College teachers (warning controversial!)

[possom]

I have just returned from my singing lesson. As I'm training to be a singing teacher myself one day whilst having lessons we always have a chat about voices and who's doing what etc. etc. It turns out that one of my teachers best pupils a mezzo has had her voice ruined by the Royal College of Music! She has been paying £80 an hour to be taught and yet the teacher doesn't seem to know a thing about correct technique nor any history of singing or anything. She cannot even sing a note to a pianissimo anymore.

My teacher is now training her once a week on weekends for the usual £20 an hour and putting her voice back together. She says that she walks past classes where the teachers are actually getting pupils to scream.

Is it possible that these teachers can charge this money because there's always someone else waiting in the wings, and if they turn out a couple of good singers then their reputation stays intact?

I'm sorry if this sounds very insulting, but with my dodgy voice box I've had to train very very carefully and correctly to produce a sound and hearing what's happening down there I'm horrified!

[Steve Hopwood]

Singing has the potential to go horribly wrong when the teaching is poor, because the equipment is hidden deep inside and damage takes time to emerge.

I take Heidi for a singing lesson to Joan every week Joan is wonderful; inspirational, thorough, competent. I accompany the lessons, and so get to see what goes on.

Heidi has an enormous range for a 15 year old. She can sing comfortably as low as the F below middle C. She has been with Joan for 16 months now, and it seemed to us that Heidi's voice was heading lower; we could see her ending up as a mezzo, even an alto.

I know Joan of old. We have worked together often and I have huge respect for her. Right from Heidi's first lesson, Joan said she was exceptional and wanted her to have a consultation with another teacher, Gaynor. Joan goes to Gaynor for occasional consultations and described her as 'several cuts above the rest of us'.

I took Heidi for said consultation over the summer. Wow. Gaynor described the mechanics of singing, how to use the palate and to think backwards through the hard palate rather than upwards when singing high. I give that merely as an example; there was more, much more.

After 40 minutes, Gaynor told us that Heidi is actully a coloratura soprano and had taken her to impossibly high notes through a series of carefully graded exercises that were fantastic to behold - the F three octaves above her lowest note. She recommended repertoire that fits her vocal tessitura - Piercing Eyes (Haydn), En Priere (Faure) and the omni-present Where the Bee Sucks, in G - that lies high ;D

Gaynor pointed out that this is where Heidi is now; where she will be in 10 years time is anybody's guess, but to have carried on with the mezzo\alto repertoire would have done long-term harm. The difference in vocal quality, the ease with which Heidi now sings, these things are a revelation.

For now, we are in a period of transition, taking weekly lessons from Joan and monthly from Gaynor. The time will come when either Heidi recognises that Joan can do little more for her, or Joan herself will decide she can teach her nothing new - she is good and honest like that. Then it will be a weekly round trip of 60 miles; hey ho ;D

I suppose the point of all this is really this; if a good teacher can get a voice wrong, then how badly can a poor teacher do? As to the RCM teacher - screaming? Sounds catastrophic to me. As to this teacher getting pupils, goodness only knows how that happens.

Steve

[meepmeep]

It's scary really. I think singing teachers need, maybe even more than any other instruments, to reeeeeeeeeeeeally know what they are talking about - a pupil can't just go out and buy another voicebox. It's a bit scary as someone wanting to learn to sing, if you have any doubts that your teacher knows what they're doing; it's scary to think that some supposedly highly qualified teachers have caused so much damage

[jod]

I spend ages finding a pupils voice and working with the instrument. I too am a coloratura soprano who was risking doing harm by singing Mezzo soprano songs. Furthermore I have a lovely 17 year old student who when I took her on aged 14 was risking doing the same. Again I'm just very careful about selecting her repertoire. She was delighted when I gave her Barbarina's Aria from The Marriage of Figaro... So was I it made her sing in her head register and gave her loads of confidence.

As Meepmeep says you can't go and buy an new voice. Furthermore the closest you get to an instrument repair shop is an ENT Surgeon, and we all know what tragically happened to Julie Andrews.

[meepmeep]

Just another thought - this is (for me at any rate) what makes having singing lessons so scary. You can be taught one thing and practice it in good faith, only to be told by another teacher, "What? No, that's dangerous! Don't do that to your voice!"

I've come to the conclusion the only way to be sure is to hear a teacher's work - ie what they have done teaching someone else to sing - to be assured that you are not entrusting yourself to someone who will wreck your voice.

It's a minefield, like jod says, look what happened to Julie Andrews; no one wants to go there, even if they haven't got a voice like hers!

[jod]

meepmeep said:

Just another thought - this is (for me at any rate) what makes having singing lessons so scary. You can be taught one thing and practice it in good faith, only to be told by another teacher, "What? No, that's dangerous! Don't do that to your voice!"

I've come to the conclusion the only way to be sure is to hear a teacher's work - ie what they have done teaching someone else to sing - to be assured that you are not entrusting yourself to someone who will wreck your voice.

It's a minefield, like jod says, look what happened to Julie Andrews; no one wants to go there, even if they haven't got a voice like hers!

Ask if your singing teacher has any experience in vocal physiology. As all singing teaching is done in metaphor because asking someone to raise their soft palate normally leads to blank looks, it is vital they know what they are physiolologially trying to achieve in order to get the sound right.

Listen to how the teacher sounds when they are singing properly. There is no substitute for some serious book work on reading papers on "developing voices" and "vocal technique". I don't know how many so-called singing teachers know that much about their instrument. I continually study to make sure that I'm up-to-date with current wisdom. I use my eyes and ears to insure I cannot hear any particular faults and to prevent mannerisms.

As a singing teacher it is a minefield, but one I'm prepared to work in. I would hate to think I had ever damaged anyones voice. That's why the background knowledge is essential.

[meepmeep]

I have actually parted ways with my teacher: can't really post on the AB forums about it... but let's just say personalities clashed, I didn't trust him with my vocal chords, and being told off like a child for being too enthusiastic (!) was the last straw!

I'm hoping to start lessons sometime with a teacher who lives in my town and whom I know has taught at least one of my friends to sing beautifully... we'll see how it goes. Got to get rid of the dodgy throat first.

Anyway... sorry, straying a little off topic here!

[Dulciana]

I have only just discovered this thread and had no idea what a minefield this was. My youngest is a keen singer; so far he is just in a choir, but has mentioned lessons - but I think I'll keep a closer eye on the singing threads here and on TOP for a while before I commit to anything - just so I'm a little better informed. (I also think I'll wait till he's more persistent, as he has already stopped and started with the violin and piano!)

[Steve Hopwood]

patricia said:

I have only just discovered this thread and had no idea what a minefield this was. My youngest is a keen singer; so far he is just in a choir, but has mentioned lessons - but I think I'll keep a closer eye on the singing threads here and on TOP for a while before I commit to anything - just so I'm a little better informed. (I also think I'll wait till he's more persistent, as he has already stopped and started with the violin and piano!)

As an accompanist, I have worked with some wonderful singing teachers. I now realise that these people worked on the basis of, if-the-sound-is-good-then-the-mechanism-must-be-working-correctly, not because they actually understand it.

They were\are great musicians able to inspire students and help them achieve wonderful musical interpretations of the vocal repertoire. Now I have seen Gaynor at work, a singing teacher who fully understands vocal physiology, I wonder how much better the singers I accompanied could have been.

Jo, could you help us out here by posting, say, five crucial questions we should ask a prospective singing teacher, along with the answers so we cannot be bluffed?

[Dulciana]

Yes, please!

[jod]

stevehopwood said:

patricia said:

I have only just discovered this thread and had no idea what a minefield this was. My youngest is a keen singer; so far he is just in a choir, but has mentioned lessons - but I think I'll keep a closer eye on the singing threads here and on TOP for a while before I commit to anything - just so I'm a little better informed. (I also think I'll wait till he's more persistent, as he has already stopped and started with the violin and piano!)

As an accompanist, I have worked with some wonderful singing teachers. I now realise that these people worked on the basis of, if-the-sound-is-good-then-the-mechanism-must-be-working-correctly, not because they actually understand it.

They were\are great musicians able to inspire students and help them achieve wonderful musical interpretations of the vocal repertoire. Now I have seen Gaynor at work, a singing teacher who fully understands vocal physiology, I wonder how much better the singers I accompanied could have been.

Jo, could you help us out here by posting, say, five crucial questions we should ask a prospective singing teacher, along with the answers so we cannot be bluffed?

As I would like to give a considered response, especially over the "not being bluffed" bit, would you guys mind waiting a few days for my response.

However a first meeting should include a teacher listening to a rehearsed piece of music, and doing a number of warm up exercises to evaluate the range and timbre of the voice and where all the natural break points are. (preferably without the pupil knowing precisely what note they've just hit... useful when you a) play the piano and b) have a vocal range of 3 and a half octaves on which to pitch things from.

[possom]

In my area (this may not apply to people out of East Anglia ), I would check that the teacher knows about how correct vowels are formed without raising the larynx (correct arhhh instead of aaah and ee as in German Ich instead of squeaky mice ee) , lots of knowledge about resonating in the head rather than everything being produced in the vocal chords, breathing low and naturally, no strengthening exercises tensing up or other strange physical procedures, "singing should be as natural as when you speak" quoting my teacher. My teacher says that good singing is when you take everything away that interferes with the voice such as tensing up, breathing incorrectly etc. and then it'll work just fine.

If he can get me to sing he can get anyone to because I have a dodgy larynx (see other threads from me moaning about it).

Hope i've tried to put the vowels across ok

[Dulciana]

Even more of a minefield than I thought!

[Steve Hopwood]

possom said:

My teacher says that good singing is when you take everything away that interferes with the voice such as tensing up, breathing incorrectly etc. and then it'll work just fine.

I used to believe this as well. Having watched a singing teacher with a complete understanding of vocal physiology, I have grave doubts about it. Heidi's teacher today even explained how her heavy period affects her larynx. Ok, so everything Gaynor (notice how she has gone from a 'transition' teacher to Heidi's teacher in the swoop of one thread) teaches is 'natural'. The teacher needs a staggering level of expertise to even begin to understand how all this works in order for it all to be natural.

Here is a quote from Jo, in the fifth contribution here; "Ask if your singing teacher has any experience in vocal physiology. As all singing teaching is done in metaphor because asking someone to raise their soft palate normally leads to blank looks, it is vital they know what they are physiologically trying to achieve in order to get the sound right.

Listen to how the teacher sounds when they are singing properly. There is no substitute for some serious book work on reading papers on "developing voices" and "vocal technique". I don't know how many so-called singing teachers know that much about their instrument. I continually study to make sure that I'm up-to-date with current wisdom."

It seems to me that singing teachers lacking a detailed knowledge of vocal physiology are relying on luck\blind ignorance in order to do no harm and go on from there to do positive good.

Boy, but I am glad Heidi has not got to rely on having a lucky teacher. At least Heidi had a first singing teacher who recognised her limitations and was able to point Heidi in the right direction. I wonder how many other singing students are so lucky?

[jod]

possom said:

In my area (this may not apply to people out of East Anglia ), I would check that the teacher knows about how correct vowels are formed without raising the larynx (correct arhhh instead of aaah and ee as in German Ich instead of squeaky mice ee) , lots of knowledge about resonating in the head rather than everything being produced in the vocal chords, breathing low and naturally, no strengthening exercises tensing up or other strange physical procedures, "singing should be as natural as when you speak" quoting my teacher. My teacher says that good singing is when you take everything away that interferes with the voice such as tensing up, breathing incorrectly etc. and then it'll work just fine.

If he can get me to sing he can get anyone to because I have a dodgy larynx (see other threads from me moaning about it).

Hope i've tried to put the vowels across ok

Now its my turn to be contraversial. The conjecture about East Anglian Vowels is right. But singing properely is completely different than speaking. In fact look inside a human thoat when a singer is singing and you will see quite how much tension is going on. Your teacher is right about gettting rid of extraneous tension. But the physics behind getting the vocal folds to resonate at 1024hz (That's a soprano high C) involves the vocal folds being stretched. The fundamental size of the tissues cannot be changed so it is a case of changing its shape to alter the frequency.

Correct vowels are formed by the shape of the back of the tongue. Hence the standard lingustics experts quadralatteral of vowels. A good singing teacher should know this. The maximum space needs to be created in the nasopharangeal tract to optimise resonace, where this is felt is your typical head voice etc.

A good singing teacher should tell a singer to try to sigh or yawn while singing. This drops the vocal folds to their lowest point and relieves stress on the surrounding muscles. It also raises the soft palate thus maximising on resonance.

But to make out that singing is absent from tension is absurd. Its all about freeing up extraneous tension so that the stuff that needs to be there can occur unhindered.