Airy Sound and Projection

[kickingtone]

Sometimes I sing like this.

 

It's a style choice, but I sometimes get comments on lack of projection, too much air, falsetto etc.

 

 

When people say things like, "too much air", what does it actually mean? Too much air for what?

 

Maybe they mean too airy for their preferred style. Interesting to know, but not the purpose of that current exercise.

Maybe they mean too much air for good projection and to be heard in a mix! Now, that IS objective and relevant.

But it is a myth that less air necessarily projects better.

 

So I tried (yet another) experiment -- sing it again, this time leaning in more.

 

 

Then I decided to play them together. RACE THEM! (It was an afterthought. I am really surprised they synced so well, as they were each sung separately without any reference.)

 

You'd think the airier one would get drowned out???

 

 

You can hear both just as easily, and I didn't amplify either. It is a bandwidth effect.

 

But some people immediately think of lack of projection as soon as they hear any airiness!

 

I don't like the mix particularly (I prefer them separately), but it does prove a point.

 

 

 

 

[kickingtone]

No trolls.

 

Thanks.

[kickingtone]

I don't want to engage the troll, but he inadvertently raised an interesting point.

 

I had my timbre categorized by two classical singers on another forum a while back. The classification was NEUTRAL - NO AIR. (those are terms used in their particular pedagogy.) That is how the second clip in the OP would be categorized.

 

However, one forum member who liked rock insisted that he was hearing "airiness". He was not able to identify the timbre correctly, and any advice from him was, well, therefore useless.

 

A simple test to see how much air you are using is to do a siren.

 

I posted up a siren as a demo. I think it was 30 to 40 seconds long. The guy who was protesting posted a siren, too. His was hardly 10 seconds long, and he sounded as if he had just surfaced from a 40 metre dive. So much air was escaping that he ran out of air very quickly.

 

Even when I do a deliberately breathy siren (which I call the whisper siren, used for placement and projection), it is over twice as long as his effort. Try it, and see if you can last 30 seconds. Even try a normal siren (without the whisper), and see how long you last.

 

https://soundcloud.com/kickingtone/sirenslowwhisper

 

 

A lot of people confuse creak and vocal cord closure. They are two different things.

 

For low notes especially, "creak" is associated with the female speaking voice, especially in US accents. Singers, both male and female, use it in some genres of music. One theory is that "creak" gives people with higher voices access to lower notes. Classical singers don't use creak, and don't confuse it with cord closure.

 

I think the confusion comes from the association of falsetto and the female voice, and the use of creak to try to sound deeper and fuller.

 

"Boom" is associated with the male voice. Males can often use boom to access lower notes, where females use creak.

 

"Boom" and the absence of creak is not airiness, although the untrained ear may confuse them.

[CosmicDolphin]

When people say things like, "too much air", what does it actually mean? Too much air for what?

 

For singing any length of time. Passing a lot of air over your vocal chords dries them out.

 

Not that it would affect you as we've only heard you sing for about 10 seconds at a time, so you'll be fine.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Keep the comments civil and constructive please - there's no need to call him names.

[FelipeCarvalho]

In regards to being airy and projection, it's important to keep in mind that airyness and **poweful sounds** do not go well with each other, the OP sings only in a very soft voice that's why he gets away with it (that and not singing whole songs as it was pointed).

 

Using airy quality when attempting to project or to sing powerfully is one of the few things that are trully harmful. Because in order to increase the airflow, the cross-sectional area of opening of the vocal folds needs to increase, increasing the distance they travel and the collision speed/force.

 

Projection itself is achieved by increasing AP narrowing above the vocal folds, decreasing the open time/area, increasing closure time and decreasing collision force.

 

In resume, the actions are antagonic thinking of biomechanics, so poor idea. To start to figure out projection, simply use your own voice louder, using situations that would demand *calling* or a *command* voice can be helpful.

[kickingtone]

In regards to being airy and projection' date=' it's important to keep in mind that airyness and **poweful sounds** do not go well with each other, the OP sings only in a very soft voice that's why he gets away with it (that and not singing whole songs as it was pointed).[/quote']

 

You are wrong. What I do is sing WITHOUT "creak".

 

Singers supplement their voice with creak because of LACK of power and projection. When the voice disappears altogether, creak is called "fry". It is the weakest of all vocal modes.

 

Related to creak is "grit" and "overdrive". You have been taught to associate them with power, but they are psychological effects -- gimmicks with only an aura built around them. They would never work for a classical singer, for example, who has to project his voice without the aid of a microphone.

 

I give you a simple challenge. I have heard you sing, and I contend that your voice lacks bandwidth and power. My challenge to you is to post a clip of you singing over the first of my clips as "powerfully" as you can. I want you to DROWN IT OUT with YOUR OWN voice and post the results here. [together with your vocals, solo, for volume comparison]

[kickingtone]

Projection itself is achieved by increasing AP narrowing above the vocal folds, decreasing the open time/area, increasing closure time and decreasing collision force.

 

In resume, the actions are antagonic thinking of biomechanics, so poor idea. To start to figure out projection, simply use your own voice louder, using situations that would demand *calling* or a *command* voice can be helpful.

 

If you want to learn about power, listen to experienced tenors. They have REAL power, not gimmicks, and the reason is the OPPOSITE of what you are saying.

 

They use proper support at the diaphragm and trunk, and OPEN THROAT. Go and review Youtube videos by the likes of Fanco Tenelli (appoggio technique) and they will tell you that they are doing NOTHING with the throat. It is relaxed.

 

(But, if you were to punch them in the belly while they were singing, they won't flinch. That is where all the power is.)

 

It is when this support is weak or insufficient that airflow is blocked forcefully at the throat, and the air spits through the vocal cords, giving that characteristic edgy or creaky sound. In contrast, in classical singing, the air is held back precisely controlled at the diaphragm, and you hear no creak.

 

Again, call mode -- singing into the mask, is different in classical and contemporary style. The mask is higher up in classical mode, giving a different tonality (look up Michael Trimble's Youtube videos).

 

[CosmicDolphin]

What I do is sing WITHOUT "creak".

 

And pitch...and tone...and resonance...and mostly without the other 3 minutes or so of the song

 

Singers supplement their voice with creak because of LACK of power and projection.

 

No, it's a technique for expressing emotion in a song.

 

Example - Listen to " She's out of my life " by Michael Jackson....pay attention to how he uses it to embellish the line " and I don't know whether "..it adds a layer of intimacy that you just wouldn't get if it was sang straight.

 

If you ever get to cut a vocal in studio with a vocal coach they get you to try sprinkling all these little things through a song. Not because of any lack of power or projection but because it connects with listeners and draws them in.

 

Related to creak is "grit" and "overdrive". You have been taught to associate them with power, but they are psychological effects -- gimmicks with only an aura built around them. They would never work for a classical singer, for example, who has to project his voice without the aid of a microphone.

]

 

Taught to associate them with power by whom ? The Illuminati ? Did they build the aura..?..I thought that was a type of migraine...talking of which..

 

You are just comparing apples with oranges and sounding like a fruit case. A pop / rock singer would probably never need to fill a hall with their voice without amplification. They have to get above the backline of loud instruments... that's why we have PA systems.

 

A classical singer wouldn't use creak , fry, distortion etc. because it doesn't suit the material. It wasn't written that way ....singing pop/rock songs straight doesn't work that great either.

 

You may have a preference for classical singing..I'm pretty sure it was World Music a few months back...whichever. They are all different , they all have their own tropes and genre expectations as well as vocal techniques. If you don't like the style of singers in popular music then don't listen to it but don't put classical singing on some pedestal to look down upon others.

 

 

[kickingtone]

^

You don't really expect me to respond to all of that childish stuff, do you, CD? How old are you?

 

As I have told you before, I am not interested in your opinions and hurt feelings.

 

I extend the challenge same to you, that I extended to Felipe.

 

Ten seconds should be a breeze for you, right? Post up your vocals, and feel free to show us the "correct" pitch, tone and resonance, as you see it. Then post both yours and mine played simultaneously (or I could do that for you).

 

Simple. Facts, not rants.

[FelipeCarvalho]

[uSER=758061]CosmicDolphin[/uSER] at this point I believe it´s pointless to try to argue anything with him, it will only fuel the issue further. But it´s a perfect example of what happens if you don´t get out of your own head, and why lessons are important. I just pointed the aspect of air + projection because it is indeed a problem should anyone attempt it.

[kickingtone]

Two professional opera singers categorized my voice as NEUTRAL NO AIR.

 

These people know what they are talking about. You don't, Felipe.

 

I have no idea why you think I would take advice from you, when you are unable to demonstrate your point, and every concrete measure proves you wrong.

 

I suspect that you don't FULLY understand how air is held back using the diaphragm. You are listening for a particular mode of vibration at the larynx (creak) because you are familiar only with the pedagogy that uses it. When you don't hear that sound, you make the wrong assumption about the airflow.

 

The only problem here is taking advice from people with limited understanding. A girl took lessons from a teacher who said the same as you are saying. She had told the teacher how she wanted to sound -- no creak. The teacher told her to start with "the fundamentals" which he said meant creak, and then "add in" the "air" when she was advanced. A teacher with a classical background would not have given her that advice. In fact she was naturally doing things the right way already for her goal. Sadly, she lost her natural ability after taking the teacher's advice and then the teacher dumped her. He basically asked her for a fee when she pestered him to fix her voice.

 

My advice to anyone is, if you get a teacher, make sure they have a VERY BROAD understanding of voice and of learning patterns.

 

If you are going into a very strict pedagogy, like opera singing, then you have less choice. It really is pedagogical, and they would probably kick you out anyway, if it is not for you.

[kickingtone]

This may help to explain:

 

Take a deep breath and don't release your diaphragm. Keep your mouth open. At this point, you are holding your air with your diaphragm.

 

Now keep your mouth open, and relax your diaphragm, but close your vocal cords, preventing the air from escaping. You are now holding the air at your vocal cords.

 

Classical methods of singing hold air and control airflow almost entirely by the first method. So, you won't hear any telltale vibrational mode of the vocal cords related to holding the air, because it's done at the diaphragm.

 

Non-classical methods use a mixture of the two methods, and creak may kick in before air is held back adequately.

 

There is nothing wrong with creak. It is part of major styles. But it is not a reliable indicator of airflow in many circumstances.

[kickingtone]

Such insecurity! I am flattered that a ten second clip of me singing can have that effect, and cause such passionate ranting. Imagine what a full song could do.

 

The OP demonstrates the DIFFERENCE between projection and softness. The softer singing STILL projected unexpectedly well alongside the full singing. Softness and projection are two different things.

 

Really, the only relevant question raised in the defensive rants people have supplied is that BOTH are soft and that is why you can clearly hear both???

 

So, the simplest thing to do would be to demonstrate that by POSTING A CLIP (it's only 10 seconds long) that demonstrates what YOU call a full voice singing OVER any of the clips in the OP, and post your clip SOLO, too so that we can compare volumes.

 

That kind of debate is FAR MORE INTERESTING AND INFORMATIVE than all the rants folk have replied with.

 

This thread could have been made productive by people who disagree immediately posting a couple of demo clips, instead of moaning about irrelevant stuff -- "you don't sing full songs, here", "your friends on some other forum...blah blah blah"...

 

Unlike you folk, I am open-minded about this. I really would like to hear which voice type would basically "drown out" the clips shown. I'm sure some singers can, just not any of the people complaining here, having heard them sing before.

 

I used to spend time listening to panelists arguing on TV shows (mostly politicians) , and I would listen to the various voice types trying to talk over one another. I was sometimes surprised at which voices won the battle. (UK viewers would know who Michael Heseltine is. When other panelists tried to talk over him during a BBC Question Time program, his voice rumbled over all of them, much to my surprise. I clearly recall one female panelist, who successfully used a shrill cutting tone to interrupt everyone, get steamrollered by Heseltine's voice. Her voice suddenly sounded a mile away and she stopped dead in her tracks. I'd be interested to know what it is about his voice that did that, because I would not have predicted it.)

 

Another example, was a pastor on a debating program. His tone even appeared to be laid back, yet, he steamrollered everybody without raising his voice. I have also listened to panelists arguing in various countries, and how it works in the different accents. -- India (there is a regular Youtube posting of one of their TV debates), same with South Africa, US, of course (much different from UK). It is all about bandwidth and projection and is quite fascinating. It seems to be too much to ask the trolls on this thread to discuss this question.

 

I only mention the extreme examples above because those are the ones that got me thinking about how voices interact and project against one another.

[FelipeCarvalho]

 

Well thats it Felipe, you can only lead a horse to water and if he knows best and lessons suck that that is his loss.

 

But you too made a loss by declining my offer as my new teacher last year. it seamed it was too big of a job for you and you only wanted to teach me the ability to sing simple songs like from the band "the doors" and that was it like.

 

Your Boss on the other forum (what do they call him) Robin Bastard could of been my regular coach too! But when he tried to scam and rip me off for $100 that was the end to that. Thankfully due to the Rothschild new world order I was able to get the money back through my credit card company (after a lot of unneeded hard stressfull hard work).

 

But that dose not matter now its all done and water under the bridge and I have moved on with my life and learnt my lesson on how not to get my fingers burnt by judging a book by it cover (the marketing BS con of RL 4pillars)

 

Well what can I say, I told you how I work, and why. You said that you wanted something else. So I am not your guy, it's simple as that.

 

You will find plenty of people out there that will agree to work on any conditions, and in my professional opinion, sell magic. The problem is exactly having the kind of experience you are talking about.

 

I was trained with italian classical technique, and following some strict paradigms that my masters worked with me. If I agreed on training you on some other manner that I devised on my own just to make some quick money, perhaps it would be satisfying for you for a while, but ultimately I would be deceiving you and in the long term your results would not be on par with what *either* of us expect. And that is just not acceptable for me, no matter the financial loss it could mean.

 

I advice you to take care when considering those folks out there that agree too quickly on changing their approach or promising quick solution. It may be tempting, the intention might be good, but it does not mean its a wise way to approach it.

 

And I also have to say that I have no *Boss* on other forums or am involved on comercializing any products sold on them. I am a moderator on three online communities about singing and technique, and I am not involved on selling anything on any of them, not even my OWN lessons.

[davie]

Just a general reminder to everyone, please try to keep your comments constructive. Thanks

[CosmicDolphin]

I really would like to hear which voice type would basically "drown out" the clips shown. I'm sure some singers can, just not any of the people complaining here, having heard them sing before.

 

I don't think you understand how audio works but by all means, enable the download option on your SoundCloud and I'll do it just to prove a point.

 

 

 

 

[kickingtone]

 

I don't think you understand how audio works but by all means, enable the download option on your SoundCloud and I'll do it just to prove a point.

 

Just post a link to your solo version, then. I'll do the rest. You can use soundcloud, vicaroo,.. anything that will play direct from link.

[CosmicDolphin]

 

Just post a link to your solo version, then. I'll do the rest. You can use soundcloud, vicaroo,.. anything that will play direct from link.

 

The downloads are enabled

 

https://soundcloud.com/cosmicdolphin...cosmic/s-z1VYS

[kickingtone]

 

The downloads are enabled

 

https://soundcloud.com/cosmicdolphin...cosmic/s-z1VYS

 

That's better. Now there is something concrete.

 

I took your clip above (the trace looks compressed) and I put it UNALTERED on one track in Audacity.

 

I took my FIRST clip (the quieter one) and placed it UNALTERED in another track .

 

Then I selected both clips and did mix and render to create one clip.

 

That is all. No other processing.

 

https://vocaroo.com/i/s0qXpS2UxEJA

 

 

[CosmicDolphin]

 

I took your clip above (the trace looks compressed)

 

My pre-amp has a built in compressor, I don't think it was doing much though.

 

So what is your verdict ?

 

 

[kickingtone]

 

My pre-amp has a built in compressor, I don't think it was doing much though.

 

So what is your verdict ?

 

 

I can hear my vocals just as clearly in the mix as if your vocals were not there, apart from a bit of a mess near the end where we are out of sync.

 

That's with your vocals sitting -1 to 1 peak to peak (and centred) and mine sitting almost entirely -0.5 to 0.5 peak to peak (off centre) in Audacity.

[kickingtone]

Sorry Davie. but on another forum he advocated the my training and lessons where all for nothing! meaning that there was no improvment in my voice what so ever. But you on that Jeremy clip said there was an improvment

 

Just for the record, New2 posted his vocals on another forum, where it got ripped apart. I made NO comment about his singing, at all.

 

I only commented about his reaction to the criticism (being based on pure frustration), and I said that the song is very idiosyncratic and difficult to sing.

[CosmicDolphin]

 

Him and his expert friends on the home recording forum use audio software jest to cheat. as I said before "how do I make the bit of the song I can not sing sound great"

 

 

To be fair I've got about $20k worth of studio gear and plugins

 

[FelipeCarvalho]

But there are people out there that can offer all that. This guy Eli dose! http://www.hybridvocaltechnique.com

He has a 5/6 octave range. The highest note he said he ever hit was a B7. and he hit C1 pressed the key on the piano and sang the note to me (took him 2 goes though)

 

He seems to sing really well, best of luck!!