Broadway's obsession with Belting.- Page 3

[marincrazy11]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 12:49am

mmmmmmmm, technique! There are a lot of people at my school who complain about how they don't teach belting, but I'm happy with my classic training because like inthemoney said, it just gives more that I can do. And hey that can't hurt with trying to get jobs. Don't get me wrong I want to learn how to belt healthily and work on my mix but I'm kinda enjoying my classical training. I think the key most people are forget, which is what most people here have said, is training and technique.

[InTheMoney]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 3:19am

"but aaaa problem, im not as good as belting anymore, at least not by myself...anybody know why this happens? is it maybe that i just am getting used to the opera style?"

Now that you've discovered your classical voice you need to focus your training on being able to switch between the 2. All that's happening is you've been focusing so much on head at the mo that your voice is automatically going there. It's good - it shows you're comfortable with singing classical - but now you need to work on your belt again to incorporate your classical technique with your belt & to be able to do each at a moment's notice.

Tell your singing teacher you want to work on both at once. The same thing happened to me when I was learning classical, but I found that working with my teacher on a classical song, then going straight to a belter helped. Don't try to contrast too much at first though, and look at how your technique may have changed & how you can improve it knowing what you do now.

[InTheMoney]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 3:20am

"but aaaa problem, im not as good as belting anymore, at least not by myself...anybody know why this happens? is it maybe that i just am getting used to the opera style?"

Now that you've discovered your classical voice you need to focus your training on being able to switch between the 2. All that's happening is you've been focusing so much on head at the mo that your voice is automatically going there. It's good - it shows you're comfortable with singing classical - but now you need to work on your belt again to incorporate your classical technique with your belt & to be able to do each at a moment's notice.

Tell your singing teacher you want to work on both at once. The same thing happened to me when I was learning classical, but I found that working with my teacher on a classical song, then going straight to a belter helped. Don't try to contrast too much at first though, and look at how your technique may have changed & how you can improve it knowing what you do now.

[wickedkiwi]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 3:28am

aaaa overwhelming amount of good advice

thnx u guys! someday i'll start a post about if it helped me, which it prolly will...

i think im going to start with easy belt songs, as if i were learning to sing all over again, dont feel like belting to idina anyway, too in love with the classical songs right now

anybody else listening to bwayworld radio right now??
i LOVEEEEEEEEE buddy's blues, FUNNYYY song!!!!! i'd audition this song if i were a guy...but im not, so back to belting/headvoice/mixing stuff

[clarky]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 3:35am

In my opinion a voice is like a tool. A singer learns how to use it like an instrument. You sing soft and loud, high and low. And one should be able to belt and not to belt. It all depends on the music. The music tells you how a character is. For example in Jekyll & Hyde: the music for Emma is written diffrent from Lucy. Anyone who sings Emma like Lucy just didn't get the point! Emma is more (let's call it) "semi-classical" (legit) cause she belongs to high class and Lucy is more a "pop" voice cause she is low class.

[Princeton78]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 11:03am

For some reason, as I read this thread, I thought of Laura Benanti. The girl has a great range, a beautiful town and gets perfect volume when she needs to (Remember the end of her "Steps of the Palace." She proves that you can get volume without screaming. Does this make her a belter?
Also, noone has mentioned Carolee Carmello....now there's a belter with quality....her in "Pimpernel" singing "When I look at you?" I thought she was gonna blow the sound system. :O)

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 11:07am

unfortunately, 'lay' people confuse belting and screaming relentlessly too often.

[hush_ethel]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 3:57pm

even tho im young, my voice is particularly belty, and it used to be very soprano-y, and personally, i just find it more comfertable, and if its done right and you dont into screaming, which personally i think some people kill, it sounds wicked awsome, i just think it all depends on how it is done, but then again, i bawled in phantom when christine sang soprano, so you never know, i could just be out of my mind :)

[AuBrie]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 4:31pm

Belting can be great and powerful if done well...emphasis on IF. for some roles belting can make it effective... example eponine in les mis. she is of a lower class and in the book described as an urchin. I think more of a belting style fits her voice. I do agree it is sometimes overdone by singers who don't do it as well. Any singer who wants to learn to sing with volume should train in classical music. go to any opera and the opera singers do not use mikes. They have plenty of power in there voice but are not hurting it. All singers should be classically trained because it will improve their voice overall and they can learn to belt so that in 10 years they will still have a singing voice. I am a singer who can belt but also sing opera in a first soprano range. I use both these voices in different times. obviously I do not belt during Bach. I used to do all belt style for Musical theater but as i became more trained i realized that my head voice is just as effective and sometimes more than my belt voice. when I do belt I try to mix more head voice in so that it sounds less brassy less like screaming. and maybe even pretty.

[Adoannie925]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 8:41pm

It depends. I don't think most people sing in full chest voice anymore. Some "belters" who sing in a mix (head and chest voice) are tolerable, but full chest voice, eh, I'm not too into that. I wish we had more leading lady sopranos, but the newer shows seem to be leaning towards belters. Whether they belt or not, if I'm listening to a singer, I'd like to listen to a pretty or interesting tone in their voice (maybe some good technique too!), regardless of whether they're a belter or not. In my opinion, I feel like today's generation seems to be belters who sing in a mix, which is cool, but I think there should be some legit sopranos, too. That's my opinion.

[LilMiZBroADwaY23]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 9:17pm

I'm have a very mixed opinion about belting. I love doing it, considering I know how to do it properly without damaging my vocal cords. But if you get the wrong person doing it, it just makes me want to shoot myself. But if you don't know how to belt CORRECTLY, you shouldn't belt at all.

I enjoy belting immensley. I have a big, brassy, voice for it. But I'm also a Lyric Coloratura ((Highest, a High F over High C)), who can also sing alto and belt. I've been singing Opera ((My favorite book 24 Italian Songs and Arias, the loves of my life.)) since I was in fifth grade. My voice teacher is a Professor of Music at Notre Dame, and has taught me well. He doesn't encourage my belting, but allows me to do it occasionally in his precesence. But he does agree with the way I do it because it is correct.

As everyone said, Technique, Technique, Technique. It's what it all comes down to.

[another_day_2day]

Posted: 12/6/04 at 9:47pm

i perfer belters for some reason...but not the point to where my ears bleed.....i duno0 head voice sopranos always piss me off...sorry if you are one! im sure u have a beuatiful voice...ALOT of them do..i just dont perfer them

[ShoTime]

Posted: 12/7/04 at 6:30pm

I think the fascination is that it's exciting to listen to someone belting at their break, without breaking. Everytime I hear a man or woman singing at what appears to be the edge of their range, and maneuver succesfully, it always gives me chills.

Now the problem with this is that the average note that needs to be belted is being raised a half step every show that comes out, or so it appears.

I think the reason why pop singers are succesful, yet quickly fade, is because they are willing to do whatever it takes to get an audience. So unlike most trained singers (this is of course assuming that most pop singers aren't trained, and I don't mean coached) are willing to sing higher and louder than most trained singers. This leads to problems like nodules (ashlee simpson) and fatigue and things like that. This is not saying that Broadway performers don't get nodules or fatigue, but I've strayed...

I think it can be emotionally exhilerating to hear someone screaming. Is it pretty to my ears? No. But I think that someone shouting out some note, and doing it well, is sometimes more exciting than someone just singing some pretty note.
(The opposite of this, however; is shoshana singing the first "Fiyero" legit in No Good Deed, which gives me more chills then the belt which immediately follows)

I did not see Caroline, or Change. But I did see several performances on tv, and am basing this opinion off of them. I think that Tonya Pinkins was allowed to continue to perform even with a diminishing ability to hit the needed notes because it still sounded emotionally accurate, if not more so. When I saw her on the Tonys, I was waiting for her larynx to either pop out of her mouth, or her vocal chords to come shooting out of her throat, neither happened. It was not a vocally appealing performance, but emotionally, it was moving.

I've strayed too far and will end with this idea. If any of you have heard Tony Vincent sing - he is incredible. Vocally, he's my idol. He can belt a high C like it's nothing. However, when he does so, it appears to be about a 5th lower, because it sounds so easy. To an audience who doesn't know music, I don't think they would be as excited by him singing a C clearly as they would a G with some grit to it. But that's just my opinion.

Please feel free to correct or disagree with any of these ideas, it's just something I felt the need to discuss.

[Plum]

Posted: 12/7/04 at 7:01pm

ShoTime- The thing is, a lot of the belters that are being obliquely referred to here aren't really using their voices to act. They're just giving demonstrations of their technical prowess (which some would say is questionable) without much regard for musicality or expressiveness. And given that this is musical theater and not a straight vocal concert, that isn't really a good way to go.

[B.B. Wolf]

Posted: 12/7/04 at 7:07pm

As Plum said, many of the people that have been listed on this thread are not doing what is typically called belting, they are simply mixing and putting more emphasis on the chest side of their voice. But, as I've said many many times on threads like this, there is no such thing as a "healthy belt". It is ultimately destructive becuase it is adding strain to natural vocal production. You cannot do straight tones with zero strain. It's not possible, unless you're very young and your voice/vibrato have not developed yet to the point of engaging upon proper breathing. Singers like Eden Espinosa and Idina Menzel who are kind of becoming the poster children for this kind of singing are not belting. If they were they would have no voice after a couple shows. Not to mention that it's just not possible to belt that high. Anyone who says they are doesn't understand what belting is. As for men, the highest tenors in the world can't belt past a high Ab or A. Domingo startsd mixing at an E or Eb and Pavarotti, being a higher tenor, starts mixing around F or F#. The thing that needs to be understood is that it's not simply crossing over from chest to head voice. It can come in gradations and needs to come in gradations for proper production.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 12/7/04 at 7:10pm

"Singers like Eden Espinosa and Idina Menzel who are kind of becoming the poster children for this kind of singing are not belting. If they were they would have no voice after a couple shows. Not to mention that it's just not possible to belt that high. Anyone who says they are doesn't understand what belting is."

Then what would you call what they're doing? Just curious...they aren't mixing like other performers do up there. At least Menzel isn't.

[Plum]

Posted: 12/7/04 at 7:21pm

I thought mixing was exactly what Menzel did.

[BroadwayGirl107]

Posted: 12/7/04 at 7:26pm

I don't think so. I guess I couldn't say for sure, but it sounds nothing like the mix that other belters (ex: Sutton Foster)use at all....maybe that's what confuses me.

[B.B. Wolf]

Posted: 12/7/04 at 7:27pm

Yes, she is mixing. As I said, she's simply adding more of her chest sound to it. A lot of singers can't do this, so for that, she definitely is among the uniquely gifted. It's still not belting.