I think that in the classical industry, a singer is sometimes forced or encouraged into pigeon-holing themselves to a particular vocal category.

An assessment is made once someone is of a certain age and training level, to determine which box a singer fits into: soprano, mezzo soprano or alto?

And later, coloratura soprano, dramatic soprano, lyric soprano, soubrette, etc. etc.

I have thought to myself, what box do I fit into? 

I decided I must be a lyric soprano because I can sing up to a top C (and an Eat a push), and down to an E below middle C (or a C at a push).  3 1/2 octaves when I work at range extension.

One teacher though I was a mezzo soprano. Another firmly rejected this. So I got the idea that to be a mezzo was a bad thing, underselling myself, denying myself top notes. And I feel this may have been right at the time - I had a residual complex about singing high back then and I am glad I went along the soprano path now. 

My current thoughts are this:

I feel that it is important for all ladies to develop their top notes - to try and use the soprano tessitura as far as they comfortably can.  BUT, I feel that the soprano repertoire doesn't cater for ladies' lower ranges adequately. I feel that it denies ladies lower notes that they might have.

Is this a feminist issue?

Do even altos and mezzos have enough lower notes written into music for them?

Maybe in the acoustic environment of Classical music, the lower notes wouldn't carry as far. But if they were developed?

Still, for me Jazz music is now very important as it is the one genre, providing the song is in a low key, that truly enables me to use a half of my voice that I just couldn't in the Classical arena.

I often somewhat guiltily sing mezzo songs and arias, (how can I list myself as a soprano AND mezzo soprano?) but it's just not been enough..

Good old jazz :-)

I am going to cast away fears that developing my low too much will reduce my top.

I bet I CAN have it all and sing as high as I could when I was a kid maybe, but as low as an adult too...

And I feel men should do the same!