|
SLS style teaching and the way it talks about head voice and falsetto is the most confusing godddamn thing ever. As far as I can tell they're pretty much the same thing, albeit with "headvoice" being full and connected and "falsetto" being more thin. Either way the full voice one definitely sounds like the wrong approach, the "head voice" one is almost there but with a few cracks that suggest its not properly supported.
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2012 15:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 13:15 |
|
|
Thanks, that's what I was (mostly) hoping to hear. I mainly did the straining one for reference (especially since it's how I used to approach everything) and to see whether there's anything of value that can be salvaged. The "head" stuff is pretty drat comfortable if (currently) weak. Only a few months ago, the max volume I could achieve was probably half as much, so I have no doubt it'll get stronger. Connecting at the bottom is what troubles me most, and what leaves me doubting. Also, a quick recording on something I've recently been able to do on an Ah vowel. It feels pretty meaty, no strain, but still hard to connect at the bottom. The first break is just me running out of breath, but the second one conveniently lets me switch to plain chest. This is right out of the shower, but later in the day I could probably support it better. https://soundcloud.com/gandlethorpe/b-flat-descending I haven't been able to do this on any other vowel though, and thus can't really apply it in many songs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2012 17:21
|
|
|
I know some will disagree with me on this, but I like to think of the Head voice as the higher range of falsetto. For example, you know it's falsetto if you can sing those same notes in chest voice (though it usually sounds quite strained in chest voice at the top of your range). But once you reach the very top of your chest voice and are forced to go into falsetto, you're actually going into head voice register. Head voice has a different tone than falsetto because you're zipping up your vocal chords and it can actually be sung much louder than falsetto. Falsetto is very breathy and it's very difficult to sing loudly. But head voice is more piercing and more nasal. You know it's head voice if your nose vibrates. It's similar to chest voice in that as you reach the higher notes near the top of your range, you're kind of forced to belt them out and it's very difficult to sing quietly. What people often confuse with head voice, is actually the mixed voice. The mixed voice is a combination of falsetto and chest voice. When you can train your voice to combine these two registers where they overlap, you get a much better tone. It doesn't sound as strained as when you try to belt out those high notes in pure chest voice, and there is more of a smooth transition between registers rather than the sudden break between chest and head voice. You're kind of using the same technique of zipping up your vocal chords and you feel the vibration in your nose as you do with head voice, so a lot of people call mixed voice head voice. I like to differentiate the two though, because it makes it easier for me to understand. Gianthogweed fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Dec 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2012 18:44
|
|
|
I haven't posted any singing in here for a long time and I was dicking around today, so enjoy: I welcome comments but  I'm quite aware that the ends of phrases (and especially the end) are REALLY ragged. I was just messing around and I'm not inclined to go back when it's just for fun.Edit: Another one! Better endings! 
Hawkperson fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Dec 20, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2012 04:09
|
|
|
Gianthogweed posted:I know some will disagree with me on this, but I like to think of the Head voice as the higher range of falsetto. I think I kinda get what you're saying, and agree mostly. I think your definition of head voice is like a male trying to sing like a female opera singer (which I can sorta do sometimes), i.e. notes that have no chance of getting any chest resonance. That tricky area where chest starts to get uncomfortable is where (your definition of) falsetto starts to dominate, but mixed voice can minimize the apparent gap. Let's take this song By Jason Mraz for example. Would you say the part at 2:34 is falsetto or mixed, while the (opera-like) part that starts at 3:03 is pure head voice? Also, I agree with you on blending falsetto and chest. I hear a lot of instructional videos saying "falsetto just doesn't connect with chest", but I don't believe it. Just take a look at Al Green, Frankie Valli, David Gates (of Bread), the Beach Boys, etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 00:05
|
|
|
gandlethorpe posted:I think I kinda get what you're saying, and agree mostly. I think your definition of head voice is like a male trying to sing like a female opera singer (which I can sorta do sometimes), i.e. notes that have no chance of getting any chest resonance. That tricky area where chest starts to get uncomfortable is where (your definition of) falsetto starts to dominate, but mixed voice can minimize the apparent gap. He's doing mostly falsetto, except for the really high notes, then he's going into head voice. Generally speaking, if you're singing softly, you'll probably go into falsetto rather than a mixed voice. Chris Martin from Coldplay does this a lot. It's a bit easier than training a mixed voice, but it still takes a lot of training to make it sound good. When I think mixed voice, I think of singers like Bono, or Sting, or Gotye (those really high parts that sound like pure chest voice but are actually a mixed voice). When I think head voice, I think of Heavy Metal singers like Rob Halfred or Bruce Dickenson (those very high pitched operatic tones).
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 00:33
|
|
|
Okay, I think I see where you're getting at. Sounds kind of like a book I bought a while ago, which I generally agree with, by Roger Love, and actually where I was introduced to the concept of mixed voice. So that mix is what still eludes me, even though I have about a ~2.5 step overlap of chest and falsetto where doing either alone starts to get uncomfortable or breaks apart. Can you explain more about mixed voice, especially "zipping up"? Because I hear that term a lot and know it's talking about the vocal cords, but I don't know how to go about practicing it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 01:21
|
|
|
gandlethorpe posted:Okay, I think I see where you're getting at. Sounds kind of like a book I bought a while ago, which I generally agree with, by Roger Love, and actually where I was introduced to the concept of mixed voice. I'm still trying to get the mixed voice as well. A great way to find it is to do scales ever day saying the word "nay". You kind of need to force a very nasal tone, because the more nasal you sing, the easier it is to find the mixed voice. It's going to sound awful at first, you'll sound kind of like Jerry Lewis (Hoigin flaigin!), but as you practice it you'll be able to improve your tone and it will sound more like your chest voice (a lot less nasal). You'll know your doing it if your nose is vibrating and you're coming up from above the note rather than from beneath it. There's a great CD series called "Brett Manning's Singing Success" that teaches you all the exercises you need to get to find the mixed voice. It isn't easy though. You need to practice every day and it will take at least a few months before it sounds any good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 02:53
|
|
|
New singer question time! Last semester, I joined the choir at my college. I had never sung before that, and was able to improve as the class went on. I learned a lot, but I'm still in the beginning stages of my singing. Last night I was singing over some stuff I had recorded and was singing as loud and harder then I had before, certainly by myself. After about 30 minutes my vocal chords started feeling strained (like when you have a cold and your throat is sore) and this morning my voice is a touch hoarse, with my throat still under the weather. I was taught how to sing with proper technique (in a choral setting) but I don't know if I had been following that as I should've been. I assume I can attribute that to my vocal chord problem? Or is it just 'natural' strain from singing harder than I had before? Thanks for any help. I was recording myself in fifths over the music and it was a blast 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 20:08
|
|
|
Hm, I wouldn't consider singing "louder" singing "harder." I think that's probably where you went wrong. Loud singing isn't really about forcing things (that usually makes people tense up which causes problems). When I sing loud I think of it as simply releasing the sound I'm making. It's very relaxed (and fun as poo poo as you noted). Singing uses a lot of muscles that we don't have very precise conscious control of so you might fix it in the future with a simple change of mental approach. For now, yeah, you kind of took a poo poo on your voice. Take it easy today and only talk if you need to, and get lots of sleep and you'll probably be fine. It's my understanding that you basically made your vocal cords swollen by rubbing them together too much. If you continue doing that you might get blisters, which is basically what vocal nodes are. But you are probably fine. As noted earlier in the thread, I am not a doctor so don't blame me if you turn out to have throat cancer or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 23:35
|
|
|
Hawkgirl posted:Hm, I wouldn't consider singing "louder" singing "harder." I think that's probably where you went wrong. Loud singing isn't really about forcing things (that usually makes people tense up which causes problems). When I sing loud I think of it as simply releasing the sound I'm making. It's very relaxed (and fun as poo poo as you noted). Singing uses a lot of muscles that we don't have very precise conscious control of so you might fix it in the future with a simple change of mental approach. Thanks for the help/reply And yea, I'm not holding you or whomever liable for the advice they give out based on limited info. I was just curious how prevalent it is for beginner singers to injure or strain their vocal chords. I didn't know if it was A) I'm just getting used to singing, where the muscles are doing what they haven't been required to do before or B) Im dumb and used improper technique and my vocals aren't used to that kind of strain. Or just some combo of both
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2012 01:55
|
|
|
Gianthogweed posted:I know some will disagree with me on this, but I like to think of the Head voice as the higher range of falsetto. For what it's worth I think your definitions are wrong, but people misuse terminology regarding voice registration so much that it almost doesn't matter. Speech pathology makes a distinction between the modal voice and the falsetto voice as a matter of vocal chord function. From the reasonably good Wikipedia falsetto article: Wikipedia posted:The modal voice, or modal register, and falsetto register differ primarily in the action of the vocal cords. Production of the normal voice involves vibration of the entire vocal folds, with the glottis opening first at the bottom and then at the top. Production of falsetto, on the other hand, vibrates only the ligamentous edges of the vocal folds while leaving each fold's body relatively relaxed.[11] Transition from modal voice to falsetto occurs when each vocal cord's main body, or vocalis muscle, relaxes, enabling the cricothyroid muscles to stretch the vocal ligaments. "For example, you know it's falsetto if you can sing those same notes in chest voice " is wrong. For example, I'm a mediocre light baritone with a few years of classical training who likes sometimes to sing countertenor material in my falsetto in a roughly alto range, and the overlap between my modal voice and falsetto is at least an octave. Lots of men don't experiment very much with the ability to sing in the lower range of their falsetto, but this is currently standard practice among current operatic countertenors (like Andreas Scholl or David Daniels), who tend to extend their falsetto really low (lots of falsetto A3s) with occasional light modal notes they carefully transition to. Really awesome falsettists like the above mentioned singers have fuller glottal closure in their falsetto resulting in more volume and rich tone than the whispery, light tone that people often think of with the term, but it's physiologically essentially the same mechanism, just reinforced and strengthened. I think the more correct use of the terms chest and head voice are really just in reference to perceived changes in resonance in the modal voice rather than a change in vocal chord function. Your definition of head voice sounds like the perceived registration feel of the upper falsetto. Wikipedia has decent articles on vocal chord function and registration. It sounds like you've been going off of Manning's stuff? His videos on youtube make him seem like a hack. Faltese Malkin posted:Last night I was singing over some stuff I had recorded and was singing as loud and harder then I had before, certainly by myself. After about 30 minutes my vocal chords started feeling strained (like when you have a cold and your throat is sore) and this morning my voice is a touch hoarse, with my throat still under the weather. If you feel your voice is being strained, take it easy, pay closer attention to technique, don't sing out so much, and maybe sing the upper notes in falsetto if that's easier for you (this is what I do a lot singing choral tenor parts being an actual baritone), at least in rehearsal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 04:17
|
|
|
I know my definitions are controversial. But I think what you're referring to is head register (as in resonating in the head) as opposed to head voice, which has several definitions that aren't agreed upon. So i just picked the definition that helps me understand what I'm doing to differentiate the breathier falsetto with the more nasal and powerful falsetto at the higher end (head voice). I just started the brett manning series. A friend reccomended them because they improved his singing significantly. Brett Manning may very well be a hack, and I'm still suspicious that there is such a thing as a mixed voice. But my friend can sing inthe mix quite proficiently now, and he credits those cds. He insists that its an actual mix of falsetto and chest voice, but I'm not yet convinced. I think the tone of that region of notes just improves naturally with regular exercises, and Manning's exercises are pretty traditional for the most part. Right now my mixed voice sounds like most annoying sound in the world (a la jim carrey from dumb and dumber). But when you actually hear Jim Carrey do that it actually does sound like two voices at the same time, so maybe there's something to it. Nevertheless I'd like to know what other singers think of Brett Manning's technique, and the whole idea of the mixed voice. Is he a hack? Does the mixed voice exist?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2012 04:58
|
|
|
Gianthogweed posted:stuff about falsetto mixed voice manning etc The issue is that these terms have had agreed upon definitions for singers for a very long time, and people who clearly don't understand the terms or agreed upon singing fundamentals are using them to lend credibility to their own newly invented methods of instruction which confuses everybody, as seen in this thread. I was going to respond to gandlethorpe earlier and I forgot to hit post, so here goes. gandlethorpe posted:I've been seeing an SLS instructor since February and have definitely seen growth in my voice, but I'm still often unsure whether something is head voice or falsetto. Hi Gandlethorpe, this is going to sound mean but if you've been seeing this teacher since February you're getting ripped off. You shouldn't have to be asking this question here if you're taking private instruction. Why is it that everyone who teaches "head voice" versus "falsetto" on Youtube seems like a loving moron? I don't know. Reading Gianthogweed's post, I don't have a clue what zipping up the vocal cords could mean. It certainly doesn't remotely describe any physical process that's actually going on, nor does it describe any sensation I've ever had while singing. Then there's the adoption of classical singing terms with reinvented definitions. Every time I look into SLS it seems like a bunch of people trying to reinvent the wheel without understanding why it rolls. After listening to some explanations, here's what I understand of the distinction between "falsetto" and "head voice". SLS type definitions -"Head voice": singing very nasally above the break with poor breath support and a raised soft palate, which gives good resonance but poor tone and no real natural vibrato. -"Falsetto": singing classical falsetto, which is above the break in the male voice, with a dropped soft palate resulting in poor resonance The target voice that instructors demonstrate in the videos I've found is just a more nasal standard falsetto usually with a forced tone (hello pop vocals) from pushing breath really hard and sometimes tensing the throat. These are style effects that anyone with classical training can do with a little practice. As for Brett Manning specifically, I googled him and, uh, what the gently caress is this? Then there's this video. I mean, what? People pay this guy? Listen, if you can't already sing really well you're not going to get anything out of his videos which focus on adding style to an already strong voice, and if you can sing well there's really nothing really there for you other than watching bad practice habits and bad technique. Does mixed voice exist? Seeing as it's the name these instructors have given their technique, sure, I guess it does. Oh and here's him performing a song and it sounds like karaoke night so... P.S. cpach clearly knows more than I do about the science of singing technique and I agree with everything he said AriTheDog fucked around with this message at 05:51 on Dec 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2012 05:34
|
|
|
For what it's worth a ton of classical instructors also are bad about terminology, and major historical schools of singing that predate a scientific understanding of vocal production are still a big deal. When dealing with anything historical it's a total cluster: in the earliest usage of the term (like in the 14th century etc) head voice probably did mean falsetto, for example. I've had choral directors tell the tenor section to not strain for high notes by telling us to sing "pure head voice" or "pure head tone" when they very clearly meant for us to sing a passage falsetto. My old vocal coach used the same terminology (and was remarkably unhelpful about any specific training in my falsetto or in transitioning between my modal and falsetto voices). I maintain that poo poo is such a clusterfuck that terminology about registration is almost useless without a known context or some careful definition. Ari's attempt at understanding the head/falsetto terminology used by some commercial singing instructors is about as good as anything. It's probably really just a distinction between "falsetto production I think sounds horrible" and "falsetto that I think sounds good". For what it's worth I think the "mixed voice' you're talking about is basically equivalent to good technique in what would be more properly called the head resonance, particularly among tenors, using vocal cover and vowel modification above approx. F4 for most tenors. It could also possibly refer to a relatively clean dovetailing between falsetto and modal voice. Aso gandlethorpe: your takes on Isn't She Lovely aren't bad or anything, but it's healthy to remind oneself that someone like Stevie Wonder (or Michael Jackson) doesn't just have a high voice, they have an EXTREMELY uncommonly high voice and trying to sound like them at the same pitch isn't realistic unless you're also a one of thousands genetic wunderkid. Isn't She Lovely isn't actually insane (verse I think goes to A4, chorus B4) so a good real tenor could sing it without falsetto, but even then Stevie just sounds like he's singing in the most ordinary, comfortable part of his voice on the track and that's not very common. There is similar genre music where dudes are pretty much just singing falsetto in this range (which is what you're doing). It's really easy to get distracted in a search for range but it's not always the best thing for the actual development of vocal technique. A lot (most?) good vocal coaches mostly start students in the solidly comfortable part of their range so to focus on basic technique for this reason (while running exercises over a wider range, typically).
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2012 19:25
|
|
|
cpach posted:For what it's worth a ton of classical instructors also are bad about terminology, and major historical schools of singing that predate a scientific understanding of vocal production are still a big deal. When dealing with anything historical it's a total cluster: in the earliest usage of the term (like in the 14th century etc) head voice probably did mean falsetto, for example. I've had choral directors tell the tenor section to not strain for high notes by telling us to sing "pure head voice" or "pure head tone" when they very clearly meant for us to sing a passage falsetto. My old vocal coach used the same terminology (and was remarkably unhelpful about any specific training in my falsetto or in transitioning between my modal and falsetto voices). I maintain that poo poo is such a clusterfuck that terminology about registration is almost useless without a known context or some careful definition. This is pretty much my thoughts on it. The emphasis on the mixed voice part of his cds is working on a clean transition between the registers. This is something I was able to do pretty well before I even started the cds though, but I admit my higher modal voice above middle C was always pretty strained and has only recently improved in tone. I'm a pretty deep baritone, almost a bass, so perhaps this is only natural. I don't think I'll ever sound like Sting, Bono, Gotye or Steve Perry but I can fake them on Karaoke night with liberal use of head voice. I can sing 3 full octaves if I go into head voice, and my range has improved significantly since I started singing regularly. I used to be only able to sing 2 octaves. I'm not sure if Ari's definition was much different than mine, and I don't think it contradicts anything. I always associated falsetto with the breathier, quieter singing above the chest (or modal) voice. This can actually sound quite good if sung right (Coldplay comes to mind). Head voice is also above chest voice, but resonates in the head and can be louder and more nasal. It can also sound great if sung right (a la Judas Priest). It's just two different ways of singing the high notes as far as I'm concerned. They are both above the chest (or modal) voice, it's just that the breathier falsetto resonates more in the throat, while the more nasal head voice resonates more in the head (your nose will vibrate with head voice). Some may disagree, but this is how I learned the distinction, and it's the easiest way for me to understand what's going on when I try to sing these high notes. As for the mixed voice, again I'm not sure I believe it's an actual mix between chest and falsetto, but I agree with you that it is probably more of a means of mastering the transition between your modal voice and falsetto/head register. For a baritone, knowing how to do this is essential. We can't sing above middle C in the modal voice as effortlessly as tenors can, like Sting, Gotye, Bono, etc., so perhaps singing like them is beyond our physical capabilities. Most men are baritones, and higher tenors like Michael Jackson and Stevie Wonder are even rarer still. That's why they earned the big bucks. Sometimes I wish I was a tenor. Gianthogweed fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Dec 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2012 19:13
|
|
|
So I'm not a singer, but I'm looking for some resources. I just picked up a singer for my jazz combo, and it's his first time singing in a few years, but he seemed fine enough at the last rehearsal to my non-singer ears. He's a baritone, and his experience singing is choir throughout grade school, and then a barbershop quartet in college. So here's what I'd like to know: -what can I do to help him develop a "jazzier" sound? He feels he's falling back on his old choral experience, and I'm inclined to agree -what are some things that would be good for him to practice? -what are some things I can do to help him at rehearsals? Any help would be greatly appreciated, since I'm a drummer and know less than nothing about singing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
I've heard this line so many times and I finally get to repeat it: Jazz is an oral tradition. So listen! Grab some CDs of singers who have the "feel" you like and make him memorize them. I'm serious. Try not to give him any tunes that you'd like to do in the near future, because of course they will be carbon copies of the recordings for a while. But make him do that and you will see some massive improvement in jazziness. Vocal jazz is blessed because the singers tend to have good technique and for the most part this shouldn't steer him poorly. In fact, I would recommend a vocal jazz group for at least one of his listening CDs since the singers tend to have very good technique, and they generally focus on making a clear, beautiful, but jazzy tone so that they blend together well. Once he's got the basic jazz sound down, he can think about adding his own solostic style. What would be good for him to practice? Well, the above, and then improvisation. For improv, memorizing famous solos (instrumental or vocal) is pretty common, again to learn the style. If you're really serious about this you should definitely get him to learn his music theory so that he can understand improvisation in the same way that a sax player understands improvisation. It's really useful to have a singer that can read a chart and pull out appropriate licks for the changes. Help him at rehearsals? I dunno, do you do anything special for solo instrumentalists? Giving him good setups for syncopated rhythms might help his jazziness. Is this your jazz combo, like it's the Jazz Marimba and Friends Combo? Why won't someone ask me to sing for their combo. I want to so bad 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 05:37
|
|
|
Hawkgirl posted:I've heard this line so many times and I finally get to repeat it: Jazz is an oral tradition. So listen! Grab some CDs of singers who have the "feel" you like and make him memorize them. I'm serious. Try not to give him any tunes that you'd like to do in the near future, because of course they will be carbon copies of the recordings for a while. But make him do that and you will see some massive improvement in jazziness. I'm not exactly sure what kind of "feel" I'm looking for...I'm a drummer, and up until recently I've kinda shied away from non-instrumental jazz  Last night I looked up jazz baritone singers, but it's only like five people, and again, I know so little about singing it's embarrassing. Are there any specific CDs you recommend?Yeah, I'm getting everyone to learn theory so they can solo. I'm starting with getting him able to read chord changes so he can do a basic vocal bass line, and then having my bassist practice soloing over that. For vocal soloing, is there a list of syllables to choose from anywhere? And is there a list of non-English syllables too? Specifically Japanese since he's fluent, but I would be interested in others too. Up until this last rehearsal it was just me and the bassist, so I was focusing exclusively on him, teaching him things like swing feel, walking bass lines, chart reading and whatnot (he also doesn't have jazz experience--heavy punk background), and I want to be able to do that for the singer too. Right now it's mostly confidence building, but I don't know how to help him in rehearsals once he's loud and has the tunes memorized, and I don't want to just ignore him. Is that okay to do, if he's got that stuff down? What's a "good setup for syncopated rhythms"? Yeah, I'm the bandleader. We're definitely not going to be Me and Friends, or My Trio/Quartet/etc. though, since I feel those names are overused. I can't speak for other people, but I was actually kinda avoiding singers, and trying to find a pianist and/or saxophone player. I met my singer at a party hosted by a mutual friend and figured "sure, why not?". I think when most people think of modern jazz, it's instrumental. But I saw your post in the playing with each other thread, and your location might have something to do with it...I'm in Chicago, which is like the jazziest city in the country :P
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
I'm sneaking a peek at work so I'll respond more later, but no, there is a crazy stereotype against vocalists, I would even say especially in jazz. Because so many of them don't learn the theory, and then mouth off about it. I didn't want to act troll-y in the vocalist thread, though
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
Jazz Marimba, how much experience do you personally have with jazz and jazz theory? I'm asking because you sound fairly new to it yourself and if that's the case there's not a whole lot you can do besides not worrying too much and having a whole lot of fun with it. Your singer's always going to sound a lot like he sounds right now no matter how much he practices. That's not necessarily a bad thing, though, it just means that's what you're going to be working with. I'd recommend instead of trying to make the group fit a pre-conceived mold, to interpret the songs with the sounds at your disposal and enjoy the process of creation and education. EDIT: Obviously studying the theory, techniques and stylings of great artists is an excellent idea, but other than that you have to let things take their natural course. cactuscarpet fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Jan 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 21:35
|
|
|
cactuscarpet posted:Jazz Marimba, how much experience do you personally have with jazz and jazz theory? I'm asking because you sound fairly new to it yourself and if that's the case there's not a whole lot you can do besides not worrying too much and having a whole lot of fun with it. Your singer's always going to sound a lot like he sounds right now no matter how much he practices. That's not necessarily a bad thing, though, it just means that's what you're going to be working with. I'd recommend instead of trying to make the group fit a pre-conceived mold, to interpret the songs with the sounds at your disposal and enjoy the process of creation and education. I've been drumming for several years, all but one of which has been jazz. But...guilty as charged; I'm pretty much the stereotypical drummer that sucks at theory. I've been working on it for the last couple months, but it's not terribly much. Thanks for the advice! Hawkgirl, I look forward to your next post!
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 06:18
|
|
|
Jazz Marimba posted:So I'm not a singer, but I'm looking for some resources. I just picked up a singer for my jazz combo, and it's his first time singing in a few years, but he seemed fine enough at the last rehearsal to my non-singer ears. He's a baritone, and his experience singing is choir throughout grade school, and then a barbershop quartet in college. Theres so many different styles of jazz, and you'd be using different technique depending on what you're trying to do. i'm going to assume that he already has the basics down; breath control, good relaxation, pitch, etc etc. If he has a choral sound, he's probably using more classical technique, such as singing with a low larynx. If you're going for a smooth, jazz-lounge sound, then you'll want to get him to raise the larynx SLIGHTLY, which will introduce some nasality and make it sound a little closer to speech. It's really important that that is not overdone and is done without introducing stress, which might take some practice if he hasnt tried this yet. A subdued vibrato that is used less and sometimes introduced toward the middle of a held note, versus the all out vibrato that is used in choir music, will help too. Jazz also has a lot more liberties with how you pronounce and emphasize certain vowels and consonants, so you'll want to look into what works in the jazz style you're trying to do. This is something that they'd slap you for in choir, but can work really well in jazz. Don't abuse or over-do this,it'll make him sound dumb. (Heres a good example of what I mean with this. (I'm still working on pronunciation/enunciation in singing myself, so I'm far from an expert on this.)) Finally, if he's unfamiliar with runs and improvisation, you can (and should) introduce some of that. I'm assuming he knows scales/relative pitch? If not, now's a good time to learn!  for the most part you might want to stick to simple stuff, like a quick trill, a triplet, etc. Huge runs are more the land of R&B and dudes singing the national anthem at sporting events, but they can work sometimes if you know what you're doing.That's some of the easy-to-introduce stuff off of the top of my head that could help for a jazzier sound. This all comes secondary to proper singing technique, so if he has trouble with control, he might need more general exercises. Hope this helps a little, and if theres anything else you want to know I'm happy to help 
Copacabana fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Jan 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2013 00:45
|
|
|
So I forgot I was coming back to this thread, and then today I was writing a super-long post on my phone and then I got distracted by NAMM and by the time I was on the tram back to my car the stupid post disappeared, so uh, sorry.Jazz Marimba posted:I'm not exactly sure what kind of "feel" I'm looking for...I'm a drummer, and up until recently I've kinda shied away from non-instrumental jazz Don't limit yourself to male singers, or even to vocalists. Like cactuscarpet said, your singer is never going to actually change the timbre of his voice and to a certain extent, the way he prefers to use it. Instead the point is to go find the kind of jazz you'd like in your combo and get really familiar with it, and get your singer to pick up the style. In college I was in vocal jazz groups so the first CD I memorized back-to-front was a New York Voices CD. I can sing every song with identical phrasing and style as whoever's singing the lead at any given moment. And though my personal solo jazz style is different, it was really educational to go through and literally memorize the whole CD. But you can do that with any singer or even any instrumentalist. Play around with singing an octave above or below if the instrument isn't the same range as your voice. quote:For vocal soloing, is there a list of syllables to choose from anywhere? And is there a list of non-English syllables too? Specifically Japanese since he's fluent, but I would be interested in others too. For English-ish syllables, check out Kurt Elling, Chet Baker, and Ella Fitzgerald. That will give you a pretty well-rounded example of the variety of syllables used. For Japanese-ish syllables, I'm not very familiar, but there are a LOT of Japanese jazz people. You should be able to get an idea of that from Youtube, I would think. In general the rule (actually this is a good rule for a lot of jazz singing) is to tend towards conversational and/or instrumental-sounding syllables. quote:Up until this last rehearsal it was just me and the bassist, so I was focusing exclusively on him, teaching him things like swing feel, walking bass lines, chart reading and whatnot (he also doesn't have jazz experience--heavy punk background), and I want to be able to do that for the singer too. Right now it's mostly confidence building, but I don't know how to help him in rehearsals once he's loud and has the tunes memorized, and I don't want to just ignore him. Is that okay to do, if he's got that stuff down? What's a "good setup for syncopated rhythms"? I dunno, ignoring can be good. I mean, you're creating a jazz group, which innately suggests a sort of improvisational freedom that most other groups don't have. Even when you are performing written charts, there should be an element of improvisation to it or (I would argue) it's not really jazz. My instinct would just be to guide him towards your tastes by complimenting the stuff he does that you like. And encouraging him to just make poo poo up and play around with rhythms and notes. Vocalists can get away with a lot of personal and improvisational variations that instrumentalists can't, because we have the benefit of connecting to the original song through the lyrics. Did you know that Etta James' version of "At Last" is not actually how the song is written? I mean, it's not a different song, but it's different that you can usually tell who actually looked at the chart and who learned it from memorizing her recording. Anyhow, to expand on what I said earlier, and following what Copacabana suggested: The whole idea of (current, "popular") vocal jazz is exaggerated human conversation. It's no "Rocketman," but no joke, that is a good way to get a choral singer used to the talky way vocal jazz is. Take a chart you're learning and make him talk it. This has the added bonus of getting him to realize how corny and rhyme-y many classic jazz lyrics are written. His job is to make those lyrics sound more conversational by changing the rhythms around to get it less sing-songy and more conversational. Then, his further job is to take his pure classical vowels he learned in choir and dirty those fuckers up. No more hard "t" unless (like Copacabana said) he's trying to emphasize a word poetically. Don't skip over those dipthongs, really sing the vowel you would talk. "Rrrrrrr" excepted, because it sounds weird, although Diana Krall does it ALL the time. I would strongly recommend that to begin with, you have your singer do a major stripping of his style and ban him completely from vibrato and from pure classical vowels. Especially that vibrato. In choir/classical voice, vibrato is treated as a completely natural component that happens when you are singing correctly. Therefore, vibrato is considered part of a good singing voice. In jazz, vibrato is just another stylistic effect. So some jazzers do use vibrato all the time, but even they use it in a different way than a bel canto singer. Most jazzers I would say only add terminal vibrato (so, vibrato at the very end of a long note). To get past this point, I think it would be helpful to 1) have a recording of the dude in question and 2) a better idea of the particular jazz style you're going for. Because jazz covers a wide range of stylistic interpretations, a huge range, and we could probably all argue about the "right" way to sing vocal jazz. I'm only sharing how to get to the kind of vocal jazz style that I prefer, which might not be yours. Hawkperson fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Jan 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2013 05:19
|
|
|
Hey, guys. I'm in dire need of some vocal tips. If I had money for a coach, I'd go to one, but for right now I just have to rely on the internet. I recorded a few videos of me singing for Youtube last night, thinking I sound awesome to me (without having heard myself) and I feel kinda lousy about my tone in particular. I don't know if it's kosher to link to my Youtube channel (I really don't care about the views, promise!) but here it is: http://www.youtube.com/user/BurningSpiritHM/videos?view=0&flow=grid . Be as brutal as you wanna be, it's the only way I'll learn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
So some thoughts: I like your shirt. Do you really need to talk before these songs? After I realized you were going to talk for the first minute of every video I started skipping it. The bunny is super cute. I feel like you're doing some silly things with your voice on purpose (see: Suddenly Seymour, How Do I Live), but you have a generally good control of your voice...EXCEPT vibrato. You rarely use it, and when you do, it kind of sounds like you're forcing it to happen, which makes it really small and uneven. There's some pop singers that do that, but it really sticks out in a musical theater song like Suddenly Seymour. It's hard to teach vibrato since you can't really feel what's going on in there, but try to think about relaxing to get vibrato, rather than tensing up to get it. There's about a billion metaphors voice teachers use to coax it out of people. The one I remember best from my lessons is "spin," as in, pretend that there is a little fan in the back of your mouth that is "spinning" the air as it leaves. You're not working a bellows, you're just turning a fan in your mouth on and off to get vibrato. Honestly I think your tone is fine, except on How Do I Live where you are clearly overdoing it because you are singing to a very handsome bunny. You have a pretty classic bright tenor tone. I guess you could round out the tone a little more if you don't like the brightness (pretend you're yawning while you're singing to try it out).
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2013 08:19
|
|
|
Thanks. I haven't really ironed out what to do with Youtube videos, so I was just kinda winging it. I'm taking note of everything you mentioned, and I appreciate reassurance about my tone. It just sounds deeper in my head, and I guess I would prefer to have a deeper voice overall, but, considering I started choir as a bass/baritone, I'll take the tenor label as a compliment. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2013 09:44
|
|
|
Voices change over time, also I had a long discussion once with a voice teacher about how sometimes color influences a voice part more than the classic range. She had a light, fluty tone that suited her to soprano music even though her usable range topped out at two octaves above middle C, which is on the low side for a soprano. I'm pretty sure she was explaining to me that no, you are not a contralto, you are a dorky mezzo soprano with a solid low range that wishes she were a contralto. Anyhow, maybe you were once an actual baritone or bass, or  more likely you had a stronger ear than most of your peers so the choir director stuck you on the really important and/or difficult parts. I'm sorry tenors you know what I mean
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2013 10:01
|
|
|
Hawkgirl posted:
Oh how I know what you mean. I'm a tenor with an extended low range, down to D#2 but with vocal fry kicking in around F#2, and I swear every time someone tries to make me sing a bass role I want to backhand them. Hell, I was classified as a bass for like 2 years because "IF YOU CAN SING E2 YOU'RE A BASS  " even though it sounds like gravelly rear end, and I can take head voice up to E5 and whistle up to G6.  Jesus H. Christ posted:Thanks. I haven't really ironed out what to do with Youtube videos, so I was just kinda winging it. I'm taking note of everything you mentioned, and I appreciate reassurance about my tone. It just sounds deeper in my head, and I guess I would prefer to have a deeper voice overall, but, considering I started choir as a bass/baritone, I'll take the tenor label as a compliment. Yeah, I'm with Hawkgirl, there's no way in hell you're a bass/baritone. Baritenor, maybe? I suck at classification by tone alone. Anyway, your tone is really drat good, and I'm pretty critical of most singers. I enjoyed listening to your singing quite a bit. With that said, onto the criticism! I am picking up some tension in your voice, only slight in your tessitura but more pronounced on your high notes. If I had to make a completely unprofessional guess, you're using too much nasal resonance, and you're pinching a little toward the top of your mixed voice. That tension is also screwing your vibrato every now and then. Your vibrato may SOUND good, but if the production is botched it's going to mess with your flexibility. Try using slightly less air past your first bridge, and on higher notes try not to close your throat, or more specifically, your glottis. That's an easy way to hit higher notes, but it also increases your subglottal pressure, which is like instant tension and reduced flexibility. What's your range, out of curiosity? (What you can vocalize, not just your chest voice. Also, where it feels most comfortable for you, first/second bridge, etc.)  I'm an armchair instructor and I'm still learning myself, so take everything I say with a grain of salt
Copacabana fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Feb 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
quote:Anyway, your tone is really drat good, and I'm pretty critical of most singers. I enjoyed listening to your singing quite a bit. With that said, onto the criticism! This made my day. This made my entire week. :3333 I have confidence as a singer, but then I hear myself and it sounds really nasally to me vs. what I'm hearing in my head, so I really appreciate this. quote:I am picking up some tension in your voice, only slight in your tessitura but more pronounced on your high notes. If I had to make a completely unprofessional guess, you're using too much nasal resonance, and you're pinching a little toward the top of your mixed voice. That tension is also screwing your vibrato every now and then. Your vibrato may SOUND good, but if the production is botched it's going to mess with your flexibility. Try using slightly less air past your first bridge, and on higher notes try not to close your throat, or more specifically, your glottis. That's an easy way to hit higher notes, but it also increases your subglottal pressure, which is like instant tension and reduced flexibility. What's your range, out of curiosity? (What you can vocalize, not just your chest voice. Also, where it feels most comfortable for you, first/second bridge, etc.) I...uh, I don't know what any of this means.  I've never had any vocal training, and I'll google the terms you've mentioned (I get "vibrato" and "tension", at least), but I don't have a clue what my vocal range is. I can go pretty low, because I was Audrey II in Little Shop and people told me they thought I was a recording of Levi Stubbs, and my highs are demonstrated in the videos I posted, but I don't know notes. It sounds like I'll have an even higher range if I stop being so tense, and I'm sure I will if I stop smoking, too. All in all, thank you so much.
Jesus H. Christ fucked around with this message at 00:48 on Feb 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
Preface: I'm 18 years old, a high school senior, male, aspiring to be an opera singer, and I am a tenor. I've studied with my fantastic teacher for three years now, and don't regret switching from organ lessons for a second. I just discovered this and right now all I have are recordings from my camp last summer. This first one is Buxtehude's Befiehl dem Engel, Dass er Komm. It was in a quartet with period instruments, which made for a really cool experience.  This second one is from a few days later. It was a very unfortunate few days, as I got vocal fatigue. It happened slowly, starting with just an itch in my throat the morning after the performance above, but I kept powering through the camp (it's three weeks long with quite a bit of singing every day, our director admitted it was a mistake not making me stop as soon as I sounded strained) and by this performance I could barely croak out sentences. But the only professionals on staff were a Soprano, Alto, and Bass, and the show must go on. This is the fourth movement of Pergolesi's Magnificat, Suscepit Israel.  I'll try to record a little something tomorrow that is me with a healthy voice and not with a bunch of other people. But these are kind of current and are better than nothing. A few teacher at colleges I have visited have told me I really should start recording myself regularly, and I really should listen. Hoshi fucked around with this message at 14:26 on Feb 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2013 05:55
|
|
|
Well, just out of curiosity, where are you visiting and where are you thinking of attending college? Any particular teacher you're dying to study with? I have a vague understanding of the opera world through a good friend of mine. She is just finishing up her performer's certificate, which I am led to believe is basically a doctorate degree with less writing and more performing in operas. It's pretty fascinating to discuss the business, since the opera world is getting pretty drat tiny at this point. Did you apply for any summer workshops?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2013 07:49
|
|
|
Hawkgirl posted:Well, just out of curiosity, where are you visiting and where are you thinking of attending college? Any particular teacher you're dying to study with? I have a vague understanding of the opera world through a good friend of mine. She is just finishing up her performer's certificate, which I am led to believe is basically a doctorate degree with less writing and more performing in operas. It's pretty fascinating to discuss the business, since the opera world is getting pretty drat tiny at this point. I'm going to Simpson College in Indianola, Iowa. How did I find it? My voice teacher knows a whole lot about it - he goes there every summer to work with the Des Moines Metro Opera. I'm still choosing between two teachers, not sure which yet but I'll have to decide soon or the decision will be made for me. I didn't apply for any summer workshops, for two reasons: 1) I want to go back to my summer camp one last time (It's freaking great) and 2) My parents want me to get a job and I convinced them to let me go to my summer camp if I get enough scholarships to not get drowned in debt. So far it's looking pretty good, but until we get financial aid packages it's all up in the air. AriTheDog posted:The issue is that these terms have had agreed upon definitions for singers for a very long time, and people who clearly don't understand the terms or agreed upon singing fundamentals are using them to lend credibility to their own newly invented methods of instruction which confuses everybody, as seen in this thread. I don't mean to be rude, but do you have any sort of source? You are literally the only person I've heard say this, and every professional I've worked with has told me you need to be careful because everyone has a different way to define almost any term in singing. Finally, if anyone is looking for some interesting reading, I recommend "Great Singers on Great Singing" by Jerome Hines. It's a very interesting read, and pretty insightful. Hoshi fucked around with this message at 12:17 on Feb 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
Does anyone have any tips on learning to sing without a teacher? I live in Topeka, KS and I haven't been able to find much for vocal lessons. I have absolutely no prior experience and probably sound like garbage. I started taking piano lessons a little over a year ago and I would like to be able to sing along to songs and not sound terrible. My piano teacher said he could help with it a little, but I would prefer just to keep concentrating on piano with him rather than splitting his time between the two. I like the progress I am making and don't want to hinder it. Although he did help me learn what it meant to match notes, I never had any idea what that meant, or what it felt like before. It doesn't help that I am pretty self conscious when it comes to my voice, especially if I am singing. I guess you just have to get over that though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Record yourself, sing into a microphone while listening with headphones. Even using a short delay/reverb can help you hear what sound you're making. Experiment with breathing, vowel shape, diaphragm support (the place in which you're pushing air out when you sing) while listening to what sounds good and what doesn't, and attempt to incorporate the positive changes into your technique.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
Stryguy posted:Does anyone have any tips on learning to sing without a teacher? I live in Topeka, KS and I haven't been able to find much for vocal lessons. I have absolutely no prior experience and probably sound like garbage. I started taking piano lessons a little over a year ago and I would like to be able to sing along to songs and not sound terrible. Is your problem with affording a teacher or finding a teacher? If it's with finding a teacher, there are teachers who do skype lessons; I think my teacher does them. If you're interested PM me and I can give you his info.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
Just got cast as Gaston in our local theatre's production of Beauty and the Beast! My last show I had only one song and now I have a load more with this one - can't wait!
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 03:36
|
|
|
Last weekend I had the privilege of singing Faure's Requiem at Carnegie Hall in New York City! Prior to last semester I had no training in singing at all before joining the school's Chorale for my ensemble requirement. After a semester of hard work I grew to become the bass/baritone (whatever) that our section relies on. I still feel like a fish out of the water though and I'm clueless as regards to technique. My only advantage seems to be my tonal memory (I can remember everything on key all the time), but I struggle in just about every other aspect - breathing, posture, low notes, high notes, sight-singing, etc. I just found this thread; I wish I had known about it sooner! There is a lot of good advice in here - props to the people have contributed. I just started voice lessons recently and it hasn't helped much yet, but I haven't had much time to practice singing alone yet either (my major is piano, not voice.) I hope to be a solid singer soon. It's such an enjoyable activity, and I feel that it helps you be more musical overall as a musician - dare I say that all musicians should be able to sing! edit: I made a thread about this but it got no replies, so I'll post it here. Eric Whitacre's Virtual Choir 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3rRaL-Czxw Nearly 4000 singers via live video and VOIP being conducted by Eric Whitacre, peforming "Water Night". Our group has the privilege of learning this music for our end of the semester concert. CowOnCrack fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Apr 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
I studied opera in conservatory in Paris for about 5 years (becoming in the process a fully mediocre opera singer). I am a lyric tenor. The whole question of terminology in the classical sphere is daunting. This is amplified by terms meaning different things to different voices and there being many distinctions about type of voice, often having to do with the singer's 'fach', which is more or less the repertoire they sing. A heldentenor will sing mostly Wagner, for instance. The tenors most commonly heard in Puccini are lyric tenors. Sometimes people will refer to 'Mozart tenors', but sometimes this includes several other categories of tenor. Additionally as the voice matures the singers fach might change. And this is just tenors! There is a long tradition of terms used in the classical genre, but they are by no means 100% consistent even in a strict conservatory setting. There also seems to be a tendency among scholars and teachers to want further and further degrees of distinction and specification, which rather than helping matters makes them worse. An excellent example of this is 'The Structure of Singing' by Richard Miller. If you are really training (in a conservatory, singing hours each day with constant feedback) this book is amazing in many ways. However, Miller tries to take the basic distinctions and make them more 'rigorous'. The book is so thorough as to include vivisections of the vocal chords and such. The various exercises and descriptions of how the voice actually works and how to 'exercise' that can be incredibly useful for some learning styles. In particular understanding how the vocal chords come together to make a sound and how to work with that for different types of sound, and the fundamentally important relationship to breath was ground breaking for me. The language, without a lived context in which it can become grounded is however mind numbing. Of course it is quite impossible to learn to sing from a book. If you are in a setting where you can locate these things in your own bodily experience such language and books are invaluable. If you are in a setting where you are wanting to learn any other genre, they might be useful, but are much more likely to be infuriatingly confusing. Singing is a full body endeavor. It is highly sensual. One of the first and most active pleasure centers in the body has to do with the swallowing mechanism. As an instrument the voice has no 'mediating' medium (such as a string, or brass instrument, etc.). The body is the instrument and singing is a direct body to body communication in this way. Particularly in opera where there is no amplification. This means that it is also a very vulnerable activity, sometimes described as 'naked'. For many of the French i encountered, who can have a penchant for such things, the endeavor is also an intimately psychological one. This means that things in the 'psyche' are transmitted by and directly apparent in the voice. There are sound based forms of yoga that can be helpful for some singers in releasing forms of somatic, emotional, psychological 'locks' or 'blocks'. Almost any yoga can be a good supporting discipline for singing. If you happen to have been enculturated as an 'American' you might find the writing, singing and words of Thomas Hampson useful. I was able to attend some masters classes and performances of his and for me he was able to talk about things that might otherwise be very arcane in clear, grounded ways. Tone and color and such things are produced by shapes of the body, which includes the basic morphology about which there is little you can do, but also how you use the jaw, position the larynx and such. One of the things this means is that it is very useful to sing into a mirror. I was required to always have a mirror. As has been noted, you cannot hear your own voice as it is heard. Recording has some utility in this, but learning to relate to songs as muscle memory can also be quite useful. Their a ways in which it might be as important to somatically feel the music as to hear it. Suppose you are a tenor and the role or aria has in it a high C. Before you sing the first note you must physically know you are going there and sing the aria in that context. Of course this means you must hear it, but it also means that this hearing is registered in you body as a whole. This means that you do not have to 'switch gears' (which will change the 'color') or push to get there. Really brilliant singers get stronger and stronger as the performance progresses. For this type of singing no 'pushing' is ever involved even in the production of immense volume. For Janis Joplin it is a different matter altogether. If you are not intentionally trying to rasp or permanently 'texture' your voice in some way, when you become tired, stop using your voice. Many opera singers have regimens where they will not speak or make sound at all for days after performances and such. In terms of the opera world you could have an amazing voice and no career. For a career many, many things are required. You must have a real sense of the business and the ability to manage relationships. You must be an outstanding musician. You must have a great deal of physical and emotional stamina and resilience. Increasingly you must be 'good looking' and even charismatic, though this is not the historical model. You must have an artistic sense and stage presence. You must be able to sing hours a day and have the 'drive' to do that. Most opera singers are only 'in voice' a few days a year. Everything else is discipline and an immense amount of work. A fair amount of luck is not a bad thing. With very rare exceptions you need to start at an early age. Some of this overlaps with other forms of singing and much of it is unique to the rarified and thoroughly useless art form of opera which when at its best involves all the aspects of classical music, singing, acting and theatre and even literature or poetry... And in my experience can be fully transcendental. I have good friends from the 'middle east' you describe it as 'that singing where they shout the whole time." Many of the terms and confusion about the terms may come from taking things that are applied to this pretty rarified art and applying them to other contexts of singing, it seems to me, but might also arise from very gifted teachers and artists who have a deep bodily reality they are trying to transmit to a student through language. I have also sung a good deal of jazz, folk, chant and types of rock and play several instruments. Though I have occassionally made my living this way and been priviledged to associate with people who really make their livings this way, much of the above is just about that question of terminology and my own anecdotal conservatory experience with opera. As such I don't mean it as prescription or something to be applied across the myriad of genres and musical styles or even categorically true about opera. Hopefully I am just offering a reflective surface in the matter. Sogol fucked around with this message at 04:18 on Apr 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 13:15 |
|
|
So here are a few covers.   No backing instrumentals and I've never been formally trained, so take them as you will. I'm looking into getting a teacher soon though, so any tips/pointers would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2013 08:18
|
|
