Learned something about my vocal vibrato today!

This may or may not interest you...

Today,   while examining my voice in VVOCAL,   I learned an interesting thing about how I sing,    how I idiosyncratically do my vibrato.     It was something I never gave any conscious thought to before.

I notice when I sing,   it's the topmost regular peak,  in the horizontal squiggle,   that nails the pitch correctly;    the valleys are all below desired pitch.

VVOCAL draws a line midpoint through the peaks-and-valleys,    assuming that THAT is your desired pitch; it's assuming that you are wavering equally between sharp and flat,    so you generally  tend to line up that middle-line with pitch-perfect.     But that isn't how I sing;   I find I get a correctly-tuned  sound when I line up the above-line peaks with pitch perfect.      The peaks should just touch the line of pitch-perfect.     

I never knew what my vibrato was "doing" before,  pitchwise,  after singing for zillions of years.      I assume it's the pitch irregularities that make a vox track interesting,  no?

Comments?   Are you the same way?  

I have no idea. Never really thought about how the voice could be represented in such a graph, and never even used pitch correction, assuming that p.c. even represents vocals in this manner.

But this kind of representation might be useful in teaching one about singing or that kind of thing, I would think.

I've never tried putting my vibrato "under a microscope" before, but I've observed my voice using a tuner. I noticed that when the vibrato is in full-swing, the pitch is actually subtly wavering around the desired pitch.

As usual, Ras, I haven't the faintest idea what you're on about

I was playing with Autotune about 10 years ago and I found I tend to glissado in to my notes , slide up up to down to them quite a bit. But that's tje technal stuuf. What matters, I think, is whether it evokes an emotion that matches what the song is trying to convey.

I am completely confused.

I know what you mean. Unsatisfied with what I presumed to be standard approaches, I went through a song and listened for the parts that sounded right and noted how they looked vis a vis the 12TET grid as well as approximate Just Intonation values (cribbed from the Wikipedia correlation chart under 12TET).

I then went through and moved phrases to where I guesstimated they should be and then adjusted to taste (sometimes a fair bit). I think it sounded better than when I started and, by moving whole phrases I didn't end up with any (to me) noticeable artifacts. (Unfortnately, the vocal still sucked. Funny how that works.

It was more an experiment than any sort of attempt to save a promising but flawed performance. It was more like, I'm gonna make this stupid thing work if it kills me. It didn't kill me, but it didn't seem promising. I mean, I figured what I really needed was to work on my singing. Funny how that works.   

Not to get off topic but have you ever noticed how sub par sounding tracks can make a record as long as the song is good and performance is legit?

You bet. My young friend whose fledgling track is on a different thread here ay CASSS has a rough way of singing, pitchwise... to say the least.   In applying AT to it, my main thought was, "Which pitch deviations are acceptable here--- and 'stylish'--- and which really sound more like pitch gaffes that a listener, even a 'lay-listener' is not likely to forgive?"