Jump to content

OVER THINKING TERMINOLGY

Rate this topic


Danielformica
 Share

Recommended Posts

:) Thanks for the video Daniel.

This also shows another reason that we have trouble with our singing. If we already think that we cannot sing we will choke when someone asks us to. Your wife had no problem being on camera. Had no problem when you asked her to make a sound. But when you asked her to sing, she covered her face and hid behind her plant. She even had a look of terror just from the thought of singing in front of people.

We have that to a certain degree when we are "In Training". The thought of that shakey area whatever it is for us can cause us to bring in tension. Once we get over that initial fear or uneasyness we can make progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely agree with your general statement that practicing is basically THE thing to do if you want to learn to sing.

However, as I already wrote in other threads the problem is really that the scientific classification of vibratory mechanisms M0,M1,M2,M3 really has NEXT TO NO USE in practical singing, and this is basically what you are showing in the video.

So the M1-M3 thing is actually a concept where it's really easy to show that it doesn't work because the concept is bad from the start.

The problem is, that the real challenge of learning to sing from a technical standpoint is not to be able to produce notes within M0-M3 (because that's something basically anyone can do naturally) but TO MIX those mechanism. In fact, for most applications that mixing means incorporating M0, M2 and M3 into your M1 mechanism to be able to use your M1 mechanism to sing pitches you wouldn't be able to sing in the "natural" way you use your M1.

This is also why I always try to state that M2 IS NOT THE SAME AS HEAD VOICE, because what is percieved as head voice can also happen within M1.

But in the end of course you are right, practicing is always THE thing to do. The M0-M3 thing is just not a good example to prove that point (it is basically similar to saying someone that knows how to run and knows how to throw a ball must be able to play basketball at a certain skill level), but your statement is definitely true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without terminology how am I to ask about getting the right amount of sguillo in my goosenfrabe? :o:P

I do agree with not getting too wrapped up in terminology. Too many different SCHOOLS will use the same term to mean different things. Even here there will be discussions going back and forth because two people will be saying the same thing but not realize it because they are using different terms.

I read several articles before I joined this forum on Passaggio. All of them were using M0,M1,M2 in their research.

But they were using them to describe actual physical musculature. So when I joined this forum when others were writing about M0,M1,M2 I was very confused. It turns out that there was "NEW" research that uses M0,M1..... to mean Vibrational characteristics. And this "NEW" research became the standard.

Some people get the Idea that their definition is the only one that is is valid. But if the concept can be understood by using words like Goosenfrabe or falsetto or headvoice why not use them.

Some people don't like the idea of picture words. But with picture words the idea can be readily be identified by most of the people. When you are using terms like MO, M1..... only the initiated will be able to comprehend what you are talking about. That is great for the researchers but for people that are just trying to improve their voice it can be a bit of a hinderance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great post Owen.

Yeah I reckon vocal "exercises" are mostly useful for the tough bits of a song that you can't do to your satisfaction. When you get to the hard bit you can break it down, simplify it, maybe change the lyrics to na na na or whatever, think about the vowel/volume etc (CVTers would say choose your mode) and practice the simplified version, gradually building it back up to the full thing as you get better at the simplified thing.

It's kind of a troubleshooting approach. While I'm not a great singer (yet ;-)), I've made more progress doing this than I did in years of practicing repetitive scales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I reckon vocal "exercises" are mostly useful for the tough bits of a song that you can't do to your satisfaction.

I agree with this 100%. I would add that when you start out singing, there are going to be more tough "bits" and more referring back to your exercises than when you've been doing it for a while.

I was working on a song tonight that and the vast majority of it I didn't really have to pay attention to my technique, it was mostly automatic. There was one measure where I got tripped up and so I had to go back to my exercises to work on finding the correct onset to get that bar the way I wanted it to sound. But otherwise, it was automatic.

A year ago I would've been stopping regularly during this song and thinking to myself "Am I using my support muscles? Am I keeping my larynx low enough? Am I using too much air?" But that doesn't mean I shouldn't have been singing songs a year ago and just focusing on exercises. Singing songs a year ago is how I got better. Singing songs now is how I'll get better a year from now.

It's all about just making sure you incorporate good technique into your songs. And when you don't sound quite like you want to, refer back to your exercises for a solution to how you can make the sound you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was a deliberate choice of Cathrine Sadolin and it's a fantastic one IMO. Instead of having confusion because different people have different meanings for the same terms, you have clarity because there's a whole community who uses the word e.g. curbing to mean THE SAME THING. It actually makes talking about singing possible without a back and forth trying to figure out each other's language.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nice vid dan! nice post benny!

do you know a real great way to look at the voice for me?

my way of explaining it.....

mo,////////////////////////////m1//////////////////////////////////m2///////////////////////////////////m3

where "/" = infinite number variations in between

one voice! develop the musculature enough to mix the voice!

where "m1//////////////////////////////////m2//////////////////////////////////////" = a well integrated, well developed voice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say to each his own.

Everyone learns differently. Judge terminology by what it does for you. If you are a vocal student, or a singer, does it help you? That is a personal question for yourself, not a forum debate.

If you are a teacher, what is your experience with students? Do they like it, does it help them move quicker in their progress?

Maybe we should move with people coming forward and sharing their story on what helps for them rather then philosophizing on these topics for hours -_-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, can't stop the philosophy. That's what this thread was about, El. Daniel was saying, get out there and sing. Don't get bogged down in all the different philosophies. It's fine to pick a direction and go for it. But after all the exercises, you still need to sing.

And that's philosophical, too.

To borrow the swing the bat term, a batter does not become Babe Ruth by staying in the batting cage, forever. He steps up to the plate, and swings, aiming for the parking lot.

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...