Vocalist.org archive


From:  "Lloyd W. Hanson" <lloyd.hanson@n...>
"Lloyd W. Hanson" <lloyd.hanson@n...>
Date:  Mon Nov 6, 2000  5:26 am
Subject:  Re: Attempting the Bubble etc. (fwd)


Dear Randy and Vocalisters:

You commented that perhaps I am feeling left out as a kind of joke but then
continued with comments about voice teachers who are less informed about
proper or best methods of teaching voice. I enjoy your comments but I do
feel a need to define somewhat how I view the great body of voice teaching
that surrounds us.

Although I enjoy studying the voice and how it works and want always to
learn what does and does not work, not all voice teachers share a searching
for this ideal in the same way I do.

Basically, voice teaching requires ears that accurately recognize good,
functional singing and a teaching method that allows the teacher to bring
their students within a healthy, functional technique. It has been my
experience that all good teaching uses the same basic techniques but
describe these techniques differently and approach the teaching of the
basic functions of the voice to their students in varied ways. Sometimes
these approaches are enormously inefficient and waste a lot of the students
time and money but are not basically incorrect nor non-healthy. And most
teachers are very aware if their teaching is inefficient and struggle to
become more directly effective.

I know of no one technique that is best for everyone. I do know that the
vocal mechanism functions in basically the same way for everyone, (unless
the voice has been damaged), but the way in which we each understand how
our voice functions is not consistently the same from person to person.
Because of this individual understanding of the function of the voice, the
teacher must have a flexible approach that teaches to the students
understanding. This is true of all skill oriented teaching.

However, I am a firm believer in finding terminology that is accurate and
consistent with vocal function and that can become universal. I divide
teaching singing into vocal function and art. I believe function and art
need to be clearly understood individually if they are to become one in the
process of artistic singing. Analysis is, therefore, necessary.

But even analysis can be undertaken in such a way that it does not appear as
analysis but rather as an interest in both the function and art of singing.
Many teachers do this and are not especially aware that they are doing
so. These teachers often are very resistant to having to consciously
analyze their teaching because it tends to take away the rather intuitive
skills they have developed over many successful years.

The sharing of ideas without a need to make them proprietary is, in my
opinion, the best way to bring all voice teaching to its highest level.
Organizations such as the National Associations of Teachers of Singing
(NATS) have helped as they become a sharing body of teachers who wish to
provide a meeting of ideas and minds on the many experiences of singing and
teaching singing.

Singers and teachers of singing often find it difficult to share ideas
because to do so requires that we find words to describe what we do and
that is not always easy. But we can improve our understanding of our own
work by attempting to find such words and we can have the joy of sharing
these words with others interested in our love of singing.

Thanks for your contributions.


Regards
--
Lloyd W. Hanson, DMA
Professor of Voice, Vocal Pedagogy
School of Performing Arts
Northern Arizona University
Flagstaff, AZ 86011


emusic.com