I've sort of stayed out of this conversation because, I've seen too many of these turn into arguments about Semantics.. what does the word mean, rather than discussions of attributes on a agreed definition between those discussing that definition.
I guess i'll get it all out at once ----
Lets say we have these professional football players , and to keep it a tad more simple, lets say they are all running backs.
We want to answer "who is fastest"
There are a number of definitions and without a definition we can't answer the question.
We can put them on a track with a stop watch in running shoes and emprically measure their time.. but even here we need to decide if we're asking for the fastest over 20 yards, 40 yards or 100 yards. The common convention is 40 yards and without any adjective I'd assume the discussion would be about 40 yards...but I can talk about 40 yards specifially and say this guy is faster in the forty and someone else says that doesn't make any sense ,, my guy is faster in the 100 yard dash.
That's sort of silly to bring up the 100 yard dash if I'm talking about the 40 yard dash.. I can agree with the other on the 100 yard dash without it weaking my point that the guy is faster in the 40.
It could also make sense to time people at the various lenghts running in full pads...they take away more from some people than others.. but then you get into quibbles if they're wearing different pads or cleats than they'd actually wear in the game etc.
Some people will say... X is way slower than Y because X can cut and weave and make people miss more with that speed.
Well .. that is all fine and good... but that is a different question than how fast he can run the 40.
We can get in a whole argument about what is more important and I'd certainly agree that in the end the speed in cutting and stuff is where the buck stops...
... but just because the buck stops with what happens on the field doesn't mean that coaches won't measure different subsections of their overall aptitude ... they have some measures like cutting or tire course that try to compare other types of speed combined with agilty. There is a reason to measure each even if that doesn't ultimately determine the better running back.
Lukily people are realy respectful here and qualify their statments. Elsewhere on the web If i started a thread on a football forum, "Fastest Speed in the 40" and people kept coming in and telling me that the 40 doesn't matter or even contradict people who say X is faster in Y in the 40 with he's faster on the field ... when that wasn't the discussion.. it an get frustrating.
Vocal Range can mean a lot of different things. It is not something clearly like the 40 yard dash on the same track with the runners fastest shoes etc.
Still valid conversations can be had if on more agreed definitions of types of range without impuning a singer's over-all skill without being better at a chosen definiton
-----
On closer to Haley
Haley can land notes perfectly on pitch a great distance from the preceding note. If that is an attribute we're looking for.. ability to execute that sort of launch at a broad range she might be among the very best.
Haley has an incredible head voice that both extends her range and makes choosing to use her head voice interchangable with the high end of her full voice to subtitute it to get round sounds and tones she can't get at that point in her normal voice.
Haley's head voice is so incredible - like the finest struck crystal bell - that I would count it as fully part of her range while the head voice for most female singers is an asside or novelty skill of there's that they can't incorporate seamlessly.
In addition to that sumblime beuatiful starting range of her head voice, Haley has the ablity to perfectly land notes even an octave higher than that with the sound of a pure Piccolo .. not the screech some singers have up there. I'd never count that screech in other's range but there is a strong argument to include that perfect whistle of Haley's.
---
Those things being said (dexterity to land a pitch at range above last note, including a gorgeous and fully toned head voice for her but not for other singers who can't do it well).
... alll that being said.. so don't go give me a "but she has a great head voice" .. .I just said that.
By a more traditional definition of range -- perhaps an assumed 40 yard dash - Haley's range isn't as wide as many other of the legendary singers.. even handfuls of Idol contestants.
I wish I had a clear 40 yard dash definition but this is what I'd put out there as a definition:
--- the abilty to sing arpegios in each of the vowel sounds ooo's (i.e tool) and ahhhs (father) ays (days) or eys (hey) .. o's (Oh boy) mi's (me first) without diminshed or markably changed tone at the top end. Once a singer's voice starts loosing it's richness, you stop counting it. And all of that in full voice not head voice
That sort of definition isn't written in stone, but it is the most common way people discuss range. Sometimes you might qualify it as best range in an operatic voice or best range as a rock singer ...but generally it's the full voice.
Yeah. full voice is meaningless for Marvin Gaye who made his artistry almost entirely in his falsetto -- but people would discussion Marvin Gayes range would also mention that it was the range in his falsetto.
---
OK so here are my observations with with the definition of Haley's full voice, not counting dexeterity in landing an octive higher or head voice -
-- when Haley reaches for the higher notes in standard Diva songs. ..and even the higher notes on her album that she does not sing in her head voice --- she can't keep the tone she has 3 or 4 tones lower. I've noticed that she's often using an "eh" or an "a" as in Apple) or that sound creeps in. If she wants an "oo" or an "ah as in father" that rings like she'd hit the note lower .. she can't really do it (or it might hurt her voice alot when she does ... the top of undone is tricky like that for her I think ..... I bet she'd use a rounder "un" at the top in her toneful vibrato if she could easily...the un get some eh and a mixed in and gets raspy. You might fairly argue that as a song writer she writes songs that sound good with a raspier sharper side at the very top... and I could buy that.
None of that takes away from her singing abilty one bit.
Like others have said, she isn't a soprano and or doesn't have the range to sing soprano parts as they're written.
I'll end with this:
She Sings the Star Spangled banner as well as I've ever heard it done. The song demands restraint and varied emotion embracing different words -- perhaps with different thoughts in the minds of each singer - but each phase has to point to different emotions - the song does not get too high for her because she can land the final notes in her crystal clear head voice...and have it be a better note the 99% of the others
Even with a better full arpegio range Pia's Star Spangled banner is stilf for me.. strong clear notes start to finish without much invitation or help in having the listerner move from emotion to emotion. Pia's strong voice and consistent range and abilty to land "free" in her full voice doesn't do much good for people who want an oddysy that brings to mind the struggle of resolve and open ideals of our prior generations. But I'd still say after hearing that ... that girl PIA has an incredible range.
BUT PIA's range or any singer's range.. would influence peoples song choices. Jessica Sanchez could sing a pure Whitney Houston imitation better than any contestant we've heard on the show. What's the point of imitation.. creativity is better? Well I'm discussing how good she can execute Whitney Houston's range.. not who can interpret the song better.
A writer might write a song that they wanted sung exactly in the style of Whitney Houston .. full of diva notes sustained ... the sustained note though have feeling as the tone at the beggining might get warmer at the end while staying on the same pitch which Jessica could do but Pia really couldn't quite do as well. That doesn't' make Jessica have a better range exactly because PIA or Hollies tone might be quiet loud and full up there but Jessica had a bit more up on the same notes to transition the openenss of the notes.
One song that is right up PIA"s alley is America the Beautiful and that is one while I'm sure Haley could do a fine rendition of but less of what that song really calls for. I sort of want America the beautiful sung with a strong steady resolve start to finish.. almost like a horn fanfare. If Pia does any emotion well it is reslove and steghtn. The words themselves paint the picture... and getting creative with Purple Mountains Magesty would take away from it's ..err.. magesty.
I wouldn't want Haley singing Ave Maria which is so beautiful in it's operatic form and love so much that way.. well it just wouldn't make any sense for me to try to do a workable job in a soft way if i was planning a wedding or a funeral. I think Ave Maria is traditionally written for Mezzo Soprano s and I also think the high notes are notes that are in the high end of Haley's range but not beyond her.. yet they're a bit too high to give those notes justice. (and Haley isn't trained in an operatic voice either ... which is a whole different skill)
So there is a place for the limited definitions of range that would be defined by singing the highest arpeggios at a full strength and full tone you'd have an octave lower... just as if you have a situation where a running back needs to make a 40 yard dash to pull a linebacker off coverage of another player you might want the guy who runs the 40 for that. Generally you'd want the running-back with the most skill, though.. not a slightly better 40 yard speed... as long as his speed didn't fall below a threshold needed.
