Felipe Carvalho

By stating that pitch is such a crucial factor you are using a rule and you even complain that something is getting in the way of you hearing it. And the link to the thread?

I think "By a child" is key to this particular mark Never did a 6 hours gig, I think... but did plenty of gigs with 4 to 5 hours of stage time, which is not uncommon on corporate bands... not an ideal , or smart, thing and has its risks even if your technique is good and you can get plenty of rest later. So yes and no. You could but you shouldn't.

Most singers want to sound good and sometimes pitch and relative perception is a problem. But there are other much more important things, reason why the reporter on that video still sounds lame even after a professional audio engineer tries to fix her voice, and even on the "less evident autotune" version. However the issue I am pointing is that according to your own words following the rules on pitch would be comparable to forcing an artist to use a certain shade of color to represent a sky or whatever. And yet you complain that something the guy did (which happens to be autotune) is preventing you from knowing how well he can follow said rules. So which is it? And where is the link to the original thread so we can see what was going on instead of just your version?

Hah how silly, there is never too much volume through a PA system.

Most people on reddit r singing are not looking for technique, they just like to talk or read about singing, or want to show their voices and get some casual opinions on it. Of course people will use computer technology to sound as good as they can get it to sound, on some cases you will get a tutorial on tuning your voice as part of the DAW introduction, but usually that wont go very far either. Do note however that you start the thread saying that using autotune to achieve the standards of pitch and rhythm makes a mockery of reviewing, implying that reviewing depends on these, and later you complain about these same standards. My opinion is the same as it always was, people can tell good from bad without help when they are choosing what the music they enjoy to hear, and they can do the same with their voices as long as they dont sabotage their perception with excuses to why they dont sound as good as the stuff they enjoy, when these are dropped, then the need for technique may appear. If that person was just trying to make it sound as good as he could get it, and was not pretending to be some sort of singing technique reference, it fits this attempt, in a non optimal way, and to me its all good as long as he does not make a point of lying about it (as in deliberately saying he IS NOT auto-tuning when he is). Actually its all good with me either way :P. But where is the link to such reddit posting event?

There is more than one way to sing stuff on the high area and the 3 singers you listed as reference are effectively doing 3 different things when it comes to the core coordination, what is similar is that they often used some sort of distortion on the higher notes. That is probably where you should look. Trying to make head voice sound like a scream on its own is not realistic, you will probably need a stronger approach AND distortion to get to what you want. I hope it helps. Rock/Agressive vocals is what I do and teach, let me know if I can help further.

Hello Anderson, I heard two clips, the one here and another one where you sing a song. It does not sound bad on the singing one, this one is just a siren so there ain't much to say. On both you are approaching it using your voice closer to what you would need for classical female singing, counter tenor, but in this one it seems you are trying to open more and use more power. So this may not sound very good if you don't change from the kind of head voice you are used to. What do you want to sing?

Ah!!! I love some Rival Sons, can you get on the messenger chat so we can talk? Would love to hear how you approach this! About voice training, it´s true we can´t reach down on other people´s throats, but I would not say it´s just an icing in the cake either. If you know how sounds are produced and you are smart, you can use certain sounds and ideas to help positions to be acquired. This can be pretty handy specially when dealing with powerful and high pitched vocals. Welcome!! Link to the chat in messenger: https://m.me/join/AbaMTBP3g9tLhKss

Sure, or just not bridge if that's the choice. It's also common when you listen to high level performers to find the use of transitions as an interpretation resource, as part of the dynamics of the song, instead of just a technical means to execute the high range. Something like changing from full head voice to chest on the upper mid range (A4-C5), in heavy metal, Dio and Bruce Dickinson did this a lot. Other singers change from a more aggressive style to a more melodic one using the different registers as different characters. Many, many choices!

Depends on how this shouting sounds, the songs you are trying to sing, and what your teacher is trying to get you to do. For most males shouting is the very first step that is necessary to learn how it feels like to use your voice with a moderated amount of energy on the middle range, and to correct possible posturing problems related to vocal fold closure. If you start to avoid this before you control it really well, you are setting yourself for frustration. Can you provide a sample of how you sing one of these problem songs?

Yep, the 3rd partial is also lowered, which also indicates softer singing (less closure) and less twang. I was not being selective, it's just redundant. This idea that "asymmetry of closure" emphasizes odd harmonics instead of even seems odd, can you point to the place where this was said? The harmonics themselves, odd and even, are a consequence of the asymmetry of the signal that is produced by the vocal folds. Because during the closed phase there is no air passage, the pressure gradient happens only during the open phase, this is the main source of asymmetry. Then, considering just the open phase, the shape of the pulse can vary from closer to one half of a sine wave, to something closer to a saw tooth (or square) wave, which is a change in symmetry of this pulse considering it's attack and decay, in this sense more closure equals more asymmetry. Higher closure levels move the signal towards the later and the energy level on all the harmonic spectra shifts in relation to the fundamental. Such as can be seen on the stage/full voice he does later on the video, represented in the 4th graph:

In regards to the harmonic content: On the first example where the 6th harmonic should be amplified this is the spectral distribution: Both 6th and 5th harmonic have a boost, this is very consistent with the idea of *twang*, being close to the 3khz area. On the second example, where he says it´s 5th harmonic: Indeed the 5th harmonic is stronger on the twang region, but it´s on a very similar level to what it was before, it´s likely the darkening reduced twang and separated the clustering. Reducing twang is also consistent with the lowering of the energy level on the second partial in relation to the fundamental when compared to the first example. Then he demonstrates a vowel on the low range, again the profile is very similar to twang, and of course now that the note is lower, the 3khz band is affecting much higher partials: Finally on stage voice, there is a situation closer to the initial sample, only now because of the higher level of closure, the energy content of the harmonics rise in relation to the fundamental: Twang and 3rd partial are the dominant areas, with a slightly lower 2nd partial, and the fundamental bellow all of this. This is the profile you get with *covering*, also fits CVT *curbing*.

??????

Honestly there isn´t much there to agree or disagree, it´s true that male voices get more stable around 30yo, and then you get old and with it problems happen. How well you age will depend on much more than just your singing technique of that you can be sure. But most of the video is him, once more, using high level performers to tag along as if he was in position to say anything about their skill. For example saying that Russel Allen is in "relatively good condition" or mentioning his masterclass and saying it´s the way he works. Very pretentious and no singing whatsoever... Disappointing for a video about Russel Allen.

It´s true that there are people that are significantly better or worse at the skill, it´s also true that everyone works for it in some manner, and it´s true that for the extreme cases normal instruction might not be very efficient, either by being bellow the capability of one of these genius level individuals, or because it´s just totally beyond what a person that has extreme difficulty with singing can cope with. The core of the matter is this: If you consider that everyone that gets good worked for it somehow, and that one of the common points on extremely competent performers is that they were singing at high level from a very early age, the inevitable conclusion is that this talent, if you will call it that, can be resumed to learning speed. And what can be done about learning speed? It seems to be: - Keep learning; - Learn as fast as you can. Two things that seems to be extremely important to stick to this plan: - Sing everyday; - Record yourself singing songs and evaluate it by the same standard you evaluate music you consume. First one is straight forward, if you are not singing, you are not learning. End of story. Second one is a tool that is pretty much of free access nowdays, recording, which gives you a very reliable feedback on what you are doing, but the crucial part is to NOT lower your bar with excuses. And then there are learning tools, voice teachers, programs, coachs, communities. On our messenger group you can very easily sing to a bunch of people that are also learning and get feedback and different ideas on the fly for example. All of these can speed up learning, effectively making you more *talented*. TL/DR It´s a race to skill.