Sign in to follow this  
Robert Lunte

Train To Bridge Early & Late! Master BOTH

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Did you see his video on FB where he attacked SLS? I was like "whoh".. He was definitly attacking someone there lol. And the winner for larget can of worms opened is Ken Tamplin!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think it was bashing and thats not cool. Geran they don't call it the same things. im not affiliated with sls or anyone else though I have been asked by a couple different schools. Its all the same in the end. YOU GET OUT OF IT WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT. The different schools give you the tools and you either use the tools correctly or not. You could sing at a whisper or balls out,thats your choice. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This video could be relavant to this discussion because Ken talks about bridging early being very bad:

Personally, I think this video is a bit rude, attacking other vocal coaches (really), but I also have the feeling that Ken is slightly misunderstanding the concept of bridging early - because HE kind of teaches early bridging himself! ... in the sense that he lets his beginning students work with mostly low volume sounds. He wants people to change VOWELS a bit late, sure - and THAT's probably what he's talking about when he says that you shouldn't bridge early. He's also got a bit of a superiority vibe to him which I dislike.

I mean, as a whole, I LIKE Ken Tamplin, both as a singer and a vocal coach but I think that he shouldn't be attacking other coaches (he doesn't like it when other coaches attack him as we've seen - who does?). And in fact, personally I think he often sings with TOO much "beef" and "heavyness" for my taste. A thicker voice isn't always better, IMO. Case in point, I really love the sharpness of Steven Tyler's voice. Aerosmith's songs wouldn't sound great with f.ex. BB King's voice (who sings pretty beefy). Despite this, I think Ken's vocal program is one of the best out there.

JonPall,

Specifically, Ken talks about the voice suffering from atrophy, which seems like a bit of an exaggerated, scary, word... but it does get your attention I guess. I think he means just lack of musculature development to the extent that it becomes a detriment... and I agree with Ken on this point.

This is why last year TVS implemented a whole series of new specialized onsets designed to build this musculature and have proven to be very extremely effective. Building musculature has become a big focus of my day to day pedagogy and development of ideas in the current phase Im going through... not to mention for myself as a singer/artist. Im really proud of these onsets that build this strength, because its getting great results... a great case study is Owen Korzec... who posts here all the time... we started using the TVS specialized onsets for building musculature last year... in some sense, Owen was one of my lab rats, I experimented on him... fine tuned the techniques with him... and WOW, you should hear him pull M1 through the passaggio now... it has been a real success story... but back to Ken's concern about atrophy, I agree... however, in order to actually have this become a detriment, we are talking about extreme levels of neglect... the lack of musculature activation required to actually turn to "atrophy" in my view is very rare... most of you guys, if you just follow the routine, you'll get stronger and move in the right direction... there is a big difference between activities that lead to atrophy of the muscles and just practicing light mass maneuvers to learn how to bridge and/or shut down the constrictors... this is a whole different situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to be honest, the only bridge that i have to think about now is B4 to C5(and above) the first bridge has kinda gotten to be automatic now. I can't seem to let go of enough weight to really sing a piercing C5 (and above) . How does one accomplish this task?

You will get there.

"I need a little patience." - Axl Rose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is far from a conversation about early bridging or coach bashing. It's about a wrongheaded methodoly. Here is something Kevin Richards posted on my Ken Tamplin Vocal Academy face book page and my responses:

Kevin Richards Ken - you know I am behind what you teach as its what I was taught myself and what I teach to others, but I will give SOME merit to SLS exercises for a few things. The exercises are good for light warm ups and for relieving straining in a beginner singer; but after that they become worthless. No appoggio support, no combining of lower and upper resonances to create a chiaroscurro sound, no ping etc.

A lot of the claims about SLS made by Riggs and others are blatantly false, proceed from an incorrect physiological premise and just don't work as advertised.

Tuesday at 11:41am · Not Spam.

Ken Tamplin Vocal Academy I do agree Kevin on some of the exercises however here is my contention. If a singer, doesn't learn correct abdominal support from the very beginning, different laryngeal positions and the role they play, combining the correct strengthening of arytenoid muscle (and the use of the cartilage) as well as holding steady the cricoid cartilage below the larynx, and the mandible (at least initially) doesn't start out in a lowered state to understand the least amount of jaw shifting (movement) throughout correct vowel placements during vocal tract shaping (and yes this changes when one matures), an understanding of when to spread the pharynx and when not to and so on, one will create moving targets for the rest of their life never knowing why some nights they can hit certain notes and other nights they can't. Maybe for very light jazz, really light pop you can get by without building these mechanism. Yes there is a lot more to it than just these few structures, but these are critical. You (and Robert) seem to be some of the few people on this planet who knows what the heck they are talking about. (though I still disagree with Lunte on early bridging).

Tuesday at 12:41pm · Edited · Unlike · 1..

Ken Tamplin Vocal Academy Oh and one more thing, I'm simply asking people to prove it, not talk, but prove what they teach with their own voices and their students voices. Learning something from a textbook is one thing, real live application is quite another.

Tuesday at 12:18pm · Unlike · 1..

Kevin Richards I agree Ken. The SLS people are a lot of talk and very little demonstration. As for Robert, yes he did advocate "early bridging" early on (as that's how he was taught), but myself and others have turned him on to engaging more muscularity and appoggio support to keep the vocal fold focus of lower registration (M1) as you blend over into the head registration (M2) - thereby lengthening the focal strength of chest much longer and higher.

I too have had to fix a slew of SLS voices with so many problems - mainly lack of proper support and proper tonality. Its a shame what they do to voices.

Tuesday at 11:03pm · Not Spam.

Ken Tamplin Vocal Academy I hold very closely to the tenets of appoggio particularly in the area of support. I hope that people have enough guts to stand up against this wrongheaded philosophy of SLS and expose it for what it is. The Emperor Has No Clothes.

21 hours ago · Like..

Kevin Richards really strong Appoggio takes a while to achieve and lets face it, a lot of people are not patient with learning so SLS seems like the easy way out. I tell my students all the time "yes this takes some time to achieve, but once you get it - you'll never want to sing another way again".

20 hours ago · Not Spam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kentamplin

I dont defend or support the name SLS, neither Ive been instructed in such way.

But I do know that before people placed a label on it, SLS was just an adaptation of the classical method to take advantage of amplification on lower projection levels. And it was pretty much a work of ballancing a coordination with a relatively speaking, higher posture of the larynx, but not overlooking support or any of the sorts.

The idea in itself is pretty much what we all do to sing pop, nobody uses full resonance to sing on a mic, it sounds just wrong in 99% of the cases.

There are plenty of videos on youtube that are plain wrong, not restricted to SLS. And I do know a few teachers that instruct using SLS label that were classicaly trainned, and still are trainning, and uses support to accomplish the goals.

Anyways, nonsense will have all kinds of labels in an attempt to take credit, I think its best to focus on the specific cases, for example the Cat Skinner dude. You are correct, results. Either they exist or its just snake oil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ken, overall, ... I think a lot of people agree with your points... I TOTALLY get the feeling of frustration that can come from watching consumers or these students of singing get information that is not really the best information and sometimes, just patently wrong, or ironically, the opposite of what students should be doing. For us vocal coaches , its hard to hold your tongue sometimes... Ive been there myself.

... Just saying... calling out the name of the school may not be necessary. I think you can make your points and even hint at who your referring to, without calling them out. To do so, actually compromises your image to the very people your wanting to inspire. I like your points, just the delivery was ? ... I support your right to stand behind your convictions and vibe you want to put out there. think your a great coach and feel a kinship with you... thats all I have to say about it.

I believe there is some truth that Maestro Kyle, looking back, was teaching early bridging mostly... if you wanted to label it... back in the day when you and I were training with him. Let's be clear on something, in the last two years, TVS and Pillars has been a lot about building musculature to extend M1. We developed some special onsets that help work the muscles that have proven to be successful. Which is one of the purposes of producing my video above and the "6 Specialized Onsets". Add to that, we spend a lot of time on Appoggio respiration as well... I have the pedagogy dialed in for this. Yes, I pull more musculature then I used to ... Just normal growth and evolution of a voice coach that always pushes the envelope.

At the same time, there is an application to light mass bridging for beginners, and value in regards to styles that seek to have a lighter tonality. I advocate understanding both, training both... and some students, just will never figure out "late bridging" in the beginning... for those, 'lift up / pull back" needs to be inserted for a few weeks to shut down the constrictors and calibrate the timing of bridging... down the road toward more experience with training, students should gravitate to building more musculature and 'pull' M1 to get better and get more progress. How do you do that?,... I think mostly, focusing on specialized onsets and getting deeper into vowel modification and working special siren and sweeping maneuvers that work the musculature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the bashing is a bit ridiculous. I learned a lot from sls and I sing pretty balls out Cornell, Coverdale etc. Again I think the tools are there from each teacher. It's knowing how to apply them. The family tree of vocal lessons is all pretty closely related so we are all family:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Singing lighter mass will often induce different vowel modifications as some vowels go better with more mass and some go better with less mass. CVT has a quite useful explanation of this with their modes. In the heavier mass modes there are different "ideal vowels" than in the lower mass modes.

Not really. The purity of the vowel can be maintained as one blends from lower to upper resonances in all phonations of light, medium or heavy. One does not have to give in to a vowel mod to blend if "the machine" is balanced.

For me, vowel mods are not necessary to blend resonances. That is creating a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist. You're creating an unnecessary extra step. This applies to beginners too, not just more experienced singers.

Now if you want to talk about vowel "shaping", that's a different story. One can shape the vowel slightly to help the blend, but not go as far as altering its sound say from "ee" (me) to "ae" (may) as Robert demonstrated in his vowel mod video in Pillars. All the vowels can be sung purely if you know how to shape the vocal tract correctly and have proper support.

This whole business of "bridge early vs. bridge late" to me is non-sequitor. It's ALL subjective to the singer and the song. Robert in his early days advocated a bridge early only construct, but has within the last year embraced the use of more muscularity and elongating the fold focus of chest resonance higher in range. Ken Tamplin has not embraced the opposite. He abhors light mass phonations and early bridging that the people of SLS embrace - and he is right to a degree - but his crusade against them is a bit one sided. His approach is not useful in all situations either. Yes it builds a powerful voice but not everyone wants to wail all the time.

To me, neither way is healthy to do 100% of the time. Natural singers employ both depending on the song or style of music they are singing.

Two of my favorite natural singers who did this quite well were Freddie Mercury and Paul McCartney. Both employed early and late blending depending on the song. For me that is the right approach. Have as many tools in your toolbox as possible so you can sing virtually anything.

Kevin Richards

RPM Vocal Studio - http://www.rpmvocalstudio.com

Rock the Stage - http://www.rockthestagenyc.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really. The purity of the vowel can be maintained as one blends from lower to upper resonances in all phonations of light, medium or heavy. One does not have to give in to a vowel mod to blend if "the machine" is balanced.

For me, vowel mods are not necessary to blend resonances. That is creating a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist. You're creating an unnecessary extra step. This applies to beginners too, not just more experienced singers.

Now if you want to talk about vowel "shaping", that's a different story. One can shape the vowel slightly to help the blend, but not go as far as altering its sound say from "ee" (me) to "ae" (may) as Robert demonstrated in his vowel mod video in Pillars. All the vowels can be sung purely if you know how to shape the vocal tract correctly and have proper support.

This whole business of "bridge early vs. bridge late" to me is non-sequitor. It's ALL subjective to the singer and the song. Robert in his early days advocated a bridge early only construct, but has within the last year embraced the use of more muscularity and elongating the fold focus of chest resonance higher in range. Ken Tamplin has not embraced the opposite. He abhors light mass phonations and early bridging that the people of SLS embrace - and he is right to a degree - but his crusade against them is a bit one sided. His approach is not useful in all situations either. Yes it builds a powerful voice but not everyone wants to wail all the time.

To me, neither way is healthy to do 100% of the time. Natural singers employ both depending on the song or style of music they are singing.

Two of my favorite natural singers who did this quite well were Freddie Mercury and Paul McCartney. Both employed early and late blending depending on the song. For me that is the right approach. Have as many tools in your toolbox as possible so you can sing virtually anything.

Kevin Richards

RPM Vocal Studio - http://www.rpmvocalstudio.com

Rock the Stage - http://www.rockthestagenyc.com

Amen and amen.

I wanted to draw exception to Felipe's statement that full and strong acoustical resonance of the voice will sound wrong 99 percent of the time with amplification. I know he's a voice teacher and I am just an amateur. And maybe my experience is colored more by singing over a guitar in any situation, with or without a mic, often without. (I'm one of those hippies you will find howling something around a campfire. :lol: )

But I could be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that's what I was referring to. "heavy" to me means pulling up chest into head area (AKA belting), which is not "balanced resonance" anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why oh why must we call it pulling up chest? and why does belting mean we automatically "pull up chest?"

you don't "pull" anything up down or sideways.

can you send me an example of pulling up chest?

what the hell are you pulling on? lol!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I watch old Roy Khan videos, I notice it looks like he is passing a bowling ball when he sings high chesty notes. Especially during his time with Conception. Almost like he is in pain. I hope I don't look like that when I sing lol :) my new thing is to increase my chest voice. I can sing in head down to middle C before it falls apart. In chest , my record is B4. And that's straining. But that band wants to do some Dio lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith for the record. Dio main "secret" was the control he had over head voice and focus. He did belted sometimes, and most who listen attribute his "magic" to the rasp/agressiveness, but it was really the strong, clean and natural production behind it that was so good, that really was something magic to listen to.

Support + chest is not the way.

Rob totally. And the results sincerelly do not live up to the applied effort. If you are going to add pressure, then convert it into sound or it will choke you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Actually the one reason I like the terminology from CVT when talking on the internet is that they are explicit about what volume they use. If you watch a youtube video of voice coach X showing an exercise I don't know if it applies or not. Is it low volume? High? Neutral or overdrive? Especially hard to transfer from female coach (me being male).

So even if there is a microphone, post-processing and amplification that information is still there, helping the discussion along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this