> another reason not to listen to (different from 'hear') oneself is that
>the sound is the result of the action of singing. in the continuing
>execution of an action, our attention is not on what we have already done
>nor, is it on what we are currently doing (ever try running while looking at
>your feet?), . . .
> talking, for example, usually involves trying to make a point, convey a
>story or get an idea across. we are focused on the action of saying the
>words that convey the point we are trying to make. the sound of our voices
>will often reflect our involvement in what we are talking about. this
sound
>includes tone, intensity, volume, etc.. inflection is enacted. by the
>time you hear the sound of your voice, the time for inflection is long
gone.
> we don't plan anger, laughter, joy, embarassment, etc. unless we are
>pretending.
Studies (which I can't site anymore without lengthy journal sifting) have
been completed that measure the effect of distortion of the auditory
feedback on an ordinary speaker. Depending on what a person is hearing
(e.g., time delay, volume increase or decrease), you will get all kinds of
strange things. The most ordinary example is when you speak to someone
listening to rock music on a headset. They usually shout at you unless
they are veteran headset users. At any rate, the physiological adjustments
are immediate. Just the same, I agree with the notion that one must be
thinking ahead musically lest they find themselves just behind the mark.
Michael E. Chesebro, M.A.,C.C.C., S.L.P.
Voice & Fax: 562/983-9965
Wireless: 562/884-2122
|
|  |
