Jump to content

Rate this topic


Simpan24
 Share

Recommended Posts

Killerku,

John told me this.  He starting playing bass as a teenager.  He loved the Beatles.  His words, "lucky for me, I just happen to be able to sing".  I ask, did u do this technique or that or have a teacher? he sad no.  I said where did the high notes come in?  He said they were always there.  Im sure he has practiced some but his band gigged so much (continuously) he did not have a lot of time to practice, in the sense we do.  His first recording around 19 his amazing. I will attach some more files as I have time of some of his greatest moments.  Many are live.  Thanks

Do you seriously think he wasn't singing along to his bass or before that?

Ask yourself a few questions. Does this guy physiologically understand the voice? And if doesn't, why would you trust his opinion of what happened physiologically if he doesn't. I can say I learned a whole lot of my voice on my own. But retrospectively as I gained knowledge mechanically I often had insight into 'why' things were happening certain ways. 

Everything is a physiological state. Some people might find positions come more naturally and some may have more coordination. 

Just because someone isn't consciously aware of the coordinations they have trained, doesn't mean they didn't train them at some point in their lives.

Now, I'm one of the biggest fans of ignorant passion singers, 50 percent of how I listen to probably never had a day of real lessons and a lot of times it shows. I love the sound and the passion even when they may not even know how to imitate a cultural ideal of singing, although sometimes they might stumble into it. But I trust their insight into vocal usage less than someone who mechanically understands the voice.

Also, people like to brag, exaggerate, or make stories. There's been a pretty long history of people not discussing the 'how' so things can seem more magical. It's literally the essence of magic. Would you really base most of y our perceptions on the word of this guy? Do you think if he was born in the 800 AD Africa, he would have had the same path, without even a bass guitar to play? He'd sound totally different. Come on. 

And personally, my high notes were pretty much always there, if you count falsetto. I had most of my guitar. Cause I could do falsetto/whistle voice. I didn't count any head voice as I didn't realize people developed it. :P Eddie Kendricks kind of opened the door of bridging my falsetto into a head voice. I can now make it fancier with the knowledge of people here. What is range, really? Is it singing a frequency, or meeting a cultural ideal of what that is supposed to sound like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Gneetapp.  My main point is these guys 'just have it' for what ever reason that may be, as we have been discussing.  I just think for for the majority of us who practice diligently we will probably never arrive at that level.  Thanks for your comment and glad you enjoyed the videos.

Hi Lien, I forgot to mention that I don't practice diligently, lots of excuses such as no time, my son wants attention, tired from work, don't have a place, etc, and yet I was able to improve my voice (range and tone). I don't have great recordings yet of songs I covered, as I recorded those almost as soon as I was able to do a certain configuration that allowed me to sing those notes, no matter how bad or unstable. If you search the forum you can probably find my very first recording, an attempt to sing Iris (Goo Goo Dolls). After that you should check all the other recordings, for even though they are far from good (and believe me they are), they were made right after I was able to navigate my passaggio and connect my higher range. I think I even posted a link for a more recent raw cellphone recording of me practicing Iris while playing the guitar in my kitchen. I know I still have a long road ahead of me, and even with my 70% hearing loss in one ear, lack of consistent training, I can feel and hear the benefits of learning vocal techniques. I just started recording my practice (whenever I manage to do it), and I intend to upload the videos to a private youtube account, so I can give permissions based on invitations or e-mails. This way I can always look back and see, or show to other people, what you can accomplish with hard work using the right techniques. 

So, as we have been discussing the gift of music and singing, I thought it was appropriate to give you the link of a video that teaches the gift of music...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

No Robert.  U are misunderstanding me.  I am going to continue practicing but I am realistic too.  Myself and many others are greatly moved and appreciate extraordinary talent.  That is all I am saying.  I hope you enjoyed the videos. 

I'm being hard on you to make my point. I'm not actually upset. 

The thing is , people neglect to consider to realize that you can be the best that you can be. Stop fixating on "how to sing like someone else", or how you'll never be able to sing like this or that person. Stop! Stop the madness!

Start focusing on the one thing you can control and that is how to be your best. And realize that being your best, is actually pretty damn good! Most people have the ability to sing frickin amazing if they work hard and long enough at it.

Stop whining and get to work.

tough love coach

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My theory as a singer who has done a lot of self teaching is the self taught ones with larger ranges are often simply willing to be more annoying than the average population with voice usage. Case in point listen to these horrific sounds that might get me institutionalized if people were to hear it:

https://app.box.com/s/5blb2p95cctzzky28m7jaofht63f2m8x

Every coordination in there can be controlled because I explored my voice with no judgment. If something sounds funny, I just laugh. The ability to coordinate the voice in any way applies to singing. The rules I have with voice usage are: if something sends me hoarse, overly strains, or hurts me then that is bad. Everything else is fair game.

But most people want to start by trying to sounding like "X" right away and most people don't know how to get there so they try to force whatever speech habits they have. They aren't willing or don't know how to slow down and explore the voice to reach a destination. People don't want to sound bad and are concerned that people will judge them if they were to make a sound that wasn't traditionally appealing, so this holds them back from developing 'talent,' which ultimately is the ability to coordinate a voice in a way that others find aesthetically pleasing. 

Mike Patton (Faith No More, Mr Bungle) does stuff like the above all the time and has one of the largest 'frequency' ranges of any popular singer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPsXRiV6yo4

Now I prefer Sinatra's relatively minuscule 2 octaves on average over Patton's 6-whatever, but I do love Patton on California. Patton may have a very high willingness to experiment with annoying sounding vocal coordinations, but he can use his voice in a way that moves me if he chooses to.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted to highlight a point not quite elucidated,  I think, by Killer's reply. But I can simplify it. Sometimes, singers are the worst people to ask about singing. I am not against the idea that some singers seem to just get it and do instinctually what others have to train for. And the role of genetics? With me, you are preaching to the choir.

And there are a lot of good singers that I think would make lousy teachers and cannot adequately describe what it is that they do. Teaching a subject is a special talent separate from the actual abllity to do this or that thing. And I know this from experience as a teacher of my trade. I have known a number of good electricians who are good and effective but they are total failures with people and how to relate concepts and inspire another person to learn. They just don't have it. So, not just any electrician can teach you electrical trade.

Same with singing or any other human endeavor.

I have watched Yngwie Malmsteen try to talk about what he does in an effort to teach. And I think it is a total failure of concept. Awesome guitarist but he does not know how to describe what it is that he does.

On the other hand, I saw a young guitarist, probably half my age, who explained the focus of speed-picking so eloquently and simply that it educated me and I have been playing guitar since probably before his parents were old enough to have children. Because he has the talent to talk about and relate what he is doing. And he is nowhere near as famous as Malmsteen.

In addition, why is it that the singers you find so inspiring are singing tenor range stuff? Do you have no baritone singers you also like? By that, I mean singers that consistently sing the baritone range, even if not technically described as a baritone.

As far as excellence in voice as a standard, I think the most perfect voice I have heard is Sarah Brightman and I am sure there are a few handfuls of people that would disagree with me and point out her faults.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lien bottom line is this... Jens is a member on forum who used to break at C4-E4...now he sings up to C6 and above...

 

here is a clip of his cover of on of the hardest songs in metal to sing

I think this proves it that practice makes perfect.. if i get even 50% of what he shows here ill be extra happy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lien, I will concede some people just get it without training or a lot of practice. I also imagine they are not stretching past what their voice can do. But who cares? A guy without the same advantage can still sing the same range, as well.

Just like. I have an genetic advantage for reaching stuff on high shelves because I am 6' 6" (2 meters) tall. Who cares? Another guy who is 5' 10" might find another way to achieve the same goal, whether climbing lower shelves or getting a ladder. Who cares? We both reached the top shelf.

Some guys have to get a mask or put on special make-up and prosthetics to look like a monster. I just wake up and draw another breath. An unfair advantage, I know, but there it is.

And while you are "hearing" us, do listen to Jens. He was originally typed as a bass, whether he was or not, whether the teacher was accurate or not, he can sing really high and powerful and not get worn out. It is technique and training, in addition to his passion for the music.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ronws, remember,  I not just talking about hitting high notes,  only.   We can all  hit high notes of some kind, the quality may suck,  the note may be squeaky,  etc.  Im talking about a voice that sounds good all the way through.  When I post John's sound bytes you will hear what im talking about.  Unbelievable control and command of his instrument.  Thanks and I enjoy your comments. 

Do you honestly believe he was born that way? Do you really think a person, who is NOT made to be singing, is born that way by nature? To be good at something that is a product of humans? Do you believe a talent really exists? 

What about basketball? Are people born to be a good ball handlers? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, Lien.We have to wait for you to learn how to go to the lower right of the reply box and click on embed videos and images and then paste in the window there.

If it is not going to happen in the next 30 years (estimating the time i have left on this planet) I won't get to see it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol b patient guys.  I been with my girl all weekend so I havent had time to finish up the video.  Just b patient.    One more time.  I think certain people's body types, how they are made whether by god  or by  natural selection, can have advantages.  This is true for the singing voice too.  How thr chest connects with thr neck,  size and structure of larynx.   Also thr environment comes into play: how they learned to talk from being around the parents.  I have many friends who have had NO lessons and they can sing like nobody's tomorrow.   Thr is something going on here that most be acknowledged.   Can people without the advantage learn sing great?  Some can and some never will.  That is how life works.  Dio, no lessons,  Russell Allen, no lessons.  John Cowan, no lessons,  etc Natural talent/self taught does exist.

       Natural Talent is still subjective........ A natural talent for Queensryche  would be a disaster for blues Jazz or country. Whether he admits it or not Dio trained. It may not sound like it but Willy Nelson had operatic training. Other people were making hits from songs he wrote until he decided to release an album of his own without all the extra BS instruments that was taking away from his style and intent.

      I am over 50 and just starting to make progress after receiving the "Four Pillars" Program.  One of the problems with us people who do not think they have natural talent is that we sit home and quietly work on our singing hoping no one will hear us till we get good. Part of the Training for vocal control is making loud irritating and sometimes painful sounds that people who what to be known as good singers do not want other people to hear. And other people do not want to hear that anyway so we are stifled in our training.

    Chances are good that this friend of yours with natural talent is type of guy that was loud on the playground in school. You have to be open to playing with your voice and making noises that are not normal just to see what works and what does not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ronws, remember,  I not just talking about hitting high notes,  only.   We can all  hit high notes of some kind, the quality may suck,  the note may be squeaky,  etc.  Im talking about a voice that sounds good all the way through.  When I post John's sound bytes you will hear what im talking about.  Unbelievable control and command of his instrument.  Thanks and I enjoy your comments. 

Good is an inherently subjective quality man. For someone who hangs out on a singing forum, the amount of singers I love to listen to who have very little skill in precisely using their voice to achieve a pitch with 'traditionally beautiful' timbre is pretty high. I've listened to Billy Corgan probably 100 times more in my lifetime than Russel Allen. :lol: Russel Allen may be 'skilled at singing' and of the virtuoso dudes, I actually prefer him more than most. But I've always found guys like Corgan more 'interesting.'

And you've already defined squeaky as 'not good.' Why is this so? I've listened to Eddie Kendricks more than Russel Allen and Michael Bolton too. What about Prince? Range at least can be objectively defined as a frequency range. Pitch accuracy can be objectively defined as the ability to control the pitch more precisely within that. And personally I've found both are not necessarily what I'm looking for all the time in singers either.

But 'good' timbre. There's a fair chance you've built up this guy and then a lot of people will hear him and think, well... That's pretty good, or meh. I'm not sure there is such a thing as a superhuman timbre. It's inherently divisive and very much dependent on tastes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lien

This is a result of training, for example:

 

In which way do you think his voice is lacking in comparision to the natural guys you know? Because really, I am yet to meet someone that can nail this in one take with this precision, even Sebastian had a hard time with this stuff.

 

Question: how did you train your voice up to now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lien, ofc there Will be many great talents. However great practice and good techniques will make you able to challenge such guys. 

There are many ways to be a successfull singer being born one is just one way, i know tons and tons of guys who built an incredible voice piece by piece.

in regards to: pitch, quality, timbre, range, power and you name it.

The thing with the voice is that everyone drives a Porsche, but some do indeed drive them better from the start. So basicly the voice is about you learning to drive your Porsche. Cheers and good luck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What percentage of the population even listens to Sebastian Bach? I noticed a pattern a long time ago on guitar forums where everyone was talking about Michael Angelo Batio and Yngwie and the same pattern appears on every sub interest forum. 

Singer are interested in throats mechanically moving through positions and are impressed by precise movements. Guitarists are interested in fingers mechanically moving through various positions. The general population doesn't really care about how hard it is to sing a Skid Row song or sweep pick. 

Before I learned about singing, I didn't even know Skid Row was hard to sing. I just thought it was 80s cheesy power ballads, like a guilty pleasure. And to be honest, that's probably what most of the population thinks of Skid Row. Not that it is amazingly powerhouse singing, but that it sounds of its time, 80s. What's appealing in timbre goes through various fads. Johnny Cash sold over 90 million albums for his entire life. Skid Row 20 millions, primarily in the 80s.

To say singing is very subjective is an understatement. Cash sounds like a powerhouse to me (and probably the general population on average) more than any of the high pitched shrieking dudes, but I made a conscious choice to remain the way I was prior to learning the mechanics of singing rather than become one of those guys that was obsessing about Batio's sweep picking on the guitar forums long ago.

I know which singers sound powerful to me, because they sound believable, unique, expressive, and sincere. They sound of themselves, not of a time period, of a fad, or a difficult mechanical coordination of the voice. I've sung enough and played guitar, piano, bass, drums, visual art, and so forth enough to know that some coordination are mechanically more difficult to execute, but when experiencing art, I just experience art. I look at paintings with my eyes, mind, and soul, listen to guitars with my ears, mind, and soul. I don't hear throats and fingers when I genuinely experience art. If I'm making art, I'll have to use both to try to express the mind, but it's just a channel for the mind. Not the destination. These things have no baring of whether the end result moves my mind or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Killer this is not about experiencing art, its about singing and using your voice to make art.

As much as your soul can have to say, and as much as you can feel about the songs, without the technique to translate that into something that others can understand, there will be no experience.

Now the post he made is clear in the regard that he believes that virtuose is something that only a natural talent can deliver, and that training can not produce that. I disagree, I believe that virtuose is possible to achieve through training, since I know many samples that do confirm this.

 

That said, I agree with you completely that there is much more to it than technical control of the instrument, and this clip of Chris has way more than just great control. For example, there is individuality in there, you can hear his voice and identify it as being him. Some of the "natural" clips sent here sound to me like a more general "Air Supply" sound with almost no individual quality that allows identification of the person performing. 

If the question was if technique hinders musicianship, I would send this one:

Where I am sure a lot of people would complain about the choice of changing the chorus melody and not doing the ending modulation.

And Cash IS a powerhouse. You guys just have to stop looking to explain quality with technique! It either sounds good or not, technique is there to fix the not. (and not kill yourself to produce good). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Felipe, I honestly have no idea what Lien defines as a natural talent. It seems to be something that isn't achievable through training, it's not squeaky. All of the range sounds good and the high notes are already there. What's more we all know it when we hear it.


I wasn't digging at Chris Miyai there. I was simply pointing out how subjective things are, that one person might hear Sebastian Bach and think it's a talent he could only be born with and another will think: it sounds like dated 80s hair band screeching. I guess I'm in between. It's fun sometimes, but it doesn't particularly float my boat. It's the same with all singing. Some think Pavarotti sounded like a boring, bloated old man, others think the high notes were never squeaky, his voice was rich and rewarding and he was extremely talented.


As to whether virtuosity interferes with art, I'd say it depends. Some artists might be better off keeping it simple. Over complicating things might lead to a loss of a cohesive identity. Johnny Cash didn't need a head voice suited to an 80s metal band for example. If he learned that and focused intensely on that it might have interfered with his career. Other artists might benefit from breadth and precision. Depends on the artist, what they are trying to express, their goals, and who they care to reach.

 

The closest thing to talent I can think of in singing is: someone who can connect. Depending on the habits of listeners throughout different eras, this is constantly changing, From Bessie Smith, to Bing Crosby, John Lydon, Neil Young, Freddie Mercury, it doesn't matter to me the how. They all did it differently. It could be anyone. Virtuosity if anything can be taught more that than a strong vocal identity. But most voices aren't sent through mass marketing avenues so it's hard to say how people would respond to most voices. Likewise, do people relating less with Bing Crosby nowadays make his voice any less expressive? Or would people rather relate to something current?

 

Most diligent, informed people can probably train a degree of virtuosity given the time and right educational resources. As an example they might be able to after many years sing Skid Row less squeakily than Sebastian Bach, but the average person not part of the 80s zeitgeist would probably prefer someone with a strong identity like Cash, even if he is an older artist from a bygone era. If anything is talent, it's 'that' distinct thing that people relate to in a voice. 

 

In that way I don't comprehend what Lien is referring to as 'people know it when they hear it.' Singers have vague ideas of what another singer is doing. So we might know something when we hear it. But the average person can pretty much just hear a sound and either relate or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think like many other topics discussed this one went from someone asking a simple question like" can a singer basically get better or does he have to be born with it" to " I like my guy better than your guy blah blah".  

 

Listen there are  amazing natural talents out there like a 3 year old that can play classical piano better than I can tie my shoes or a 5 year old girl that can sing like Whitney Houston already. However with much practice and listening in the right direction and you can sound or sing close to who you would like to or as good as you want to be you. I have friends that can mimic Stevie wonder , dio, Charlie Wilson , Rick james, Bon jovi , Bruce Springsteen, Garth brooks, Robert plant, Donny Hathaway, David Ruffin mick jagger etc. you can too they can't all be that special.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think like many other topics discussed this one went from someone asking a simple question like" can a singer basically get better or does he have to be born with it" to " I like my guy better than your guy blah blah".  

 

Listen there are  amazing natural talents out there like a 3 year old that can play classical piano better than I can tie my shoes or a 5 year old girl that can sing like Whitney Houston already. However with much practice and listening in the right direction and you can sound or sing close to who you would like to or as good as you want to be you. I have friends that can mimic Stevie wonder , dio, Charlie Wilson , Rick james, Bon jovi , Bruce Springsteen, Garth brooks, Robert plant, Donny Hathaway, David Ruffin mick jagger etc. you can too they can't all be that special.

 

 

The problem is, mimicking is no good for me. The first identity is the one that hits hardest. The identity that evolved for the artist throughout their life, shaping their vocal sounds. Sounding like X is the problem. They already were X. I look for Y or Z and so on.

It's like guitar players that are like, "Hendrix wasn't any good, cause he was sloppy and I can play it cleaner." But they didn't play it. The kind of talent, if it exists, that I understnd, it isn't in sounding like someone else, its in sounding uniquely like yourself. It's being Jimi Hendrix, writing his songs, using his unique guitar style, using his unique voice, not playing his stuff slightly more precisely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Cowan Bytes

1979 Don't look back  (analog recording)  checkout John's use of distortion and the A above high C on the end.  I saw him sang this song so many times I can count and he never missed the note.

1981 Deeper and Deeper (analog recording) to me John's F# to high B are his best notes.  The Bb / A modulation here is unbelievably big and full here,  Checkout the rich vibrato and absolute pitch.  Saw him sang this many times live, nailing it to the wall every time..

1977 Fly through the country   Great breath support and dynamics.  Real nice high A.

!980s   Good Woman's Love  Fantastic high B.  When I had him in concert I would tell him to hit that note exactly like that, he always did. 

1984  Watermelon Man  Live in France.  Unbelievable A above high C.   I have heard him go as high as an Eb above double high C.  It is recorded too.

1989 Im Down   This speaks for itself!!

1990s  Oh Darlin  John's forays into what he calls the half voice. 

 

When i had John in concert I never heard him warm up, hum a scale, etc.  We hung out and ate hambugers and drank beer.  He talked with the audience and on the phone.  He never once ask for a place to warm up.  Him and the band drove a van, not a Silver Eagle Bus.  Sometimes he would just be waking up from sleeping. He had no private place to warm up.  Usually by the 3 rd song (Good Woman's Love) he was cooking.  He used the first few songs to warm up his voice. Acoustic instruments here folks no loud amps are studio monkey grease.

 

John is a natural.  I believe in lessons.  Most of us have to have lessons to learn what may come natural to others.  However, there are individuals who just have the goods.  John told me he miss one show in 30 years of performing but never because of any vocal trouble.  Take it for what it is worth but I think the guy is amazing!!

 

Thanks for finally showing this guy. He's good, but I'd have to hear him in a more complete context to understand his artistry as a singer and how it relates to me. It doesn't immediately jump out as super distinct, but not fully generic or imitation either. I wouldn't be able to understand the talent until I heard more context in which the voice is existing.

It's like taking a few sentences out of paragraph, or a paragraph from a book. I'd have to hear him tell a full story and so forth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

The problem is, mimicking is no good for me. The first identity is the one that hits hardest. The identity that evolved for the artist throughout their life, shaping their vocal sounds. Sounding like X is the problem. They already were X. I look for Y or Z and so on.

It's like guitar players that are like, "Hendrix wasn't any good, cause he was sloppy and I can play it cleaner." But they didn't play it. The kind of talent, if it exists, that I understnd, it isn't in sounding like someone else, its in sounding uniquely like yourself. It's being Jimi Hendrix, writing his songs, using his unique guitar style, using his unique voice, not playing his stuff slightly more precisely.

I appreciate that Killer reminds us that to be sure, singing your own style and finding your own sound and your own songs, is a higher achievement of artistry. I just don't think anyone can deny that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I wrote "or as good as you want to be you" not grammatically correct but saying as good as you yourself and your own style can be.   The thing is though we all didn't get into singing because we wanted to sound like or become the singer we are.(some rock star flicked our switch and made us want to be singers) We had to have influences and strive to be as good as them . And try to sing countless hours in the bathroom or bedroom trying our hardest to get better. If you just strived to be you technically you have already succeeded. 

I have wanted to be a countless number of singers and guitar players in my life and that's what has made me a better musician. I have more tools to choose from. And we are talking about singing technique here. We are not talking about artistry and songwriting.  Singing will get easier for you if you put down any ego and ask questions and take lessons if it doesn't come from sticking your ear to a speaker and trying to sound like that artist. Which many great singers will tell you that's how they got better. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's simple if you can't do something ask how.. If you practice hard and diligently and ask enough questions until you really do understand how certain sounds, ranges are done you will find the answers but if you just give in to an attitude of "well some people just have it" then you will fail and deep down not be as good as you would like to be.  That will make you feel like crap. But if you try hard and truly love it you will have ups and downs like anything else worth a shit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

      I still say those "Natural" singers worked their butt off behind the scenes Just like everyone else. As you said your friend John Sang in church and loved Beatles and Motown. Singing those types of songs will definately give you a workout especially Motown.......Giving yourself the chance to screw up a little helps also. I am also over 50. My whole family sang.......... One big problem with that is that there is always someone better. My problem started with the one "Big" break for friends to hear me with a real band......... The song was not only out of my range but one that I did not know other than the Main chorus line. A big slap in the ego of a 10 year old boy. I still sang but kept to Country/Folk songs while I wanted to sing Aerosmith and Bad Company......... NOW I can sing Bad Company and sound Halfway decent ...... Aerosmith may take a little longer......... BUT had I known then that my biggest setback was BECAUSE of not being loud enough and confident enough......... I would have worked on those songs instead of sticking to country/Folk where I could sound good enough and not get my ego crushed some more.

    And it does not take Boring scales........... It takes making noises that are NOT your typical soulful, smooth vibrato laden sounds. ........ More like Going from One extreme to the other and NOT CARING what it sounds like because you are learning and building strength and listening to what coordination helps in what area of the voice and to control the sound to do what you want when you want to do it..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lien, I am a complete believer in talent.  Talent is obvious in many ways, like when you see Freddie Mercury sing, when you see Roger Federer make a ridiculous half volley, when you see Pele do magic with the football.. They have something x-factor that mere mortals do not possess.  It is indeed true.  

Having said that talent only makes up IMO 10-15% of geniuses and this is across all fields.  The rest is pure dedication and hardwork even for the greats.  I have been practicing diligently for the last 2.5 years and I am today able to take my voice to places that I never knew existed in me.  I consider myself to be "talented".  I do get certain things easily compared to others, even musically.  With poor and non-existent technique I used to be able to sing A4 many many years ago... But it is not until I put myself down to work and dedicate my life to the art did I really start understanding my potential and what I could achieve.  My talent, while obvious to me and others around me, played a very very little role in my own personal development.  

All the examples of singers that you mentioned perhaps sang for 10-20-30 years.  Even with as little as 2.5 years, I am able to see such a massive improvement in my co-ordination and strength.  Singing is a repetitive activity.  If you do the right things and for a long time, you will improve and this applies to anyone.  I found my inspiration only in my 30s.  I feel at some level guilty at having wasted my time when I was younger.  But I am very glad to have started at least now.  What do they say about every day being the first day of the rest of your life.  

I absolutely cannot wait to see where I can take my voice after 5 years of steady effort, let alone 10 or 20.. Excellence is a life long pursuit.  There are many many different ways to reach excellence.  Hardwork and persistence will never let you down...  

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...