Do you want to be a recording artist or a live performer?

I’ll get to the title question a bit later, but now I want to mention that a few posts ago, I cited a Youtube video posted by the creator on the Reddit singing forum. To me, it seemed unnatural and a possible lip sync. The creator contacted me and said he wanted to disclose exactly how he created it, which I thought was a great idea (and wish more would do this!), so I told him I’d post it in a blog post so that my readers could see it. Now I am not going to tell you that I know for sure it’s accurate, but because he says it is very easy to do (and the software is free if you have a requisite Apple/Mac device, which I don’t), you can try it for yourself and see if you get a similar result (you can try Audacity if you use Windows or Linux, or don’t like Garageband for some reason):

Another video on this same subject is more technical and seems to confirm the advantages of this approach:

The key thing is not to try and be the Singing Police; there’s so much enhancement these days in the pop genres it’s not really worth worrying about. Instead, you can use the enhancement to develop your ear. Over time your abilities will get better. At first, I was a bit frustrated that I could barely determine anything, but I knew that it was highly likely that if I kept at it, I’d get better, possibly much better. And I’ve very content with how things turned out, though I continue the endeavor (who knows where things will lead?).

And lately I’ve been recording my singing using different microphones, as well as doing research into the subject. For example, this is what I found on one forum about one popular microphone:

tracks recorded [with the Audio Technica 4050 microphone] seem like they’re made out of elastic; they take compression, eq, whatever SO much better than anything recorded w/ w a crummy mic.

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-end-theory/36472-anyone-used-mxl-770-mxl-v67g-mics.html

Now I wouldn’t mention this claim if I hadn’t experienced something similar myself. To recap, I started with a smart phone mic, then used the Samson Go, then the Aokeo AK-6, then the Aokeo AK-30, and then the MXL USB.006. I was pleased with each new mic, but the MXL really seemed to sort of sculpt the sound, whereas the smart phone and Samson Go were too “muddy.” The two Aokeos were clear but a bit harsh/crude; they may have also been too bright.  The MXL keeps everything “tight,” so I’m not worrying about making some odd sound that throws everything off (such as when the lips create a “click” type noise). There’s no muddiness yet it seems more “full bodied” than the Aokeos.  To listen to my tracks and decide for yourself go here (read the descriptions so that you know what the recordings represent):

Generally, if the track has “dry” in the name, it is not “processed,” though there may be some reverb used that is built into the Aokeo mics. If the word “all” is used in the name, that means at least a minor amount of processing was used.  This usually means EQ, compression (rarely more than 2.5 to 1 ratio and most earlier tracks were 2 to 1 ratio or no compression), echo and/or reverb, and perhaps a “touch up” to a short segment of the track (such as to take the volume down slightly). I have never used any kind of pitch correction on my voice. Also, in recent days I learned to take out the background noise, which I think is worse in the some mics (the AK-30 and MXL especially).  You don’t need much money to experiment with mics these days, and you may be able to get to a local music store to try some out for free.  Also, if you know what to look for, there may be good deals on sites like ebay or locally, such as on Craigslist.

So, as to the tittle question, of course you can and perhaps should be both, but can trying to be one hinder your endeavor to be the other?  Of course I can’t say I know for sure and it may vary from one person to another, but if what I encounter online (Youtube, the Reddit singing forum, etc.) is any indication, too many aspiring singers think they need to sing acoustically (like opera singers, meaning high volume is required), but are rather unaware of what recording their singing in a “professional” way entails.  My sense is that once you get the fundamentals down, you should start learning about recording, because you can do the same thing live, assuming you have the right equipment (which doesn’t have to be expensive).  If sing live at high volume, though, you may be surprised at how difficult it is to get the sound you are seeking when you record.

A key difference between the live performer and the recording artist, it seems, is control.  The live performer, especially in the context of most live venues, can basically get on a stage and start screaming.  Take a look at Youtube “cover” vocalists to see what I mean (and there are some previous posts where I cite such videos).  Even if you want to be a “screamo” vocalist in the studio, though, you still need to control your vocals well.  Here’s an example:

And learning control means you are likely to learn how to do a lot more with your vocal “instrument.”  And it’s basically free – you don’t need to take formal lessons and the software isn’t that complex.  The easiest to learn is likely Audacity; there are a bunch of tutorials for this software on Youtube alone (I don’t think it will work with smart phone operating systems, though; you can use Bandlab or Garageband if for some reason you want to process your vocal tracks on a phone).  However, as I discussed in the previous post as well as above, the microphone you use can seem to make a significant difference.

NOTE:  Due to something non-musical I’ve become involved in, I can’t offer lessons for a while.  However, I will still offer a free assessment of your singing, just email it to me:  nickspinner55@gmail.com.  It may take 48 to 72 hours to get back to you, and you should just use your smart phone’s basic recording app (hold it a bit off to the side; don’t sing directly into it).  If you use a different mic and/or software, just let me know.  Don’t play any instruments or mix the vocals with other tracks.  I’ll create a new post announcing that I am back to teaching, but I intend to write up new posts if I have something I think is interesting, informative, etc. to say.  And if you have any questions involving something about this post, you can post a comment.

More about my investigation into the world of technological enhancement of the singing voice.

A couple of posts back I used some short clips of my singing to show the difference between enhancement with studio effects and no enhancement (using the Samson Go mic in all the clips).  If you don’t know about this mic, it’s considered a clear step up from a basic smart phone mic, but far below “industry standard” for singing at a “pro” level (I used it because it’s the best I have and it has a setting that does a good job of cutting out background noise).  Anyway, since then, I wanted to figure out how this sound was created, since it is so common among those who do these kinds of Youtube performances:

I bought an older iphone but have yet to get Garageband to work with it, so I tried to find another app, and now I’m using Bandlab.  When I tried creating a vocal track with it, I decided to use the mic of the smart phone I used, because I had trouble getting the Samson mic to work with it in the past.  The first thing I noticed was that the wave form, which had hardly any “headroom.”  And when I listened to it, I could tell it was loud, and not in the sense you may be thinking but in this sense:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war

If you don’t know, starting in the 1990s, studio recordings were engineered to be louder and louder, meaning less headroom, and that leads to a less dynamic (complex, nuanced, etc.) rendition, and in many people, headaches too!  There has been a slight backlash in recent years, apparently, but it’s still typical in the pop genres geared towards the “youngest ears.”  If you want an example of a recording with little headroom, listen to MGMT’s “Time to Pretend.”  I also noticed that on Youtube now there is a 2014 remaster of Led Zeppelin’s “I Can’t Quit You Baby” as well as what may be the original (no year given), and to me the difference is obvious (in terms of the 2014 lacking the dynamism of the earlier one, and being easier to listen to as well).  There are also examples on that Wikipedia page.

So, with Bandlab and my cheap smart phone I recorded the same song (“Yellow” by Coldplay), trying to sound intentionally bad, nasal in particular:

I used EQ, two compressors, and reverb (notice how when he talks the reverb is obvious but when he sings it seems to blend in), nothing else (I have never used auto-tune or pitch correction on my singing).  I let several people (non-musicians, no training in singing) listen to this recording and they thought it was “great.”  And I’ll  mention that if you want to sing to a karaoke track and don’t want to concern yourself with the pitch of the song, you can change the pitch of the song to match the key you are singing in, and it will sound better (I’ve done that once or twice using Audacity software).  Unfortunately, many aspiring singers believe that this kind of obvious “studio magic” is real, and just today someone posted to the Reddit singing forum this obvious example of it, asking, “How he does that? (Freddie Mercury) That’s extrodinaly! This is really hard!”

I strongly suspect around 0:28, this is someone else’s voice or it was “squeezed upwards” with technology (very common with Disco, and that was done before this recording).  His live performance suggest no such “superhuman powers.”  I then thought of an old Youtube video that featured one “voice coach” criticizing another one, and went back to listen to it (I couldn’t find it on Youtube any more but I had recorded a relevant part of it a few years ago):

Some of the singing here sounds like what we hear in this video:

My guess is that the “voice coach” tried to engineer his own videos in some cases but isn’t as good at it as Warren Huart is (and if you don’t know, this kind of song features massive technological enhancement).  And if you are interested in the subject, this is a good primer on the use of compressors:

Is it discouraging to realize that you can spend a lot of time and effort (and some spend a lot of money too!) learning how to sing optimally only to see others basically yelling (sometimes off pitch often), and then the audio engineer makes them sound like a “rock star?”  I guess it would be for most people, but I find so much of “mainstream” society to be fake that it doesn’t surprise me at all.  You can still choose a genre where nuance and “real” voices are appreciated, but there will still likely be quite a bit of “processing” done if you want to sound like a recent singer in that genre.  You can go back and listen to old recordings on Youtube to get a sense of “real’ voices, and of course you can listen to opera singers too.  But as an aspiring singer I think the most important thing is to be realistic about your goals, and do not try to emulate “studio magic” without the engineering!

NOTE:  As of this date I am still offering a free first lesson/assessment with absolutely no obligation of any kind.  Just email me: nickspinner55@gmail.com.  Also, I won’t give your personal information to anyone else.  I might reference your singing on some blog posts if you provide me with audio clips, so let me know if you don’t want me to do that, but remember that the idea is to help aspiring singers!  If you have publicly posted on sites like Youtube or Soundcloud, I’ll assume it’s okay to link to those in my blog post.  I can’t guarantee that there is room for you in my schedule at any given time, and the earliest I can schedule new lessons will be some time in July, 2020, but I should be able to provide you with some advice that might be helpful, after getting a sense of where you’re at.

 

Finding online examples of vocals manipulated by sound engineers.

Following up on the last post, I continued to research how vocals are treated by sound engineers and what the differences sound like, so I’ll mention a few below that I thought were helpful.   If you want to save time you can listen to this first video from 1:10:30 to 1:11:30 and from 1:14:30 to 1:15:30:

I can imagine that more than a few people might say that Lemmy sounds like “just some old man croaking” when they hear just the main vocal track, without effects.  And here is a video for those who want extreme distortion effects that might not require any ability to sing:

Then there is an example of what a “quality” compressor can do (you can fast forward to 20:00):

This video provides the most examples of slight modifications, but at the beginning, when he says, “we’re going to listen to it without anything,” it sure sounds like it has been auto-tuned (and she was likely using one of the best mics available):

The comments are often quite interesting to read as well.  For example, for the video above there were these:

what a lot of these mixing tutorials fail to explain is that these top dudes aren’t receiving stems recorded on a tiny interface with a $200 mic with no pre, performed by an aspiring artist/producers lol The most important thing is that they’re getting tracks produced out by some of the best producers, writers, singers/artists and engineers. AND a huge bonus is that it gets tracked through some amazing equipment, but that isn’t the most important thing. so if you’re starting out, try focusing on making great content and making it sound great through your system by any means!

And:

I learned this the hard way… good is nice, but amazing is beyond this world (planning on getting a channel strip, I’ve watched youtube videos /MixbusTV/ and it seems using hardware (preamp, compressor for Vocals) is a game changer.

After watching these, I found a good deal on a used iPhone 4s, and after watching videos such as these two (directly below), decided to buy it.  I intend to write up a post about my “experiments” with it (I already own a Samson Go USB mic), probably within the next two months at most:

In the video titled, “A little sample of the Samson Go mic,” if you start around 6:30, you’ll hear him speaking with a different mic, then he switches over to the Samson, and when he sings he’s got compression and reverb effects from the Garageband software.  What’s odd (to me) is how you can hear strong reverb when  he’s talking but not while he’s singing with instrumental accompaniment.  So, if you decide to record yourself with no accompaniment, you might want to save a version with  reverb and one without it (if you add reverb later, of course; otherwise you might have to record yourself twice if you do it the way he does).

I’d say the most important thing I’ve learned is to be subtle with my vocals rather than to try and “show off,” such as with extreme note bending.  Once you have a sense about what your singing voice sounds like after manipulation with basic sound engineering, you can figure out how to optimally “shape” your singing.  But do you worry about “sounding bad” or “having bad tone.”  And certainly do not be concerned about those who dislike your genre and/or stylistic preferences.  My advice: learn the fundamentals of singing and then think about genre/style as well as sound engineering; otherwise it’s “putting the cart before the horse.”  And while you are learning do not be mislead by “fake” videos, for example:

I think this person recorded himself and is lip syncing here.  I’ve seen people either sing live at low volume (with the original studio recording playing at high volume), or else they play the recording of themselves singing the song at perhaps 10%, with the studio recording at 90%, and they lip sync it.  The sound quality one would expect if he was singing in a walk-in closet with no sound treatment on the walls is absent.  By contrast, this seems to be a “real” performance, though possibly with a mic that would be too expensive for most of us:

NOTE:  As of this date I am still offering a free first lesson/assessment with absolutely no obligation of any kind.  Just email me: nickspinner55@gmail.com.  Also, I won’t give your personal information to anyone else.  I might reference your singing on some blog posts if you provide me with audio clips, so let me know if you don’t want me to do that, but remember that the idea is to help aspiring singers!  If you have publicly posted on sites like Youtube or Soundcloud, I’ll assume it’s okay to link to those in my blog post.  I can’t guarantee that there is room for you in my schedule at any given time, and the earliest I can schedule new lessons will be some time in July, 2020, but I should be able to provide you with some advice that might be helpful, after getting a sense of where you’re at.

My experiments in sound engineering my own singing.

As I mentioned in the previous post, I am posting clips of my singing in different genres/styles (some of which I am not interested in singing live or in any other venue with an actual audience) both with and without enhancement using the free Audacity audio editing software, which some claim is not a true digital audio workstation (DAW), though it does have most of the features of this kind of software. I am a novice at using it, and basically just tried out some different things to see what sounded best to me, so don’t ask me what specific settings I used. I did not use any type of auto-tune, just the 2.1.2 version of Audacity. I noticed some sort of pitch correction option but have yet to try it. I found that EQ made the biggest difference (raising the highs and lowering the lows a bit), and I used a Samson Go USB microphone.

The advantage of this mic is that you can set it so that background noise is almost entirely eliminated, assuming you don’t live next to a highway or train tracks. Mine was about $35 total, and it’s a condenser mic. I would like to try really expensive mics that are supposed to be the best in the world but that’s not a priority for me now. With some of the enhanced clips, I used a technique where you make two copies of your recorded track and then offset those and lower the volume to “thicken” the sound, but to me it sounded a lot like a mild reverb effect (I used some amount of reverb in all the enhanced clips). Also, I should mentioned that I used different settings for all of them, so the enhanced clips were manipulated in mostly similar but not identical ways.  The effects commands used in the enhanced clips  included most but never all of the following: Reverb, EQ, Limiter, Amplify, High Pass Filter, Compressor, and Normalize.

The point here is not to show how a little enhancement can make certain differences, as you probably already know that the voices of the “stars” are often enhanced in major ways. Instead, I think that once you learn the fundamentals, you might want to consider how you will sound with typical enhancements.  Here’s a video about the technology used to create a song by one of today’s “big stars:”

At 21:39, we hear what I think is a non-enhanced recording of her voice, though presumably sung with one of if not the best microphones for her voice. After a shot period of time, by about 21:45, we then hear what apparently is the enhanced voice. And I should also mention that I took the advice of the sound engineer discussed in the previous post, so I sang with just enough “energy” so as to not sound bland.  Here are the first two clips (the “before” clips will come first), in one of my preferred genres:

Now in these two I used a very soft voice, not something I’m that interested in performing but I was curious about what I could do with it in Audacity.  I did use three identical tracks (with the duplication command) in the “before” because the volume was so low, but it doesn’t change anything else, from what I understand:

And here is another “after” of this song from the previous day, with slightly different modifications (and I didn’t get the lyrics right here):

Here’s another soft one, with the “before” being enhanced only with the Amplify effect because I was singing at such low volume:

And here are a couple more in a genre I prefer:

And here’s one I think of as a sort of “warm up” song, but I would perform it if I thought the audience was receptive:

And here’s a “classic rock” song:

If anyone would like to do further sound engineering to mix these with the karaoke tracks, feel free to do so.  I will post them here (assuming they are reasonably good, of course).  After writing the above and creating these clips, I think I finally figured out what is necessary to create that highly compressed sound in so many of today’s pop songs, which is explained by a sound engineer here:

https://www.musicianonamission.com/vocal-compression-how-to-compress-vocals/

He states that one should consider expectations:

What genre does it fall under? Does it require a modern, mainstream, in-your-face vocal sound like you would hear on the radio? Or does would it suit more subtle, musical compression?

Then I did more research and learned that Audacity’s envelope tool can compress in a supposedly similar way, so I intend to try that out within the next couple days, and if it works, I will update this post with a “before and after” example of it.  And for comparison purposes, here’s an example of extreme sound engineering, but it includes what the person sounds like without the enhancements (though probably with a better mic than mine and sung in a studio).  You can go to 1:52 to hear what he sounds like presumably without effects and then at 4:14 you hear what he sounds like after the track is enhanced:

NOTE:  As of this date I am still offering a free first lesson/assessment with absolutely no obligation of any kind.  Just email me: nickspinner55@gmail.com.  Also, I won’t give your personal information to anyone else.  I might reference your singing on some blog posts if you provide me with audio clips, so let me know if you don’t want me to do that, but remember that the idea is to help aspiring singers!  If you have publicly posted on sites like Youtube or Soundcloud, I’ll assume it’s okay to link to those in my blog post.  I can’t guarantee that there is room for you in my schedule at any given time, and the earliest I can schedule new lessons will be some time in July, 2020, but I should be able to provide you with some advice that might be helpful, after getting a sense of where you’re at.

 

 

What should you do after you master the fundamentals?

Unfortunately, few actually do, though most of those who do may not realize what a great accomplishment this is! The problem may be related to recording technology, because many microphone singers, myself included, aren’t that interested in the relevant technology. I know some who seem to get fixated on buying the “best” microphone, but there isn’t much thought beyond that! Lately, I’ve decided to investigate microphones and what is called digital audio workstation software (DAWs), because I grew tired of people comparing crude smart phone recordings with professional studio quality ones.

It’s often quite obvious (at least to me) that no human being could sing like certain types of recordings, but the fact of the matter is that there is no “real voice,” because so many factors are in play, and when you use a microphone, things get a lot more complicated! So, you need to ask what you are trying to achieve. Do you want to sound like a top pop star’s studio recording? I can’t help with that, but instead I’m seeking to learn enough to obtain a good balance between “naturalness” and “quality.” Yes, it’s true that there are other factors, and I want to mention what I consider a prime example, taken from a recent performance by Nelson Cade III on “The Voice” TV show:

He’s singing too fast, he’s inconsistent, the phrasing is way off. Even if we assume he wants to create his own phrasing, it’s internally inconsistent. Nor does he demonstrate any especially compelling qualities. But there’s’ his costume, the quick reaction of the judges, his apparently pleasant personality, his playing the guitar, the sounds of the audience, and of course the music. Now I’m not saying he’s a “bad” singer, and in fact, I think he does much better in other performances on the show, where perhaps he is more comfortable in those genres, but instead I want to emphasize that one needs to think about factors other than the actual singing. And as I did some research into how to use DAWs, I came upon this video, which I think aspiring singers should watch:

At least two good points are made (for singers), one being that some genres “require” a lot of technological enhancement (or that’s become the “industry standard”) while others are much more natural-sounding, and so there’s a lot less enhancement, generally-speaking. Another point is that “belting” and other attempts to “push limits” are not necessary any longer, though he’s assuming that a competent sound engineer is going to devote enough time to the project to achieve the objectives he references. In my next post, I’m going to provide some examples of my “experimentation” with a better microphone than I used in the previous clips of my singing here, but for the time being, I’ll mention that I personally prefer performances like this, also by Cade, which allows one to appreciate his singing to a much greater degree:

And as I’ve pointed out in the past, phrasing and overall musicality are not easy to teach, if one can teach that sort of thing at all (I have suggested taking acting lessons or public speaking courses for those who have “stage fright” type issues).  It’s usually obvious when someone is lacking, such as William Hung’s performance of “She Bangs” on “American Idol,” but here’s a much more subtle example:

Compare the above to the original:

They both can use the so-called whistle register, but Harris is stiff and it feels forced, almost as if she doesn’t like the song or it’s some sort of test that needs to be passed.  There is also some inconsistency.  And while Riperton isn’t perfect, relative to the studio recording, her rendition is smooth and possesses the “emotion” and naturalness that Harris’ performance lacks, IMO, regardless of who is technically superior.  For some people, if you point this out, they can correct it quickly, but for others they seem unable to see themselves as others do, or they are ashamed to demonstrate musicality in a way consistent with the genre, for whatever reason.

NOTE:  As of this date I am still offering a free assessment with absolutely no obligation of any kind.  Just email me: nickspinner55@gmail.com.  Also, I won’t give your personal information to anyone else.  I might reference your singing on some blog posts if you provide me with audio clips, so let me know if you don’t want me to do that, but remember that the idea is to help aspiring singers!  If you have publicly posted on sites like Youtube or Soundcloud, I’ll assume it’s okay to link to those in my blog post.  I can’t guarantee that there is room for you in my schedule at any given time, and the earliest I can schedule new lessons will be some time in July, 2020, but I should be able to provide you with some advice that might be helpful, after getting a sense of where you’re at.

What is “good” and “bad” singing? Is the “sizzle” distracting you from understanding or appreciating the “steak?”

I’ve noticed something on the Reddit singing forum that should come as no surprise, which is that apparently a whole lot of people have some sort of abstract notion of “great singing,” and are unable to recognize that people they think are great singers are in some cases not even good (by any objective standard). How many think Freddie Mercury is one of the greatest? In the recent Amazon commercial featuring him singing, he is singing off pitch (0:18) and singing in a way that is considered outright “ugly” in traditional circles!

Then there are a number of commercials, movies, etc. in which Bob Seger’s very popular song, “Old Time Rock and Roll” is featured, so let’s take a listen to it, studio recording first:

Basically. he’s doing a lot of yelling. Here’s a live performance from his prime:

Hes “talk/singing,” yelling, etc. Not much in the way of any traditional notion of excellent (or even acceptable) singing here, but he has energy and consistency (see my last blog post). Then there are the first two singers of AC/DC, who clearly had energy and consistency, but again, these are “ugly” sounds. I’ve provided many examples in previous posts of bad or mediocre singing that was “cleaned up” with techology, but most people hear the studio recordings and think those are “real.” They then try to sing like that, not realizing it may be humanly impossible, and it doesn’t end well, in my experience, with students who hold or held this notion. On the opposite end of the spectrum are the often terrible live performances, even by the “great pop vocalists” (there’s one of Sinatra singing “Summer Wind,” for example, which is just sad), that abound on Youtube if you have the patience to look for them! But if you watch videos of truly bad singers doing covers in night clubs, you find that the audience doesn’t seem to mind, and often they seem quite happy with the performance.

Why? They are there for entertainment, not a lecture about the origins of Bel Canto! Moreover, when people want an assessment from me, I’m very specific about what I want to hear: a simple song, sung without affectation but with enough energy not to be boring, recorded on a smart phone’s basic recording app, with the phone held off to the side (no music being played either). That is all “steak” and no “sizzle.” Because I now know what to listen for, I can diagnose issues much more easily this way, but most people don’t listen to anyone singing without the fake “sizzle” and will call good singing/vocalizing bad! Let’s take an example of a clip I created (in one take):

If you think there is a problem, what is it? A couple of people said I was a bad singer, but only one was able to be specific. He said I slide around a lot and sometimes have a conversational style. Guess what? I’ve told people that’s what I do, and I’m proud of it! Read a book such as “The Great American Popular Singers” by Henry Pleasants (1985), for example, and note that he lauds such stylistic choices! I also point out that I enjoy bending notes, which is great for my preferred genres (Blues and Blues/Rock), but to some people bending sounds bad; there’s nothing I can do about genre ignorance, though I have provided clips without note bending in some posts.  It’s also interesting that when people make such claims they never mention who is a better singer in the Blues or Blues/Rock genres.

They probably are smart enough to realize that I’ll just go find a live performance of that person that is clearly flawed and cite that, directly refuting their claim!  No, I definitely do not want to sound like anyone else or be a “cover act,” but if you do, then that’s the standard for you, not me.  Also, a lot of beginners don’t take into account whether the music they will be singing with is going to be at high volume or not.  Again, they have some sort of abstract notion of “singing in a vacuum.”  If you are going to sing with a real drummer and at least a couple guys on electric guitar playing something like the Led Zeppelin songs I prefer to sing, your voice is going to require some kind of piercing quality.   Many of the vocalists for these types of bands developed serious vocal cord issues, including Robert Plant, apparently (and it was earl on!), but I can sing for hours with no strain using my technique!

Now let’s turn to some examples of successful pop singers/vocalists and consider good and bad. I don’t think anyone would say Robert Goulet’s “The Impossible Dream” was anything but an example of good singing (would it be considered “Classical Crossover” these days?):

Note how there are conversational elements, but we can’t know what went on in the studio to get this result. Here is a live performance:

He’s not bad but I don’t find it especially compelling (how many people listen to this kind of music on a regular basis, if at all?) and it’s too conversational, IMO. So is he “good” and I’m “bad” because I like to bend notes and slide a lot? is there a “Singing Police Force” that I am unaware of but should fear? Let these people bask in their ignorance, as it only hurts them, nobody else! For those who are at least beginning to understand “how the game is played” in pop music, there is a “secret” to many studio recordings, which is that the singer/vocalist is vocalizing at low volume, and that allows for a lot of nuance. If a beginner tries to do this, though, he/she likely doesn’t have the requisite muscle strength/cord closure to do so, and whispering is not the answer, so it sounds weak and breathy (clearly “bad”).
Now what about a “bad” singer:

Here’s the thing, while he may not be doing much singing in a traditional sense, he’s got consistency and energy (see my last blog post for more about those qualities). Now some seem to think that every “voice coach” who is “qualified” should be ready to sing arias at Lincoln Center – how unrealistic is that? Many of these people are either just yellers, post fake videos of themselves singing, or never show anyone their singing abilities, or lack thereof. Don’t mistake the sizzle for the steak, as they say, meaning the style, the genre, or the technological effects are a different issue from technique. There are plenty of opera singers who would sound “bad” if you isolated a segment of their vocals from the performance as a whole (with music being played), for example. In pop music, you’ve got two major possibilities, a live performance that is not enhanced beyond a minimal amount (such as a bit of echo/reverb) on the one hand, and performances that are significantly enhanced with technology (assuming they aren’t just outright lip synced), so thinking that you have to sound “perfect” in some objective sense when you do an “offhand” recording on your smart phone for demonstration or assessment purposes is a waste of time and might lead to disappointment, frustration, etc.

Don’t listen to the people who are ignorant and can’t even provide any details with their criticism! Know your audience – they are the ones who matter (though I do think it’s a bad idea to strain your vocal cords to placate anyone, since there are so many interesting things you can do without resorting to straining). Bjork is an example of someone who sings “bad” at times, and often uses non-singing vocalizations; one person said she sings the way a bear makes “huffing” type noises, and I can see that (I also wonder if or how much damage she’s done to her vocal cords over the years) – how many of her fans would have preferred her to sing in a straightforward, traditional way instead? And if you just want to sing songs like “Happy birthday to you” without sounding really bad (which has been the case for a few of my students), you should be able to accomplish that by learning the fundamentals, such as breath support. Don’t think you have to be ready to sing arias at Lincoln Center or else you are “no good.”

NOTE:  As of this date I am still offering a free first lesson/assessment with absolutely no obligation of any kind.  Just email me: nickspinner55@gmail.com.  Also, I won’t give your personal information to anyone else.  I might reference your singing on some blog posts if you provide me with audio clips, so let me know if you don’t want me to do that, but remember that the idea is to help aspiring singers!  If you have publicly posted on sites like Youtube or Soundcloud, I’ll assume it’s okay to link to those in my blog post.  I can’t guarantee that there is room for you in my schedule at any given time, and the earliest I can schedule new lessons will be some time in August, 2020, but I should be able to provide you with some advice that might be helpful, after getting a sense of where you’re at.

Learning by listening, in this case, “Beyond the Sea.”

First, if you’ve read my previous blog posts, the following should be a good test for you.  Watch these videos (perhaps more than once) and ask yourself what they represent:

The most obvious thing to me is that the first video is clearly a lip sync performance.  Now if you are just learning to sing, you might not realize that it may be humanly impossible.  That is, there is not enough time between some of the lines, so it might have been recorded as separate tracks and then put together by the sound engineer.  This is a way to make a song sound more exciting, but then if you sing it live without major technological enhancements you won’t be able to duplicate it.  Overall, I doubt much technological enhancement was used, other than some kind of echo effect, but I think it’s worth studying the studio and live recordings, and if you can sing it reasonably well, pay attention to areas of difficulty, if any, then see if that’s the case for Bobby Darin in the live version.

There are some other interesting characteristics of this song (if sung in a similar way).  Adjusting embouchure, particularly with words that end with an “ee” sound (me and sea), can allow you to hold the notes longer with strength, for example.  And while singing the word “sailing” in this song it’s best to not close the mouth to make the “ng” sound, as is common in English words ending in “ing.”  Instead, singing it as say-lin may be best, again, so that you can hold the note longer with strength.  Many of today’s young pop vocalists might sing it with too much volume, what I’ve call “scream/singing” in the past, but what we have here is a crooning style with some belting touches.  Thus, it’s a good exercise in maintaining consistency, which tends to be a problem for amateurs.

Speaking of which, in the rendition by Keven Spacey, what we hear is a solid amateur performance.  He seems to understand the importance of consistency on at least a basic level, and he stays within his abilities.  He apparently doesn’t know how to belt, or can’t maintain consistency when he does, so he refrains from attempting it.  If he were a student of mine, I’d make sure he has proper breath support and then ask him to push just a little bit more air during whichever belting part of the song he feels most comfortable singing.  It may be that he has yet to develop his AES muscle, which I think it crucial for doing this, but I’d likely be able to tell based upon what happens when he tries to belt.  If his AES isn’t developed, I’d have him do exercises with “pure” vowels and simple, smooth lines.  After a few days of that, he could go back to singing the song, or parts of it, and I’d see if he has more focused strength to his singing (that’s what the AES enables).

But what’s most interesting to me is that while he’s an actor, his performance is rather “under-powered.”  It should have more “punch” or “energy,” as is so common for many (probably most beginners) non-professionals.  In previous posts, I’ve mentioned that beginners whose singing is rather ‘flat” or weak might consider taking acting lessons, or at least a course in public speaking.  It’s crucial to show your audience that you want to be there and that you’re going to give it your best effort, yet so many non-pros seem tentative, as if they are “not worthy.”  Instead, you could do three renditions of a song, one that is tentative, but also one that is “over the top,” as well as one that you think is “just right.”  Wait a few days, then listen to them and see what you think.  Ask others which rendition they prefer.  Once you get to the point that you can sing on a very basic level competently, it’s time to think about performing – some amateurs are mostly missing this element and nothing else!

NOTE:  As of this date I am still offering a free first lesson/assessment with absolutely no obligation of any kind.  Just email me: nickspinner@gmail.com.  Also, I won’t give your personal information to anyone else.  I might reference your singing on some blog posts if you provide me with audio clips, so let me know if you don’t want me to do that, but remember that the idea is to help aspiring singers!  If you have publicly posted on sites like Youtube or Soundcloud, I’ll assume it’s okay to link to those in my blog post.

An example of how confusing traditional terminology about singing can be (advanced).

On Quora.com recently, someone asked, “How can I tell if a singer is using his or her head voice or chest voice?”

One “expert” response by a person who claims to be a “Piano, Guitar, Bass, and Vocal Instructor,” and who appears to have been involved in music since a young age (take a look at http://www.irvnelson.com/irvstory.html) was:

In untrained singers, it’s easy to tell the difference. Chest is normal voice, and it is used in lower and midrange notes. When untrained singers try to sing higher in chest voice, it turns into a scream. Head is falsetto voice, and in an untrained singer it sounds like a little kid.

With classically trained singers, there is an obvious difference between chest and head voices. With operatic voices, the head voice is trained to become almost as powerful as the chest, but the two voices can sound so different from each other that it actually sounds like two different people when the switch is made.

With most professional pop and rock singers, the break is obvious. Think of when Chevel Sheppard (who won The Voice last year) yodels in a song. The high notes in the yodel are falsetto, the lower notes are chest voice. There is an obvious break between the two. When these people sing high notes in chest, it is called “belting”. Many contemporary singers have good belting voices and avoid singing in falsetto at all because when their voices finally break into falsetto they sound horrible. Others (especially male singers) use their falsetto to their advantage, and it becomes their trademark voice (think Adam Levine).

https://www.quora.com/How-can-I-tell-if-a-singer-is-using-his-or-her-head-voice-or-chest-voice

With some well trained contemporary singers it can be very difficult to hear the difference, because they learn techniques that eliminate the “break” between the two voices. The “Mix” method of vocal instruction is one of the methods that teach this. It actually sounds (and feels) like as the singer moves up in pitch, he or she moves to a mix of chest and head voices; like 75% chest 25% head, then 50/50%, then 25/75%, then finally on the very high notes 100% head. As a result, there is no break, and the transition sounds completely natural. Some pop and rock singers found this on their own back in the day (think David Gates) and more and more are finding it now, with help from instructors knowledgeable in the technique.

Using the term falsetto and head voice as equivalent is potentially confusing, as we see in his comment, when he talks about a mix of “chest” and “head.” There is no such thing. You can go back and forth between the two, such as in yodeling, but he mentions that and understands what it is. It is also not necessary to go from chest voice to yelling/screaming if you don’t have “proper”/operatic technique. You can lighten up a bit, especially if you use microphones (unlike in traditional opera), but that doesn’t get you much higher. If you are an adult male with a tenor-ish voice, your chest voice will tend to sound better in most pop songs but without proper technique, you won’t likely have more than a couple of tones on a baritone-ish (or lower) adult male pop singer’s voice. There are some natural male counter-tenors, but they are so rare as to be not be worth going into detail about them here.

Next, no there is no obvious break in opera singers’ voices – that’s one of the key points of Bel Canto, for goodness sake. Yes , if you were talking to a male opera singer and asked him to sing as he usually does (assuming he’s not a counter-tenor/falsettist), then to sing in falsetto, sure you’d hear the difference, but they don’t do that in professional performances, and there are only a few operas in which that sort of thing is done, for comedic effect. What this “expert” doesn’t seem to understand are the muscles involved. For falsetto (what he calls head voice, apparently) you use the crico-thyroid muscles. For “fry” you use the vocalis or thyro-arytennoids (there is some debate but for the purposes here, there’s no need to “get technical”). In any other kind of singing recognizable as such, you would use a mix of the two (in yodelling, you go from all crico-thyroid to a vocalis/crico-thyroid mix, back and forth). The reason so many pop singers yell/scream when they go higher is that they sort of lose their grip on the crico-thyroids because they have not developed them properly and coordinated them with the vocalis.

As to “belting,” this can be confusing too. Many if not most female pop singers these days actually sound “screechy” when they go higher, which of course is not good for the vocal cords, but it is “cleaned up” with technology. I’ve cited examples of this on more than one previous post here. Belting safely probably best refers to someone who can go up and down in their range without screeching or yelling and who have a “decent” range (more than an octave, though for male pop singers one octave should be plenty, then one can “flip” into falsetto, which seems to be fashionable these days). When I go up to the highest notes in my range I allow the crico-thyroids to really take over (and avoid going into falsetto, because I don’t personally like that sound and plenty of others have already used “flipping”), so I have power but I’m not yelling. For most people, I’d guess it will take a year or two to develop this, or more (such as if you can’t do much practicing).

This “expert” seems to think that “mixed voice” means that the singer has learned to incorporate falsetto into chest voice, but if you try to do this you may damage your vocal cords, and this is the main reason why I decided to write up a post about this claims. He mentions pop singer David Gates, who sounds like he has a tenor-ish voice, but note that Gates sings in a mellow way, without belting, so he’s still vocalis-dominant, as most pop singers are, but goes higher with less power (since amplification allows it) and has good musicality. Gates seems to be a good example of maximizing his tenor-ish chest voice, but this does mean he has developed and coordinated his vocalis and crico-thyroid muscles, though it’s possible he did but just didn’t use that ability due to his song choices.  Here’s an example of his singing from the period the expert mentioned:

Note that as of this date I am still offering a free first lesson/assessment with absolutely no obligation of any kind.  Just email me: nickspinner@gmail.com.  Also, I won’t give your personal information to anyone else.  I might reference your singing on some blog posts if you provide me with audio clips, so let me know if you don’t want me to do that, but remember that the idea is to help aspiring singers!  If you have publicly posted on sites like Youtube or Soundcloud, I’ll assume it’s okay to link to those in a blog post.

 

How did the rock band, Queen, get their vocal sound?

And notice that I didn’t say Freddie Mercury but Queen.  There’s an excellent explanation here:

https://www.quora.com/How-did-Queen-achieve-that-big-background-vocal-sound

It includes the following:

Brian [May] says it was generally only six tracks normally (obviously Bohemian Rhapsody had more than six tracks of vocals in some places, to say the least).

The basic version of their harmonies is a three-note chord which Brian, Roger and Freddie would record note by note, singing each of them in unison. They would double-track each note too. In the video where he goes through the multi-track and talks about the harmonies he makes the point that each line was like its own little tune, they all had to be in time and they all had to be in tune. Timing and timing are probably part of that sound then.

Owing to the technical restraints of recording equipment these six tracks might be “bounced” to a stereo pair to make room for other parts such as harmonised guitar. That would add a little tape compression/distortion which is apparent on some of their backing vocals.

So really it’s just the particular blend of voices which makes it sound that big. They’re covering all the bases, so to speak.

Freddie’s got that really clear “expensive” sounding voice. Roger brought the screaming ’70s high notes and a roughness. Brian has a sort of thin roundness to his voice. A very fortunate mixture of characteristics.

So some of it is technical, involving knowledge of sound engineering.  Fortunately, someone on Youtube created a version of “Somebody to Love” that contains only vocals (though he/she incorrectly states that only Freddie’s vocals are present):

 

I can’t speak to the harmonies, but what I find interesting is how Freddie uses “growl.”  This is something to avoid as a beginner, but if you can figure out how to do this on your own (I don’t teach growl type sounds and I find claims about teaching it “safely” to be questionable), you might go ahead and just do it, as Freddie apparently did.  You’ll likely also develop vocal cord issues, but a lot of people will probably say that they want to try and make money or become famous while they are still young, and they don’t want to wait a year or two to develop their voices properly.  Note that this is pop vocalizing, not singing in a traditional way.  One obvious difference is how quickly the words are vocalized, which does not allow for what Pavarotti called elasticity (and which I believe is of utmost importance if you want to keep your cords safe and be able to sing in a traditional way, though you can still sing blues and other genres without resorting to growling, yelling, screeching, “flipping” in and out of falsetto, etc.).  English is simply not a good language for this, though Italian is (one could call singing in Italian “pure vowel singing,” actually – that’s a reasonable way to view it).

Freddie was quite inventive with this vocal techniques that are not traditional, but I think it’s best to first learn how to vocalize safely, and then you can decide what vocalizations to make and how much stress to place on your cords.  Note that as of this date I am still offering a free first lesson/assessment with absolutely no obligation of any kind.  Just email me: nickspinner55@gmail.com.  Also, I won’t give your personal information to anyone else.  I might reference your singing on some blog posts if you provide me with audio clips, so let me know if you don’t want me to do that, but remember that the idea is to help aspiring singers!  If you have publicly posted on sites like Youtube or Soundcloud, I’ll assume it’s okay to link to those in a blog post.

 

 

Do you really want to know how to belt?

I watched a singer, Anthony Arya, on “The Voice” the other day, and noticed that he stayed in a tight range (so it surprised me when one of the judges/coaches chose him).  I was wondering if he was able to belt, so I looked for him on Youtube and found that he has uploaded several videos of his performances.  Then I looked through some of those to try and find a situation where belting would sound right, and came upon this one:

Listen carefully around the 1:35 mark.  He “pulls off” belting and instead adds a touch of “grit.”  It will be interesting to see how he fares on “The Voice,” in terms of whether they take note of his tight range singing, but if he came to me and asked me to help him with his singing, I’d ask what his goals are, because he is clearly about to entertain with his singing on a certain level, and that may be what he wants.  If he tries to learn how to belt (let’s say without technological enhancement, which is how I teach it), his singing could “regress” (though I doubt it), and the obvious question is, why should he take that risk if there is no need to?

Now I do question why he decided to audition to be on “The Voice.”  His singing is clearly not the kind that wins on the show, though of course the publicity might be what he wants, so that when he performs he can say he as one the show and advanced to a certain point.  I have no idea how helpful that is in one’s career, but I’d guess it’s likely some benefit (no matter how minor) can be derived from the appearance.  Perhaps he hopes one of the coaches will help him learn to belt.  In any case, there is an “easy way” to try and learn to belt, especially if it is going to be done rarely and in a small number of specific songs.  In the song he is singing, the word “much” is the one to focus on.  You can’t belt it the way Americans pronounce the “u” as they speak, but you can either belt the Italian “pure u” vowel (as in Gucci or the English word too), which would sound too odd here, or you can go with a “pure o” vowel and taper off and round it into more of an English u type of sound.

The sound that is probably best here, though of course in pop singing you might want to sound a little different for stylistic reasons, is “uh.”  In English, songs that have a line emphasizing this sound often end with the word “love,” so it’s not exactly uncommon.  The “easy way” to learn this is to first make sure you are able to reproduce that sound whenever you want (you may need a voice coach’s help), and then every day you “push” just a little bit more.  The goal is to try and get certain muscles to coordinate.  It’s best to do this “across the board” so that you can just sing any song that has belting; that entails learning the major sounds that are required.  But again, if you just want to belt this one sound in this particular song, you could just work on it, which might save you some time.

Here is first appearance on “The Voice” (you can compare the sound engineering to the video above):

This post got pushed back – I had intended to publish it back then but forgot about it.  However, I think this is a very good lesson for amateurs who are at the point where they have to decide how “advanced” they want to get with their technique.

NOTE:  As of this date I am still offering a free first lesson/assessment with absolutely no obligation of any kind.  Just email me: nickspinner@gmail.com.  Also, I won’t give your personal information to anyone else.  I might reference your singing on some blog posts if you provide me with audio clips, so let me know if you don’t want me to do that, but remember that the idea is to help aspiring singers!  If you have publicly posted on sites like Youtube or Soundcloud, I’ll assume it’s okay to link to those in my blog post.