Felipe Carvalho

I guess I am, but its not my fault, better results, better reviews! hehehhe Funny indeed.

Jens really, Ive wasted like 6 years of my life hitting the brick walls with my bare hands trying to improve on my own. I felt really stupid after starting the lessons, if I could go back in time I would been trainning way before I began. THIS is stupidity. Wanna learn great, then get the best possible instruction and train. Potential is not something I can say beforehand. How can I know what will happen??? What I can say is that its still not working, it can be much better, and depends only on trainning. That I can say. Because I listenned to it, and it really sounds weird, the tensions are causing scoops, atacks from bellow, some parts of the melody are not defined and the nasality is also not a bonus. For some reason you guys think that the world is gonna end because Ive told him that. I doubt it, if it was me Id get good and make me eat these words, which Ill gladly do. Now I can lie too, very good and stuff, I doubt its what he wants from other conversations. I dont assume that everybody is immature and all sensitive about a learning process. He is starting, so let him start from a solid perspective and work for it. Enough, GL.

Jens, and yet Im correct. As stupidy as it may seems, as easy as getting a teacher may be. ronws, Robert provides sessions, doesnt he? Due time for them. Instead of talking about technique, time to train.

Tommy I relate a lot with the ideas of trainning you have, still for a number of reasons on singing its tough to get it that far. At least I never broke anyones ribs so far ahhaahahha, egos on the other hand... On the original sound thing. The first step is to have a voice you can use to sing, if you dont, then everything else is meaningless. Then, the musical language. So you dont wanna sing the same melody, sure, no problems, make one. But then you need musicianship hehehe, and to have musicianship you need to train perception and learn from other musicians. So in these cases its a good idea to listen to the original and try to capture the ideas, specially when venturing outside your own style. For example, if I want to do a Jazz song, and capture the Jazz feel, I will have to listen to jazz, listen to the song who knows how many thousands of time, and get the ideas being used. Either that, or I go rock n roll / metal, alter the whole song and place some distorted guitars and Riff and make it fit MY sound. What will suck completely is if I try to do whatever comes to my mind, with no familiarity with Jazz on top of a Jazz band playing... About copying artists "sounds", usually what I hear here is more on the direction of a comical impersonation than actually capturing the intentions... Like singing a metallica song and placing a "hell yeah" on the end of every phrase... I never try to do it, and yet Ive heard more than once people telling me I sound "exactly" like this or that artist. A sign I went in the right direction, usually a matter of dynamics and choices for legatto/rhythmic phrasing, simple stuff that has nothing to do with the fundamental quality of the vocal production.... A simple pause can capture more of the original artist than trying to mimic how he pronounces words...

Not good. Chest voice tensions creeping all around, tongue tensions and even nasal on the pre-chorus. Teacher and trainning. GL.

If I say I like a song, I mean that I like it. And thats all what I was asking, and what I see people having so much trouble to respond No matter the ammount of knowledge you have, its the most important bit of information you can give on a review/critique. Trying to give out the ultimate wisdom or teach everyone that ask for an opinion is a strange posture, to say the least. I will answer my own question now: I do point technical problems I hear, yes, I do point somethings I know that can help yes, but I dont write information when I know it will not serve any purpose, specially exercises and the likes. Whatever I write here, I write as another singer and as a listenner. I am not giving "didatics" or some psychological mumbo-jumbo. I do spend some considerable time before writing stuff and I can do some more than just like/not like, but I dont pretend to be the ultimate source of information or have the final word in this. As long as my opinion is concerned, and in the technical side I tend to be quite accurate, you can count that its just what Ive perceived listenning to what was presented, no didatics involved. And even if I am pointing technique stuff that I consider of importance, I do give out what I thought of it, do I like it? Yes or no? Its the least I can do. In the end of the day guys, no matter your didatics strategies when teaching, which is not the case, this is what an opinion is all about, and everyone can give this out, everyone know if they like or dont like what they are hearing. If not you take for yourselves the job of the singer, which is processing this feedback. If the information given will be used or discarded, as Tommy said, its a matter of how much you trust the source, and your will to use the infor or not . Jens I do see your point, but lets say I dont quite agree on the implementation. Poiting out good stuff that can be used is great, and I do try, but ignoring problems that I know that are of significance, not really. Confidence is important, but its also important that you are placing your confidence on something that can respond to it. Confidence is not closing your eyes and just ignoring negative opinions, confidence is looking at them, taking what you can use, discarding what is not important for you and moving on. If the person cant take negative opinions, then its best to find another field of activity or hobby, but then again, does it even exists? In which profession you are allowed to take such stance? Speaking of the technical side and what we can do, there are things that are simply not possibly to be worked via text: Emission for example is critical, if its not ballanced and ajusted, not only it will get in the way, it can result in health conditions. I am not asking if its critical, Im not debating if its critical, I know its so. Even if I like something sang on top of an emission that is too pressed or too weak, I will say that I like it, but I will make it clear that the problem exists and can not be ignored. And no, there is nothing that any of us can do via text to address this problem, it must be worked carefully and it takes time to refine and consolidate it. Nothing done on top of a problematic emission is good as far as technique is concerned, it must be addressed after its ajusted. And no, when I give my opinion on sounding good/not, I am not considering technical accuracy or virtuose, its just me, as a listenner, as if I was doing takes for a recording, or if I was listenning to material of a band to play in a bar I owned. In these situations I wouldnt care less if the person is spitting blood to do the job, as long as it sounded good, thats what is needed . Its all I can do: Hear this and that, like and dont like it. To fix it, do this or that, most of the times the fix will be "seek instruction", and I think its a quite wise thing to do, I really mean it when I say so. Something good and desirable that should be kept and used, like a comfortable and homogeneous production, I will praise, in many occasions I did so in these forums. Hopefully what I write is trustworthy, but I have no direct control over that, all I can do is make some effort so that I keep it sincere and hope it to show. Cheers ;)

The sinus is not something you have to worry about. They dont move. The main resonant chamber you have to ajust is your mouth. Did you try what I described? Whistle+voice? Try to relax in this. That is as resonant as it gets, and you will feel almost nothing besides a focal point in your lips and upper front teeth.

Jens I may use the idea, tnx. Tommy, yeah you are right, well Ill just think of something else hehehaahaha Poor approach. Tnx for the replies. Nice thread. ronws I have no clue of what you are talking about on most of your posts man, I sincerely didnt see the dogs thing, I was replying to Rach on the didatics stuff. But well no, I dont agree with it either.

Ok man, Ive listenned to it. Feels a bit "shaped" into place you know? Like trying to make your voice go forward or into twang, instead of just placing it there. As you trade the vowels this makes your voice shift too much and it sound more spoken than sang, and a small bit nasal. This one is tricky to solve on your own, try whistling and producing a sound at the same time, a low pitched V for example, then use this posture to sing with, relaxing it a bit and changing the vowels slowly. The song, well, its not an easy song, at all... I would address it in pieces, listen to the original and get the melody down, its a bit guessed as it is, you know the harmony, you know the melody overall idea and you are kinda fitting the lyrics on a melody you are making up on the fly, you know? Try using the guitar to play the melody with the song, each note. Work in the first verses to begin with. And then, after the timmings and notes are all very defined in your head (this is important). Sink the dynamics down on the floor, the beginning is very soft, gentle, almost whispered on the first phrase, a bit stronger on the second, a crescendo to give the impression that you will explode and THEN... down again. This sets the mood on the whole song, its crucial that you capture this idea and really abuse it. Listen to the original and notice how its worked, its a lot of info, I know, but its important. As you get these ideas down, melody, timmings and dynamics, you will slowly build a language, prety much as you have licks on a guitar that you know how to fit on many different songs. Anyways as it is, its not really working, you will need some study to get this down. Just forget this nonsense of giving up, its really just a matter of study.

Honesty but not that honest heh? I see.... Is that really how everyone feels? Does anyone even care about this or am I making all the fuzz over nothing?

Well I really thought honesty was something desirable... Is this really true jens? You dont care if the answers you receive are at least sincere?

Honesty is the key whenever you are into giving your opinion in something, specially in this case, a review section on a specialized forum. If you seriously cant stand your ground in saying " I like it, or not like it", despite if knowing or not the reasons why, then Im sorry but you are doing something else, you are not reviewing. But I dont believe that is the case. As I said on the beginning of the thread, and all this circular arguments confirms, its just a case of overthinking stuff that really dont matter to it. A person asks your opinion and you go about didatics of how you will better teach him/her? Come on... This is arrogance. So singers are "sensitive to pitchness". Surely! And they do well on being so. But If they are really this sensitive, why sending something pitchy? Tensions? Or is it a perception problem? There are persons who do not have a relative pitch perception well developed and will need to work on it, the basic step to develop it is exactly knowing that they have the issue (the lack of perception prevents the person of perceiving it, tricky uh?). Im not against anyone here giving out "good jobs". All im asking is if you are giving a good job when you really think it is a good job, regarding the song. Are you reviewing the song you heard or something else that has nothing to do with? As was said before: Are you giving the truth? Can it be trusted? Its curious that the didatic thing was brought up, trust is the only thing that matters in a teacher-student relationship, all this postive reinforcement blabbering works well with dogs and maybe kids up to a certain age, but does not work when you work with an equal. If you try to pull something like this and the person notices... Maybe it will work with a bunch of complete beginners who have no idea of what they are doing, but I consider it no ethical, to me its what defines a fraud. By praising qualities that are not there yet you are deceiving the results that you should be helping the person achieve, and not creating illusions of accomplishment. Am I really this weird? Would you guys be ok being instructed like that? "ooohh awesome job in this line (the rest sux big time...), such a wonderfull singing (you wish)"... Why doing it with others? This is not ok guys, it is a distortion of values. From the day I began trainning, negative feedback, was not only important, but expected. So what is wrong? What needs to be changed? If its all wrong, then its better listenning to it already and working towars the goal starting now than trying to give out homeopatic dosis, thats what I would want if it was me, and its the only way I can think about this. Anyways I sincerely hope you guys think a bit about it. And Im not directing this to you rowns, I never doubt you were sincere. This is really a more general thing, and really towards the honesty part, not trying to force my opinions on anyone, as I said before. Again, is it honest? Cant it be trusted? Simple questions. There is no didatic involved And yet you will notice that I am only more direct with the people I see on the technique forum and seem to talk from an instructed background. In my opinion if you can talk and discuss support, give instruction and brag about how super large your range is, then the least to be expected is results when singing. Otherwise I dont ommit myself, but I do keep in mind that the technical background isnt supposed to be there and I approach things in a more "wordy" way, although I do try to keep the message intact ;)

Max wavering I mean the vowels, the resonance is shifting and breaks the homogeneity. Its hard to give a tip for this man, the only solution I know is legatto trainning... Try singing the intro with less mouth movement and more gently, less pressure, but keeping it forward and round. I think it will give you an idea of what I am saying. GL do send more man, "home" sounded spot on, if thats comfortable to produce, remove the distortion and try bringing the rest of the song into that direction.

I like it, there is confidence rolling and well your tone doesnt really leave us much choice hahaha. I was listenning to the original... Such deep interpretation line, wonderfull stuff, not for the faint of heart, good luck on that man But since its a work in progress, my 2 cents: It brings a tear On brings, something in there is making you come flat, I bet its the n in there. Try using the EE in there, EEs are sweet . Into my eyes Eyes is on a crescendo... Hard stuff, I would think of the lowest note, the highest, and just walk through the two points, instead of attacking each, do you know what I mean? So you do like a single line of voice and let your brain register the notes in the places for you. It avoids extra movement and reduces the effort. Other spots with the same ideas will benefit from both approaches too. More work on the dynamics its due too, like on "I tried so much". I would try to fit some other lower dynamic spots around the phrasing. It will make all the energy this song carries pop more due to the contrasts. The first falsetto, "Im so blue", right on the mark. The next one needs the same ajustment, the word "got" is making it fall back, try to make it all the same and it will rock. Because of the registration and because got is lower on pitch, you will probably need to back off from volume to keep it more consistant. Either that or use head on "got" but I think it would sound alien in there. On the spot you guys were talking about, the melody is correct on the first and then comming flat on the second time. But on the first time, you got in the word "you" two vowels, EE and OO. You are not yet decided to which one, thats why it sounds a bit strange, decide for one, bring it into evidence and it will work. I would chose the OO. Will make the dynamic fall and will work with the rest quite nicely. Just some ideas, I know you got your blues together Keep it up man, very nice that you sent this :)

Sorry did not like it man, the intro is wavering too much, and when the dynamics rise, it is sounding good on home, but then you are breaking, and wavering too much in there too... Need more attention to the intro to begin with, and try to keep your voice working exactly like you did the first scream, dont try to make it lighter. Although on some points you do remind of Dio with the distortion and the focus, its more important for now to deliver the song as a whole without problems and then add the details, those are of less importance. I know its a freaking hard song, but well, its Dio... Its supposed to be hard and the eyes will be solely on your performance. Much more study is due in my opinon, head voice needs to be consolidated and powerfull.

Humm. I think it can be better man, your voice is sounding quite relaxed but sounding kinda insecure. Consolidate the details of the interpretation, and just make the song your own, its all there, take full control of it, aim to make it better than the original version. ;)

Sounding quite solid man. Very pleasant to listen. If you want to work more on the guitar recording, I heard a somewhat exagerated lows on the bass line, an eq rolling of a bit of the low end from 100hz and bellow maybe? Be gentle, its just a bit. The vocals are sounding quite good. I only kinda disagree with your choice on the chorus, even if you use a break there, I would reinforce the open AH, like what he did on the original, only lower in dynamic and in falsetto, would sound killer in my opinion. But this is your call, as it is fitting the song so its perfectly fine. Another thing that the original has, and its your choice too, is that the guy kinda mumbles the verses, so I would focus more on connecting more on a few phrases, reinforcing legatto, also just a bit man, a phrase per verse maybe just to remind of the original intention, and of course keeping the punctuations you are already doing and that are sounding awesome to me. Nice job man, really very well executed and sounding quite nice. Not an easy song this one, not at all. :)

So, if we can, as was suggested, affect different genres of singing can be adopted by varying nasality, for example, then is that not a singing emission that is "out of balance," by favoring more nasality than less? You cant, if you try to affect a genre by using nasality or even a "beautifull clear tone" without understanding the language used in the genre or style or whatever, you will just ruin the material, be it country music or opera. And again, this is one step further from what I am talking about here, the "aesthetic" things I am refering to are not optional, and do not render a "tone" to a voice in anyway. Its the very definition of singing. If it fails, then no matter how you are doing to NOT deliver, you cant justify yourself by saying that other artists use one similar part of the problems you have and deliver. The listenner does not care. The only thing that matter to this is the result. The rest is just trying to talk your way into doing a decent job. Wont work. And then I am back into the original question, since so much deviation from the subject is happening, I think I may have hit a quite sensitive spot here: Again, when you review something as good, would you be satisfied if you did a similar result with your own voice? Do you actually enjoyed listenning to it? The existance of material that fails to have the basic qualities of singing, all spoken or squeezed with a totally tampered voice, reviewed as good tells me immediately that its not the case. OR, are you trying to be nice, be suportive and encourage development. Considering your own resuts and the social impact saying certain things may have? Considering what others are writing? Considering the emotional impact and so on? Are you giving the truth or are you giving comfortable lies? Just think about it and consider well what you are writing to others, it has much more effect than you imagine, and it can do much more harm on the long run than just some hard feelings. Just think a bit, no need for more answers or to discuss this, I think its quite complete as it is by now, I invite reading the whole thread to see how troublesome a simple thing as just answering honestly can become if you overthink it.

Nice man, Ill give it a listen later On your own! Very cool, your voice is very well developed. Forget the technical details then, as Daniel pointed, aim for that comfort of the beginning and continue the work as you were doing it, it worked so far. I always advice a teacher/coach, to make it more healthy and fix small details. But if you follow this path, make sure the guy is very good and have a lot of quality on his own voice, at least as much quality as you do, it will narrow down the search and will prevent you from working with someone that tries to tamper too much with your voice.

Man the first phrase won me right away. Very, very nice . Awesome interpreation, and what an awesome tone you have. Since you want a review on the mix, well, there is clipping happening, so try mixing both the vocals and the song at a lower volume on the faders, should help. Still I would not mind hearing more songs from you mixed like this one, try to fix the clipping but keep the quality for us please There are some small issues regarding technique, are you working with a teacher/coach or on your own? Congrats man! Now some more songs please :)

Hello! Its sounding ok, but still a work in progress as you say. The recording quality is quite bad and does not help you, you know that right? Pitch perception is nice, but the way you are using your voice now is a bit exagerated, try beginning the song more softly, gently, use an let the power for the chorus. You see, power is nice, but power is on the contrast and not on the total ammount of voice you can deliver on a song, so if you keep everything strong, then nothing is strong. If on the other hand you use soft and gentle phrases and then on the chorus you let just a bit more, no need to go that loud, the contrast sounds huge and conveys the message much better. So working dynamics and interpretation is what I think you should look for while you dont find a teacher to work the technique with you. Let the technical details be with your future teacher, its much easier. GL!

Kamelot is a quite bitchy material to sing isnt it, that guy is awesome... Dunno man it really not good yet, you know that too, I do like how you are sounding much more solid on the low/mid sections since that Silent Lucidity you´ve recorded, but its still missing compression as you go higher, the section Tommy pointed is where it shows most, its breaking there. Technically your voice is more forward and defined than recordings prior to this, haha I recall that you said in a thread somewhere that a doctor told you you could not resonate? So much for that I guess. Oh, on the first verses, sounding nice, but try to let the dynamics fall more, will sound better on the context (your voice is alone in there), and it will leave a margin to increase it later, might even help with the compression.

Oh I like it better than the old style, more natural. And that editing you used in that song really did not help hehe. Its just that these details are a matter of sitting down and fixing them, not a problem of your voice, you have the chorus and the ideas defined, its just consolidating and, well doing it. Oh and about riff I dont mean that it must be removed, its just out of timming, like in "the guitarrist is not paying attention to the drummer", do you understand? Just a matter of him taking more care to follow the beat. My personal opinion is that the teaser would work much better with just a bit of more attention to this, even if just a piece of the song. But its not my call. GL man, dont really have anything against you. The world needs more metal . \m/

Sounds very, very, VERY bad. Specially given all the nonsense you keep writing on the technique session. Find a teacher and stop writing about things you dont understand, someone might actually take you seriously.

I did not like it man, the ideas sound cool but as it is, it really does not translate well for us listenning. Did you sent this just here or are you openning to public? Dont open yet, just reharse it with the guys and record it when more solid, nothing in there sounds beyond what you guys can do, its really all loose, as you said it, kinda improvising and figuring out what to do on the fly. Would it not be possible to do a more defined reharsal? Given what Ive heard from you before I really was expecting something much more refined. From 1:00, sounds more consistent, better. As a general tip, for the vocals on the chorus with backings and harmonies, fall down on the dynamics of the lead and connect everything better, make the articulation more smooth, then on the resolution of the phrases let it explode a bit but fall back again, it will fit better the idea you had there. BTW, the initial guitar riff, it must be fixed, not only tone, but it must be played on the beat, or removed, its really kinda alien in there as it is now. And the beginning of the melody line, well you just have to have one ;)haha, its clear you were kinda searching for it in there and then you found a ground of ideas to deliver. Plan a melody there, even if its low and easy, it needs to have an interpretation line, use dynamics, a simple low, high, low, high -> sustain -> chorus works wonders. GL man!