Ok, so what your saying is .. that since I sing and sang 'popular' music and not 'operatic' music when I was originally trained .. that I was not trained classically ???
--- In vocalist-temporary@yahoogroups.com, Cindi Waters <musicteachky@y...> wrote: > > Hello, Margaret, Ed, and vocalisters. I was trained basically as a classical singer. Later on I decided to pursue an avenue on interest in commercial singing. I did not pursue it, but I did study a little bit in that area. I can say that without doubt there is a big difference in the style. The early vocal pedagogues understood that once a pop area is tried by the vocalist, it is more than likely the operatic purity will be lost. While I did not lose my ability to sing classically, I also noticed a difference of thought, thus approach. Cindi > "Margaret L. Harrison" <peggyh@i...> wrote:edsmed969 <michael.gum@d...> wrote: > > > > As far a vocal training .. how would you classify training as a classically trained vocalist? Is it by the music preformed or the method of training? > > I would say it could be either, both, or neither. > > I think, from reading discussions on this list, that the "classical" method of vocal study refers for most people to the teaching of a vocally healthy manner of singing, which is capable of being applied in a stylistically correct manner to the performance "classical" vocal music (opera and art song, and artistic settings of folksong). This type of teaching can be applied to any style of music, but for a student who wants to learn to healthily sing other styles to be happy, the teacher would need to be very familiar with the style of music the student wants to learn. > > Peggy > > > Margaret Harrison, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Service. > > > > --------------------------------- >
|