david,
the problem with attempting to come up with objective standards for
artforms is that our appreciation of artforms is subjective. continuing the
analogy to hand position for pianists: while many who would like to see the
cupped hand position be the standard, that would earn horowitz a big, fat F.
let's look analogously at an activity where the results are objective -
golf. there is nothing subjective about a golf score. so, what is to be
the standard backswing length? tiger woods 3/4 swing or, john daly's
round-house swing.
in my own teaching, i don't really concern myself with posture unless
the student is doing something that gets in their way. i think posture is
grossly overrated as a concern in singing. as i teach a wide variety of
styles of singing, i feel it is more important for the student to understand
the effect of larynx position on sound than it is to adopt a particular
position (i do recognize that within a style, particularly one as rigid as
classical singing, it is more likely one position will be most advantagious).
even titze, a widely recognized voice scientist, is flexible on the subject
of larynx position. as far as breathing is concerned, some people do better
with their own screwed up method than they do attempting to do it correctly.
while i generally prefer qigong breathing, again, if someone's own method is
working for them, i don't interfere as i'm more interested in what they do
with their breath rather than where or, how they take it.
while i, too, have seen students who are products of studios where the
sound is the only thing that matters, get into trouble, eventually, i have
also seen studios that produce a whole slew of singers who all look as if
they just joined the same army. few are succesful while the rest work in
bookstores for the rest of their lives, diligently honing their compulsory
figures.
mike
|
