Why Vocal Performance is the WRONG choice for a MT Career

College Majors Musical Theater Major
21

<p>Voice Teacher, thanks for bringing this subject up, and I agree it is something to consider. I have been thinking about this for my ds as well over the last few weeks. Just a thought re. that it is the wrong choice to study VP if you want an MT career. Considering the fierce competitiveness of getting into MT programs these days, if, for example, a student wasn’t accepted in any MT program, but still wants to develop his or her voice with an eye towards re-auditioning or transferring and was able to study with a good, solid voice teacher in a good program, I’m not sure it would be wrong.</p>

<p>I think studying with a very operatically-oriented teacher would not be a good choice. One would need to look around to find the right college and/or teacher, but they are out there in fairly good numbers, I believe. A solid classical, note, not operatic" technique seems to me a good basis to build on. My concern, and this comes from spending a lot of time on YouTube watching senior showcases recently, is that a number of MT programs are not giving this basic vocal training to their students. I was pretty shocked at the shape that some of the students voices were in and would not want my ds singing like that in front of agents after four years of study and $$$ paid in tuition. Just a few examples, I heard a lot of throat tension and “tightness”, throwing the head back to get the higher notes and generally a “pushed” sound…and more. But I am planning on doing due diligence re. vocal training next year. Well, I guess I’ve already started in fact.</p>

<p>On the other hand, there were other programs where the kids had clearly been taught excellent vocal technique, and it really showed, to my ear anyway.</p>

<p>Just as there are bad teachers in every subject area and school out there, I think there are probably teachers in VP programs that can teach good vocal technique for classical and MT, and there are those who clearly can’t or won’t or whose expertise/preference is opera. There are also most likely teachers in MT programs that can teach good vocal technique and those that can’t for whatever reason. So rather than chalking it up to luck, or assuming that you will definitely get good vocal training through an MT program rather than a VP program is also a little risky.</p>

<p>Even in classical music, which is also tremendously competitive, wide vibratos, sacrificing diction for only the beauty of the vowels, wobbles, screaming, etc. is also decreasing. You just won’t get work if you sing like that these days. Twenty years ago, I couldn’t listen to opera for all the reasons you mentioned. Just last month, I listened to a live broadcast of Wagner from Germany, and it was incredible how much has changed in that time. The singers were tremendous with a healthy and full production, just the right amount of vibrato, great diction, amazing storytelling/acting ability. Hopefully, this will continue to filter down with each generation.</p>

<p>I think it is very difficult though, for parents who have no background in music or voice to figure this all out. Even with the small amount of knowledge I have, it’s not easy.</p>

22

<p>That last paragraph summed it up exactly for our family. Doing the kind of research you mention of actually looking at students from the programs and how they sing is probably a very good kind of research to do. I think your point (which has been made upthread too) about the difference between classical and opera is a good one.</p>

<p>I learn so much from these discussions. (sometimes I just learn enough to know I need to find someone who really knows it…but that’s better than thinking I am knowledgeable just because I’m actually so ignorant I don’t realize how much it is I don’t know!)</p>

23

<p>I think this is very personal. I have had several voice teachers since around the age of 11, all with stellar reputations, but looking back on it only two of them ever really taught me anything. Parents can’t really know this and neither can the student until you go for a while.</p>

24

<p>I value both VoiceTeacher and CoachC’s advice…but I am more in the Coach C camp on this one…25 years ago I went to college for MT, and ended up in a VP program for my vocal training. I have never regretted it, and I was fortunate to have a voice teacher familiar with both styles of singing. The breathing techniques I learned for opera and classical have greatly helped me sing in other genres.<br>
The point is, make sure that the vocal training you choose is adaptable to both forms of singing. A good program WILL provide you with both, and they ARE out there, believe me. And you can have a love for both artistic styles and perform both. There is no such thing as either/or, in my opinion.</p>

25

<p>Case in point: I just saw Godspell on Broadway this past weekend, and Morgan James - who has a fantastic voice - belted out “Turn Back Oh Man” better than I have ever heard. When I looked in the program, I saw that she got her BM in voice from Juilliard. And she is not the only one…I do see graduates of VP programs on Broadway on a regular basis.</p>

26

<p>OK:</p>

<p>There are always “cases in point”, exceptions, etc. My initial point was really meant to be about the vocal performance degree as a whole, with specific info on conflicts in the training. But since “classical” training as a whole keeps coming up, here are a few excerpts from sources by pros (including classical teachers) that are the basis of my statements:</p>

<p>Excerpts from “In Support of Contemporary Commercial Music (nonclassical) Voice Pedagogy" an official statement from the American Academy of Teachers of Singing (distributed in the Journal of Singing, September/October 2008 Volume 65, No. 1, pp. 7–10):</p>

<p>"Unfortunately, techniques for singing other genres such as folk, gospel, blues, jazz, pop, and rock, which fall under a new heading called Contemporary Commercial Music (CCM), have been neither clearly defined nor seriously addressed in traditional voice pedagogy texts. While it is true that all singers must breathe, phonate, resonate, and articulate, they do not necessarily approach these technical elements in the same manner. Recent acoustic, physiologic, and pedagogic research challenges the widely held belief that classically based voice techniques alone can serve the world’s diversity of singing styles. This new information has motivated the American Academy of Teachers of Singing to address the topic: “In Support of Contemporary Commercial Music (nonclassical) Voice Pedagogy.”…“Since there are significant and measurable acoustic differences between classical singing styles and popular singing styles, the Academy proposes that the techniques used to train singers in those styles should be tailored to the particular performing needs of the singer. Developing a balanced chiaroscuro (bright and dark) sound with vibrato from onset to release of tone, self- amplification through a strong singer’s formant, formal articulation patterns, and seamless blending of registers throughout the voice, serve only repertoire that requires such vocal production. A vocal mechanism trained in that technique does not automatically nor easily reconfigure to produce sounds that are typical stylistic requirements of CCM repertoire”…“The issue here is not that one technique or style is better than another; rather, it is that they are different aesthetically, physiologically, and acoustically, and thus demand different pedagogic approaches.”</p>

<p>The American Academy of Teachers of Singing consists of the following teachers who helped craft, and ultimately voted to approve this statement. (Notes in () are my notes.)</p>

<p>Adele Addison, Elaine Bonazzi, Lindsey Christiansen, Patricia Craig, Jan Eric Douglas, Robert Edwin, Shirlee Emmons (Classical Vocal Ped Author), Robert Gartside, Jean Westerman Gregg, Hilda Harris (Metropolitan Opera), Helen Hodam, Barbara Honn, Marvin Keenze, Paul Kiesgen (Classical Vocal Ped - Indiana University), Antonia Lavanne, Jeannette LoVetri, Elizabeth Mannion, George Shirley (Metropolitan Opera), Richard Sjoerdsma, Shirley Verrett (Metropolitan Opera), Pearl Shinn Wormhoudt, John McCollum, Scott McCoy (Classical Vocal Ped Author), Joyce McLean, Richard Miller (one of THE most famous classical voice researchers), Dale Moore, Russell Oberlin, Chloe Owen, John Powell</p>

<p>From Author Robert Edwin (who also teaches, was trained classically himself, and has numerous students on Broadway):</p>

<p>“Research in voice physiology tells us that specific muscles are responsible for certain sounds (TA-dominant: chest, belt, mix; CT-dominant: head, falsetto). Acoustic research reveals that classical and belt sounds create different frequencies, formants, and harmonics. It follows then that different voice techniques are required to activate the muscles and produce the sounds necessary for a variety of singing styles. Classical technique that enables the singer to sing a self-amplified sound with tall, round vowels, a vibrato initiated at onset and continued to offset, and a CT-dominant vocal source, is of little use to a belter. Classical technique serves only classical and traditional Broadway legit singing.” - (Journal of Singing, November/December 2007 Volume 64, No. 2, pp. 213–215)</p>

<p>Also from Edwin:</p>

<p>“Unfortunately, Broadway seems to be more adaptable to musical change than the greater voice teaching community. In spite of the theatre world’s obvious and overwhelming shift to pop, rock, and R&B based music, the majority of college and university musical theatre voice departments continue to be heavily populated with current and former classical opera singers who know little if anything about nonclassical voice pedagogy and repertoire. Their mantra is, “If you learn to sing classically, you can sing anything,” which is the equivalent to a tennis instructor saying, “If you learn to play tennis, you can play any sport.” Frankly, the situation could get worse. As Broadway continues to distance itself from classical or “legit” singing styles, the classically trained singer will have fewer venues in which to sing and will have even more difficulty adapting to the ever-changing vocal demands of the roles, especially in light of the current emphasis on high belt and belt/mix singing.” (Journal of Singing, January/February 2005)</p>

<p>There are “classical” teachers who get everything that is written above and they produce results, whether or not they understand all of the science behind the sounds, they know how to get students to produce them in a healthy way. THAT is good teaching. However, there are also classical teachers who make statements such as: </p>

<p>“Rock singers, with their driving, hypnotic style, are not easily weaned from their vocal habits… Continuous phonation levels above the pain threshold (130 dB) is not only harmful to the ears, but also risks the permanent impairment of the vocal mechanism.” - Barabara Doscher (there is not a single study I have ever uncovered proving this. In fact, Thomas Cleveland, et al. found decibel levels under 90 dB in professional country singers (opera singers reach 100+).</p>

<p>“Chest Register is usually the speaking or yelling voice…chest register is overused by singers when belting…a practice sometimes referred to as the “Annie” syndrome.” Clifton Ware (Scott McCoy in his article “A Classical Pedagogue Explores Belting” actually found several professional belters who used LESS vocal pressure (pressed voice/yelling voice) than classical singers.)</p>

<p>I think Ewanes’ comment: “I think there are probably teachers in VP programs that can teach good vocal technique for classical and MT, and there are those who clearly can’t or won’t or whose expertise/preference is opera” sums it up well. At the end of the day, parents and students need to do their research and ask lots of questions. Obviously there are several people on this forum who have had great results with “classical” teachers - that’s great!!! As I mentioned before, I teach with “classical” colleagues who DO produce GREAT results in MT and I think that should always be the case with all teachers if they really believe “good singing is good singing” and “its all the same voice”. But personal experience teaching and sitting in on thousands of auditions has shown me that the experiences posted by others are the minority not the majority. </p>

<p>I hope things are shifting and you are all right. All I know is that I get so irritated on the other side of the table when I see someone with more than “4 years” of “classical” voice lessons who sounds like they’ve never had any training beyond a low level choir. I hate when I hear screaming and nasal, squeezed singing presented as “belt.” I hate when students tell me belting is dangerous because they personally got nodules from belting and when I ask what their belt training was they say something along the lines of “I trained classically and we worked a lot with shouting, nasality, and really brassy vowels.” To those of you who have not come across any of these situations - you and your child are VERY lucky. I do know that anytime I see Robert Edwin’s name on a resume, or any of the other “non-classical” singing teachers - their students (with very rare exception) always produce the right sounds . I have never seen an Edwin student sing poorly. </p>

<p>VT</p>

27

<p>VT - </p>

<p>Agree heartily about Robert Edwin, and about “belting causing nodules”. That idea makes me want to SCREAM - but screaming actually DOES cause nodules (or hemorrhagic polyps)!! :)</p>

<p>When I have time (ha :slight_smile: ) I will start a nodules/“nodes” thread, and begin to dispel all of the misconceptions around that…</p>

28

<p>CoachC - I agree 100%!!! A vocal health thread would be great, including a talk about Adele’s hemorrhagic polyp, which if you read her blog and follow her history of symptoms, appears to have been caused from excessive coughing caused by the flu, not singing. She kept singing on damaged folds (from the coughing), which more than likely turned a hemorrhage into a hemorrhagic polyp, so technically we could blame it on the singing, but you gotta love how the media twisted that story around.</p>

<p>VT</p>

29

<p>Soon…I promise… (I know you all are following that lyric reference :slight_smile: )</p>

<p>I see many current Broadway performers as patients, and while I can’t ever reveal identifying info of any kind, I can share lots of stories that will be eye-opening. </p>

<p>I do like that Adele’s story has kind of redeemed vocal fold surgery in the eyes of the media and therefore young singers - now we have a well-known successful vocal fold surgery as well as the infamous Julie Andrews story.</p>

<p>p.s. And no, the fact that I see Broadway performers as patients doesn’t mean MT singing is innately injurious. That will be a major point of our vocal health thread!! )</p>

30

<p>The wonderful details of this thread (thanks all), I think, support my D’s current status of having two voice teachers - one for each side of the coin. So far, so good.</p>

31

<br>

<br>

<p>The high school our D attended has a choir teacher who is very classically-oriented, and she also is the Music Director for school musicals. She’s great for legit musicals, but not great for shows that involve belting, plus any time she sends kids to voice teachers they are ALWAYS classical teachers. She is among those who consider classical training the be-all and end-all and all MT singing unhealthy, and she spreads misinformation and bad MT singing habits to her students.</p>

<p>Can anyone suggest the best recent research I could share with the school’s Drama teacher and Choir teacher that might convince them that the serious MT kids should be sent for MT, versus classical, vocal training? There are some AMAZING MT vocal coaches in our city, and it is a shame that these kids are being pushed down a classical path and do actually seem to be injuring their voices when they try to belt in the school musicals (which unsurprisingly is what most of them want to learn how to do). </p>

<p>Now that our D is no longer there I feel a bit more at liberty to get involved in trying to correct this situation and would love to have some relevant research to share with them. ;-D</p>

32

<p>Here are a few:</p>

<p>AATS. (2008) NATS Visits the AATS. Journal of Singing. 65, 7–10 . Retrieved March 21, 2012 from Ebsco.</p>

<p>The American Academy of Teachers of Singing does not have its own journal, so from time to time, the Journal of Voice (publication of the National Association of Teachers of Singing) will publish statements or letters from AATS. This statement supports the need for specialized training for singers of Contemporary Commercial Music (CCM) which encompasses styles including: Musical Theatre, Pop, Rock, Jazz, Blues, R&B, County, Bluegrass, Heavy Metal, Gospel, Contemporary Christian, and all other styles whose roots are in American music.</p>

<p>Cleveland, Thomas F.; Stone, R.E.; Sundberg, Johan; Iwarsson, Jenny. (1997). Estimated Subglottal Pressure in Six Professional Country Singers. Journal of Voice. II, 403—409. Retrieved February 21, 2012 from Science Direct.</p>

<p>Cleveland, Thomas F., Sundberg, Johan, Stone, R. E. (Ed). (2001) Long-Term-Average Spectrum Characteristics of Country Singers During Speaking and Singing. Journal of Voice. 15, 54–60. Retrieved March 11, 2012 from Ebsco. </p>

<p>This study investigated the differences between the spectrographs (an acoustic measurement of tone quality) of country and classical singers. The results show that the measurement commonly associated with “forward placement” in classically trained singers is non-existent in country singers. The study also returned decibel level measurements (which measure the “volume level” or what scientists call “intensity”) that were remarkably lower than those associated with classical singers.</p>

<p>Cowgill, Jennifer Griffith, (2009). Breathing for Singers: A Comparative Analysis of Body Types and Breathing Tendencies. Journal of Singing. 66, 141-147. Retrieved February 27, 2012 from Ebsco.</p>

<p>This study showed that singers breathe differently based on their body type. Singers who were heavier may breathe lower than singers who are muscular but their lung volume and expiratory force (breath pressure/”support”) are statistically the same. The paper suggests that singers with different body types (i.e. overweight versus thin dancer) need different breathing strategies in order to get the same result.</p>

<p>Grant, Mark N. (2004). The Rise and Fall of the Broadway Musical. Boston: Northeastern University Press.</p>

<p>This book is actually written from the viewpoint that pop/rock and modern cast recordings have destroyed American Musical Theatre. However, his justification for this stance clearly highlights some of the major differences between Golden Age and Contemporary musical theatre. Some interesting points: Sound designers often have to ask trained singers to sing with less volume in order to help them blend with their un-trained counterparts; There are often more speakers spread throughout the audience than there are instrumentalists or singers onstage; Because many cast recordings are released before a show opens or as the show opens, audiences now expect that the live show will sound just like the recording. Therefore, sound designers must use recording studio techniques (EQ, Reverb, Compression) to recreate the cast recording sound in the theatre.</p>

<p>Hixon, Thomas J. (2006). Respiratory Function in Singing. Tuscon: Redington Brown.</p>

<p>This is an excellent book on how the breathing for singing REALLY works. No myths, no voice teacher fluff. The author is a respiratory therapist and backs his statements with scientific research. Important points for CCM singers include: Higher lung volume = Louder increased intensity (louder singing); Low diaphragmatic breathing induced tracheal pull (basically the lungs pull the larynx down, which pulls the vocal folds apart and makes it harder to belt but easier to not carry too much chest voice into the upper range. </p>

<p>Kochis-Jennings, Karen Ann, Finnegan, Eileen M., Hoffman, Henry T., Jaiswal, Sanyukta. (2012). Laryngeal Muscle Activity and Vocal Fold Adduction During Chest, Chestmix, Headmix, and Head Registers in Females. Journal of Voice. 26, 182-193, 2012. Retrieved March 11, 2012 from Science Direct.</p>

<p>In this study, the researchers used electromyography, a process which measures electrical impulses through needles inserted into muscles, to investigate the interaction of the “chest voice muscle” (thyroarytenoid) and “head voice muscle” (cricothyroid) in singing. There results are exciting and ground breaking. In 1967 Vennard said that airy singing was often a result of incomplete vocal fold closure and that if a singer worked on their chest voice, they would likely see their head voice improve. With this study showing activation of the TA (“chest voice muscle) at rates between 20 and 40% of maximum activation in the seven singers studied, there now seems to be scientific evidence for the need to re-visit Vennard’s work.</p>

<p>Jones, Sarah. (2010, January 1) Music: The Joy of Glee. Mix Online. Retrieved on March 22, 2012 from Mixonline.com</p>

<p>This is one of the many articles published by Mix Magazine describing the audio processing equipment used in creating the live and recorded sound of professional artists. In this article, the designer of Glee talks about how he attempts to make the singers sound larger than life, or as he says: “Glee is all about vocals — big, huge vocals.’ Anders likens them to the way the show characters might sound in their own minds. These kids, they’re like, ‘We sound amazing, we’re huge,’ and that’s what you want — big, grandiose sound.”</p>

<p>Sanders, Sheri. Rock the Audition, Milwaukee: Hal Leonard, 2011. Print.</p>

<p>Sanders book is excellent in many ways. The DVD that she includes allows readers to hear and see what she speaks about in the book. Her interviews with casting directors are top notch and help drive home a very important point for aspiring Broadway performers – its not about how loud or how high you can sing. Its about what you bring to the room, who you are, and what you have to say. In summary her book is about giving yourself the freedom to be yourself.</p>

<p>Titze, Ingo. “Belting and a High Larynx Position.” Journal of Singing, May/June 2007 Volume 63, No. 5, pp. 557–558. Print.</p>

<p>Ingo Titze is one of the world’s leading voice scientists. In this article he explains why a high laryngeal position can be useful to a belter. His explanation of formant tuning may require further reading to be understood, but he clearly lays out why a lowered laryngeal position (as often taught in classical lessons) can be counterproductive. </p>

<p>Vennard, William. (1967). Singing: The Mechanism and the Technic. (5th ed.). New York: Carl Fischer.</p>

33

<p>Many thanks for all of this detailed reference information! I’ll find a diplomatic way to pass it along to both the Drama and Choir teachers. They may or may not listen, but it seems important for someone to at least try to persuade them that some kids may benefit more from MT voice training than ever-more classical training.</p>

<p>Again, thanks so much for your thoughtful response.</p>