Kevin Richards

Technically your entire vocal range is a mix of resonances at all times. This is what confuses people about the term "mix voice". Most people refer to it as just that area between their speaking vocal range and head resonance. And there lies the issue. Segmenting the voice into parts is what gets 99% of singers into trouble. They create false areas of transition, false registers, false modes. The voice is a constant mix of three resonances - throat, mouth and sinus. The lower you sing, the more throat resonance is heard, the "higher" you sing, the more sinus resonance is heard in the sound. Mixing is a way to blend your voice seamlessly between these three main resonance shifts. I heard some chest pulling on a few notes here and there, but when you did the improvised "ow" you're closer to a better upper mix sound than when you're singing the song. You're in the ballpark through of mixing/blending your resonance in the right proportions to get the result you want.

1. Show ME where I am confused on falsetto and head voice. Show me. Do it. Because I'm not. 2. The video you reference was me in the recording studio singing AC/DC (not my own song) and its a reference vocal for the band not the final take AND you're hearing my voice in a dead environment and without the musical reference to what I'm singing. Get your facts straight. 3. I've appeared on numerous radio jingles, sang to over 50,000 in the Summer of 1996 on a tour of Asia and Europe opening for "Royal Hunt", have sung on numerous Grammy producers demos - and none of them have ever caught on that I sing tense, have problems with melody, intonation or tonality. Strange isn't it? My critique and further comments for Joe were fair. Some may be uncomfortable for others to read but I'm being 100% honest in my assessment and in the end trying to help Joe and protect my industry. But your assessment of the song was correct. It did sound like Joe did not know the song very well.

Joe, your site and course have been known to coaches for a while. Long before your post. Remember, its OUR business so we are constantly seeking out any and all new competition. I just helped Robert squash a coach in Singapore for saying they could teach his TVS methodology when they had no permission to do so. If coaches are out there online, I find them. I'm quite good at it being that I was in IT for close to 10 years before teaching voice.

Joe - "Methinks thou protest too much". Your VERY long answer is a perfect indication you're not as sure footed as you'd want us to all believe. Your long list of supposed accomplishments You see Joe, I DO know what you teach as I bought your course under another name. I have every vocal course on the market. Why? No the competition. I have a pretty good idea what you know in terms of depth of knowledge on the subject. How you sing is also a glaring indication of your overall abilities. The choices you made artistically show me a lot. Understand that this is our livelihood and we are constantly having to answer for people like yourself who feel they can just put out product because they can. If you're going to step in our ballpark, be prepared to play against heavy hitters. Robert and I were both teachers for many years before deciding to create courses for the public. We spent a long time learning the craft of teaching, creating a methodology and gaining experience with people. I don't see that from you. So you took a couple of courses and have read some books. And...? How many students have you taught consistently for at least 2-3 years? What is your methodology? Your pedagogy on voice? You see, Robert and I are trying to raise the bar on training singers but someone with your inexperience trying to step into our profession raises huge red flags. You don't understand the business, and it is a business. You're not comprehending what you're doing to the profession overall. Robert and myself commenting the way we are is not personal. It's business. Our business. Any new kind on the block is going to scrutinized and forced to prove they have the muster. Frankly, I don't see it. Yet. You should stay below the radar, teaching students regularly for a few years, gaining experience, gaining insight - before going anywhere near trying to teach the public. Having taken a few courses and having read some books simply isn't enough. Myself and Robert were students of voice for at least 20 years before putting out product. You're jumping in water way over your head at this point Take a step back and reassess.

I am disappointed that Robert deleted that portion of my comment that dealt with you having a vocal course because it's an important point that I made. Your intentions to offer a lower priced alternative to more expensive courses may be noble, but in the end you hurt the business overall by offering a sort of "Made in China" knockoff. It lessens the market value for more qualified teachers and more comprehensive courses. It also makes people less likely to buy courses from myself, Robert, Ken, Brett etc. because they see a lower price. They get the course, realize it's not out together by a professional teacher and they become disillusioned about buying vocal courses from anyone else. Cheaper doesn't equal better - just as more expensive doesn't equal quality. To offer a course for money, one MUST be an expert in that chosen field - be good at it and able to demonstrate it effectively. Interpretation is fine and actually necessary for a singer to grow. As an example; Frank Sinatra was the King of interpretation in terms of his phrasing, and arrangements of songs but the overall emotional intent of the song always remained. If you wanted to really interpret "Silent Lucidity" differently, you have to use different music. Singing some wild interpretation over a karaoke track of the original song simply makes it too opposite.

I was just sent the link to this thread and have given said track a listen. This is not about interpretation - this is flat out amateur in too manyways. I'm sorry if you expected me to coddle Joe; the truth has to be said here. The song performance of this is below average. If a singing student sent this to me for review I would say the same thing. Your idea of pitch, melody, rhythm, emotional conveyance need A LOT OF WORK. Its not interpretive, its being somewhat clueless in how to sing a song properly given its subject matter and emotional intent. Needs more work Joe...

I guess I just think of articulation differently. To me, its the least important part of the chain in singing - the manipulation. Lyric mapping is where you find how to articulate the words properly for the given song. Each genre treats it somewhat differently. Classical/Broadway/Cabaret tend to stress near perfect diction, whereas modern music is more "fast and loose" with diction. Words combine, consonants get shortened/altered, closed vowels get opened etc., but they're close to how to say them A good example of an exception is the word "Fire". Almost no one sings it as they would speak it. It ends up as "Fie-yah". Same goes for "higher" - it ends up as "high-yah". If you sang it as you speak it it sounds too "broadway". Again there are exceptions to that in modern music as well; Dennis DeYoung of Styx, Kevin Dubrow of Quiet Riot were both overly articulate singers who "chewed" on every word near perfectly. The opposite of that would Kurt Cobain, Bob Dylan, Eddie Vedder who under articulate and most people find it hard to understand them. The whole point here between Robert and myself is to find what works for you. There are very few "hard and fast" rules in voice training because each person is different. Unique in how they think, how they learn, their confidence level, ability to experiment, etc. and so on. Experimentation is the most eye-opening teacher.

Articulation of consonants should be almost identical to how you speak them - quickly and softly. Vowels need to change slightly as we sing higher because as you blend into head resonance, the open vowels tend to start to sound similar. Consonants need to become more clear the higher you sing, otherwise it's just a mish-mosh of indistinct words. The best piece of advice I ever got about articulation was this - sing as if the audience is deaf and needs to read your lips. If you over (or under) enunciate they can't read your lips because they learn to read lips by watching natural conversation. There are some adjustments to be made between speech and singing - but not many. I don't think it's as complicated as Robert alludes to - at least you shouldn't be thinking it's complicated. A good benchmark to start with is speak the lyrics and notice how to enunciate the words. Try to emulate that but soften it slightly so it flows.

Exercises don't always tell you the whole story about your range or abilities. I know people that can sing very high in a vocal exercise but struggle in songs and students who can sing notes in songs they can't in an exercise. It's partially confidence and fear - how your thinking reacts to a given task. Some singers are more relaxed while singing but tense when they vocalize because they think of it as "practicing" and become more fearful than they should. Vocal exercises are usually done with open vowels which keeps the voice open and creates a better airflow because there are no words to disrupt or "chop" it up. The first thing you want to do is change your vocabulary and think about "singing" notes rather than "hitting" them.

Hey Wakawaka, OK listened to your version and here's what I come away with. 1. You don't know the song well enough to record it yet. Your phrasing seemed haphazard and unsure where the lyrics fit inside the tempo of the song. 2. In this example your voice is badly under supported OR you were afraid of overloading the mic and held back your delivery. Either way, the vocal sounded weak and unsure of itself. Not enough"oomph" to the vocal. Not sure if a specialized onset is the answer. I think your answer is more in consistent respiratory compression (breath support). 3. Articulation. Makes sure your consonants are clean so the words are decipherable. Vowels can be a little sloppy in the natural range but your consonants need to be clean but harsh or hard; this cuts down "popping" all over the mic. I've given this advice before bit it applies here too; practice this song until you're sick of it. Then leave it alone for a few days; go back and try it again. More than likely, your confidence will have improved and you'll sound better on the song. Now you're ready to record it again. Confidence is key. Repetition and not fearing mistakes builds confidence. Sing it 100 times if you have to. But sing it like you mean it.

Hi Kaige, A unique version of the classic hit from The Animals. Nice tone, good delivery and phrasing. It held my attention (which is a hard thing to do). Not many singers can pull off just guitar and vocals. Nice job. My only disappointment was not taking the vocals up higher in the last verse. That would have really driven the vocal home and made a very satisfying coda. Otherwise, cool version.

Hey Elvis. I will mirror some other comments here - this version sounds "unsure" like you're not quite sure how to sing the song. Remember - it takes about 10 times singing a song before you feel completely at ease. I can hear your uneasiness; especially on the notes when you go flat. Fear = hesitation = failure. Recording can be an intimidating, cold and uninspiring chore. Like anything else in life, the more you do it the more comfortable it becomes. The more you figure out how to do it. You're tone is good, you just sound like you lack confidence. Practice the song until you're sick of it. Leave it alone for a couple of days, then go back and sing it again. You'll be surprised how much more confident you'll be.

Excellent rendition. Nice tone, smooth vibrato and phrasing. You have a great grasp of the dynamics of the song; you know when to push the volume and when to pull it back. My only negative would be the delivery. It lacks heart and soul. It's an excellent exercise in singing the song on pitch but it lacks something. Do another take and sing it with more passion. Feel the lyrics. Imagine you're singing about someone you know. Get inside the song. The melody should draw me in emotional. Go back and listen the Bill Withers; you can hear his heart breaking. You're almost there.

Yes, articulation is a big factor here. It's very hard to decipher the lyrics here. 1. Speak the words first and listen for the consonants and how they are formed. Duplicate them in the song as you would speak them. If your speech is clear, the song lyrics should sound clear. You have a nice tone and the pitch is pretty good for singing a capella. Not many people know how to stay in tune without musical backing. I would say your biggest issue with this piece was enunciation. Your consonants are a little too sloppy. Other than, it's actually quite good.

Hi Drew, Interesting song musically. Vocally it's a little repetitive and although I like the echo effect on the vocals, it's difficult to decipher the lyrics at times because of it. It seems the song is cut off at the 2:49 mark as well. Technically the vocals are OK, nothing outstanding. You have a good voice but this particular song doesn't showcase it. Keep writing though and be sure to challenge yourself not only with your training, but with your songwriting.