Check out some sirens GABC

[JonJon]

1 minute ago, VideoHere said:

Jon, to really do a song right, you have to get a sheet of lyrics and pick each word apart and see the vowel(s) in each word like I had shown in "Ready for love."

You sing on the vowels, because vowels enable breath flow, where consonants inhibit breath flow and or close down the throat.

The notes you admire are tuned vowels ......

The vowel changes with the pitch.  The higher the notes, the more you have to be concerned with vowel choices.

Pronunciation and intelligibility erodes as you sing higher...

how did my bridging attempts sound? (yes, they r raw lol)

[kickingtone]

On 4/3/2016 at 6:34 AM, JonJon said:

I was trying to feel the sensation of letting go of some of the "quack" of those top notes to let the top note be lighter like a falsetto and I almost got it a few times but couldnt quite nail it.

I was also trying a few ways to get the high falsetto to bridge into the head voice seamlessly or vice-versa....I got it close a few times

If the diaphragm controls the pressure accurately, then "quack" becomes optional.

My take on things is that the vocal folds don't like to be caught half way in a high pressure draught (draft). It is damaging.

They will either want to compress tightly against the draught, or fly wide open out of the way. So, you will tend to get either a compressed sound, or a falsetto.

To get a light sound that isn't falsetto, you need high pressure without the high airflow (draft). To achieve this, the diaphragm has to walk a tightrope. And psychologically, you have to have confidence in your diaphragm to walk that tightrope and keep the pressure right, without any "gusts" of air. Lack of confidence in that can still trigger the protective reflex that flips the folds into high compression or wide open, which is why I think that high notes can be a psychological problem as well as a physical one.

So, I think it is all about accurately controlling air pressure with diaphragmatic opposition.

My voice is practically "quackless", and I can slide up and down to C5 without too much problem in terms of breaks or vowel changes. I find myself more concerned with playing around with the volume.

The flip side is that, although I am not a big fan of quack, I still want the option of a little quack, but I don't really know what produces a lot of it. I've been told it is "good vocal fold closure", but I find that is what makes any quack I do have go away. I can hold a quackless note for much longer than a quacky one, because the quacky one leaks more air..

[JonJon]

5 hours ago, kickingtone said:

The flip side is that, although I am not a big fan of quack, I still want the option of a little quack, but I don't really know what produces a lot of it. I've been told it is "good vocal fold closure", but I find that is what makes any quack I do have go away. I can hold a quackless note for much longer than a quacky one, because the quacky one leaks more air..

for me its the opposite. What I am feeling as "quack" (really mega duck sounding) is related more to a choking/squeezing feeling where I was using twang to try to squeeze out a note higher and higher but it just gets too tight and thats that. Its the feeling I get when near the top of my headvoice.

 

Today at work I had a pretty solid breakthrough related to hitting higher notes and connecting better etc to do with feeling the connection and resonance more in the soft palate as opposed to just trying to squeeze harder and harder. I got a great feeling of squeezing the gut and having a good hard connection of air pressure all the way from the diaphragm up to the soft palate....and was picturing the sound coming off and bouncing forward off of the soft palate. That really helped me to avoid squeezing/choking when trying to get higher notes.

All in all in the last 3 days or so my whole level of singing technique has taken huge steps. Its pretty exciting. Now I need to do some study to be able to identify exactly WHAT I am doing lol

[kickingtone]

On 4/5/2016 at 7:39 PM, JonJon said:

for me its the opposite. What I am feeling as "quack" (really mega duck sounding) is related more to a choking/squeezing feeling where I was using twang to try to squeeze out a note higher and higher but it just gets too tight and thats that. Its the feeling I get when near the top of my headvoice.

I think quack or twang is caused by the air flow "spitting" through the folds. The harmonics it produces still have to be guided to your resonance centres to be amplified, and the more relaxed you vocal tract, the more it can shape as a wave guide.

On 4/5/2016 at 7:39 PM, JonJon said:

Today at work I had a pretty solid breakthrough related to hitting higher notes and connecting better etc to do with feeling the connection and resonance more in the soft palate as opposed to just trying to squeeze harder and harder. I got a great feeling of squeezing the gut and having a good hard connection of air pressure all the way from the diaphragm up to the soft palate....and was picturing the sound coming off and bouncing forward off of the soft palate. That really helped me to avoid squeezing/choking when trying to get higher notes.

All in all in the last 3 days or so my whole level of singing technique has taken huge steps. Its pretty exciting. Now I need to do some study to be able to identify exactly WHAT I am doing lol

Yep. Finding where the resonance feedback is will help you tune your vocal tract to best guide the sound.

And these Eureka moments are the best! They really bring out the researcher in me. Your vocal instrument is like a whole laboratory that you carry around with you, with the keys at you fingertips....yes.. the keys...

[Xamedhi]

The quack is produced by twang, the pharynx contraction, which makes the space smaller and produces better fold closure, AND amplifies a lot the higher frequencies of the voice. Also it tends to have a higher larynx ( you can twang with a lower larynx too and it sounds brighter, but there still are a lot of low harmonics ) this is why the Quack sounds so metallic and edgy. 

[kickingtone]

33 minutes ago, Xamedhi said:

The quack is produced by twang, the pharynx contraction, which makes the space smaller and produces better fold closure, AND amplifies a lot the higher frequencies of the voice. Also it tends to have a higher larynx ( you can twang with a lower larynx too and it sounds brighter, but there still are a lot of low harmonics ) this is why the Quack sounds so metallic and edgy. 

"Smaller space" where, and how does does that "produce better fold closure"?

"that is why quack sounds so metallic and edgy" does not follow from anything you have said. You can have rich higher harmonic content without any edginess.

[Xamedhi]

I don't know really how twang works, but I physically see and feel the pharynx contracting and moving slightly forward towards the tongue, which makes the space smaller and should increase supra-glottal pressure, or now that I think of it, if it's not that, and the change in space is neglectible then maybe the actual "stiffening" of the pharynx may have some effect and make adduction easier. That's why Steve Fraser and others have talked here about the "necessary twang" to sing powerfully in the high range. Even if just a bit, it's necessary to optimize vocal fold adduction ( This all by got by logic and from stuff I've read, so correct me someone if I'm wrong, please! )

[Xamedhi]

The thing is, I don't even know what do you understand by edginess. An edgy voice to me could be Daniel Heimann, Jens, Rob Halford, Geoff Tate... they all have some really cool, powerful, metallic high range when they choose to. The metal bite and attitude \m/ hahah

[JonJon]

no need to argue over the terminology...which is extremely subjective

[Xamedhi]

Not at all. My main point is that "spitting" air through the folds could be counterproductive or even dangerous if overdone and over an extended period of time. I personally don't use much "quack" kind of sound, for singing or trianing, but I know how to do it, and when I do I don't change much about the airflow, only vocal tract motions and positions.

If it's benefiting you, keep using it, of course.

[MDEW]

4 hours ago, kickingtone said:

"Smaller space" where, and how does does that "produce better fold closure"?

"that is why quack sounds so metallic and edgy" does not follow from anything you have said. You can have rich higher harmonic content without any edginess.

Twang happens when the area above the vocal folds is decreased or the epiglottis is tilted/engaged.... The epiglottis is made of cartilage and covers the wind pipe when swallowing helping to keep food out of the wind pipe. In the picture below, see those muscles arranged in an X those close the epiglottis, some of those fibers continue and are part of the vocal cords. That is how engaging TWANG helps close the vocal cords. Whether you want to view it as Twanging the epiglottis or engaging the aryepiglottic sphincter, or narrowing above the vocal folds It does not matter, that is where TWANG happens. It also helps to close the vocal cords.

 

[Xamedhi]

Thanks MDEW, I was needing that  !  Take your well deserved Like hahah

[kickingtone]

7 hours ago, Xamedhi said:

Not at all. My main point is that "spitting" air through the folds could be counterproductive or even dangerous if overdone and over an extended period of time. I personally don't use much "quack" kind of sound, for singing or trianing, but I know how to do it, and when I do I don't change much about the airflow, only vocal tract motions and positions.

If it's benefiting you, keep using it, of course.

The spitting is a very slight thing. In the video below (1m 00s onward) he describes it as "little pockets of air that kind of break through the cords. It's a really light thing, it's not forced at all". It is that innocuous "micro-bursting" that creates the edginess of the sound.

We are talking about a fraction increase in pressure causing the air to come out in pockets rather than a cleaner stream.

Full cord closure will give you what some people call necessary twang. This is the normal amount of twang that you may not even associate with twang. Anything beyond that, and you are "leaning in" with more force than is required just for cord closure. But you are also using more air pressure than is necessary for a "clean" phonation. And you will increase that "bursting pockets of air effect". Sure, you mustn't overdo it!

If you listen to his vocal fry at around 1m 00s, you will hear him breath out until the fry bites. While cord closure is important, what is really important is that the air pressure is on the high side relative to whatever compression you are using for the cord closure.

You do need to shape your vocal tract to amplify the edgy sound, but the actual edginess comes from the vocal folds.

http://www.askavocalcoach.com/how-do-i-make-myself-sound-more-edgy-1704/

Quote

If you desire an edgier sound, you’re probably going to have to start playing more with leaning deeper into cord closure and possibly incorporating more nasal or forward sounding resonance (some people also call this pharyngeal).