I don’t believe those instructions work. It’s certainly possible to be a good teacher and to have successful students basing your technique on statements like these, but I think the results come despite the language, not because of it. A good voice teacher needs first and foremost a good ear, and a good student needs first and foremost good instincts and work ethic.

The majority of people believe that singing is a talent, that the voice is a gift, and that the best a voice teacher can do is guide that gift without “screwing it up.” I believe that a voice can be built through hard work on muscular coordination and strengthening. That a “ruined” voice is merely an imbalanced one that needs a good training regimen to come back. The technical side of singing–making your voice do what you want it to–is an athletic skill that can be learned, just like swimming or yoga. Of course, some people have bodies more suited to it. Everyone can learn to swim but not everyone can be Michael Phelps. Similarly, everyone can learn to sing but not everyone can be Luciano Pavarotti.

When I teach voice I focus on one element above all: making sure that the many muscles inside the larynx are learning to work together efficiently and in a way that will allow the voice to grow. Everything else becomes secondary. Aesthetics are important, but function is fundamental. My students progress quickly because they are literally building their voices every time they practice. With a good attitude, a hard-working student will experience rapid progress from the very first lesson, and they will find themselves firmly on the right path by the end of two years.

Contact me for lessons to try it for yourself!

The Verdi Requiem is, in my experience, one of the most frightening. As several scholars have pointed out, it seems to be an agnostic’s Requiem, pervaded throughout by fear of death rather than joy of heaven. Musically this is most obvious in the relentless statements of the Dies Irae, and its unforgiving reprise during the final Libera Me. The finale concludes not with a beautiful ascent to heaven but with a whimpered plea to be freed from eternal death.

But plenty of other sources exist to delve into the spiritual meanings and musical structure of the work. Instead, I’d like to offer a performer’s perspective on tomorrow’s performance, written after the first orchestra rehearsal this morning. Despite the piece’s rather strenuous vocal demands–for reference I sing tenor in the chorus–the Requiem is one of the few works that always leaves me ready for more after the final cutoff. A combination of Verdi’s masterful writing for voice, his intelligent pacing with frequent rests for the weary, and the sheer adrenaline generated in the final Libera Me fugue makes this work a joy to sing. The grand moments are truly grand, but rarely screamed, the quiet parts are hushed but don’t require scratchiness or extended singing “off the voice” as Mahler sometimes does. The language might as well be Italian. The writing is difficult but never awkward. All these elements combine to let the singers freely express the emotions inherent in the work, unhampered by the technical impossibilities which are unfortunately the norm for much of the symphony chorus repertoire.

Having sung with the CSO during our Grammy-winning take on this work with Riccardo Muti, it is interesting to compare Kalmar’s and Muti’s interpretations. I was first struck by the similarities of their vision. Both focused a great deal of energy in rehearsals on finding the right balance between “opera” and “church”–in many cases explicitly contradicting themselves. In the end, the operatic moments, such as the hissed “quantus tremor est futurus” during the Dies Irae must still be sung, while the more sacred moments, such as the unison “agnus dei” chorus, must remain well supported, resonant, and emotionally expressive. So it is no wonder that the same conductor can say “this is not opera, it’s a prayer” in one breath and “this is opera!” in the next.

Kalmar’s interpretation seems to favor his Uruguayan over his Austrian heritage, which in my view is as it should be. The piece is Italian through and through, and requires Italian use of portamento, Italian roundness of tone, Italian legato, and a healthy Italian skepticism of the metronome. Compared with Muti’s interpretation, tomorrow’s concert promises to be slower in pacing, especially in the cantabile moments such as the Lacrimosa, but also in the Sanctus double fugue. While I’m sure many in the audience will latch onto the tempi of Kalmar’s reading as a point of discussion, perhaps contention, I feel both takes are valid.

The four soloists are somewhat different in temperament and voice type than the four heard on the Muti recording. I was impressed by the rich colors and technical solidity in this morning’s rehearsal and am looking forward to hearing them give their all this weekend. The soprano is Ryan Opera Center alum and local favorite Amber Wagner. The Iowa-born baritone, Kyle Ketelsen, has been heard frequently in Chicago lately and with good reason. The mezzo-soprano Michaela Martens has a rich voice which will be a pleasure to hear in the Lacrimosa, and tenor Michael Fabiano showed thrilling tone especially in the Kyrie quartet this morning.

I have frequently told my colleagues that I would gladly sing this work every day for the rest of my life, so I’m really looking forward to this weekend’s run. In the end, I think the important thing is not what Kalmar does differently from Muti, and how the GPMF orchestra and chorus compare to the CSO (after all, many are members of both!) but rather that some of Verdi’s brilliance be exposed–no single performance can illuminate all of the genius behind this score, and the more frequently we can sing and hear it the better.

In general, the wrong kind of tensions are automatically reduced by strengthening the muscles involved in the right kind of tension. I used to clench my hands terribly while singing. Try as I might I couldn’t fix it. At some point it just stopped. I don’t even remember when it happened–because I wasn’t thinking about my hands, I was just singing better.

Think about an archer, for example. Before he can draw the bow completely, he must become strong enough to do so. Until then, his shooting is going to be erratic and lacking in power. As he tries as hard as he possibly can to draw the bow his whole body gets tense and trembles. At some point he will be barely strong enough to draw the bow, but still his arm will tend to shake and he will miss, though not as frequently as before. And now the power is there. But eventually he will be strong enough to draw the bow easily. At this point the rest of his body will begin to visibly relax. Telling him to relax before this point is counterproductive, as he might end up relaxing those muscles that are supposed to be working to draw the bow.

And so it is with singing. Yes, work to eliminate tension. But remember that bad tension is a consequence of lack of the correct kind of tension. You cannot relax your jaw while singing until you gain the strength and flexibility to form vowels farther back in the pharynx. You cannot relax your neck and shoulders on a high note until you have strong enough breathing and laryngeal musculature to produce the note in a balanced way. By all means, try to stay relaxed. But don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. Sometimes it is better to carry some tension in unnecessary areas of your body than to drop the required tension in the fundamental vocal mechanism.

Translate your don't into do. This isn't just about feeling good or being nice. Self-control is an exhaustible resource, as anyone who has tried to simultaneously be on a diet and keep the house clean and be patient with annoying co-workers knows. Don't taxes our mental stamina and introduces tension.

Compare the following two statements:

“Don't lift your shoulders while breathing in”

“If you take a full, relaxed breath you'll notice your shoulders stay low and relaxed.”

The first is much more likely to cause shoulder tension in a student. Now pile on a couple of other don't instructions, like “don't spread the top note” and “don't jut your chin” and self-control is exhausted while tension is at a maximum.

The fact is, many teachers understand this concept and still get it wrong. The reason is sometimes do masquerades as don't. Compare again:

“Don't lift your larynx as you go up the scale.”

“Keep your larynx low as you go up the scale.”

“Take a low, deep breath and maintain your inspiratory posture as you go up the scale.”

The second statement is much more likely to be perceived as synonymous with the first. The reason is a do has to be specific. It must be a “how to” (or perhaps a “how do”) rather than a “just do this.” The third statement goes beyond keeping the larynx down and tells you how to achieve this goal.

In the spirit of the post, let's get specific. When you notice a behavior you want to correct

1. take that don't

2. rephrase it as a do in your head

3. then formulate the “how do”–get specific and explain what to do that causes the desired behavior

It's easy to stop at the second step. Don't.

I did find that if I was not careful, overdoing the exercise tended to produce an overblown sound and raise my larynx. But in moderation, listening for a quick, healthy vibrato seems to be very effective in singers who are habitually too heavy, chesty, or unsupported. Try it!

Some of my favorite tenors of the past seem to have initially had problems with vibrato that was too quick. Specifically, Giacomo Lauri-Volpi and Franco Corelli come to mind. And both of them had thrilling, spectacular, and natural high notes. I wonder if there isn't something there…

For student recitals and other free programs, the translation is free of charge, but I'd still like to hear from people who used it just so I know I'm not just throwing it out into the abyss and never hear from it again…

Download Text and Translation

I'd like to unpack the issue a little.

The core problem in singers who sing too loudly is actually a question of balance. Producing a good singing tone requires many different muscles working in careful coordination. And the whole is only as strong as its weakest link. Habitually loud singers tend to favor a "thick" or thyroarytenoid muscle dominated form of production. (In singer's jargon, too "chesty" or "bright.") While a correctly produced forte certainly requires a healthy TA muscle component, if the production is constantly too thick the coordination is thrown off. With time, the lengthening or cricothyroid muscles are not strong enough to balance the overly heavy production.

As always, I like to compare singing to sport. Singers are athletes of the voice. An athlete who does too much weight training, especially of only certain muscle groups, is going to hurt his or her overall performance eventually. And so it is with the habitually loud singer. Exercises can be done to isolate nad strengthen the "heady" side of the voice, of course. But I find that the best training reinforces and builds the actual coordination of singing rather than breaking it down and isolating it too much. This means singing at a variety of volumes (and, incidentally, on a variety of vowels and consonants and pitches–getting stuck in any given exercise is likely detrimental.)

So, in conclusion, the problem isn't singing too loudly. It is singing too loudly in an unbalanced way. The way to tell if your forte is properly balanced is simple. Ask yourself (or your teacher or coach) the following questions:

1. Can I make a smooth diminuendo on this sound?
2. Is the sound warm and round rather than bright and brittle?
3. Is my vibrato even and not too slow?

The exercise is most difficult in the range where the registers mix, so from about middle C to the C above that, or in the lower middle of the female voice and the upper range of the male voice. In this range, it is possible to execute in three ways: you can start in a heady production and swell to the limit of that configuration, you can start in a chesty production and grow to a chesty full voice, or you can start in a heady production and switch (the switch can be disguised but it must happen because the vocal folds change vibratory pattern) to a chesty production and back.

In performance, for men you would probably choose to stay in the chesty production all the time, while women (and countertenors) would probably choose the heady production. But for exercising the voice, the better choice is probably the one that makes you switch registers, as it will stretch, strengthen, and coordinate the intrinsic muscles of the larynx more than the other two.

It is difficult to master, but I highly recommend it. This is an exercise which, if done with minimum muscular tension, literally will build your voice and vocal coordination. Do not try to take it to the extremes of your voice until you have mastered it in the middle, though!

Note: by "heady" and "chesty" it is understood that I mean the vibratory pattern in the vocal folds themselves, and not a resonance phenomenon or sensation in either the head or chest, which a given singer may or may not experience. "Heady" is really synonymous with "falsetto" for the sake of this post.

1.  Miller, Donald G. – Resonance in Singing
   Concerned mostly with formant tuning (the adjusting of vowel formants to reinforce the harmonics of a sung tone, also known as vowel modification) but full of interesting insights. Comes with a VoceVista software CD!
2. Sundberg, Johan – The Science of the Singing Voice
   One of the most eminent scientists who takes an interest in the singing voice, this book is comprehensive and all conclusions are well-supported. The bibliography alone is worth the price of admission.
3. Nair, Garyth – Voice Tradition and Technology
   Most interesting in this work is the careful attention given to the resonance of consonants and the joining of vowels and consonants in singing, using spectrographic analysis to achieve best results. There is also a chapter by D. G. Miller
4. McCoy, Scott – Your Voice: An Inside View
   Structured like a textbook, with exercises and questions to end each section. There are recommendations for further reading within each topic. He gives explicit and valuable insight into exactly what voice spectrography in the teaching studio can be used for most effectively, as well as the best physiological review I have seen. Unfortunately, he doesn't take all available research into account as of the writing of the book, including contradictions to the source-filter theory and the Bernoulli Effect in singing, but the book is a very valuable resource.
5. Reid, Cornelius – Bel Canto Principles and Practices
   An exponent of the somewhat controversial method of separating, strengthening, and recombining the vocal registers, Reid nevertheless makes many great points about the actual coordination of the muscles which comprise the voice source that are applicable to all pedagogical belief systems.
6. Titze, Ingo – Principles of Voice Production
   I have not yet been able to get this book from the library, but will update this annotation when I do. Most of the books above cite it heavily.