<p>I'm sure many of you have different opinions on this subject. I know many performers who rarely formally "train" (no voice or dance classes). These people do alot of school and community shows. I take voice lessons and dance lessons...but only do on average 2 shows a year (one in the summer and one in the fall...although this year i will have been in more than that). Experience vs. training are two very somewhat different approaches to preparing for a professional career/college career in musical theatre. Is it necessary to invest alot of money into dance/voice training when there are school and community performing opportunities that are mostly free?? I personally believe in a healthy mix of both with the emphasis on training for performance auditions. All thoughts are greatly appreciated. How extensive of a resume' is needed to succeed?</p>
<p>Performances are GREAT in terms of audition and performance preparation. However, private lessons can help to hone one's voice and dance technique. If you are interested in MT, I wouldn't skimp on the voice training. While dance training is great, it seems less important in MT college auditions (not an opinion here on its importance, just an observation from reading posts of those who have auditioned). If its a dance major that is desired, this would obviously be different.</p>
<p>vocaldad</p>
<p>I'm sure most of the posters on all these forums would agree that a combination of lessons and other training (workshops, private coaching, etc.) along with experience is the key to success. I am a voice teacher and find that many students come to me wanting to learn a particular song for an audition. They have had no formal training and are "yelling" instead of healthy chest "belting". That can be taught. My own dd, age 17, has had a combination of a lot of dance training (although not enough in tap), voice (since age 13) and drama coaching (this year for college auditions).</p>
<p>With regard to experience, try and audition for as many shows are you can, even if you think you won't get the roles. Auditions in themselves are good learning experiences and allows you to learn about competition on a lot of different levels (i.e, competition on the local level is going to be different than auditioning for professional and/or regional theaters and/or tours/Broadway).</p>
<p>Also, don't forget the workshops. A lot can be learned in a few hours on a Saturday afternoon, but imho, workshops should be in addition to formal lessons.</p>
<p>Good luck.</p>
<p>i am a firm believer in training being a heavy foundation to becoming an mt major in college/career. i was recently accepted into a very competitive performing arts summer camp that required an audition tape that included 2 songs, a monlogue, and a dance. for all of my pieces/routines for the required fields i enlisted my voice teacher, dance instructor and school drama teacher to help select a piece and coach me on it. i had 2 songs that were handpicked for my voice type and a dance that showcased my dance stregnths. i honestly did not think i had a chance of making this program...but again, it is a testament to the power of personal training. my voice teacher commented to me about how so many kids auditioning for things these days just pick songs themselves regardless of their level of appropriateness (she says RENT songs are usually victim to this). although many on this board remark about the high level of competition in this industry...they need to remember all of the unqualified people that are auditioning for things (American Idol is an example of this).</p>
<p>I think using the word "unqualified" here is a little over the top and a little pompous (pardon me), coming from somebody who is fortunate enough to be able to take all kinds of lessons. Of course, having the proper training is imperative in this business and needs to be nurtured by good teachers. However, there are some people who have been "discovered" with very little training, just natural talent. </p>
<p>As I mentioned in my previous post, I think training is important and I suggested that, but to say people without training are "unqualified" is definitely going over the top.</p>
<p>i didn't mean to insinuate that people without training or experience are unqualified. i know LOTS of people with raw talent who have little or no training. but i do know people i would call unqualified to audition for a competitive mt program...not just very little training but little talent at all. its a sad reality...but many people auditioning for college mt programs are just not very good or "qualified" as i liked to state it. training and performance are critical to success...yes, some people still succeed without those things...but why risk it??? i just started taking voice lessons but for the last 6 yrs i was in a local children's choir. i hated it!!! but it wasnt very expensive and it was really good voice training. alot of people seem to think private lessons are critical, i dont think so. its def helped me, but if you have a great choir teacher at your school, you are fine.</p>
<p>even if you dont live in a city where you can get pro training or have the ability to get to a phs you definately owe it to yourself to get as much training as you can where you live and take total advantage of every opportunity that comes your way if you are serious about this. also this might be my uber hardcore acting teachers rubbing off on me but whatever you do dont scrimp on the actor training. there are 10 gazillion kids that can sing and dance just as well as anybody on broadway but the thing that sets some apart from the crowd is they are also awesome actors and that takes lots of training. building a solid acting technique can be the most grueling thing in the world and it NEVER ends as long as you live but it seems like an afterthought for lots of mt kids. just my opinion.</p>