"Speech Level Singing"...Not enough or just plain wrong?

[Etchy]

I've often heard about the problems with speech level singing that it doesn't train your breath and doesn't give you a powerful voice, but sometimes hearing other singers I think they have the same basics as SLS singers...So here's my question...Is the SLS technique good for a begginer or intermediate singer and needs to be developed further after achieving that? ...Or is it just a wrong technique in learning to sing to begin with at all!?

[ronws]

For myself, personally, I have found singing to be different than speaking. In normal speaking, depending language and dialect, we have cut our wind and resonance or projection, in order to fully use our mouths to make whatever sounds our speach requires. The classical methods I have studied from Lillie Lehmann to Dr. Fillebrown to Anthony Frisell advocate the opposite. That you should learn to speak like you sing. That, in speaking, you should not strain the voice to speak in an octave it was not meant for. For men, mostly, this means quit trying to talk low and gravelly like actor Michael Madsen in order to sound "manly" or "tough." And you don't have to speak in a hoarse whisper like Clint Eastwood in "Heartbreak Ridge." The quickest way to find your comfortable speaking pitch is the word, hello. Hold the note on O which is usually inflected up in american English. Feel the resonance no lower than the soft palate. These two things alone will re-train how you breathe.

So the point of the classical method, which I find value in, is to question and perhaps replace the notion that our speach has been the "norm," to begin with.

So, I might personally find a problem with SLS because, aside from any instruction on breathing they might have, the tendency there is to still breath as if one where talking to someone sitting next to you. And, also, the whole exercise starts out in chest and in the tug of war between chest and head, chest has the larger muscle group and the longer pattern of neurocontrol than head.

Which is why Frisell advocates, especially for tenors, to start out in head with a light falsetto tone. Allow the head to control and sublimate the chest involvement. As opposed to trying to lighten chest going up while at the same time, essentially carrying chest up. It's a matter of perspective. According to Frisell, a tenor should have almost entirely head tones, yet after proper control, they will be head tones with chest volume and a resonance as powerful as that of chest.

I think of SLS as good for something like Gordon Lightfoot folk songs. But not as easily used on "Warning" by Queensryche.

Is SLS a good place to start?

Ask this question - if one starts in it and then has to go to another system that advocates the opposite of it to reach a different plateau or style, then what is the value of starting in it, the first place, just to have to unlearn some of it? Which leads to the corrolary question - is it not better to start in the system that is going to take you where you want to go?

Again, perspective. Perhaps, with SLS you can "carry chest high."

I personally don't have much experience with SLS as I differ with the foundations of it but it has been suggested that I follow it even as it would take me in the opposite direction of where I am going. But I have heard of others who started in it, only to change to systems that concentrate more on head voice to get the range that they want.

[Etchy]

I'm not really into speech level singing because I like singing rock and SLS is WAY different from the style I'm hoping for...I was just asking because I wanted to train the really soft heady sounds...which I think is the only good point that SLS achieves. By the way I'm a baritone not a tenor so my problem is bringing head down not bringing chest up! I'm reading "The baritone voice" by Frisell now and he keeps mentioning that I should develop my head voice so I'm looking for the suitable way to do it.

[ronws]

I'm reading "The baritone voice" by Frisell now and he keeps mentioning that I should develop my head voice so I'm looking for the suitable way to do it.

Excellent. And from what Bob (videohere) says, and he has spoken with Anthony Frisell (they are both from NYC,) Frisell would actually help you in whatever genre and has students who are aspiring rock singers, though his books are geared more toward opera and art song (chamber and concert singing of classical pieces, in a nutshell.) I think you will gain much from his perspective and it will not necessarily make you sound like an "opera" singer but it will teach you coordination and technique to last a really long time. The "rock" thing will come from your own aesthetic. Your will power.

In fact, for the rock or pop singer, I would probably marginally suggest Frisell a little more than Lilli Lehmann, though I totally dig her groove in using the Great Scale.

Just be prepared, with Frisell, that you will start out with light tones which may seem not very rock to you. And some ugly tones. In his opinion, a number of coaches are in too much of a hurry to produce the "pro" sound before the structure of the voice is properly built. So, he will have you work on structure and control of structure. Then, later, especially with passaggio exercises, your polish will then appear. After that, I would tackle the Great Scale.

[ronws]

Also, Etchy, there is, at least in classical, a branch of baritone called counter-tenor. They have baritone range and timbre but can do a light, heady voice. However, I would stick with Frisell's work and see where that takes you. And you're at the right time in history. Right now, baritones seem to be the popular voice, especially with the current version of heavy metal. Although, there is always a place for a good, solid baritone with style. Notable examples in my mind are Scott Weiland from Stone Temple Pilots, Corey Taylor from Slipknot, James Hetfield from Metallica. Even on the lighter side of metal. Brett Michaels, David Lee Roth.

[Etchy]

Just be prepared, with Frisell, that you will start out with light tones which may seem not very rock to you. And some ugly tones. In his opinion, a number of coaches are in too much of a hurry to produce the "pro" sound before the structure of the voice is properly built. So, he will have you work on structure and control of structure. Then, later, especially with passaggio exercises, your polish will then appear. After that, I would tackle the Great Scale.

The part I read from the book so far has been stressing on that and I'm prepared for that...because I actually felt that I have all the problems he mentioned that's why I was excited to see someone who addressed my problems directly Because I have been struggling with that stuff for a while and got nowhere doing the conventional exercises.

[Etchy]

Thank you, I'll keep all that in mind. You've been great help :)

[Etchy]

That's a great explanation! I guess I just have to try and see for myself. Although I'm not really sure speech level singing is right for me

[ronws]

I totally agree about a relaxed throat, even as others are talking about herculean effort to keep full adduction. And I figured I would probably get some things wrong about SLS. So, how many SLS students have effectively covered "Whole Lotta Love" or "Black Dog" by Led Zeppelin? I could have easily have missed the finer points of that system, painting generalities with a broad brush. My apologies.

I just remembered the thing about Seth Riggs coaching Michael Jackson. So, proof in the pudding, he was able to do something with a headvoice kind of guy.

[ronws]

By the way. I was a fan of Gordon Lightfoot. When I was a teenager, this song was part of my repertoire, in the key of C, as a matter of fact. He had a tone that I couldn't get. Then, again, as a teenager, my high range was falsetto but probably sounded like soprano as my voice sounded like a woman for a while. My voice never cracked.

Which might not be too far off the mark. One person here has suggested that I could be a dylan-esque soprano.

But my favorites of Gordon's was this song and "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald."

[Etchy]

Well I live in egypt so I highly doubt that Not a lot of vocalists here not to mention vocal teachers!

[ronws]

.

Very poetically stated. I like that.

~~Dante~~

Thanks, Dante. I'm one of the few here that actually writes songs. So, I take that as a compliment and perhaps a sign of what I should be doing.

[D.Starr]

I think the fact I find SLS hard is because I have a deep baritone voice. I can lighten my voice but I find its taking considerably long to bridge and fine tune.

Going through people's post I see that SLS seems to be for the lighter toned voice e.g. Michael Jackson. Well mor suited for the lighter voice. I strive for a pop/R&B voice and wish to invest in the four pillars but Im worried Ill began to lean towards the rock/metal style.

[jonpall]

Ron, I think most people here actually write music, at least from time to time and some do it all the time. Where did you get that idea from?

[ronws]

Ron, I think most people here actually write music, at least from time to time and some do it all the time. Where did you get that idea from?

It's probably just a superficial appearance thingy. Marcus has presented original compositions. So has Mike. And so have I. Everyone else "seems" to present cover songs. Now and then, we get new people in that submit their own work, gather their compliments, and then go on.

I forgot to add that Robert Lunte also presents originals. I apologize for that oversight, Robert.

But, since you are calling me out, taking me to task, let me return the favor, so to speak. From you, I have heard astounding performances. For someone who doesn't have Axl's basic timbre, you get pretty damned close. I've heard what seems like 5 or 6 recordings from you on your journey (pun intended) through "Don't Stop Believin." You are a phenomenal singer who has this incessant need to beat himself up. I've yet to hear a song written by jonpall in jonpall's voice.

Nothing wrong with that. The optimistic side of me hopes that we are here to build our chops and then go out and forge our own path.

To be the next Ronnie James Dio, rather than the next guy who kind of sounds like him.

To be the next Journey with crooning love songs with a virtuostic hard edge (easy, just clone Neil Schon) and not just be a tribute band such as the Lovin, Touchin, Squeezins.

To move people's hearts like U2.

To grab people by the cajones and make them sweat, like a new, original Guns and Roses.

To make "rock and roll" fans find themselves singing to opera, a Queen for the 21st century.

It is nigh unto a proven fact that a singer always sounds best on songs they wrote or were written for them by someone who truly understands that singer's voice.

Of course, I could be wrong. In opera and the classical world, it is all about repertory. How well does this new singer sing "Ingemisco" and how does it compare to the performance of Jussi Boerling? In which case, we'll be covering other artists forever, lost in their shadow. Forever needing to work on this or that thing trying to capture that subtle shade of whatever.

Or consider the success of an accounting manager who could not dance and had a voice that was not pretty or refined or "trained" get up, strut like a chicken and recitative the line, "I know, it's only rock and roll but I like it ..."

Of course, he's had some training over the years. A 60-something year old man strutting across the stage and staying in tune. There's some skill.And a whole lot of originality. And yes, I do like his voice. I can't imagine others singing this song in "his" voice. In their voice, yes.

[jonpall]

You actually have a good point, Ronws. But note that I did actually post one original song of mine in the reviews section. It was on myspace so I think you had problems viewing it. Right now, I'm writing a bunch of new songs. And once again, I'm not beating myself up. I simply look at some details in my singing performances and try to improve them, just like most of the people on this forum. If you strongly feel that you CAN improve your voice, why not attempt it? And even like the process.

[VideoHere]

You actually have a good point, Ronws. But note that I did actually post one original song of mine in the reviews section. It was on myspace so I think you had problems viewing it. Right now, I'm writing a bunch of new songs. And once again, I'm not beating myself up. I simply look at some details in my singing performances and try to improve them, just like most of the people on this forum. If you strongly feel that you CAN improve your voice, why not attempt it? And even like the process.

i agree...to me even a great vocalist can always improve or diversify or take risks...a perfect example is michael bolton.

that guy is always pushing the envelope. he been from the embarrasment of forgetting the lyrics to the national anthem, to singing opera to a packed house of "let's see what this american screamer can do" super critical opera lovers.

i will always seek to be better....but more and more i'm realizing a lot of it is sheer mental.

[Robert Lunte]

Etchy,

Having worked with SLS for several years and having been trained to teach by an SLS instructor (seeing almost 400 hours worth of lessons), I feel like I am able to offer a unique perspective on your situation. In a nutshell, SLS seems to work best for females looking to sing pop and men that naturally have high, light voices. If you're a female looking to sing very powerfully or a man with a lower voice, it CAN still potentially work for you, but it will probably take a lot longer, because many SLS teachers are afraid of developing the chest voice and/or don't know how to develop it properly. If you already have a well developed chest voice (which can only be determined by listening to you), then SLS will probably work well for you since it focuses a lot of vowel modification, which is essential to getting proper registration (coordination of chest and head) to occur. SLS works really well for extending one's range and helping one to find the softer dynamics in their voices. They do address breathing, but a bit indirectly. As I've said on here many times before, you can't talk about breath support without also talking about what happens in the larynx at the same time, because the two go together. Since SLS works a lot on coordinating things at the level of the glottis, it does address support, because in order to make some of the sounds they request of you, you HAVE to support, otherwise you won't be making the right sound. It is very important to be with a teacher that has a very discerning ear for these types of things, and that doesn't always correlate with the level number that they are. I would look at support not just as what's going on in the torso but rather as a coordination between the muscles of the torso and the muscles of the larynx.

If you have a type A personality, SLS will work well to reign you in and give you balance in your voice. If you have a type B personalty and tend to be more passive, laid back, an underdo everything, SLS will drive you crazy because your body won't be engaged enough to the level needed to sing efficiently and keep the throat free (unless you have a very talented and dynamic teacher). If you're scared to make a sound or scared of making a mistake, SLS probably won't work well for you. If you're one that tends to inhibit yourself a lot, SLS probably won't work well for you. If you tend to be over the top in everything you do, SLS will likely be a miracle for you.

So, SLS in and of itself is not bad or good per se, it just ultimately depends on YOU -- where you are vocally (which can only be determined by assessment), your personality, and your goals as a singer. At the end of the day, you just need to find a good teacher that's a match for who you are, regardless of if they come from SLS or some other method, and the only way you will determine that is simply by trying. If you have further questions, just email me.

As a side note, since Singing Success also comes up in a lot of conversations about SLS, while they are similar to SLS, they are not as afraid of developing the chest voice. They still don't develop it as fully as it truly could be, but they take you farther in that direction. This comes from having observed several lessons personally given by both Brett and Jesse Nemitz. I can't comment much on what the other teachers do. But I can say Brett especially does a lot more in person than he demonstrates in the programs.

~~Dante~~

This is a good response, agreed. For me and my experience, its always been:

1). great for getting you balanced and to stop shouting and choking yourself to death.

2). good for beginners that just want to get a nice chest voice sound going with no flash.

3). NOT what you want to do if you really want to learn to bridge to the head voice with stability and strength... certain other programs have little to no techniques regarding intrinsic achcoring... which is the backbone to what makes your head voice not sound too light or Falsettoey. Without intrinsic anchoring, you can never develop head voice notes that are full and convincing... you will always sing in a super, light-mass or windy phonation. It is, the lack of intrinsic anchoring techniques in the head voice that fall short for singers with these two camps.

I see the evidence first hand every day... I get former students from certain other methods frequently, usually after they have realized that something is still not right. Usually, these people can sing ok, maybe very lovely in the head voice. They can "play" their voice well and therefore can take instruction well and get quick results when they are introduced to new ideas. The issue that immediate becomes apparent to me is always, a serious lack of needed technique for register bridging (although some can "kinda" to it, but its usually clunky) and even more lost and totally not there... their head voice work phonations. If they can kinda bridge to the head voice, it immediately melts down quickly and turns to falsetto or some kind of strange, quacky compression that does not sound right.

If you are one of these people, know that the work you have done on twang has paid off... you need the twang, but what you dont understand is, without the intrinsic anchoring, twanging in the head voice quickly turns to quacking like a duck in the head voice.

Here is a secret... many people conclude that they are twanging too hard... NO, thats usually not the case... dont stop twanging... the issue is the resonant space that you are twanging inside of is too small... when you learn to increase the pharyngeal resonance and beef up the muscular stability with intrinsic anchoring, quack mode modifies to twang mode that sounds great.

I can teach you how ...

Hope this helps...

[lightbluesky]

Hi!

I read so much cr*p about the SLS method, so I don't believe it anymore. The majority of all the singers here posting a lot are mostly rock/metal singers.. and the SLS method seems more to be for musical singers, pop singers, R&B singers etc. And yes, if you look into the SLS book with the list of all the clients of Seth Riggs, there are kinda NO metal singers. Did you guys think about that? (mention that I'm not blaming you guys , and tell me if I'm wrong!)

It's interesting that CunoDante says that the SLS method would work best for female singers tryin' to sing more powerfully. I am personally tryin' to be able to sing with a technique that makes me be able to sing all kinds of pop, R&B, soul, jazz.

I just started goin' to an SLS teacher actually. I chose to do that because I don't want to think all the time; support more, raise the larynx, broaden the tongue, raise the palate, blablabla, so I chose this method because I wanted to be more under a control of doin' what the exercise says instead of solving a thousands of problems at once. I just wonder, to make me feel more comfortable with an answer from you guys, if SLS really is that bad of a method that it will destroy one's voice? If not, then why are people complaining about SLS?

[lightbluesky]

Ok, so If I follow the SLS method, I won't be able to learn to mix voice belt around E5/F5? :(

[Robert Lunte]

Hi!

I read so much cr*p about the SLS method, so I don't believe it anymore. The majority of all the singers here posting a lot are mostly rock/metal singers.. and the SLS method seems more to be for musical singers, pop singers, R&B singers etc. And yes, if you look into the SLS book with the list of all the clients of Seth Riggs, there are kinda NO metal singers. Did you guys think about that? (mention that I'm not blaming you guys , and tell me if I'm wrong!)

It's interesting that CunoDante says that the SLS method would work best for female singers tryin' to sing more powerfully. I am personally tryin' to be able to sing with a technique that makes me be able to sing all kinds of pop, R&B, soul, jazz.

I just started goin' to an SLS teacher actually. I chose to do that because I don't want to think all the time; support more, raise the larynx, broaden the tongue, raise the palate, blablabla, so I chose this method because I wanted to be more under a control of doin' what the exercise says instead of solving a thousands of problems at once. I just wonder, to make me feel more comfortable with an answer from you guys, if SLS really is that bad of a method that it will destroy one's voice? If not, then why are people complaining about SLS?

Wait a minute "light", I do not recall anyone ever stating that SLS would damage your voice and I would take issue with that statement. None of these vocal methods will damage your voice, but to be completely honest, because SLS is a lighter mass approach to singing, it most certainly is not going to damage your voice and again, I do not see anyone making that statement. SLS is a legitimate and effective training methodology, what I think some of us are trying to say is, there are certain ways of singing, namely.. the ability to bridge to the head voice and even more so... the ability to make your head voice sound full... that is lacking in techniques with SLS... and you know what, that is exactly why you dont see a lot of rockers and extreme singers in their list of artists, something I have always noticed as well.

The other thing that you are confused about is, stop thinking about certain voice training methods as the path for certain genres of music. At TVS we teach the hard stuff, what we call sometimes, extreme singing techniques, and yes... rockers use it a lot because they need it a lot, but so do R&B, Jazz and singers from many different genres! Vocal technique can be applied to all genres'. These are discussions about techniques, not about "stylistic coaching"... its a common confusion that I find myself always educating people about. Remove your bias for the style of singing in a certain genres when you are judging vocal training methods.

Lastly, this argument that you do not want to have to worry about "support more, raise the larynx, broaden the tongue, raise the palate, blablabla" is totally lame to be honest. It sounds like you want instant gratification, as if these things are really not important and your not willing to do the work to really sing the way you want to. Listen "light", there is no short-cut to learning great voice technique, even at SLS. What makes you think you dont have to pay attention to what your doing with the larynx, tongue and palette in SLS? If you don't want to take the components that make up ANY great vocal technique seriously, then I think you need to reevaluate what you expect out of voice training. Dude, there is no short cuts to voice training, you have to do the work and become an expert at these "blablabla" things.

Im just trying to help you with tough love here...

[Robert Lunte]

Ok, so If I follow the SLS method, I won't be able to learn to mix voice belt around E5/F5?

Well, right out of the gates here... your perspective of what "mixed voice" means needs help.... and that is if you even want to deal with this term. I know your SLS teacher is big on talking about the "mixed voice", but you have to be careful, it can quickly lead you down a path of chasing ghosts... searching for the "mixed voice" as if its some kind of mystery, 3rd register out there... Im concerned, be real careful about hanging your hat on the reality of "mixed voice"... but anyways, it sounds like you mean to say, "head voice"... and based on my experience and what I know about these other methods, your chances of being able to sing in the head voice in a way that sounds good.. I mean really, sincerely good and not windy, whimpy or quacky is severely handicapped if you go down this path of "mixed voice" with no intrinsic anchoring techniques.

Go for it and check back with us in 60 days, let us hear if your head voice is sounding full and "belty"... thats the only path to the truth... do it , give it everything you got.. dive deep into the program and then come back here and let us hear your G4 in about 30-60 days. I want to hear a smooth bridge from your chest to your head voice, then I want to hear twangy compression phonating through a boomy formant... on a G4. Thats where we find the truth... then, if its not there, Ill give you a FREE lesson and show you how to do it in about 20 minutes.

I'm just trying to help you ...

[lightbluesky]

Hello Robert Lunte,

Well, first off, thank you for your answers here!

First off, I am not thinking that I will learn any vocal technique within 5 days or so. I've been to many different teachers with different methods, spending half a year for all of them without any difference to my voice. Why I said these "blablabla" things is not because of any method out there is bad. This is my experience with all my teachers I had. They only helped me solve a problem in a song, rather than improving my singing technique and be able to sing all kinds of songs.

I didn't say you said anything bad about SLS. But I probably stated it pretty wrong, but what I meant is that many people are negative with SLS. And I thought SLS was a lot about bridging from Chest voice to Head voice and therefore you'll find your mix voice (sorry for the term)

Maybe I should ask it more simple, I'd love to learn to sing techniques like these two clips:

(especially that mix belt from 1.19 )

(the softness of her singing in the beginning of the song).

I am basically after these types of techniques and learning to sing with different dynamics. Will I get this from SLS or this is totally out of SLS?

I appreciate your help. I will book a lesson with you Mr. Lunte if my voice is goin' nowhere. Thanks for advice!

[VideoHere]

if i may make a helpful comment lightbluesky, only you can make your voice "go somewhere." it sounds like you are shifting the responsibility of your success to the program or instructor, when it really is all up to you. the instructor or program is just a guide, the real gains come from you.

just trying to help..bob

[lightbluesky]

Bob, thanks for your wise answer. I'll have that in my mind!