--- buzzcen@a... wrote:
> But it is true
> that amateur classical singers have the highest
> number of vocal problems (and
> I went out of my way to say not by much, it's fairly
> evenly distributed
> amongst genres) and classical that classical
> technique does not have a
> stranglehold on vocal health. My fact is not
> anecdotal either but based on
> my work as a voice therapist (degreed in speech
> language pathology) done in
> conjunction with a very prominent otolaryngologist.
> The fact I stated came
> straight from his statistics at the clinic.
Randy-
Sopran@a... may have misrepresented your
previous postings, but she did have a good point. Just
because most voice patients are amateur classical
singers does not indicate that most singers with vocal
health problems are amateur classical singers. They
may be, however, the most likely to seek treatment for
it. Raspy, husky, "rugged", and breathy are terms
that are used to describe the voices of many famous
pop singers, so a pop singer, amateur or not,
suffering from nodules and/or the like may be glad to
be developing 'character' to their voice. These
qualities are generally not accepted in classical
music, and are often a warning sign to the classical
vocalist that something is wrong with the instrument
itself, rather than a choice of technique. Just my 2
cents.
I personally don't believe one genre of training is
healthier than another, provided the teacher and
student actually understand the *real* mechanics of
the instrument, and you certainly do.
And I apologize for being so behind on this thread!
April Salerno
__________________________________________________
|
