Jump to content

Rate this topic


Simpan24

Recommended Posts

It's rather naive to think that youll ever get to the skill level where you will visit your physical limitations in regards to singing. For you to be as good as your singing friend? Thats not happening because.

1.  You have not trained your voice in a way that allows it to be

2. You have not dedicated enough time

3. The knowledge you have on how and what to train in your voice is not as strong as it needs to be

4. You probably dont have the mindset that allows your voice to get there

Then if you wanna blame DNA or bad genes, special snowflake and all that jazz sure go ahead :) 

 

Unless you're a woman and want to sing bass. :4: You can get hormone therapy and get closer though:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_therapy_(transgender)

Guys can fake up fairly well, but girls can't fake down and tend to require physiological changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

U r right, jens.  I don't think honestly i will get as good as friend. As u can hear from my post, he is one unbelievable singer.  I will take half that amount and be happy.   Lol. Good luck.

As i said thats an attitude thing, putting people on a pedestal and similar. Altough he's undeniably an awesome singer, you got guys here ok the forum who both have bigger range and are stronger at singing. They got it through training and grinding technique, heck the Guy here with hands down the strongest voice(Daniel) all categories is also they guy who trained the longest, Put in the most time and money and dedication into his voice.

Il never get to his level, not because of my voice or physiology but because il have a hard time to put in the same ammount of training/time and live experience.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jens,

Ask Daniel if he thinks he is in John's league, I think u will be surprised.  I love Daniel's voice and I think he is great singer and nice guy.  Remember, John pulls this shit off live not in his house behind a computer.  An Eb above double high C is an unbelievable range. John has this note on a recording he did in the 80's.  Anyway Good luck to u and I hope u exceed all ur goals.

I dont have to ask Daniel, i just have to listen :) Also Daniel is a very humble guy, probably why he's such a strong singer. 

Yes Eb above double high C is good, but most people can get that if they train alot in that range. I can do and i know tons of guys who get that and higher, so for me the "magic" is gone on such notes.

Anyways good luck aswell and may the DNA be with you hehe;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To clarify I have no issue with impersonators, but don't listen to them and don't find it meaningful.

It depends on what you learn. Knowledge changes people. Even if they make a choice to discount knowledge, there is still that choice being made that would never be there and always the option to use the knowledge.

And how much art improves with socialized education depends on how you feel about this subject:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsider_art

I'm fond of ignorantly passionate art just as much as cultured art. I think it's a difference not a superiority issue. A lot of singers I identify with sang at least partly from that spectrum with less civilized instruction.

I'm not talking about socialized education I'm talking about being humble and hearing something that connects with you and failing over and over at it until you get close enough to satisfy yourself. Hopefully your ego doesn't get in the way and make you say" I want to be original that's why blah blah " or stop you from achieving even further. I see that alot in singers who give up right before they get it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure lol.   Hey, Jens are u n Scandinavian?  My step son and I have really enjoy some of the European Bands.  Behemoth, Children of Bodomen, Night Wish, etc.  I really think the European Bands are leading the way and keeping great metal alive at the moment.  And of course,  we both love Yngwie.

Yeah im from sweden, living in gothenburg atm there's so many great bands from here wich is fun. Specialy since all the countries in scandinavia are really small.

my personal favourites are: Masterplan, Jorn Lande, Lost horizon, Heed, Battlebeast etc most heavy rock/ powermetal singers 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lien your buddy John is an awesome singer I love him ,as far as being in his league I guess I would only be in his league that I've made my living as a singer a professional singer making my money from singing .as I listen to him I think singing comes much easier to him then it did for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jens,how about this.  Each individual DNA strand is unique.   So different that u can b identified from any other human but also similar to other humans.   It is very small,much smaller than ur vocal folds but it creates human beings of which none of us are the same.  Those small differences can make one person susceptible to cancer while totally eliminating another.  Small differences can make big difference in most anything.  We can all train and become better.  However,we all have certain limitations.  Those limitation are based in large part on our physiology.   Reach for the stars and push the limits but be realistic.

I want to learn about this since its new to me. What part of our physiology creates these limitations? What exactly are these limits?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, I was all set up to show that an individual singer can sing great and be iconic. I was going to bring up Johnny Cash's version of "Hurt," a recording so moving that even Trent Reznor said, "that has become Johnny's song. Even I must recognize that and I wrote the song."

But really, does it boil down to some people just being natural good singers in whatever range they have and others who have to work at it? In which case, perhaps we have made too much hay out of one straw. In the end, even with wax in my ears, I find myself asking, "Who cares?"

Nor do I see any need to worry if one guy sings so easily and another guy has to work at it. And I don't think either singer is better. The one who just has the "gift" and the one who worked diligently for a long time. Both can be good singers, regardless of how they got to whatever level they achieve.

So, to answer the initial question in the thread title, "is singing something that people are born with?" My answer is:

Yes. Some have to learn some things to release it, others may have an easier time. 

Peace out ... V

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    I listened to your friend John....... He does sound pretty good............ But I do have one thing to say........... When your speaking voice is centered around A3 you may have an easier time of singing between G4 and C5  .  My speaking voice is centered at G2 .............. Another thing is having a practice area where you can experiment without interuption of some casual remark that sets you back 3 or 4 years.................... Case in point...... I have been working on "House of the Rising Sun" I am just getting that A4 to not sound like Mickey Mouse on steroids............Trying some new things that are helping.....BUT... in the middle of one of these experiments the door opens and I hear the question "Is someone crying up there?" ......... Which I have to respond........"No it is only me trying to sing" ........... another blow to the ego. :( Until then I was pretty pleased with myself .................... The journey continues .............. Rock on :headbang:yeah...:mellow: ..... maybe tomorrow while I try to do something to reasert my manhood..............:24:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    Another fact that people miss is this ............. You may perceive john as having a big and full High voice but it is not........ It is just closer to his lower sound.........Us guys with a lower center hear a bigger difference in our sound and try to make the top thicker..............Wrong ........ we need to make the bottom thinner to get a more consistent sound.....  And when we do ......... we will have MORE of a range choice than John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

     Listen closer to that clip ...... The sound is thin and tight .......... Powerful yes ........ But it is not thick up top......... then Listen to Blackfoot. When he goes to an A4...That is thick and Beefy ...... also entirely different than what John is doing or Queensryche does. ( My wife has been listening to Queensryche the last few days)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lien well where did you actually observe all that? Did you measure vocal folds size? Larynx size? Etc? Did you compare results with other studies?

What I want you to realize is that you observed people that have this natural thing going, yes, we all have, but you did not actually observe that it was due to physical differences, its a "what if?" . I say this because people actually did look into the high profile singers to figure out what exactly was going on and the differences were found to be mostly functional (what they did), instead of physical (how they were).

Using magnetic resonance its possible to observe the inner coordinations of the vocal tract for example, support group muscle activity was measured, etc.

 

This does not mean that we will be able to sing like this or that guy just by training, but, a physical limitation, usually is not the case provided that we are not talking about bizarre differences, like a girl trying to sing a bass aria or a bass that wants to sing just like Kate Bush (and there is controversy in this last one). Neither physical constitution alone will give someone an edge over others. Which is not suprising, its a very complex activity.

You play guitar correct? Do you think that hand size defines whether you will be the next Steve Vai?

In more simplistic terms, the guy is really THAT good. And that´s not such a bad thing to say, is it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we should create a new sub-forum called "blessed physiology". Or better yet....."Gods of singing- Just what makes them divine?"

Then this entire thread could be moved over there and the "vocal technique" sub forum could be reserved for discussions about technique.

After all, technique is the only thing any of us can do anything about anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  I could be wrong, I don't know.  However, I still think it is logical to conclude that physiology (actual make up of the larynx) plays apart even  if as u said it is  a small part. However, a small part could still make a difference.  I never said it had to b a big physical difference, just possibly some. I consider functionality to be a part of persons physical make up, too.  If they have a more evolved nervous system they will process or comprehend information at a more rapid pace.  Ur argument could b consider a circular argument because it still comes back to the physical system, which I conclude it does.   If it is the more evolved brain/nervous system or some advantage in the larynx or both it is still a physiological advantage to the person who has it, because both of these components are part of the physical system.  Evolution my friend.  

Functional aspects of the brain and body are still physical, indeed. Mind body dualism is outdated and functional MRI sealed the deal. 

My primary problem is pain, but also have a fasciculation in my tongue. Not sure if it is functional or a result of nerve damage and neither are any of the doctors I've visited. So I would have decreased 'tongue control' over you guys. But it might contribute to my sometimes fast vibrato and give me an edge there.

It is possible some people would have more advanced functional neurological connections. Doesn't mean I'd listen to them though over someone with a little chaos in the signal. :4:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You play guitar correct? Do you think that hand size defines whether you will be the next Steve Vai?

 

Depnds on if you are going to play exactly like him. I started to notice a difference between guitar players like him and others, such as myself. My pinkie finger is a little shorter in relation to other fingers, than is Vai's. I used to wonder about these guys making huge stretches on the fret board. I cursed Chris DeGarmo for his intro to "I Don't Believe in Love."

Then I realized I had a different physical structure. So, sure, I compensate. I might can play something he plays but I will play it differently, guaranteed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's look at it another way for a moment. Let's take a a group of 10 or so professional singers with seemingly superhuman abilities. For the sake of the experiment the group should include subjects of both genders, multiple ethnicities, and should represent the general population in terms height and weight variations. In other words this list could include Prince, Chris Cornell, Otis Redding, Aretha Franklin, Pavarotti, Sarah Brightman, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, Adele, Emmylou Harris etc.

   Ok. Now let's say that science was able to observe some obscure physical attribute that made all of these people better suited to singing than the rest of the general population.

Ok. You would then need to grant them all the other variables that took them to where they ended up. They discovered that they had this physical attribute. They then decided to nurture it at a young age by singing all the time whether it be scales in a rehearsal studio or in church with their communities. Then they would have to develop it into some type of signature style whether it was ground breaking or not. Then they would have to grow as MUSICIANS to know the language of music inside and out so that it seemed second nature. Then they would have to make tasteful choices that sounded great to millions of ears. Then they'd have to find the right songs to sing or perhaps write them themselves. Then they'd have to have enough drive and passion for what they were doing to survive the music industry.

    I tend to think that it is everything in the above paragraph that makes a great singer.....not the obscure physical attribute....assuming it even exists.

    And if it does exist........what does that mean for you or I? How does the work we have to do change? It doesn't. The genetics are a sealed deal that we can't do anything about. We can only take control of what is in front of us.

    There are often sports analogies in these discussions and they are often helpful up to a point. To speak in Darwinian terms for the sake of this argument let's look at the height of basketball players compared to the "mystery singer's gene". There are several reasons the two scenarios are different.

    A young man grows to the height of 6'4" by the time he's 13 years old. Everyone who sees him can observe this fact. Undoubtedly, more than a few friends and family members tell him he might want to think about picking up a basketball. Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't but if he does, he does so with the knowledge that he very well may have an edge on the competition because of his height.

    Which brings me to my second point about the sports analogy. Our subject's height is something that will allow him to be more competitive. This is where the analogy to singing breaks down. Singing is not a competition. Except for American Idol and all that fluff, singing is, at the end of the day, about emotional and artistic expression. It's not about acrobatics. We're not dancing seals. We're singers......and we're artists in development.......remembering all the while that it's a lifetime commitment.

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"What if your high notes are thin, harsh, etc and you have to eq and reverb the hell out of it to get a reasonable(?) production. Maybe you would be more effective as a baritone.   Daniel is good example on this forum of a good tenor voice."

1. You train technique and adjust the problems;

2. If the goal is classical singing, maybe, but the main probably is achieving projection. On a mic I can make a low or high notes sound deep, without it, things change a lot;

3. Dan was classified as a Baritone actually.

 

Also. The evolution theory is accepted and verifiable, yes, since it predicts and model reality while being supported by evidence.

It does not mean that by saying anything is a result of evolution your claims become also true. The only thing you have really observed is that some folks have it more easily or produce a quality that you like best. Again to make any statement about a physiological difference, its necessary to observe such difference.

To cconclud this would be more productive by actually listening what are doing currently, if you are inspired by the guy. Don't aim to get near, or the same. Aim to do it even *better*.

GL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the problem is as i said earlyer there is no research that supports that a certain vocal physique is more suitable for singing. No paper shows that X type of vocalfold makes a good singer.

Or x type of physique Will have large range and so forth, I have all the range in the world and then some had my voice checked by a doctor.

"youve got a normal voice just like all other, i could take in any Male off the streets and it would look the same."

these guys had also looked down on Jussi bjorlings folds, they said it was just like any other average guys. But he had an insane control over them. He could basicly do what they asked him to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh man, this thread had gone kaput! Yeah! Some guys have it easier! We can all agree on that! But saying that we have physical limitations that will prevent us from singing at a high level, as good as some famous singers is just absurd. And as someone had already pointed out (I think it was Daniel), it becomes an excuse. Yeah, Lien's friend sings really well, and he may be a naturally gifted singer who never took lessons (formal or informal) or ever practiced singing by himself, or even warmed up before singing. Still, it doesn't mean anyone, with the right training cannot do the same. Not similar, the same level or better! In my opinion, Lien lacks the technical knowledge to even analyze his friend's singing (as if he wasn't twanging or mixing resonances at the high pitch notes).

And finally, evolution is about the survival of the fittest. It doesn't mean the best species or the best organism. The individuals best fit for a certain situation at a certain time, have a higher chance of reproducing and passing their genetic material on to the next generation. 

Keep on rocking!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

     I think the opposite has stood the test of scrutiny also....... We will forever be at a stalemate on this subject......... At least a few examples of natural talent have been proven to be matter of training of some sort. Jens himself, Felipe Robert and Daniel is proof that training can and will give the results. Sure there are some genetic advantages if the person stays with the Genre that his voice is presupposed to. Is that the Natural singers choice? or is it because he always sings and sounds the same no matter what genre he chooses because he found a coordination that works with his voice......... and then the result is in the perception of the listener.

    I have a 4 year old niece who sings pretty good but she will also squeel at the drop of a hat.........4 or 5 hours of squeeling daily seems like a pretty good workout to me..................Another neice that was humming in tune before she could talk ............ Daily humming is also a workout and training.............. For myself I was daily training the opposite of good singing habits and had to relearn them even though I had been "Singing" for 40 years...........Trying to beef up a coordination that was set for failure thinking that pounding at it would help............some things need to be tackled in a different way even when reading and training through several books and methods.......some things do not sink in until you experience the "Right" coordination.............No matter how many other coordinations you have tried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever it is with Daniel, the conclusion is "he be got it".  All I have ever said is evolution does give advantages and that is scientifically verifiable.  

Daniel shouted, used falsetto, and pushed middle voice and did it all wrong the first time around. (His own words). He misapplied every vocal technique oppositely of what he currently does on his road of vocal training. You hear Daniel now and you think he is a natural tenor. That is a pretty strong argument against the ability to detect born with it talent. Further complicating things, some listeners might have preferred the sound of a straining baritone over a natural tenor. On average, I prefer Bruce Springsteen over Steve Perry, for example, so it is theoretically possible I'd have preferred the sound of straining and struggling, hitting flat notes sometimes, squealing into falsetto, and working and failing over the sound of 'relative ease' on average.

Physiological, neurological, and functional differences occur in populations. My tongue wiggles and shakes involuntarily in a way others cannot reproduce. I can measure it, doctors have measured it. Most peoples don't. It would result in a 'different' sound, however subtle. Difference is a foundation in art. It's not a sport. I won't win competitions to hold my tongue still, but it doesn't mean someone might detect a subtle difference in a voice and find it stimulating.   

But as an outsider observer without first hand objective knowledge. Trying to draw the line without strong objective evidence will often result in error, possibly discourage and mislead. You're very likely to not be able to detect cultural upbringing, experience level, education on the subject, psychological drive, psychological mood, psychological temperament (someone with schizophrenia or who is psychotic might have different levels) and so forth. While barriers likely exists for people, they aren't measurable until they are measurable. The margin for error in an onlooker to try to figure out what the barrier is and why it exists is really high. That's why the idea of comparing naturalness is kind of fruitless. Unless you have first hand experience and a strong objective mind and ability to suspend a conclusion, a lot of the time you're taking shots in the dark.

And all those shots you're taking, they could be devoted to self improvement and meeting whatever goal you want to achieve.

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...