Ed, and Vocalisters, Regarding training of classical vs. pop method - the classical training is geared towards singing classical (operatic and recital) music. Therefore, the elocution of it is primarily geared for the singer in a different vocal direction than the pop singer, no matter how fine an instrument either may have and no matter how wonderful the training may be. I am sure there are pop singers out there, I can name a few but I think I will date myself, who are simply mah-velous, truly terrific with voices I envy. I would not dare to think they would be, or should be, singing opera, yet their voices are wonderful for the genre of music they indulge in. Similarly, I have heard terrific operatic singers attempt to sing pop music and find it very ugly indeed. There have been some singers who could manage a type of crossover (I go back to Eileen Farrell, but again, she was limited in her pop singing, marvelous as it was), but the transference is never complete, she sounded like a wonderful operatic singer singing Cole Porter very pleasantly. Ed, if your teacher is training you correctly, he/she will have her own area of expertise. If you like opera, go to an operatically styled and trained voice teacher. If you like pop, get the best pop teacher you can find. I do not think the two are transferable, and I would as soon sit down with an evening of Tony Bennett as I would most opera singers. <g> this is not to say that the physical care of the vocal apparatus is different, both approaches must seek to take very good care of the body. Take care, and enjoy your lessons with who is hopefully a very good teacher for the style of music you desire to sing. In NYC, for instance, again ... there is the Phoebe Snow School of Music. She specializes in the pop sound. I'm not sure if it's still there, but her training is designed for the pop singer, and there is a difference of approach. Both can be anatomically correct, but the style and the production of sound will be different. Cindi from Kentucky, teaching little kids to sing well one folk song at a time. "Michael <chosdad@y... wrote: Dear List and Michael:
--- In vocalist-temporary@yahoogroups.com, "edsmed969 <michael.gum@d...>" <michael.gum@d...> wrote: > 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 ???
Again, this is kind of tricky without hearing you sing. It is possible I think to sing "popular" music and have a well trained voice - frankly I have no idea really what popular music means, though. I think it's not so much the music as how you sing the music - I'm kind of out of touch with whatever is "popular" these days, but it is possible to sing "Beatles" or "Simon and Garfunkel" somewhat classically - such music has nice melodies and sustained notes. Was the emphasis in your training on the classical ideals - sustained singing, pure vowels, resonance, smoothly connected registers, etc? If so, then I guess you could be classically trained without singing "classical" music.
In general, though, I would be very skeptical of someone who has never trained to sing operatically and wants to step on stage and sing in an opera or perform oratorios. For example, I was in Borders the other day and saw a CD by "Russell Watson" - I guess he is some sort of pop tenor singer. He's a talented guy, and I would say that compared to joe on the street he has a trained voice, but it's not trained to perform opera. I took a quick listen to his attempt at singing classical arias and I didn't like it at all!! In fact, no offense to him - I couldn't do any better myself, but I really couldn't stand his singing of the classical material and would never buy his CD. Now maybe his pop singing, on the other hand, is pretty good. I would further add that most famous opera tenors haven't a clue at singing non-opera stuff, and I wouldn't buy their pop albums.
Although most of my singing has been in classical choirs, and my teachers classically oriented, I also like vocal jazz and barbershop. In my opinion, the best of the singers in these non-classical genres are pretty close in their technique to classical singers, especially the men. But that doesn't mean they are ready to have careers in opera or classical music without further training...
The "pop" singers of an earlier era sang with very much the same technique, in my opinion, as classical singers, perhaps with some adjustments for style and resonance. I have an older recording of say Tony Bennett, and while I don't know how well his voice would have projected on the operatic stage, the technique to me is essentially the same as that of a classical singer.
That's my opinion. Just curious - why do you care whether we think you were "classically" trained?
Cheers,
Michael Gordon
---------------------------------
|