Jump to content

Wow

Rate this topic


D.Starr
 Share

Recommended Posts

he never took voice lessons? maybe not formal. emulation will only take you so far. self taught perhaps?

if i ever became known, and i had no contractual resrictions and was asked that question i'd tell them how i busted my ass night after night to make sense out of all this and achieve whatever the hell it is they liked....lol!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy Shit...this dudes' unreal:

analog: he's real... a real, naturally high, fairly light male voice, with some twang in it (when he wants to). You can hear his fundamental quality when he is speaking in his introduction.

If he is un-taught, or self-taught, he has done pretty well with it. His Italian pronunciation is fine... he got that from somewhere ;-) Its overall an effective rendition.

However, this vocalism is not without its issues. He carries tension in his neck that shows up when he is inhaling, and there is a persistent postural tension that shows up in his head positioning... his head is facing significantly off to the right when compared with the alignment of his shoulders.

While he may be breathing diaphragmatically, he is also chest-breathing. The onset gesture includes a downward motion of the sternum.

The resulting tone quality is fine for a voice of this size. He is pleasant to listen to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

analog: he's real... a real, naturally high, fairly light male voice, with some twang in it (when he wants to). You can hear his fundamental quality when he is speaking in his introduction.

If he is un-taught, or self-taught, he has done pretty well with it. His Italian pronunciation is fine... he got that from somewhere ;-) Its overall an effective rendition.

However, this vocalism is not without its issues. He carries tension in his neck that shows up when he is inhaling, and there is a persistent postural tension that shows up in his head positioning... his head is facing significantly off to the right when compared with the alignment of his shoulders.

While he may be breathing diaphragmatically, he is also chest-breathing. The onset gesture includes a downward motion of the sternum.

The resulting tone quality is fine for a voice of this size. He is pleasant to listen to.

Steven,

The whole "self-taught" is what blows me away. I know several people who are great "mimickers" and can sound like various pop/rock artists, so this guy's(Marc) Freddie Mercury impression is impressive but not freakishly so. I was more blown away by his self-taught classical sound, but I'm not classically trained, so my ear is very forgiving:)

Curious as to whether you've encountered true "legit" sounding classical voices that have NOT been tutored or trained. I find it simply mind-bottling(thanks Blades of Glory) that someone can work out on their own how to configure the correct vocal tract position + twang + breath pressure + vowel etc. that is required for this sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There used to be a tv show called "The Pretender" with actor Michael Weiss. The character could assume the role of any occupation, a pure mimick. Some people can do that with voice. Such as impersonators. Surely, they do work at what they do. Rich Little comes to mind.

Is it possible to sing like this by repeating what one hears? I think so. It's called the old italian method. They didn't have a lot of technical definitions back then. So, training consisted of listening to it be done right and then figuring out your own way to make that sound.

We have a vocal chameleon in our forum, here. I will grant three guesses as to whom that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a vocal chameleon in our forum, here. I will grant three guesses as to whom that is.

We have a lot of excellent vocalists on this forum, but nobody I consider to be a true vocal chameleon. If you're gonna say Jonpall, I would disagree. Jonpall always sounds like Jonpall to me(which is a great thing.)

There used to be a tv show called "The Pretender" with actor Michael Weiss. The character could assume the role of any occupation, a pure mimick. Some people can do that with voice. Such as impersonators. Surely, they do work at what they do. Rich Little comes to mind.

Is it possible to sing like this by repeating what one hears? I think so. It's called the old italian method. They didn't have a lot of technical definitions back then. So, training consisted of listening to it be done right and then figuring out your own way to make that sound.

So..you're saying the old Italian method was quite simply un-taught emulation? I find that hard to swallow. Surely there was an accomplished teacher/"pair of ears" to guide the training? Which is exactly what modern teachers do so I don't see the correlation there. IMO, the most invaluable service a vocal coach provides is: a pair of eyes and ears. It's not fancy vocal terms or magical scales or ancient secrets, it's being able to physically see tension in the body(as Steven stated) or hearing slight constrictions in the voice or (fill in the blank)______________ problem that has become so embedded that the singer is totally unaware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.box.net/shared/v6sd5fa96sohtqp41aru

Is this on the right track? Just the first 15 secs. I tried the "can barely stand on my feet" in what I guess is curbing. The track is long because at the end there's a bit of some Black Country Communion song... I don't even remember doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Analog, I can't physically make you read the history of singing, especially of the traditional bel canto. There was not a lot of technical definition, especially in terms of modern singing science and pedagogy. There was, however, much time spent hearing what was "agreed" to be good singing and emulate that. But that's in the history and various texts of writers on classical technique. Warning, you might have to read books published in the early 20th century to find what I am talking about. Sorry about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron,

why do I feel like you're being deliberately obtuse here? You've completely missed my point: vocal pedagogy in one form or another has been around for a very very very long time(long before Bel Canto.) Here's a Wikipedia link on Vocal Pedagogy:

(please don't say that Wiki is BS...it's close enough for our purposes here)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocal_pedagogy

My one and only point in responding to this thread was that I find it amazing this guy could sing w/out any outside guidance other than his own freakish emulative abilities. End of story.

Analog, I can't physically make you read the history of singing, especially of the traditional bel canto.

How do you know what I've read or haven't read?

There was not a lot of technical definition, especially in terms of modern singing science and pedagogy. But that's in the history and various texts of writers on classical technique. Warning, you might have to read books published in the early 20th century to find what I am talking about. Sorry about that.

I didn't exactly Laugh Out Loud at this, but I did chuckle. I'll take your 20th Century text and raise you a 19th Century text(Sorry about that.)

The first text that comes to mind is the preface from Manuel Garcia's Hints on Singing copyright 1894

Mind you, this is 90 year old Garcia here. I will bold the points that are relevant:

Since the publication of " L'Art du Chant," * the invention of the laryngoscope and

fifty years of additional experience have naturally enabled me to acquire many fresh

ideas, and also to clear up all my pre-existing doubts. The result of this I now offer

to the public in as concise and clear a form as I have found possible.

The study of the physiology of the voice has been greatly facilitated by the use

of the laryngoscope. This instrument, by laying bare the interior of the larynx,

shows how the glottis proceeds to produce sounds and registers. It shows, also,

the manner in which the ringing and veiled qualities are communicated to the voice.

These qualities—produced by the glottis—are distinct from the characteristics of

the voice called timbres, and are originated in the pharynx by quite another

mechanism. All this should dispel many false ideas afloat on the question

of voice production

.

I introduce a few anatomical figures to facilitate my explanations. The study of

the anatomy and physiology of the vocal ocgans is not indispensable to the pupil, but

might be most useful to the teacher. It will enable him, when a defect is to be

amended, to detect the organ which is at fault, and to suggest the proper correction.

•"Traitd Complet de I'Art du Chant," par Manuel Garcia. Paris : Brandus et Cie., 1840

For his day, I'm pretty sure he felt like he had sussed some serious shee out, scientifically speaking.

Also, I've clearly documented that the act of teaching singing has been around for awhile(regardless of school/technique.) Ron, please document where you feel this inaccurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Garcia also later said that once he saw his ideas of phonation confirmed, he had no further use for the scope and that student shouldn't be burdened with too much scientific data. That it was primarily for a better informed teacher. But, usually, most people just quote the part that you quoted.

What is not quoted as often is his later modification of his interest in that field of endeavor.

"Garcia himself, the inventor of the laryngoscope, soon modified his first claims as to its value in vocal culture.

On this point we have the testimony of his biographer, M.S. McKinley:

"As far as Garcia was concerned, the laryngoscope ceased to be of any special use as soon as his first investigations were concluded. By his examination of the glottis he had the satisfaction of proving that all his theories with regard to the emission of voice were absolutely correct. Beyond that, he did not see that anything further was to be gained except to satisfy his curiosity of those who might be interested in seeing for themselves the forms and changes which inside the larynx assumed during singing and speaking.""

"Resonance in singing and speaking" by Dr Thomas Fillebrown, Kindle edition, locations 79-82 through 82-86.

"Of similar purport is the word if the eminent baritone, Sir Charles Santley, who, in his "Art of Singing," says:

"Manuel Garcia is help up as the pioneer of scientific teaching of singing. He was - but he taught singing, not surgery! (emphasis by Santley) I was a pupil of his in 1858 and a friend of his while he lived; and in all conversations with him I never heard him say a word about larynx or pharynx, glottis or any other organ used in the production and emission of the voice. He was perfectly acquainted with their functions, but he used his knowledge for his own directoin, not to parade before his pupils."

"Resonance in singing and speaking" by Dr Thomas Fillebrown, Kindle edition, locations 82-86 through 87-91.

So, even with the details of a scientific inquiry, Garcia still followed traditional means of teaching. And yes, he had the trained ears and eyes, as any teacher would. And the students would also learn by emulation. To hear a good tone and then repeat it. I don't see how that would be contested.

I apologize if I seemed snotty or hurt your feelings. And yes, jonpall is the chameleon I was referring to. Nor am I calling him a "pretender." I am, in fact, recognizing that he has a unique talent, one that should be applauded. Where as my natural talent seems to be in being misunderstood and upsetting people.

I looked back at my original post and saw nothing out of line with it. When I referred to the old italian method, I meant the old italian method. Garcia came much later. Unless you are saying that the old italian method came complete with the scientific terminology that Garcia would later use for a short time in his scientific investigation. I was not aware that they did, so you may have one up on me, there. How much scientific knowledge did the teachers of the old italian school have, really? Most of the texts I have read come from the late 19th century through to late 20th century.

The problem with the old italian method is that it was never specifically written down but passed from person to person, each one putting his or her own spin on it. And then, some bemoaning the advent of the Wagnerian era. Others accepting it and trying to deal with it.

I am always learning something new, every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...