Vocalist.org archive


From:  Greypins@a...
Date:  Sat Jul 13, 2002  11:59 pm
Subject:  Re: [vocalist] Classical/non-classical singing

In a message dated 7/13/2002 4:45:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
voiceslp@y... writes:


> My friends and I often suspect that, oftentimes, the
> "classically trained" popular musicians took six
> months of piano lessons in 8th grade, and their
> publicist terms it classical training!
>

i think there is a confusion between the principles governing the
operation of the voice and the techniques of applying those principles.
while the classical approach has the longest tradition of studying and
applying the principles of vocal usage, the classical approach is but one
application of those principles and, by necessity, it is a fairly narrow
application. (in comparing operatic singing to classical parlor singing,
one can see that the more challenging the obstacles to being heard, the fewer
options a singer has.)

while most pop singers may sing without any concept of the most
effficient usage of the voice, they are governed by the same principles of
voice production common to all voices, beyond any style. with amplification
being provided for them, being heard is no longer a consideration and can be
eliminated as a concern. what remains for them is 'am i doing this as i
intend to and is it as simple and easy as i can make it?'

as amplification nullifies the need to be heard, the options to the
amplified singer widens greatly. an amplified singer might then either make
choices that are similar to the classically trained singer or, very
different. it is possible for a singer who is classically trained, to
abstract those principles of vocal production that are beyond stylistic
considerations and apply them in a radically different manner.

mike






emusic.com