> i think it is important to realize that classical singing is
just one
> of the many things one can do with a voice. it has its criteria
to be met
> but, that criteria is not all inclusive of vocal usage. as many
other
> styles of singing exhibit, there are other uses of the voice.
>
> regardless of what one decides to do with a voice, the study
of how it
> works and which action equals which resultant sound, can be
helpful. what
> has been unfortunate in the past has been the application of
classical
> singing techniques for the purpose of singing styles that are
actually very
> different. if one wishes to make a sound or, series of sounds
that are in
> oppostition to classical technique, studying classical singing is
not a very
> good way to achieve that goal.
>
> as far as i know, both sinatra and bennett had voice
lessons. both
> are/were great singers but (fortunately for me), neither exhibits a
use of
> the voice that is peculiar to classical singing. i would guess
that both
> had teachers who were classical singers and, they either distorted
what their
> teachers said until it worked for them or, they didn't listen.
>
> mike
>
I'm surprised that there is no consensus on this point
in this newsgroup. Logically, if we back up and think
about this from a worldwide perspective, all singing
is, is tone production, period. It can be done naturally,
by the most primitive of people.
There are many ways to produce tones using air and
your throat to harmonize with music. Or even
NOT harmonize with music... create dissonant sound
that is dramatic in the music.
Whatever the case may be, some people produce these
sounds, we call singing, and the result is or is not
effective to listeners. It can sound flat, it can sound
gravely, it can sound resonant, it can sound whiney, it can
sound irregular and imperfect, it can result from movement
of the head or the abdomen or the jaw. It can be whispered or
yelled in an uncontrolled manner. All of these
factors play into the way singing is perceived emotionally
by various listeners. They also play into whether a
technique can be sustained over the days or over the
years (and many popular techniques *are* bad for your
throat... read about pop singers getting nodules)
The fact that a type of singing is successful,
in my mind, doesn't necessarily mean it adheres
to a traditional technique, only that it creates
a sound that is consistent with the music, or
more importantly, the musical context for the
style of music.
Your point about Sinatra and Bennet is right on
the money. I find it hard to believe that people
think that these styles are creative applications of
classical techniques. Why think that? I know
quite a few singers who can sound very professional
in those styles who have no classical training at
all. I find nothing about classical technique in
terms of larynx position, breath control, vibrato
consistency, use of blended voice to be relevant at
all for that sort of lounge-style singing.
Bill
|
