#26
Posted: 7/22/04 at 5:47pm
Well, then, who teaches your voice teacher's teacher? It's a never ending cycle!
natural talent vs. voice lessons — Page 2
#28
Posted: 7/22/04 at 7:32pm
It is a never ending cycle because everyone keeps growing, and other opinions are always important, even if you are "the best." And I've said it before and I'll say it again, EVERYONE HAS NATURAL TALENT: you just need to find the teacher right for YOU.
#29
Posted: 7/22/04 at 8:00pm
Well, I know that no matter how much I study, I'll never sound like Brian Stokes Mitchell, for example. I mean, God gave that man a voice. The sheer power of his voice -- you just can't get that from lessons. I do agree, however, with those who encourage anyone to give it a try. You can always improve. I might never be ready for Broadway, but I simply enjoy the fact that I sound better to myself in the car and shower.
OK, now I've got "Sing!" from A Chorus Line stuck in my head.
OK, now I've got "Sing!" from A Chorus Line stuck in my head.
"Do you know ChrisLovesShows?" "Yes. Why, yes he does!"
#30
Posted: 7/22/04 at 8:39pm
You can get that power from lessons, and if you want to hear power, you should hear my voice teacher...Wow...When he demonstrated the opening line of "If I Can't Love Her" for me, I thought I would melt, it was the most beautiful sound I've ever heard! Of course, when you're a bass that's one opera singer of the year (it was in some odd place, though), this isn't surprising, but he can do that because he has technique. I'd almost be willing to bet he'd say he didn't always have that, he learned it.
#31
Posted: 7/22/04 at 9:08pm
MJR has offered some very interesting details of vocal technique. I've heard it explained several ways, but his red, blue explaintion is logical and correct.
NO, I am not a voice teacher, but certaintly work with and talk to some of the top vocalists and voice teachers in the business.
"Great singers never stop learning and training" that's pretty much true of many top notch singers. IE: I just covered Lea Salonga in Concert on Sunday. If you've ever heard her sing, you'd call her as "flawless" and "near perfect" as a voice can get.
Lea announced that she just went back to her vocal trainer who was "kicking her ass" with training, so that she can do a project in Manilla shortly.
However, someone like Linda Eder has had no substantial amount of training and admits it. She studied with two vocal teachers very briefly. I know one of them very well. He told me she came to him with that wondeful voice and that he could only adjust a few things technically and send her on way as a great singer. But this is a rarity.
I won't get into anything else about the business for it's really too complex. Just train to be your personal best and do it as "naturally" as you can. There's a big difference bwetween "acting" and "singing".
Sorry this got so long.
NO, I am not a voice teacher, but certaintly work with and talk to some of the top vocalists and voice teachers in the business.
"Great singers never stop learning and training" that's pretty much true of many top notch singers. IE: I just covered Lea Salonga in Concert on Sunday. If you've ever heard her sing, you'd call her as "flawless" and "near perfect" as a voice can get.
Lea announced that she just went back to her vocal trainer who was "kicking her ass" with training, so that she can do a project in Manilla shortly.
However, someone like Linda Eder has had no substantial amount of training and admits it. She studied with two vocal teachers very briefly. I know one of them very well. He told me she came to him with that wondeful voice and that he could only adjust a few things technically and send her on way as a great singer. But this is a rarity.
I won't get into anything else about the business for it's really too complex. Just train to be your personal best and do it as "naturally" as you can. There's a big difference bwetween "acting" and "singing".
Sorry this got so long.
www.pbentertainmentinc.com
BWW regional writer "Philadelphia/South Jersey"
#32
Posted: 7/22/04 at 10:38pm
it kinda makes me feel better that someone as great as lea needs training too. i've pretty much just started lessons 4 months ago and i do recognize a great change in my voice. my teacher was training me with lots of lea songs and my main problem with that is that i feel like i will never hold a candle to her so i want to work on different songs. but practicing singing feels so much better after you get some lessons so you can really take pride in how much progress you've made.
Thou giveth fever.
#33
Posted: 7/22/04 at 10:43pm
You need a bit of both.
It's not enough to have the raw talent if you don't have the determination and drive to train properly. For example, you may have the most beautiful voice in the world, but without proper technique, you won't have it for long. Plus, even if you are the most talented person in the world, the work is still not going to find you. You have to find it, which can be as hard for the naturally talented as all of the others.
It's also not enough to JUST train. You DO have to have an affinity for music. Some people, no matter how hard they try, are just tone deaf, or have weak voices, or zero flexibility, or no stage prescence. You can train the crap out of them and you won't be getting very far. It's too bad, because these are the people who REALLY want it. But you do need the raw goods.
AND
I'm a firm believer that stage prescence is a natural thing. It can't be learned. If there was one thing I took from the Centre Stage movie, it was the line "when Margot Fontaine danced you couldn't take your eyes off her. It can't be taught." Stage prescence is what will get you noticed, and it can't be taught.
I'm seeing this play out right before my eyes right now. I'm currently directing a kid's show, and we have two casts. The one cast is much stronger than the other in terms of natural talent, but because of that they are slacking off. So the cast without as much talent is right now doing much better because they work a lot harder. This means they know their dance steps and their songs better than the other cast, but when it comes right down to it, the kids in the other cast will put on a better show because they've got the raw goods.
Long story short.....
you need both.
It's not enough to have the raw talent if you don't have the determination and drive to train properly. For example, you may have the most beautiful voice in the world, but without proper technique, you won't have it for long. Plus, even if you are the most talented person in the world, the work is still not going to find you. You have to find it, which can be as hard for the naturally talented as all of the others.
It's also not enough to JUST train. You DO have to have an affinity for music. Some people, no matter how hard they try, are just tone deaf, or have weak voices, or zero flexibility, or no stage prescence. You can train the crap out of them and you won't be getting very far. It's too bad, because these are the people who REALLY want it. But you do need the raw goods.
AND
I'm a firm believer that stage prescence is a natural thing. It can't be learned. If there was one thing I took from the Centre Stage movie, it was the line "when Margot Fontaine danced you couldn't take your eyes off her. It can't be taught." Stage prescence is what will get you noticed, and it can't be taught.
I'm seeing this play out right before my eyes right now. I'm currently directing a kid's show, and we have two casts. The one cast is much stronger than the other in terms of natural talent, but because of that they are slacking off. So the cast without as much talent is right now doing much better because they work a lot harder. This means they know their dance steps and their songs better than the other cast, but when it comes right down to it, the kids in the other cast will put on a better show because they've got the raw goods.
Long story short.....
you need both.
.jpg?format=auto&width=300)
.png?format=auto&width=365)
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $58
Tickets From $106
Tickets From $71
