Question for those of you who can sing . . .

[Demanic]

I'm not a great vocalist by any stretch of the imagination but feel like the best way to learn to sing songs has to be to sing songs.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that vocal exercises can help . . . but actually practicing a performance is way more important. At least to me. I can't translate scales into staying in tune for a performance . . . but after a couple weeks of just practicing this song a few times each day I went from no singing of any kind in years to being able to hang somewhat tune while playing my guitar: https://soundclick.com/r/s8gddq

It's not that I don't believe in work . . .but that I've always found the best way to get good at something is to do that thing. A lot!

And this is the perfect example that not everyone learns in the same way. But it is something that can be learned. Maybe not for everyone, but for most people.

Sent from my SM-A115A using Tapatalk

 

[Clint 55]

You know, as far as the whole "singing" thing goes, you seem to be suffering from quite a bit of transference.

I'm not suffering from anything, I'm just debating people who are wrong. You know, like you like to do.

 

[Clint 55]

I'm not a great vocalist by any stretch of the imagination but feel like the best way to learn to sing songs has to be to sing songs.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that vocal exercises can help . . . but actually practicing a performance is way more important. At least to me. I can't translate scales into staying in tune for a performance . . . but after a couple weeks of just practicing this song a few times each day I went from no singing of any kind in years to being able to hang somewhat tune while playing my guitar: https://soundclick.com/r/s8gddq

It's not that I don't believe in work . . .but that I've always found the best way to get good at something is to do that thing. A lot!

See you're doing a good job. You're approaching it in a way that I happened to explain. You're approaching the tune in a way that is suitable for your voice and personality and it is in tune. That's the most important part imo. Possible technical suggestions would be to hold out syllables in key points in the song for intensity or to try to let the air flow better and reduce tension etc.

 

[Demanic]

I'm not suffering from anything, I'm just debating people who are wrong. You know, like you like to do.

Well, I certainly do. Which is why I keep challenging your incorrect assertion that vocal training is not useful.
I am willing to concede that it may not be beneficial for you. But it still seems that you are inferring from your own personal experience that it can't be for anyone else.

Sent from my SM-A115A using Tapatalk

 

[Clint 55]

No, not only from my personal experience. From my music knowledge and experience listening to singers. Also, yes of course tech practice can be helpful, but not to the disadvantage of performance practice. No hobbyist singer is going to reach proficiency if they only practice tech and don't focus on doing the performance right.

 

[Demanic]

No, not only from my personal experience. From my music knowledge and experience listening to singers. Also, yes of course tech practice can be helpful, but not to the disadvantage of performance practice. No hobbyist singer is going to reach proficiency if they only practice tech and don't focus on doing the performance right.

Yes, but you have to admit, listening to other singers is completely subjective. You and I could listen to the same singer at the same performance and completely disagree as to how well they performed. And we would both be wrong. Or right.

Sent from my SM-A115A using Tapatalk

 

[Clint 55]

But we could still agree if they achieved their desired result or not despite using good or bad technique.

 

[Securb]

Do re mi isn't gonna do ****. .

It is called Solfege and we had to take it at Berklee.

 

[nexion218]

The things is that people confuse practice and playing (in this case singing). When I said technical practice, I did not mean learning scales. That's theory, not technique. By technique I mean learning how to properly mute unused strings, how to exectue alternate picking, how to learn minimal movement of left hand, learning to pick with a relaxed right hand, how to skip strings or make clean positin changes. And I believe that singing has a technical side too, like breath placements, using different registers or changing between them, learning to produce correct pitch without constatly sliding into the correct pitch (I believe singers call it glissando). Practice needs to be concise, aim for precision and whenever you make a mistake, instatly correct it. Then comes the music part, where you have fun, learn songs, create your own and during this process you use the techniques you practiced. It's much easier to do something when you have the proper tools to do it. In this case technique is the proper tool. At least this is how I see it. And it's really not about the quantity, but about the quality. You can get further with an hour long focused practice than with a whole day of fumbling around.

 

[Demanic]

But we could still agree if they achieved their desired result or not despite using good or bad technique.

That would be where we would disagree.

 

[Clint 55]

That would be where we would disagree.

Ya ok. Have fun in ur philosophical rabbit hole. Everything isn't subjective.

 

[Clint 55]

It is called Solfege and we had to take it at Berklee.

I took a year of aural skillz with the solfege.

 

[nexion218]

but after a couple weeks of just practicing this song a few times each day I went from no singing of any kind in years to being able to hang somewhat tune while playing my guitar: https://soundclick.com/r/s8gddq

Is that you singing? I like your voice. There's a very pleasantly "neutral" quality to your singing, if that makes sense...

 

[Obsessive Compulsive]

Don't sweat it. Some people better STFU and stick with guitar. Just ask Joe Satriani.

 

[Obsessive Compulsive]

They serve zero benefits. Training or doing this and that to 'keep your voice in shape' means nothing if you can't deliver a listenable performance without falling on ur face. Do re mi is a complete waste of time. The only thing that matters is if you can deliver a convincing, listenable performance. So that's what you should practice. Lemmy mentioned earlier is a perfect example. It fits the music and makes you pumped, regardless if he was singing on 2 notes the entire song or only grumbling instead of holding a syllable. Noone gives a **** if you 'can sing for a long time' or ur do re mis were really good, or this or that syllable was nice. They just care if it makes an emotional impact beyond embarrassment.

Sounds like an the attitude that can get you ahead in the music business. Producers and the audience don't give an f if you can sing like Placido Domingo but can't sell a single tune on iTunes...lol.

 

[GuitarStv]

Is that you singing? I like your voice. There's a very pleasantly "neutral" quality to your singing, if that makes sense...

Thanks! It's not perfect, but I was happy with how that turned out . . . far less cringey than stuff I've tried in the past. At least it was mostly in tune!

 

[Metalman_666]

I've tried several times to learn to sing in the past . . . once by taking two lessons with a vocal instructor, and once buying a 'Teach yourself to sing in 10 easy steps' book. Both times they gave me a bunch of vocal exercises to do (singing scales, making fire engine noises, crap like that) that were so horribly boring I gave up in short order. Lately I've been trying to learn to sing through a different approach - just finding a song I like and belting it out for a few minutes every day . . . and this seems to be working an awful lot better for me. So my questions:

- Is there actually any value in mixing in vocal specific exercises to my practice? Because it honestly never felt like it was helping the last couple times I tried.
- If so, what are the most useful/effective vocal exercises for general rock/pop/folk type singing?

Thanks!

I'm late to the party but there is some great advice in here!

TL;DR - to warm up for your purposes, you could try singing a melody an octave lower. Go slowly and focus on each note. Add some vibrato as you sit on each note, or if you struggle with vibrato, try with more and less breath behind each note. Focus on shaping every word, especially the vowels; sing a line with a forward, almost nasally tone, and then sing it again but with a "lower" less forward sound. Now try all of this in the proper range you need to sing the song at.

If you can master that kind of variation in practice, you'll understand better how to reproduce it consistently.

IMO vocal exercises (and proper warm-up) are essential to consistent, good performance. I was a choirboy for many years and developed a strong sense of pitch partly through singing at church growing up. It wasn't until high school choir that we were drilled on proper technique including breathing, tone, and timbre, where all four parts needed to be singing the same shape of a vowel with the same energy for the conductor's desired effect.

When I "turned rock" and started playing in gigging bands, I had the fundamentals of singing down to a science. I just needed to find those "notches" in my throat for rock grit and flavour that didn't blow out my voice. And when I finally found them, I realized I have to be warmed up before I can pinpoint the sound I want to produce and make it happen *consistently*

All of this to say, just like guitar technique, practice is the only way to get better and develop as a singer. If your version of practice is just singing the songs you want to sing with less intensity at first and then more intensity, and you're getting a good sound (to you and to others), there's nothing wrong with foregoing the choral-style warm-ups. But some deep breaths, and exhaling over 5, 10, 20 seconds, or sustaining a note for 5, 10, 20 seconds goes a long way.

Just don't go from cold to 100% rock or you will feel it

Sent from my SM-N986W using Tapatalk

 

[Demanic]

Ya ok. Have fun in ur philosophical rabbit hole. Everything isn't subjective.

No, everything is not subjective. But things that are a matter of taste and personal preference certainly are.

Sent from my SM-A115A using Tapatalk

 

[GuitarStv]

It is called Solfege and we had to take it at Berklee.

Thanks! I don't think I ever really understood why I was being told to sing solfege stuff and it didn't make sense to me. The idea of doing it repeatedly in different keys to hammer home the changes between notes does sound like a good idea. I'm going to give 5 minutes a day of singing solfege arpeggios each day for a couple months and see if that helps. How much did you practice this stuff when you were taking it at Berklee?

 

[Clint 55]

No, everything is not subjective. But things that are a matter of taste and personal preference certainly are.

Saying music taste is subjectibe isn't a valid refutation of how I can usually tell if a musician is sucking and why.