Dear Randy:
You wrote the following in response to a question about the technical
differences between speech level training and classical training:
>Well, a simple answer is that it focuses much more on laryngeal events which
>fine tune the prephonatory tuning of the cords (therefore calling for much
>lower airflow) and helps induce the necessary events that help the singer
>bridge into the upper registers including whistle tone. Where you located?
If this is an accurate, though short, description of speech level
training (and it very much reflects your many other comments on this
forum) I would find little disagreement with its basic concepts. It
is very much in keeping with my own teaching methods developed over
many years and it is very similar to the work of Richard Miller with
his emphasis on onset exercises (prephonatory tuning of the cords and
resultant reduced airflow). It is my understanding that speech level
training also uses a kind of fry tone vocal function to train the
voice to make smooth transition over register changes similar to the
work of Swedish teacher, Alan Lindquist.
It would appear that, in this sense, that speech level training is
not so far removed from traditional classical training as it is an
emphasis on the more critically technical factors of that classical
training
--
Lloyd W. Hanson
|
