Basic singing course recommendation

[saqib09]

Hi,

I was wondering what singing course you would recommend for someone wanting to get a basic but comprehensive course on singing. This is not meant to answer 'how to sing high' or other 'secret' techniques etc. These things could be in the course. The point is it is a singing course, working as a comprehensive course and teaching the basics of music and singing, not necessarily 'techniques'. Doesn't have to be genre specific, in fact, shouldn't be genre specific. It would be like a guitar course that doesn't teach you how to play fingerstyle, or rock or jazz  rather teaches you all the basic things you need to know about playing guitars including music theory. While elementary jazz, blues, rock, classical, etc would be essentially part of the course I would assume, the focus is not to teach 'styles'  particularly.

I hope this was clear. Also, would be great if you shared what kind of basic training you took and how (self taught, tutor).

Thanks

[kickingtone]

You mean a course that focuses on covering all the broad fundamentals?

What would you say the broad fundamentals are? You only say what you think they are not.

[saqib09]

Whatever a competent teacher would include in a fundamental course. I don't require it to have certain fundamentals. I need something that claims to work as an elementary-to-advanced education/training course, and which assumes no prior knowledge.

[kickingtone]

18 minutes ago, saqib09 said:

Whatever a competent teacher would include in a fundamental course. I don't require it to have certain fundamentals. I need something that claims to work as an elementary-to-advanced education/training course, and which assumes no prior knowledge.

I think you may have to get more specific about what you mean.

For example, learning how to breath correctly (not running out of breath, etc.) could be considered a broad fundamental -- i.e it will apply to all types of singing.

But, it will involve "technique" whether it is made explicit or not. Almost everything would.

Ear training -- Learning how to listen, and what to listen for, may be one major area that does not involve technique. It is more a matter of picking up experience.

[saqib09]

Specific about what? I'm not dictating what the course should or should not have. It simply has to be an online course that teaches singing starting from the basics. What it contains or should contain is not something I'm telling or asking. If you know about such a course then that's what I want to know.

[kickingtone]

ok

[MDEW]

Whether anyone here wants to believe it or not, This forum was founded by someone who has a course "The Four Pillars of Singing". And it is a comprehensive course. It is worth much more than the money. You can even get a book that you can hold in your hands and read. If you prefer reading on the computer or tablet, you can download the PDF file of the book. The course itself is Videos that you watch and follow along with. 

Some people were even complaining that the first page you get to when you come to this forum is an advertisement for the course.

It covers everything you would ever want to know about how the voice works, has demonstrations of the exercises and starts off with foundation exercises.

What it does not cover is what determines different Genres, so it is not genre specific. The style you choose to sing is up to you.

It is not a music course it is a voice training course.

[saqib09]

Thank you MDEW. This is exactly what I meant, except I am looking for something that covers music and not technique.

[MDEW]

     You could find a basic music course at your local music store. It will cover the basics. The voice is used just as any other instrument. The terms and words describing things would be the same. 

     Most singing courses would be about training the voice so you can produce the pitches required. Things like when  to breath, how long to hold a note, whether or not to add vibrato....are not covered. How to do those things and what to practice to get better are.

     Training for the musicality of singing is usually done while working on specific songs. When to breath, how long to hold a note, Whether to use a long flowing phrase or chop the words up syllable by syllable is determined by what you are singing and what best goes with the music. The basic MUSIC course would teach you the symbols used on the sheet music to indicate those things.

    Kicking tone has a legitimate question when he asked....

7 hours ago, kickingtone said:

You mean a course that focuses on covering all the broad fundamentals?

What would you say the broad fundamentals are? You only say what you think they are not.

     Are you looking for fundamentals about how to produce different sounds or what scales and pitches to use when singing different songs from different styles of music? They will not be covered in the same book or course.

   

    

[saqib09]

A course for someone who never had any lessons on how to sing or who wants to formally learn singing. In other words, when a child/young person go to a music/singing teacher to learn singing, the training they get is what I'm looking for in online format.

I don't know how else to clarify this.

[MDEW]

There are several books. Born to sing, Singing for the stars, Robert lunte's book Four Pillars of singing, There is one of those Dummy;s guide to singing, How to sing.

The Basics are the Basics no matter who you go with.

Learn to breathe, practice scales, practice matching notes, Practice holding notes without the pitch changing, and sing songs. 

For the money, Robert Lunte's course is the most comprehensive you could find.

[MDEW]

1 hour ago, Dravan Grey said:

nothing about emotion then?

Learning how to fake emotions is part of a master class not the basics. Some people have them and just need to apply them.

[MDEW]

11 minutes ago, Dravan Grey said:

The 4 pillars of temple simply dose not offer this level of traning as therefor you don't know how to do it as you have no other bible to work from

    Life teaches this type of lesson. The 2 dimentional fictional characters cannot learn this because emotions come from physical  and mental experiences. BS breads BS. physical and mental attacks breed physical and mental attacks. physical and mental love breeds physical and mental love.  You get what you give.

    You may believe that my responses to you are attacks. They are not. Stop looking towards those few who dissed you and look towards the many who are trying to help. There is a difference between constructive criticism and critical attacks. 

   As far as voice, music and songs.... they convey emotional ideas and feelings. The words phrases and dynamics have meaning. If you want your music to reach people and make a difference through music,  you at least need to know the story you are telling and the intended message. 

    Maybe this is a 2D holograghic word projected onto a computer screen, but there are 3d people viewing it and experiencing real feelings. 

    Project acceptance and you have a better chance of experiencing it. Project dissatisfaction and you will get that. 

    Jimmyshitforbrains projected dissatisfaction to you and you gave it back. Here you have been projecting it to others. More people have tried to help than those that have attacked. 

[MDEW]

Starts soft and mello and builds to a somewhat aggressive nature.   Expressing her feelings and emotions.  She is kind of pissed off because she found out too late that the other person was using her. The second verse is because she realized that she did the same thing to another person and was sorry about hurting them.

Somewhat mello and soft reflecting and projecting a sad feeling and longing for a more peaceful time.

[MDEW]

Sad, has nothing to live for, has given up on life.

Happy, loves being on the Doc. Nothing he would rather do.

It is not just about "Cry" or "Twang" or anything. They have felt these emotions. While singing they are remembering and thinking about the experience that put them in that emotion.

[MDEW]

  It is not just which mode to sing in but also the rise and fall of volume, which words are loud, which soft. whether to sing one word longer and use vibrato or to end the word abruptly.....on and on. Listening to how the original singer or other singers sing the song may help in deciding how you will present the song. But HOW the song is sang makes a difference.

   Even if you are spot on with the pitch and melody note for note, the presentation may be bad because of lack of dynamics or the "Rhythm" or general feel of the song is 'OFF" in some way.

   Yes it is subjective. Everyone has their own tastes and what sounds good to one may sound bad to another, but there are stereo types. Stereo types are there for a reason. Because a lot of people feel the same way about them.

[MDEW]

I know I am going to bad reviews on this one.

My personal opinion on this is that the Pitch is fine music great but to me there is no real emotion in the song.

Otis Readings' recording moves me. I feel his pain. Rods' recording moves me. I feel his joy. I feel empty with this recording. Either he was just too tired and burned out or he did not want to be singing this song.

[kickingtone]

^^

I half get what you are saying MDEW.

From my point of view, while I can "appreciate" what the singers are doing, I am not feeling the song, full stop. All three renditions leave me indifferent. It's strange, because I can still sense to some extent whether I think that the singer has done a good a bad job of the song (and I mean in terms of emotional content). But not all emotions touch everybody equally. Some emotions may even seem invisible to some people.

[kickingtone]

I can't be sure, cos I'm not really into the song, but I can see something a bit more appealing in the last rendition. 

Otis Reading and Rod Stewart both appear to be singing very much from the perspective of the man "on the dock of the bay". 

The third rendition seems to me to have more of an outside narrative feel to it -- of somebody looking in on himself and his condition from the outside, which is more my kind of vibe. He sounds more as if his focus is on describing the cloying grip of apathy, than on his "plight", or "victimhood".

Now, any song about apathy, being caught up in apathy, coming to terms with apathy, etc. is not going to work well for me. I am not a very empathetic person, LOL. (I was briefly known as the cyborg on one forum I use, LOL).  My reaction is more likely to be "pull yourself together, man!", than to feel any empathy. But a singer who can turn it round and sing it from the outside, could have my attention. But that may result in a production that sounds emotionless to someone else.

[MDEW]

5 minutes ago, kickingtone said:

I can't be sure, cos I'm not really into the song, but I can see something a bit more appealing in the last rendition. 

Otis Reading and Rod Stewart both appear to be singing very much from the perspective of the man "on the dock of the bay". 

The third rendition seems to me to have more of an outside narrative feel to it -- of somebody looking in on himself and his condition from the outside, which is more my kind of vibe. He sounds more as if his focus is on describing the cloying grip of apathy, than on his "plight", or "victimhood".

Now, any song about apathy, being caught up in apathy, coming to terms with apathy, etc. is not going to work well for me. I am not a very empathetic person, LOL. (I was briefly known as the cyborg on one forum I use, LOL).  My reaction is more likely to be "pull yourself together, man!", than to feel any empathy. But a singer who can turn it round and sing it from the outside, could have my attention. But that may result in a production that sounds emotionless to someone else.

 I would be more of an Empath. I can walk into a room and know whether the people inside are friends, enemies or just bystanders.

Cadence or inflections can also be interpreted different in different cultures. 

As for the song itself...I have sat on a doc while feeling as if It would not change anything if I just let myself drop into the water...I get the same feeling listening to Otis Reading.

And I have sat on a Doc while watching the ships roll by and been as happy as I could ever be....Rod's' version reminds me of this. Rods' enthusiasm could have been because he was singing to the people he was singing to.

18 minutes ago, kickingtone said:

But a singer who can turn it round and sing it from the outside, could have my attention. But that may result in a production that sounds emotionless to someone else.

That is a good quality also and it fits in many songs. A detached retelling of a story without the emotional baggage. Still the music and inflections reflect this attitude and there is another meaning given to the song. 

[kickingtone]

32 minutes ago, MDEW said:

 I would be more of an Empath. I can walk into a room and know whether the people inside are friends, enemies or just bystanders.

I wouldn't say that I lack empathy through lack of intuition. I still have my intuition.

32 minutes ago, MDEW said:

Cadence or inflections can also be interpreted different in different cultures.

True. (I often use that word cadence incorrectly -- I usually want to say not just the inflection, but the entire thing that makes a voice human, and expressive, rather than robotic.)

Yes, and being able to relate first hand with the words of the song helps. But it may be a chicken and egg thing. Not relating causes lack of empathy, and lack of empathy leads to inability or unwillingness to relate. I'm not as nasty as I sound, though. I can really empathize with people who are giving things a go in a positive way (positive imo, of course).

Then there are those songs that blow my logic apart. For example, Manic Monday, has so many elements that would normally put me off, yet I think it's a very good song. That whiny teenage girl vibe would normally put me right off. That trite existence -- "wish it was Sunday, My I don't have to run day" -- trite dreams, and succumbing to all those banal teenage priorities, and making excuses for it all... why isn't that my worse song of all time? I don't know. I think it's great, and nails the vide.

[MDEW]

30 minutes ago, kickingtone said:

Then there are those songs that blow my logic apart. For example, Manic Monday, has so many elements that would normally put me off, yet I think it's a very good song. That whiny teenage girl vibe would normally put me right off. That trite existence -- "wish it was Sunday, My I don't have to run day" -- trite dreams, and succumbing to all those banal teenage priorities, and making excuses for it all... why isn't that my worse song of all time? I don't know. I think it's great, and nails the vide.

Maybe Vibe is a better word for what I mean than emotion.

 

[MDEW]

Study other singers.  Pay attention to how the words are pronounced in songs and the inflections of the words. Pay attention to rhythmic patterns and dynamics in the  words an phrases of songs. How the volume or intensity rises and fall even within the syllables of words.

 And pay attention to the attitude given. Is it soft and playful or loud and aggressive? sometimes it will change throughout the song or even throughout verses or words.

[MDEW]

It is Elvis in the movie. The way he is singing the song is what I am talking about. Not his acting in the video. LISTEN to the song and the dynamics in HOW he is singing it.

[MDEW]

The actor IS Elvis. The MOVIE is "Live a little, Love a little" Starring Elvis Presley. Of course the song is dubbed in. The song was recorded FOR the movie.

I think the reason you have trouble with people is because you do not understand what they are meaning so you think they are BSing you. 

5 hours ago, Troll - 01 said:

how do you train vibe?

The Vibe is in HOW he is singing the song. The dynamics. Giving more volume and intensity  to some words and being quiet on others. Some words sound aggressive and some words sound soft. Some words are extended and some cut off or shortened.

I could not find a video showing Elvis singing the song live.