AMDA Program -Any Good?

[kevs]

Posted: 3/22/06 at 1:26am

tmm_fan, when I went to AMDA, I actually took voice lessons from an outside voice teacher who was a Seth Riggs associate. (Brett Manning was also a Seth Riggs associate.) There really is nothing like that technique. My AMDA teacher was only interested in teaching me classical technique without applying any of that to my musical theatre or pop songs.

[tmm_fan]

Posted: 3/22/06 at 2:30am

I know; I own both Seth Riggs and Brett Manning's vocal training programs :) ... the two "greatest" out there, hand down.

Classical is probably the worst style of music for a teacher to start out with. Rock is IMO the only perfect non-musical theater music to teach. Mostn styles force the voice to relax, and are very fun to sing, anyway.

Thanks for your added imput.

[mercefinal]

Posted: 3/29/06 at 3:36pm

Ok. I will be honest with you. I went to AMDA and I will give you both the Pro's and Cons of going there. At the time (about 8 years ago) AMDA was a smaller school. There were only about 115 of us starting together. Now I hear it's outrageously big. One of the things I noticed is that they categorize you into a "type." In the real world, this happens too. Whether we like it or not. I was a 100% better artist after I left AMDA and it's because of what I put into it. If you look at show business as to who makes it or not....the odds are already against you. The school isn't to blame. Now, 8 years later, I definitely know of classmates that are on Broadway or have been successful in their own way. I ahd some awesome professors and some scary ones. That's how it's gonna be anywhere you go. The don't want you auditioning until fourth semester for, what I assume, to be business reasons. It's a school like any other and they want their money. They can't have all four semesters of their money if you audition and leave them before graduating. I had both amazing experiences and less than impressive times at AMDA. The school body tends to be immature, unhealthy, and pretentious. They all actually DO think they are already famous. That was the great majority of people. However, 8 years later I still don't know of a classmate that is "famous" in the HOllywood sense. BUt hey...that's going back to the odds of making it in the indsutry all together. I learned a lot as a person by going there and that will happen no matter what school you go to. If you want to improve as a performer it depends on YOU. If you want something to look impressive on your resume...try going to Julliard or Yale acting school. AMDA I feel is for the artist that was not "born with it" but is willing to work for it. That sums it up. I became a 100% better performer not because of AMDA, but because of the work I did while I was there and since I left there.

[kevs]

Posted: 4/9/06 at 3:57pm

The whole "learn classical first and then you can apply it to anything" idea is useless, outdated thinking.
I took "traditional" classical lessons from various teachers for years, and could never sing a male G above middle C. When I found a speech level singing teacher in NYC, he took me to a male high C in the first lesson! No one is saying "rock" is better than "classical" or whatever. You can apply the SLS technique to ANY type of music: classical, musical theatre, pop, etc. In fact, my SLS teacher was a professional opera singer. But you have to have a technique that will apply to any type of singing you choose to do. Most "tradional" classical teachers don't know how to do this. They don't know how to get you connected from the chest voice to the head voice. If you're a female, it's all in the head voice, and if you're a male, it's all in chest. But now, I can sing connected all the way to a G ABOVE high C, with no strain at all.