I don't get why when Patti sings, she- Page 3

[Bialyhoos22]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 4:31pm

Anyone who feels compelled to chastize others about her vocal technique or lack thereof, she has for many years been a voice student of the renowned Joan Lader, a woman deeply respected by many in the legit, musical theatre and pop music worlds. She is easily the most revered teacher of voice in New York and knows a thing or two about healthy vocal production. Is Patti singing in a fashion that would allow her to do a full opera at the Met? Perhaps not. But clearly, what she has done and continues to do - jaw shaking and all - is at the *very least* healthy and works for the roles she goes after. Whether you like the tone or effect is another thing entirely.
Updated On: 7/6/11 at 04:31 PM

[jrb]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 4:34pm

Ding ding ding ding.
We have a winner.
Thank you bialy!

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 4:46pm

I think Joan would keep Lassie on as a student as long as she could afford her high prices.
(that's not a dig at anyone, just business)

[Bialyhoos22]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 4:47pm

Furthermore, it seems only appropriate given that Patti's playing Mama Rose that I remind all what numerous Merman biographers have stated about the Merm's vocal technique.

While Merman stated she never took a voice lesson (and indeed George Gershwin later ordered her to never see a voice teacher) Ethel did in fact take one voice lesson early in her career and that supposedly 'respected' teacher said that she was singing improperly and wouldn't be able to maintain her sound or vocal health without retraining her diaphragm (among other things). As a performer who seldom missed a performance, let alone for vocal issues (save a burst blood vessel in her throat during Gypsy), it's clear the teacher was wrong. Just go on YouTube and listen to how that glorious brassy voice held up well into the seventies and early eighties! Sure her vibrato became more pronounced but she still had every note!

[broadwayjules]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 5:09pm

""Well it didn't take long for some jerk-off to ruin this thread.""

Ya, paljoey usually does that to a thread for me. Finally an intelligent discussion on a thread and he just has to get huffy about someone in the world thinking that Patti isn't the be all end all. Adds nothing to the conversation.

I'm with Reginald Tresilian here

[TooDarnHot]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 6:16pm

TotallyEffed - what are you talking about???

as a vocal teacher I must say that jrb is closest to being "spot on" here, about technique.

YOU don't know what you're talking about. just go keep making those impersonation videos... leave the real stuff to the big boys.

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 6:23pm

Oh, goodness.



Ok, toodarnhot. As a voice coach, care to give us a lesson on vibrato?

[COOOOLkid]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 7:19pm

No one should be listening to comments about talent, vocal technique, or presence from some dipsh*t Asian who wishes they were a black hip-hop artist.

What the ****?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 9:44pm

Ya, paljoey usually does that to a thread for me. Finally an intelligent discussion on a thread and he just has to get huffy about someone in the world thinking that Patti isn't the be all end all.

So says the Linda Eder fan.

A Linda EDER fan!

Nyuk-nyuk-nyuk...

[broadwayjules]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 10:53pm

^---AND he can read! Congrats

[sondhead]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 11:00pm

" I don't think that's the case with Ms. LuPone-I think she actually uses her jaw, larynx, and tongue to create her vibrato, much like a trill."

This doesn't make any sense. The jaw doesn't contribute anything to pitch, and therefore has nothing to do with vibrato. All a wagging jaw indicates is jaw tension, which is indeed bad, but it has nothing to do with manufactured vibrato. All your mouth and jaw can do is promote air flow and make vowel sounds.

[sleepyguy1717]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 11:10pm

If vibrato was a naturally occuring thing, wouldn't it happen with boy sopranos?

[Zeitoujo]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 11:11pm

I mean dont get me wrong, I love patti as rose, but her singing irritates me.

[TooDarnHot]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 11:25pm

Then stop listening to her, change your avatar picture, and MOVE ON.

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 11:44pm

this is a very interesting thread, but imho,

if lots of people who tend to know what they're talking about say you can sing, then you're in their show, and then you become famous.

technique is extremely important to the voice - but i mean, if you don't have it, and you're still headlining a broadway show at age 29 (Bundy) or at age 60-some (LuPone), and you're sustaining - it don't matter. You're a Broadway star, and many people with perfect technique aren't. so whatevs.

i mean, look at carol channing.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/2/08 at 11:58pm

Or Gwen Verdon.

[sondhead]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 8:44am

"technique is extremely important to the voice - but i mean, if you don't have it, and you're still headlining a broadway show at age 29 (Bundy) or at age 60-some (LuPone), and you're sustaining - it don't matter. You're a Broadway star, and many people with perfect technique aren't. so whatevs."

Everyone is different. Most people need solid technique to be sounding good. Some people have naturally good resonance and chords of steel, as clearly Ms. LuPone does, so it works out.

Why you would put Bundy in this list is beyond me. She's, for me, in a growing list of performers with NO technique--and it shows.

[bundy5000]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 9:32am

oh my so Irritable

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 10:30am

Broadwayjules, I think you misunderstood my post. What I find unpleasant, with regard to LuPone discussions, are the people who resort to schoolyard taunts (e.g., comparing LuPone to Lassie).

The anti-Patti faction seems incapable of saying anything intelligent about her. The struggles to explain away her popularity are simply hilarious: other people make her look better than she is (if she stinks, wouldn't good performers make her look worse?) or she's some product of canny marketing, a la Miley Cyrus.

And then it's all followed by a wide-eyed "Why can't I express my opinion?"

Silly, silly people . . .





Updated On: 7/3/08 at 10:30 AM

[broadwayjules]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 10:49am

No misunderstanding...I agree with your post because you are able to express yourself intelligently...Patti fan or not, and a good chunk of the Patti fanantics are unable to do this. It's either you're wrong because you don't like Patti, or you're wrong becuase you do like Patti. I think my biggest concern is how almost every single thread lately is about this and LuPone.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 11:17am

Funny how there are so many threads about Patti yet nary a POST about Linda Eder.

I'm sorry you find my posts unintelligent; others here enjoy them. Most of the patti threads are started by Patti Haters, like my good friend JoeKV99.

Not everyone possesses the innate intelligence and easy charm of the dazzling Reginald Tresilian (to whom I'd doff my top hat, if I had one).

Some of us were born in the Bronx.

[broadwayjules]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 11:28am

Linda has nothing to do with this thread, and unlike the Patti fanatics, I feel no need to bring her into every single thread. You may feel throwing Linda into my face proves some sort of point in your world just because of my signiture, but I couldn't care less.

I also wasn't refering to you paljoey, about the unintelligent threads...not everything is about you/Patti

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 11:29am

I, for one, find Pal Joey's posts intelligent, informative, and funny as hell.


Consider my own hat doffed.

[jrb]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 11:35am

Ah...the Lina Eder "situation".

A woman who claims to have never taken a single voice lesson and yet, is considered by most to be far more singer than actress (poor woman can't act her way out of a carboad box, imho).

Linda is a perfect example of someone with natural technique (or lack thereof, depending on how you see it).
Personally, I'm no fan but she has made a career for herself and does some relatively impressive things with little to no training. More power to her.

Ultimately, no matter if a person is trained or not the technique shouldn't show. It shouldn't even be a thought in the viewer's mind. Technique is supposed to be hidden. Like a garden cloth to keep out the weeds, it is designed to sit beneith the surface and prevent imperfections from growing up to the surface - or at the very most, to facilitate the singer's ability to achieve desired communication.
Folks like Eder have it easy - they have no technique. They just shut up and sing. Folks with technique are really striving to get to a place where their performance is seemingly effortless. As a singer, I envy the Eders of the world. I've studied for years to sing with the ease that they have inately.

As for Patti - I echo those who have said that her technical glitches just don't matter. She is popular because she embodies the ideal of the diva. Like Maria Callas (another inately flawed performer), Patti's celebrity is as much about her oddities as it is about her undeniable talents (and no, I'm not comparing the two as singers. They aren't comparable - totally different genres.)

[lcinva]

Posted: 7/3/08 at 11:37am

Well, I don't have the vocal training music-wise of most people on this board, I'm just an average person with an interest in Broadway. However, I do have an advanced degree in speech-language pathology, and jrb is the most correct in explaining the vibrato function. His musical instrument analogy wasn't too bad either.