VoiceScienceWorks
  • Welcome
  • What we do
  • Who else is doing what
  • Vocology Toolbox
  • Warm ups & exercises
  • Handouts
  • N.E.O. Voice Festival
  • Contact Us
  • Underground Ictus
VoiceScienceWorks

ongoing discussions 

a forum to discuss the continuous mysteries and discoveries of the voice

when does a bad imitation become a good imitation?

6/20/2016

2 Comments

 
Picture

​I’ve been tuning in a lot to this trend of singing pop songs in a ‘vintage’ way, bringing back a no longer current style (1930’s/40’s vocal qualities seem popular) and applying it to modern day songs. It has inspired me to brainstorm on some questions under the HUGE topic of what is the difference between mimicking and communicating.
Picture
 
It seems the majority of the way artists get across that they are bringing back a style that is no longer current (I’m still thinking of this 1930s-50s trend) is by using, or overusing, affects – a growl, a scoop, an overly pouty-lipped diphthong. Of course, when these vocal expressions originated in the style, they were tools of communication. But when I hear artists bring them back, I often feel that all they are communicating is ‘Look I know how to do this thing with my voice that fits in this style’  (even when it seems that their goal in earnest is to be emotionally engaged and communicate the meaning of the song to listeners) I’m trying to tease this out because I think it’s wonderful to have a lot of different vocal colors, effects, and extended techniques at your finger tips to mix and match in an artistic way. But I when I listen, I’m often overwhelmed and rolling my eyes thinking, Could you just cut the affects and sing it simply, like you’re singing a children’s song? It’d be so much easier to listen to…..

So I’ve wondered-

Is it that they are simply overusing these affects?  Would sprinkling them about less and saving them for more specific moments feel more genuine and less gimmicky?

Is it the actual way they are doing the affect? If we analyzed the sound of an original artist from that time period, who many agreed sounds ‘genuine’ and ‘authentic’, would there be something in the harmonic output that is missing from the modern day copy cats? Keeping in mind, of course, the difference in recording abilities between then and now.

Is it that artists who didn’t grow up in that time period can’t possibly understand the cultural influences that led to those vocal trends in expression, and therefore will never sound authentic recreating them? Which of course brought me to the thought of something many of us base our profession on – trying to sing opera! Talk about bringing back a style of singing that is no longer current. And we see the same thing with amateurs and professionals in that field – the use and overuse of affects that start to sound gimmicky (stylistic slurs, attacks, messa di voce, over darkened vowels etc.) as if the number one goal is to say, Look I know how to sound like that style!
 
So my final thought was, which I think is the most interesting topic is - for anyone to learn and replicate a style, especially one that is not current in the culture you grow up in, you have to mimic those who have come before you. Imitating, in fact, is one of our biggest learning tools and in some voice instruction, the only learning tool. So when does a bad imitation become a good imitation? At what point does it sound like YOU when you have to start out learning to sound like someone else? At a harmonic output level, could we break down the difference between gimmicky and genuine? What about at an emotional level? And, how do we teach the difference?

~Laurel
2 Comments
Steve Wachter
7/17/2016 12:31:25 am

I believe I commented on Laurel's post on David's post so to be equally out of place, I will comment on David's post on Laurels post!

I was in a group long ago with my brothers and we played about 20-30 performances at fairs and various outdoor festivals and markets over two summers.

We played mostly folk rock and some rock....Simon and Garfunkel, The Byrds, The Beach Boys, Chuck Berry and a few Beatle songs etc.

Since we were brothers, our advice to each other was probably to much on the blunt or rash side.

The artist is expressing their identity and feels they want to do it in their own way and when someone advises we can easily offend but as David points out....listening to others advice can be a very effective way to improve and learn no matter our level of expertise.

Someone may be able to point out ways to help the artist better communicate their style, message and/or identity to an audience.

An example of this....in composition....someone may say to keep it simple and don't be too poetic and too wordy....
A cliche can sometimes express the artists intent..... Robert Frost's poem "The Road Less Taken" sounds cliche but clearly expresses something that a more wordy or complicated title may not have communicated with such clarity and simplicity.

In otherwords advice should be positive but if it does come across rash, ask yourself if this advice is going to help my audience understand who I am and what I'm trying to get across in my song, poem, performance....etc.

Reply
Karen
11/13/2017 01:47:00 pm

This is very interesting. Do you have any examples of artists singing in "vintage" styles? Without examples, I can only try to guess what you're referring to.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Author

    Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.

    Archives

    August 2017
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    October 2015
    September 2015

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Picture
Connect with Us
For Email Marketing you can trust.