TMV Partners

You are not logged in.


Announcement

GO HERE: www.TheModernVocalistWorld.com

ATTENTION TMV WORLD FORUM MEMBERS! YOU NEED TO GO LOGIN AND/OR REGISTER AT THE NEW AND IMPROVED TMV WORLD FORUM SYSTEM.



CLICK THIS LINK TO GO TO THE NEW FORUM. WHEN YOU ARRIVE AT THE NEW FORUM, LOGIN OR REGISTER AND THEN CLICK ON "GETTING STARTED". ALL OF THE POSTS AND TOPICS HAVE BEEN MIGRATED OVER AND EXISTING MEMBERS WILL BE LINKED BACK TO ALL THEIR POSTS IN THE NEW SYSTEM AFTER YOU LOGIN.

www.TheModernVocalistWorld.com

IF YOU ARE A NEW VISITOR THAT JUST JOINED US, YOU ARE INVITED TO COME OVER TO OUR NEW FORUM SYSTEM. CLICK THIS LINK TO GO THERE AND REGISTER.

www.TheModernVocalistWorld.com

Adverts

#1 2012-07-23 15:09:18

renee@myvoicecoach.com
TMV Forum Member
From: Nashville, TN
Registered: 2012-05-17
Posts: 103
Reputation :   
Website

Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

There was a time that I was convinced that it was beneficial to a singer to start off by learning some classsical music and technique. The idea was to use it as a reference point for techique and then make the appropriate adjustments later on for all other genres. Now I confess I feel it's more like a convenience for the classsically-trained teacher. As for the student, it's sort of like working on their golf swing in order to learn how to dunk a basketball. Both involve dropping a round object into a round hole. But they have little else in common. Have any thoughts on this?


Renee Grant-Williams

http://www.CyberVoiceStudio.com

"Shut Up And Sing"

Offline

 

2012-07-23 15:09:18

AdBot
Advertisements

#2 2012-07-23 15:31:12

FelipeCarvalho
TMV Forum Member
From: Brasil
Registered: 2011-07-28
Posts: 2889
Reputation :   61 
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I disagree completely. The technique can be applied to pop music as a trainning system.

About what others should or should not do, I can only speak for myself. And I should :). But yes, I advice it.

Offline

 

#3 2012-07-23 15:43:21

Dr.Evil
TMV Forum Member
From: Ukraine
Registered: 2012-07-15
Posts: 94
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I think that those two techniques are too different. Of cource classical singers of this forum will all say something like 'the classic technique is universal, it gives the most correct and safe skills, it developes voice better, it's good for your health :D , cures cancer and AIDS :lol: , once you'll learn classical technique it will be easy for you just to do some steps down and you will be pop-god :lol: ', because it's what all clssical singers say everywhere i looked, thay just look down on pop/jazz/rock singing, that's what they are being taught by their teachers, and their teachers learned it from teir own teachers ... It will be realy hard for a classical-trained singer to learn non-classical technique, he'll have to replace most of his skills, which are now reflexes, so it will be almost as hard as learning from the begining. Fnd if that's so, what's the purpose of losing a lot of time to learn skills, which you will have to get rid off?


Gonna conquer the world ]:-|

Offline

 

#4 2012-07-23 18:15:58

VIDEOHERE
Administrator
Registered: 2008-12-22
Posts: 7197
Reputation :   66 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

what an excellent topic. having experienced a little of both, i would say unequivocally lol!! that the classical basics are the time tested, absolutely instrumental, indispensible concepts to, at the very least, know and understand.

the basics!
breath support (or appoggio)
open throat
lower larynx (as a strenghening tool as well)
vowel modification/formant tuning

i personally believe even if you are headed towards a career in pop, r&b, or even country, just having that classical core is invaluable....absolutely. 

bob

Offline

 

#5 2012-07-23 19:05:48

Tommy
Guest

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

renee@myvoicecoach.com wrote:

Now I confess I feel it's more like a convenience for the classsically-trained teacher. As for the student, it's sort of like working on their golf swing in order to learn how to dunk a basketball. Both involve dropping a round object into a round hole. But they have little else in common. Have any thoughts on this?

I understand your point but I think these two examples are too far apart to compare to different methods of singing which are at least both in the same vain.  Maybe comparing playing stickball or softball to hardball would be better :)

One may consider mastering hardball/baseball overkill to become a good stickball or softball player or even tackle football compared to flag or touch, but in a lot of cases it can't hurt.  I say a lot of cases only because I believe one has to be wary of developing bad habits.  Or should I only say "habits." Not necessarily bad, but habits that could present problems if they are out of your particular area.  If you take habits from tackle football for example and aren't skilled enough in toning them down or tweaking them to fit flag football then you will have problems.  I am only wondering if this could happen in singing.  Can you be to operatic for pop music?  Too classical for Blues? 
You have to learn how to "use" the techniques, not live in them.

 

#6 2012-07-23 19:13:40

Dr.Evil
TMV Forum Member
From: Ukraine
Registered: 2012-07-15
Posts: 94
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Well i know 2 persons who study classical singing, one of them does it a year, other dois it 2 years, and you know what, when it comes to non-classical singing they sing like they newer studied singing at all, the only difference is that thay sing in correct key, that's all.


Gonna conquer the world ]:-|

Offline

 

#7 2012-07-23 19:19:02

chamcham
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2012-07-01
Posts: 201
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Dr.Evil wrote:

Well i know 2 persons who study classical singing, one of them does it a year, other dois it 2 years, and you know what, when it comes to non-classical singing they sing like they newer studied singing at all, the only difference is that thay sing in correct key, that's all.

1 or 2 years is not a long time for studying singing.

Offline

 

#8 2012-07-23 19:34:10

Dr.Evil
TMV Forum Member
From: Ukraine
Registered: 2012-07-15
Posts: 94
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I don't say that it' long, but the results must be visible any way, but they don't. I'd add that one of them has pretty good breath support, but didn' develop any reasonable range to sing most popular songs, thay are just out of his range, and other has better range, but in non-classical singing he doesn't have any support' choking his larinx and singing high notes weak like he is going to die right after he'll sing it.


Gonna conquer the world ]:-|

Offline

 

#9 2012-07-23 20:14:24

MDEW
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2012-06-24
Posts: 2866
Reputation :   32 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Understanding the basics and how utilise them are hardest part to me.
Some teachers may have their tried and true methods and reveal the meaning of an exorcise after they feel you are ready for it then go on to the next. I would prefer to know what the exorcise is supposed to accomplish first. Then I know what to look for.
     If you understand what the principles behind a technique are you should be able to carry that over to other styles.
    It is only my opinion at this point in time. I am no teacher. My reality and understanding shifts daily.


"Knock me down, It's all in vain. I'll get right back on my feet again."  Pat Benatar

Offline

 

#10 2012-07-23 21:35:18

izzle1989
TMV Forum Member
From: Morrow, GA
Registered: 2011-12-11
Posts: 702
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

VIDEOHERE wrote:

what an excellent topic. having experienced a little of both, i would say unequivocally lol!! that the classical basics are the time tested, absolutely instrumental, indispensible concepts to, at the very least, know and understand.

the basics!
breath support (or appoggio)
open throat
lower larynx (as a strenghening tool as well)
vowel modification/formant tuning

i personally believe even if you are headed towards a career in pop, r&b, or even country, just having that classical core is invaluable....absolutely. 

bob

I agree with Bob.

I think it has more to do with how good the teacher is and how much practice the student is willing to do.


"verum ipsum factum"

Offline

 

#11 2012-07-23 21:38:43

izzle1989
TMV Forum Member
From: Morrow, GA
Registered: 2011-12-11
Posts: 702
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

FelipeCarvalho wrote:

I disagree completely. The technique can be applied to pop music as a trainning system.

About what others should or should not do, I can only speak for myself. And I should :). But yes, I advice it.

I also agree with Felipe because obviously they are doing something right to produce great voices year after year. I am a classical student too and I only decided to do this because I wanted to make those types of sounds within my styles of music.


"verum ipsum factum"

Offline

 

#12 2012-07-23 21:51:42

renee@myvoicecoach.com
TMV Forum Member
From: Nashville, TN
Registered: 2012-05-17
Posts: 103
Reputation :   
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

izzle1989 wrote:

VIDEOHERE wrote:

what an excellent topic. having experienced a little of both, i would say unequivocally lol!! that the classical basics are the time tested, absolutely instrumental, indispensible concepts to, at the very least, know and understand.

bob

I agree with Bob.

I think it has more to do with how good the teacher is and how much practice the student is willing to do.

Izzle - How much practice time should a singer spend on things that are not necessarily going to be directly useful to him/her?


Renee Grant-Williams

http://www.CyberVoiceStudio.com

"Shut Up And Sing"

Offline

 

#13 2012-07-23 22:03:27

izzle1989
TMV Forum Member
From: Morrow, GA
Registered: 2011-12-11
Posts: 702
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

It depends on what you are talking about in particular.


"verum ipsum factum"

Offline

 

#14 2012-07-23 22:29:08

FelipeCarvalho
TMV Forum Member
From: Brasil
Registered: 2011-07-28
Posts: 2889
Reputation :   61 
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Not directly usefull?

Lets do a reality check here. Trainning within the classical approach is not the same as preparing yourself to sing classical material.

If you apply it on pop, the results are great, the most versatile and consistent singer I know learned using the classical method, and the guy delivers from skid row to our local music better than the original artists. As well as many other great singers, and myself, although Im not half decent yet.

Now, if you mean actually trainning to sing arias, ino, becoming a tenor, baritone or bass. Then you are right, although hardly I believe someone would waste 10 or more years of life to go back and sing pop.

I think that going back would be actually even harder than learning it.

Offline

 

#15 2012-07-23 22:46:22

Remylebeau
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2012-06-16
Posts: 261
Reputation :   11 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I don't think you can address this topic without discussing the differences of how the classical technique is taught to different genders and voice types.

As I've discussed in other threads, unless you are training as a Contralto, women are generally taught to sing their high notes in what those of us in the non-classical world would refer to as falsetto.  Classical teachers will call it "headvoice" and many of them will argue that it's physiologically not the same thing as male falsetto.  However, the science has pretty clearly shown that it is the exact same thing.  If a woman sings high notes in cry, belt, or even opera quality (the way classical tenors produce their high notes), it's often considered distasteful by classical teachers.   

The teaching of falsetto and only falsetto to women leads to a whole lot of ridiculous misconceptions.  I can't tell you how many girls in the soprano section of the various choirs I've been in have told me "I wish I could learn to belt, but I can only sing in my headvoice".  Such ridiculous constraints they believe that they have could easily have been avoided if they'd studied with a more contemporary teacher who understands how the voice works and teaches more than just one style.

Falsetto has its place in contemporary music, but people usually don't make a gig out of using it as their only means of producing high notes.  There's a couple of exceptions, of course, but there always are.

As for men, it's a little better in the sense that all voice types will probably get around to learning how to tilt their thyroid and bridge their passaggio at some point if they seriously study classical technique.  Baritones have to go up to G4 in opera and Basses up to about E4, which a tenor could probably sing in speech/chest voice, but a Bass probably can't.  But honestly, most contemporary music for men is written in the tenor range and they really don't let baritones and basses sing up there in classical music even though their voices are perfectly capable of it. 

All that said, there's some wonderful exercises that come from classical technique (siren on an 'ng" for example) that are helpful no matter what style you sing in.  But training to be a classical singer in order to become a contemporary singer is just silly.  Odds are you're going to end up with a bunch of ridiculous beliefs about the limitations of your voice, and a very rigid method for doing things that isn't applicable to contemporary singing.

Last edited by Remylebeau (2012-07-23 22:47:08)

Offline

 

#16 2012-07-23 23:00:55

VIDEOHERE
Administrator
Registered: 2008-12-22
Posts: 7197
Reputation :   66 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

it depends on much you take of it and from it and then what you do with it.

these are tried and proven fundamentals that all contemporary voice teachers have piggybacked off of to one extent or the other.

Offline

 

#17 2012-07-24 00:09:31

Remylebeau
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2012-06-16
Posts: 261
Reputation :   11 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

VIDEOHERE wrote:

it depends on much you take of it and from it and then what you do with it.

these are tried and proven fundamentals that all contemporary voice teachers have piggybacked off of to one extent or the other.

Which totally defeats the purpose of going to a classical teacher in the first place if you want to sing contemporary.  If contemporary teachers can take the applicable exercises from classical technique and leave out all of the stuff that's not useful and may even hinder contemporary singing, going to a contemporary teacher is a much more direct route to progress than going to a classical singer and then unlearning a bunch of stuff with a contemporary teacher.

I think maybe a better question is: what if you want to sing both classical and contemporary? Should you learn the classical or the contemporary first?

My personal thought is that it would probably be ideal to first study with someone who can teach you the fundamentals of both styles first. And then if you're really serious about the classical part, go study that more in depth once you've had a broad introduction to the fundamentals of the voice and singing in all styles. 

There's a reason that in the pedagogy of most subjects, the introductory course is a broad survey of the entire field, rather than a narrow look at one part of it.  It's good to learn a little bit about the entire discipline first, even if you have a general idea of what you want to specialize in.  Having an understanding of something outside your narrow specialty will make you better at anything, including singing.

And it's my experience that contemporary vocal methods and teachers tend to include some knowledge about classical technique and classical singing.  Classical teachers and methods, in my experience, tend to be far more reluctant to introduce their students to any material outside of the classical sub-field.  And even if the student has no intention of singing anything else, I still think that they're doing them a great disservice by not exposing them at least a little bit to other aspects of singing.

Fortunately, from what I've read, more and more classical teachers are starting to embrace Estill and other broad (and scientific) approaches to the voice.

Offline

 

#18 2012-07-24 00:10:30

ronws
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2010-05-23
Posts: 11731
Reputation :   139 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I started out learning classical techniques with the idea of improving my rock and pop singing. I am not an opera singer. Though there a few arias I wouldn't mind trying but I guarantee I will not sound like Russell Watson, or Pavarotti. In fact, I would sound more like the love child of Glenn Hughes and irish contemporary singer Luka Bloom. Now, there's a funny image. Get that one out of your head ....

So, I agree with Felipe. Classical technique is a great place to start, even if you are not aiming to be an opera singer. One of the things I liked about Lunte's system was, of the various instruction systems at the time I started looking around again, it was closest to the classical techniques I had studied before, from the writings of Graham Hewitt. He (Hewitt, and later, Lunte) was one of the few to apply classical technique to the end result of singing pop and rock, though, he was not into vocal distortion like some of the modern systems offer to teach.

And yes, Doc, classical technique does cure AIDS. You brought that up, so I thought I would address that. And it does cure most cancers, too.

The one coach I have consulted about my singing is a classical singing coach who normally doesn't give the time of day to a rock singer. But his words and teachings have helped me make leaps and jumps that have made some things so much easier for me.

Believe it or not, good or bad, on my recordings, I am using classical technique as much as I know how to do, though I do not go for a covered sound except on some low notes. For example, my low ending notes on "Sweet Jesus," I covered a bit to get a thick sound I was looking for.

Once in a while, I put a little bite on a note that is not classical, so to speak. And I challenge anyone to find a singing instruction system that doesn't have some classical technique. Some might spend some more time on tonal qualities and effects, like distortion. But they all breathe, resonate, and modify vowels.

And the underlying ideal is a line, to borrow Felipe's use of the word. Legato in both the note transition and the tone of voice and how well the word matches the intent of the singing.

In other words, sing it like you mean it, in your own voice.

As for those who underwent classical training and shifted to rock, I know Pat Benetar and Kip Winger both had classical voice training before going to rock, though I don't know for how long. Kip Winger also studied ballet. I once saw an old video of him doing pliaes and spins and he was quite graceful. At the end of the season of "Rock And Roll Fantasy Camp," where he was a band mentor/counselor, he sings some piece of an operatic aria. He's a legit tenor, by the way.

Ronnie Milsap also had classical piano lessons and classical voice lessons. Then he turned to rock for a little while. Then settled on country and western.

Sorry folks, I have a head full of useless trivia and it oozes out, now and then.

Last edited by ronws (2012-07-24 00:18:01)


"When the daylight is rising up in my eyes ..." - Klaus Meine

Offline

 

#19 2012-07-24 15:56:09

renee@myvoicecoach.com
TMV Forum Member
From: Nashville, TN
Registered: 2012-05-17
Posts: 103
Reputation :   
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Remylebeau wrote:

VIDEOHERE wrote:

it depends on much you take of it and from it and then what you do with it.

these are tried and proven fundamentals that all contemporary voice teachers have piggybacked off of to one extent or the other.

Which totally defeats the purpose of going to a classical teacher in the first place if you want to sing contemporary.  If contemporary teachers can take the applicable exercises from classical technique and leave out all of the stuff that's not useful and may even hinder contemporary singing, going to a contemporary teacher is a much more direct route to progress than going to a classical singer and then unlearning a bunch of stuff with a contemporary teacher.

Fortunately, from what I've read, more and more classical teachers are starting to embrace Estill and other broad (and scientific) approaches to the voice.

Remylebeau - I like the way you put it here. After all, what really separates the two techniques? Classical and contemporary? It seems to me they may have more in common than not. It could break down somewhat like this:

Breathing is basically the same for both
Support should be the same
Phrasing could actually be the same for bpth
Relationship between vowels and consonants should be the same in both

The choice of head or chest voice makes a BIG difference
Resonance locations could be different
Vibrato could be different

Not much else is radically different, is it? It seems it boils down to which register is used. Am I missing something? So, with tihe exception of repertoire, they are much the same. Then why not start with contemporary songs instead of classical? Why teach the Twenty-four Italian Songs and Arias (in Italian) when they really want to sing Free Bird?


Renee Grant-Williams

http://www.CyberVoiceStudio.com

"Shut Up And Sing"

Offline

 

#20 2012-07-24 16:09:54

VIDEOHERE
Administrator
Registered: 2008-12-22
Posts: 7197
Reputation :   66 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

all good points remylebeau and renee. you know me by now. i'm a huge advocate of support and breath management....i'll even extend that to breath manipulation.

when i had my lessons with frisell, although they were classical, i could easily see just learning the things he was teaching me was applicable to any other genre.

but that core classical  foundation, those core classical principles, to me.......priceless.

Offline

 

#21 2012-07-24 22:11:05

breakin
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2012-06-17
Posts: 140
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

renee@myvoicecoach.com wrote:

There was a time that I was convinced that it was beneficial to a singer to start off by learning some classsical music and technique. The idea was to use it as a reference point for techique and then make the appropriate adjustments later on for all other genres. Now I confess I feel it's more like a convenience for the classsically-trained teacher. As for the student, it's sort of like working on their golf swing in order to learn how to dunk a basketball. Both involve dropping a round object into a round hole. But they have little else in common. Have any thoughts on this?

As a student that is mostly interested in non classical singing but forced to have such a teacher (due to applying late into the semester) I can say that even if you get the same end result, the way there is not as entertaining. Due to this I will switch teacher. If you want to learn X you must feel like you practice on X. Then if you want to sing mixed and have to sing in falsetto for a whole year then so be it. But do that on X songs, not something else.

It also reminds me of long ago when I took piano lessons. I had to play boring songs, note by note. I guess I really wanted to play "real songs". I lost the lust to do this and dropped out. I learned to play chords after a fashion years later by myself but I'm not the best. What if I could have been taught to play chords from the beginning? Much funnier.

That being said I don't think you have to be a heavy metal singer to teach heavy metal singers!

Offline

 

#22 2012-07-25 00:34:21

FelipeCarvalho
TMV Forum Member
From: Brasil
Registered: 2011-07-28
Posts: 2889
Reputation :   61 
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Yeah, if you were clear that you want to sing pop, and the coach wants you to learn arias instead of applying technique into your repertoire, its pointless, you will never be satisfied with your development and you will build a ton of habits that will sound very, very strange on pop music.

In my opinion the perfect combination is a extreme, boring and methodic workout on the technical development side, and an artistic, fun and style oriented application on songs. Maybe the fun part will not be there when a song is being used to develop a particular part of technique, but its still much better than a scale on the piano.

Unless of course you want to be the next Andrea Bocelli. :) Which would not be a bad thing at all, still I believe its not the point.

Classical or non-classical, look for the results he/she produces both on his/her voice and on students, and by all means, it must be someone you trust.

Offline

 

#23 2012-07-25 13:10:30

geno
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2009-10-30
Posts: 2059
Reputation :   53 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

That's a good question Renee - There are advantages and disadvantages.  I think an advantage for learning classical first is the sheer discipline required for the beginner.  In order to sing the repetoire, you've got to learn the basics first.  This takes a while.  And during the process you're listening to and emulating truly great singers. To reach a level of profeciency will require a substantial effort. 

If you were to start pop right away, the student may want to learn how to sing like someone that doesn't have very good technique.  But the student might be happy just to make a marginal improvement, and once they raised their bar a little, they're done, and they are happy.  But they didn't really make very much improvement.

A disadvantage for Females, in the classics, if you are a soprano, they teach great head voice, but they don't teach much chest / head mixed voice.  And in pop, so often the female singers are belting with a great mix voice.

Offline

 

#24 2012-07-25 13:59:51

Trip
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2011-09-22
Posts: 160
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I'd say the same as geno: pop-singing pedagogy isn't interested in slow, steady progress, neither is it interested in skillful singing much of the time.

One of my pop-singing vocal teachers understood the concept of head voice, but couldn't implement it in his teaching. He also didn't care about support. The other one cared about support but explained it simplistically and didn't believe in head voice. ("Not your real voice," she called it.) At the same time the rangiest, and best-sounding young male singer I've heard on Bulgarian (my country) music TV has graduated from the opera-singing department in the National Musical Academy; not to mention that the hottest voice teacher in the States that I know of (got Tom Cruise into shape for Rock of Ages, voice teacher of Myles Kennedy as well, Cornell had lessons with him I think, also Alanis Morissette and a huge pile of other artists) is Ron Anderson, who teaches Bel Canto.

The problem isn't in the similarity and difference of techniques, it's in the huge difference in mental approach. More classical teachers are passionate about teaching you to sing than are pop-singing teachers. The amount of pseudo-science in pop-singing pedadogy is also higher, if I judge by my experience.

Last edited by Trip (2012-07-25 14:00:16)

Offline

 

#25 2012-07-25 22:25:39

chamcham
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2012-07-01
Posts: 201
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

geran89 wrote:

i think that classical techniques are very useful to all kinds of singing (as i learned from CVT), but, the approach that they generally use (mental images and abstract sensations) is what bothers me, aside from that, the ideas of support, twang, resonance, the hold, etc, are useful to cover all styles of singing, outside opera/classical, from the ones that are more 'speech level', to soul and rock :P

The "mental images" and "abstract sensations" are what I actually love.
They're easy to understand and are very effective for many people.

Offline

 

#26 2012-07-26 00:12:01

FelipeCarvalho
TMV Forum Member
From: Brasil
Registered: 2011-07-28
Posts: 2889
Reputation :   61 
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I am not aware of all these subjective concepts. All concepts that were presented to me are very concrete.

Please name one.

Last edited by FelipeCarvalho (2012-07-26 00:12:29)

Offline

 

#27 2012-07-26 01:34:47

FelipeCarvalho
TMV Forum Member
From: Brasil
Registered: 2011-07-28
Posts: 2889
Reputation :   61 
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Well, but you were not told why you were doing it? Did you ask?

Although I know some coaches that would simply say "because I am telling you to do it, of course" :P

Anyways, these are simply references to achieve a concept, not the concept itself. Even the CVT book uses it.

"open throat technique" is a very subjective thing in my opinion, as I do not know a constricted throat version. What I know is support, which is control of air flow and pressure, and emission, which is the coordination of the larynx muscles to sustain full voice at a given point of the tessitura, vowel and dinamics.

This ball on the back of the throat/soft palate image, is usefull to try to release tongue and jaw tensions, as it induces a similar movement to swallow/yawn. Not really a technique, more like a rehab tool.

Offline

 

#28 2012-07-26 01:38:40

Remylebeau
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2012-06-16
Posts: 261
Reputation :   11 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

geran89 wrote:

chamcham wrote:

geran89 wrote:

i think that classical techniques are very useful to all kinds of singing (as i learned from CVT), but, the approach that they generally use (mental images and abstract sensations) is what bothers me, aside from that, the ideas of support, twang, resonance, the hold, etc, are useful to cover all styles of singing, outside opera/classical, from the ones that are more 'speech level', to soul and rock :P

The "mental images" and "abstract sensations" are what I actually love.
They're easy to understand and are very effective for many people.

I find the opposite hahah, i think they are impossible to understand cause they have no logic, they are just personal sensations, that we pretend to use to teach other people. I prefer things that are more concrete, that we can debate, and that are as close to reality as you can get, so is up to the person to syncronise with this new paradigm and the things are always more clear :P This is not just way faster, but it is healthier too, cause you are less time experimenting weird things with your voice until you start doing the healthy coordination :D

I'm with you, I need concrete explanations.  I remember a choir director telling me (as many classical teachers often do) "imagine you're a puppet being pull up by a string".  This went in one ear and out the other, because I had no idea what he was talking about. 

Years later when I cracked open an Estill-based book, I realized that this was called anchoring with the cervical spine.  The book described the anatomy, why it's useful to do this, when in particular it's useful to do this, and precisely where you should feel the sensation (right at the occipital groove).  I learn better that way than trying to figure out what the hell being a puppet pulled up by a string is supposed to feel like.  But I guess everyone's different.

Offline

 

#29 2012-07-26 04:43:37

renee@myvoicecoach.com
TMV Forum Member
From: Nashville, TN
Registered: 2012-05-17
Posts: 103
Reputation :   
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I agree with chamcham.  I love abstract sensations and mental imaging. I still marvel when a tiny tiny tweak actually makes a huge difference in the way a singer sounds. I love my job. Which is a good thing since I don't know how to do anything else...


Renee Grant-Williams

http://www.CyberVoiceStudio.com

"Shut Up And Sing"

Offline

 

#30 2012-07-28 01:33:59

ronws
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2010-05-23
Posts: 11731
Reputation :   139 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I like the image of swinging my cat around the room by her tail and trying to match her sound. Or is it the other way around? She's feisty and strong and might be swinging me. Sometimes, she likes to start some nonesense with the dog, who is bigger, faster, and stronger. By the way, he sings opera.

Evidently, there are different ways that people are teaching classical technique. Then, again, what is the aim of the teacher? Some classical teachers will teach you only with the idea of singing opera or art song repertoire. Others may teach you with an eye toward pop and rock.

And it may just whatever explanation or image makes the best sense to you. I have been happy with what I have learned from classical technique, even if it means I am only reinforcing my essentially clean, high, lyric voice. My voice is doing what I want it to do. And perhaps that places me at odds with others. Others who feel that you can only sing rock if you sound strained or have rasp, etc.  I'm just enough of an obnoxious snot to sing whatever I want, however I want. That is also guaranteed to get me some grief, at times.

Then, again, maybe I don't sound like the other rock singers here who have studied systems not labeled as classical but marketed as something to make you a rock singer.

Maybe I am in no man's land. Too clean to sing rock. To unrefined to sing opera.  Perhaps I should start my own sound ideal. :o


"When the daylight is rising up in my eyes ..." - Klaus Meine

Offline

 

#31 2012-07-30 10:49:58

Jjf88
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 22
Reputation :   

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Robert trained classically and used that and used a mixture of classical and modern techniques for Four Pillars?

Offline

 

#32 2012-07-31 00:57:50

ronws
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2010-05-23
Posts: 11731
Reputation :   139 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Jjf88 wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Robert trained classically and used that and used a mixture of classical and modern techniques for Four Pillars?

Kinda, sorta. He was trained classically. Then studied with Maestro David P. Kyle, who came from a classical background and trained rock singers. Some other singers who studied with Mr. Kyle were Anne Wilson from Heart, Geoff Tate from Queesnryche, Layne Staley from Alice in Chains.

One of the neatest scales Robert has, he has named, as a tribute, the "Staley" scale.


"When the daylight is rising up in my eyes ..." - Klaus Meine

Offline

 

#33 2012-07-31 02:52:58

eggplantbren
TMV Forum Member
From: Auckland, New Zealand
Registered: 2010-10-19
Posts: 404
Reputation :   
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

No

Offline

 

#34 2012-07-31 19:02:50

Adolph Namlik
Executive Director, The Modern Vocalist World
From: "No Name", New York
Registered: 2008-11-15
Posts: 748
Reputation :   17 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

This is definitely off topic, but I couldn't resist posting this when Ron mentioned Geoff Tate from "Queensryche".

Geoff was replaced by Crimson Glory singer La Torre. I listened to this and I believe that La Torre definitely NEEDS HELP !!! :o

Personally, I can't understand a single word !!!

Check it out >>>

http://ultimateclassicrock.com/queensry … ew-singer/


Adolph C. Namlik
Executive Director ~ The Modern Vocalist World
Western N.Y.
adolph@themodernvocalist.com
http://www.themodernvocalist.com/profile/AdolphNamlik
Email : chief188@hughes.net
716~257~9606
"My Life's A Stage"

Offline

 

#35 2012-07-31 19:16:32

Keith
TMV Forum Member
From: Dryden, NY
Registered: 2011-09-05
Posts: 1837
Reputation :   16 
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Adolph Namlik wrote:

This is definitely off topic, but I couldn't resist posting this when Ron mentioned Geoff Tate from "Queensryche".

Geoff was replaced by Crimson Glory singer La Torre. I listened to this and I believe that La Torre definitely NEEDS HELP !!! :o

Personally, I can't understand a single word !!!

Check it out >>>

http://ultimateclassicrock.com/queensry … ew-singer/

OMG horrible! I can sing that song better than that in my weak little head voice.. I have heard him sing so much better than this :( To be fair though, that song is VERY hard to sing. I did notice that the backup vocals really kicked arse lol

Offline

 

#36 2012-08-01 00:29:35

ronws
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2010-05-23
Posts: 11731
Reputation :   139 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Actually, youse guys need to go the Rock News Desk. In there, you will find the fall-out. Geoff Tate is no longer with Queensryche, having been fired by the band, who also fired some of Tate's relatives who worked in management. However, according to a judge's ruling, there may be two versions of the band. Tate has already designed an alternate logo and sub-title Queensryche (with the voice of Geoff Tate.)

His worst thing is, at a concert in south America, during an argument, he did physically strike someone but I am not convinced that it was him being abusive. I think they were trying to restrain him from going somewhere and he swung out.

Anyway, the thing is in court. For a while, the rest of the band was operating under another name with Torres. And have now decided that they are still Queensryche with Torres.

Oh, the drama.


"When the daylight is rising up in my eyes ..." - Klaus Meine

Offline

 

#37 2012-08-01 00:41:08

ronws
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2010-05-23
Posts: 11731
Reputation :   139 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

So, I listened to it. And expected better quality than something that was probably recorded on a cellphone.

Even so, I don't mind that he doesn't have the same exact timbre as Tate. Each voice is unique and I champion that thought.

However, the dude was simply off pitch in a number of places. I don't mean fuzzy intonation that could have been fixed with a vowel mod. I mean, flat, by at least 1/4 tone, a smidge more in other cases.

I did a Queensryche song and I sounded a smidge off and in retrospect, it was because I was using the wrong vowel form. I had the pitch but it was fuzzy, thanks to wonky intonation. I can beg off because my voice was recovering from some self-induced partial laryngitis. (another story at a different time.) And even I like my version of a Queensryche song better than this.

The band may or may not have issues with Tate and that remains to be worked out but I hope this singer gets better in live shows than this.


"When the daylight is rising up in my eyes ..." - Klaus Meine

Offline

 

#38 2012-08-01 00:44:35

ronws
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2010-05-23
Posts: 11731
Reputation :   139 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Since I bragged about it, I should put my money where my mouth is.

Not only was my voice in recovery, I mixed the thing wrong, which should suprise no one.

So, should I audition for the band if Tate won't come back?

Never mind, don't answer that. :o

"I Don't Believe in Love" by Queensryche

http://www.box.com/s/f01abfff3963930ddb4d


"When the daylight is rising up in my eyes ..." - Klaus Meine

Offline

 

#39 2012-08-01 03:20:36

Adolph Namlik
Executive Director, The Modern Vocalist World
From: "No Name", New York
Registered: 2008-11-15
Posts: 748
Reputation :   17 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

ronws wrote :

So, should I audition for the band if Tate won't come back?

I'll answer that ---- "I'd definitely say so...."  Sounds great, Ron !!!

No bragging from me.... I recently broke a few ribs and can barely walk a few steps without running out of breath.
Needless to say, no singing for ME for quite sometime  :mad:


Adolph C. Namlik
Executive Director ~ The Modern Vocalist World
Western N.Y.
adolph@themodernvocalist.com
http://www.themodernvocalist.com/profile/AdolphNamlik
Email : chief188@hughes.net
716~257~9606
"My Life's A Stage"

Offline

 

#40 2012-08-01 16:02:54

VIDEOHERE
Administrator
Registered: 2008-12-22
Posts: 7197
Reputation :   66 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

let's give the new guy a chance. that was lousy audio. tough shoes to fill.

i always feel for a singer that has to replace an icon. such a tough spot to be in.

the chorus' lyrics are such that i'd let intelligibility take a backseat to maximizing and riding the vowels and resonance.

Offline

 

#41 2012-08-01 17:47:26

Keith
TMV Forum Member
From: Dryden, NY
Registered: 2011-09-05
Posts: 1837
Reputation :   16 
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

I made a "Queensryche Cover " thread in the critique section - Ron, you should post over there.

Offline

 

#42 2012-08-02 00:39:41

ronws
TMV Forum Member
Registered: 2010-05-23
Posts: 11731
Reputation :   139 

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

Saw it, been there, done that.


"When the daylight is rising up in my eyes ..." - Klaus Meine

Offline

 

#43 2012-08-03 22:36:43

renee@myvoicecoach.com
TMV Forum Member
From: Nashville, TN
Registered: 2012-05-17
Posts: 103
Reputation :   
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

breakin wrote:

renee@myvoicecoach.com wrote:

There was a time that I was convinced that it was beneficial to a singer to start off by learning some classsical music and technique. The idea was to use it as a reference point for techique and then make the appropriate adjustments later on for all other genres. Now I confess I feel it's more like a convenience for the classsically-trained teacher. As for the student, it's sort of like working on their golf swing in order to learn how to dunk a basketball. Both involve dropping a round object into a round hole. But they have little else in common. Have any thoughts on this?

As a student that is mostly interested in non classical singing but forced to have such a teacher (due to applying late into the semester) I can say that even if you get the same end result, the way there is not as entertaining. Due to this I will switch teacher. If you want to learn X you must feel like you practice on X. Then if you want to sing mixed and have to sing in falsetto for a whole year then so be it. But do that on X songs, not something else.

It also reminds me of long ago when I took piano lessons. I had to play boring songs, note by note. I guess I really wanted to play "real songs". I lost the lust to do this and dropped out. I learned to play chords after a fashion years later by myself but I'm not the best. What if I could have been taught to play chords from the beginning? Much funnier.

That being said I don't think you have to be a heavy metal singer to teach heavy metal singers!

breakin
I love your comparison to learning to play piano by ear or by reading music. Both have their strengths and limitations. I suppose the ideal is to learn both?


Renee Grant-Williams

http://www.CyberVoiceStudio.com

"Shut Up And Sing"

Offline

 

#44 2012-08-16 22:27:22

renee@myvoicecoach.com
TMV Forum Member
From: Nashville, TN
Registered: 2012-05-17
Posts: 103
Reputation :   
Website

Re: Should non-classical singers learn classical techniques first?

What time of day do you like to practice?


Renee Grant-Williams

http://www.CyberVoiceStudio.com

"Shut Up And Sing"

Offline

 
OTHER TMV WEB SITES: TMV RECOMMENDS: TMV RECOMMENDS: TMV RECOMMENDS:

Adverts

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB
Hosted by PunBB-Hosting