Dear Lloyd,
As always, your posts are absolutely fascinating and I learn so much
from each one.
> Although bringing the voice "forward" might work well for Gina it is
> often
> the opposite for other singers. Tone placement concepts are, at best,
> a
> most devious approach to teaching singing. I have found it much more
> effective to determine how the singer feels a tone when that tone is
> right
> and use that singers description of feeling as a code word for that
> singer
> alone. To apply ideas of "placement" from one singer to another is
> not
> usually successful and often more than frustrating.
Having spent the last 3 years with an old school teacher, I almost
cannot fathom how you would get me to make the sound I make without the
concepts I was taught. (nobody else could ever do it before) How do
you go about helping the student to get the sound right? Trial and
error of terminology? Keep one set of terms and expect the student to
eventually get it? Some things are very difficult to put into words...
and everyone understands things so differently... how do you get certain
fundamental concepts across? Please give examples...? There are so
many devious methods at an instructor's disposal...
> So, I have sought for descriptions of vocal function that ARE more
> universal. I have found these through teaching an understanding of
> what
> actually happens within the vocal mechanism and developing exercises
> that
> utilize these understandings. And it works. Coffin used to tell his
> singers that they needed to be able to translate the confusing
> language
> that is prevalent in the singing field into an understanding of what
> is
> really happening.
Can you share some of your descriptions of vocal function? Do you work
from a totally physical point of view... a kind of universal physical
posture?
> often contradictory concepts of vocal production mean in terms of
> vocal
> function. A primarily subjective approach to singing technique (which
>
> includes such concepts as tone placement, imaging, etc.) may be very
> valuable for the individual singer but it seldom has any meaning for
> another singer.
It can be frustrating without the student having the opportunity to give
feedback. This is the essential element. The student must be able to
tell how things feel and how they are thinking about them... freely,
often and without fear. Then the teacher can use the student's
language. That requires time, care and commitment on behalf of the
teacher, instead of a one size fits all approach where it's their way or
the highway!
Images can have value if the teacher and student use the same one. I
recently bought my teacher a lovely ornament from the Met gift shop. It
is a glass ornament which is shaped with a small ball on the top
connected to a tear drop shaped larger section below it. We use it to
describe how each note in my voice must have the brightness/high
overtones (the small ball on top) and the darkness/low overtones (the
teardrop on the bottom.) The ball is the squillo and the teardrop is
the space. Oh well... it's a girl thing I guess :-) Anybody else get
it? Maybe not. Just as Lloyd said... what means something to one
singer may mean something opposite to another.
How do you know when you have found that student's ideal sound? How do
you know when it has reached its fullest potential... biggest, roundest,
ringing, most depth?
So curious,
Gina
|
|  |
