proper/improper singing?

[theatrefanatic17]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 4:09pm

Ok, just a question. Is there a way to tell if a person who is singing has had major vocal lessons? Also,do people who have never had lessons and sing frequently danger their voices? And lastly, is their a way to be able to coach yourself, as in acquiring your abilities? Thanks so much.

[Sporti2005]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:40pm

it's pretty impossible to coach yourself because it's really hard to hear the technique problems in yourself thta someone else will hear in you.

when you sing, you're hearing yourself through the vibrations your inner ear, not from the outside vibrations (which is what someone else would hear).

i can usually tell if someone has had extensive coaching, but that's just me. for instance, if you gave me 10 people and said one of them had had lessons for 5 years, i would almost definitele be able to tell you which one it was. that being said, some people just have extraordinary natural technique and sound like they've had lessons when really they haven't.

a lot of time people who don't take voice lessons can damage their voices, but then again, so do people who DO take lessons. (think charlotte church) if an instructor is teaching you improper technique or pushing your voice too hard at a young age (that happens a lot with kids with "stage parents" or kids who start heavy performing really young), you might even be worse off that if you never had the lessons in the first place.

so basically, it's good to get lessons - but just make sure your teacher knows what they're doing. and don't start lessons too young or do extensive belting ALL the time, because then you could really hurt yourself.

[LittleFish8386]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:45pm

Wait, what happened to Charlotte Church??

[Georgeanne]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:58pm

You can't always tell if someone has had vocal lessons, considering I have been asked who my teacher was on several occasions and I don't take lessons (that is about to change, however).

Singers who frequently sing the improper way (belting improperly - this is a biggie, thanks Wicked!, etc) damage their voices slowly but surely.

It is hard to coach yourself because, as Sporti said, you do not hear things that professionals can in yourself.

[jaso_n]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 7:04pm

If they're straining.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 1:34am

That's a good question. I'm a recent graduate of Indiana University, where some people will spend up to SEVEN YEARS (or more) in hardcore training (undergrad then grad) to achieve "vocal perfection" or whatever, and I've always found it ironic that some will spend so much time in training when there are people like Carollee Carmello who never took voice lessons and yet have achieved more success than most performers ever will. What's the deal?

Here's my spin. Some people naturally--physiologically--have proper placement and don't need to be taught it, while others (for example, myself) don't and had to be trained to do it properly. Breathing is also something that needs to be taught, but it's probably the easiest and quickest thing to learn. Then, as for "stregthening" of the voice, and widening of the vocal range--well, some people just naturally have very strong voices and/or large vocal ranges.

So, what this all comes down to is that most people need at least a little bit of training to reach basic technical proficiency, while others need more (I'd say the average professional musical theater singer should have at least three years of training).

However, some people, despite having perfect placement, proper breathing, strong voices, and large ranges, may still be doing things to hurt themselves. I think that most of the time this comes from forcing the sound, which usually involves muscle tension in the throat (something that can be either psychological or physiological, the latter being much harder to correct). This can also be caused by improper breathing or failure to properly lift the soft palate.

SO...if someone isn't hurting themselves necessarily but still doesn't have "proper" technique, does it matter? In the professional world, yes, as most musical theater directors, (stage, musical, and casting) will know enough about the art form to be able to identify improper technique. Many audience members with vocal training would know the difference as well. And as for the average person who doesn't know what "proper" singing is? Well, they'll probably enjoy the singing even more if it's "technically correct," because proper technique usually just makes your voice sound better.

The bottom line is, in the arts, training isn't "necessary" per se, but one cannot reach one's full potential without it.

Thanks for reading.

Updated On: 8/16/05 at 01:34 AM

[phantom_tenor]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 2:41am

To answer LittleFish, Charlotte Church was too successful too young and ended up singing far too much and too high for her age, with inadequate training. The consequence was that while before she had a beautiful bell-like sound, now she can barely sing at all. Such a waste. She's only 19.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 2:50am

Eh, I never thought Charlotte Church was that good to begin with.

[cathyhyatt]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 3:22am

it's easy to tell if a person has had proper training if you have been properly trained yourself.

[phantom_tenor]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 4:03am

She had a pretty voice, and potential.

[AngusN]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 5:07am

That's utter rubbish about Charlotte Church. I saw her perform little under a year ago and her voice sounded the best I have ever heard it. It is more rounded and developed, as opposed to having the whistle effect, that many young sopranos have. People are accusing her of this because she has chosen to branch out into a different field of song - pop. If that's her choice and she can make the change effectively, best of luck to her. Infact, I have her new album and there are some excellent pop / dance songs on it.

[scooter38432]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 7:53am

There is also a difference between vocal training and vocal coaching. Training tends to be for more of a "legit" sound, or at least to give you the basics on breathing, placement, etc. so techniques can be applied to a variety of musical styles.

IMHO...
Some examples of terrific (and trained) singers who know just what to do with different kinds of music:
Kristin Chenoweth
Jennifer Laura Thompson
Howard McGillin
Audra McDonald
Chuck Cooper
Alice Ripley
Liz McCartney
Sarah Uriarte Berry (think of PIAZZA and TABOO)

Some examples of singers who could use more training:
Idina Menzel (I cringe with every screamed note)
Terrance Mann (major pitch problems -- something even training can't help)
Michael Crawford (where do I begin?)

Oh, and leave Charlotte Church alone! (Not that I'm a big fan.) Any young singer who can bring classical music into the lives of other young (and not so young) people who may not have appreciated such music before is welcome in my book. I'd much rather have her influencing people than the likes of Britney Spears. And she's only 19. Her voice is still changing and maturing. The comment about her not being able to sing anymore is ludicrous. She's a very smart person, and very well trained. As a result, she is building stamina and technique that will last her a lifetime.

[Esther2]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 10:40am

I had a gig once, and my cousin, who knows nothing about singing really, mentioned that he knew that I had studied because I could see how controlled and consistent my breathing was. I think that's paramount...once you've got that down..I think the rest is just,dare I say it, aesthetics. I haven't taken a lesson in almost 15 years..but what I learned when I did has stayed with me. The dangerous thing is, when people become to dependent or attatched to their teacher or their 'technique'--nothing's worse than hearing a singer who has been 'coached' to hit a certain note a certain way, usually in order to please their teacher, who has an aestheics all his/her own. I'd much prefer to hear someone who has a sound all their own, whether it's 'belting' or legit. Someone who takes chances, and is not afraid to be themselves, as opposed to copying someone they heard on a record.

[elphaba.scares.me]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 12:38pm

Bottom line: if you're getting sore throats after you sing or your voice sounds hoarse for several days at a time, something's wrong.

Get thee to a teacher. There's no glory in never taking voice lessons.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 1:38pm

A few things should be mentioned in this conversation:

1) The best singers are those that have an undiscerable technique. i.e. you can't tell that they are trained because their technique is so secondary.

2) Many voice teachers will hurt your voice...a number of well-known teachers have given many a student nodules. So, when training, be careful.

3) You can coach yourself if need be -- but it will always be a far inferior way to train. Your bad habits are too engrained for your inner ear to pick up.

Overall, vocal training is a very very tricky thing to do -- and must be approached with much care and even more responsibility. It is VERY hard to do eight shows a week for years on end -- and 99% of those of us who do have trained or are training extensively and expensively. =)

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 2:05pm

To add onto what Touchme was saying, I hate it when singers are so married to "proper technique" that their singing becomes mechanical--or worse, generic.

Training is important, but one has to also develop their own style at the same time, know what I mean?