Correlation between singing and mimicry?

[Sheepdog]

This has sort of been nagging at me for a while. It seems like most "naturally gifted" singers that I have come across are also better than average at mimicking other voices/accents, while people who aren't "naturally gifted" singers also tend to be worse at mimicking voices/accents. This is only from my own experience, so I was wondering if others have noticed this too, or whether it is my own confirmation bias?

It does make a lot of sense, in my opinion, because both ultimately deal with a developed coordination between the ear, the mind and the mouth. You must be able to hear a voice, mentally pick out the important characteristics of that voice, and coordinate the mouth in the correct way to produce this sound. To give an analogy involving guitar, if you're a beginner and haven't played guitar before, your fingers will lack the proper response and won't do what you want them to. Over time your mind and muscles gain more and more connection, to the point where you can very precisely dictate your hand's movements.

In this regard, I am wondering whether becoming better at mimicry, impressions, different accents, etc in order to build better ear->mind->mouth coordination would also positively correlate to many elements of singing, such as a more astute ear, better control of tone production, better awareness and control of vowels and vowel modification, as well as a better ability to convey a variety of emotions. It seems to me like building a more familiar and coordinated voice through mimicry would be of great benefit to singers because it gets you to "know your mouth more".

Thoughts?

[WebAndNet.com]

This has sort of been nagging at me for a while. It seems like most "naturally gifted" singers that I have come across are also better than average at mimicking other voices/accents, while people who aren't "naturally gifted" singers also tend to be worse at mimicking voices/accents. This is only from my own experience, so I was wondering if others have noticed this too, or whether it is my own confirmation bias?

It does make a lot of sense, in my opinion, because both ultimately deal with a developed coordination between the ear, the mind and the mouth. You must be able to hear a voice, mentally pick out the important characteristics of that voice, and coordinate the mouth in the correct way to produce this sound. To give an analogy involving guitar, if you're a beginner and haven't played guitar before, your fingers will lack the proper response and won't do what you want them to. Over time your mind and muscles gain more and more connection, to the point where you can very precisely dictate your hand's movements.

In this regard, I am wondering whether becoming better at mimicry, impressions, different accents, etc in order to build better ear->mind->mouth coordination would also positively correlate to many elements of singing, such as a more astute ear, better control of tone production, better awareness and control of vowels and vowel modification, as well as a better ability to convey a variety of emotions. It seems to me like building a more familiar and coordinated voice through mimicry would be of great benefit to singers because it gets you to "know your mouth more".

Thoughts?

Seems possible, though maybe not as time efficient as direct singing mimicry.

[VideoHere]

This has sort of been nagging at me for a while. It seems like most "naturally gifted" singers that I have come across are also better than average at mimicking other voices/accents, while people who aren't "naturally gifted" singers also tend to be worse at mimicking voices/accents. This is only from my own experience, so I was wondering if others have noticed this too, or whether it is my own confirmation bias?

It does make a lot of sense, in my opinion, because both ultimately deal with a developed coordination between the ear, the mind and the mouth. You must be able to hear a voice, mentally pick out the important characteristics of that voice, and coordinate the mouth in the correct way to produce this sound. To give an analogy involving guitar, if you're a beginner and haven't played guitar before, your fingers will lack the proper response and won't do what you want them to. Over time your mind and muscles gain more and more connection, to the point where you can very precisely dictate your hand's movements.

In this regard, I am wondering whether becoming better at mimicry, impressions, different accents, etc in order to build better ear->mind->mouth coordination would also positively correlate to many elements of singing, such as a more astute ear, better control of tone production, better awareness and control of vowels and vowel modification, as well as a better ability to convey a variety of emotions. It seems to me like building a more familiar and coordinated voice through mimicry would be of great benefit to singers because it gets you to "know your mouth more".

Thoughts?

yes, i truly believe an emulation skill (acting skill too) can really help.

[ronws]

I had to read this thread and come back to it. Mimicry. I don't know when the desire to sing begins. But, at some point, we hear a song and try to sing it. Later, for most of us hardcore singers, we hear a song or singer that inspires us to improve, sometimes to even mimic that singer. Such as Bob, who would probably stop just short of a deal with Satan to sound like Lou Gramm. For me, it was Axl Rose and the song "Sweet Child of Mine" that inspired me to improve my range and singing ability. It is still my benchmark. I don't think I sound like him and I am not trying to sound like him. But I can sing his tenor range. The bass lows he can hit, especially on "Shackler's Revenge" from Chinese Democracy, are out of my reach at any appreciable volume but I can live with that. Instead, I sing that SCOM like I wrote it. I have even re-arranged some of the vocal melody to suit me better. By the way, that doesn't mean that Bob is wrong for aspiring to sound like Lou Gramm.

On the other hand, I'm not sure I agree wholeheartedly with the notion that mimics make better singers than those who do not mimic a variety of singers, though having different vocal timbres and skills might be useful. A person is only truly tone deaf if they cannot tell the difference between one pitch and another. The difference is, however, the skills required in singing. Some do develope some natural skill, somewhat like a dog that teaches itself to ride a skateboard, no offense intended to natural singers. Others get to it by careful study. Either path is valid. And even "natural" singers need instruction or skill-building, as well.

Maybe it's environment. My mom would sing along with the radio. My grandmother, her mother, would sing in a country and western style, through the nose, and floating up to notes, not unlike Bob Wills. One of my first memories was hearing Glen Campbell on the radio with "Wichita Lineman." My grandmother and my mother could sing bits of Disney musicals, such as "Chitty, Chitty, Bang, Bang" and "Bedknobs and Broomsticks."

When I was 10 years old, I picked up my step-grandfather's classical guitar, which only had three strings left and started picking out the arpeggiated beginning of "Who'll Stop the Rain" by Creedence Clearwater Revival. So, mimicry abounds but we each have our own voice.

[Rick Jones]

It totally makes sense, I have also wondered if it makes sense that so many guys and girls from the southern states of the USA have such nice voices is because of the way they naturally make the vowel sounds as part of their accent, I try to use some of those vowel sounds without sounding like I'm putting on the accent, but to do that I had to study the way things are said/sung in the TN/GA type southern accent and copy it somewhat.

I also have a friend who is an impressionist.....he is kind of painful, because he hardly ever speaks as himself, and it's tiring... but he can really sing as well, and sing just like whoever he is impersonating....scarily so.

[VideoHere]

Seems possible, though maybe not as time efficient as direct singing mimicry.

i was thinking about what you wrote here, and could i ask you to explain this more? sounds really interesting.