I'm late to this show, but damn, this video is healing so much classical-vocal-training trauma around vibrato and my struggles to 'find it'. The pressure and shame the field wields around this one feature of singing is intense and I did both physical and emotional damage to myself trying to force my voice into that shape while feeling broken, confused, and 'not good enough' throughout my adolescent and university training years. It wasn't until I finished my undergrad and stopped singing professionally and just sang for my own fun that I felt free and safe enough to explore my voice on my own, and that's when I was able to relax and create vibrato. it's still a process. I still have deep insecurities around it, and my voice isn't yet at a place of stability, consistency and ease across my range that I want, but it's a transformed voice from what it was while I was studying. Thank you for this. I can't believe someone finally explained WHAT VIBRATO ACTUALLY IS AND HOW ITS DONE. My mind is blown and my heart is so validated
Really had to 'work' hard to relax my neck muscles in order to learn vibrato. So I think vibrato is not a natural phenomenon, but rather just an after effect of vocal muscle relaxation. Great video!
Fun video! Thanks for sharing. You could maybe do a followup video if you look into oscillating frequency traditions from around the world, including Kobushi from Japan, that are very culturally relevant in their cultures but may run counter to Western classical pedagogy.
I'm curious about two techniques. First the "overtone" singing. Singing two notes at once that can move independently of each other. I hear it as a regular voice, plus a resonant head/sinus tone. Two separately used apertures where we commonly just use one at a time. The second one, is that I have heard singing done on both the (normal) exhale, and then one the corresponding inhale. It makes sense that it is possible, because air is passing in an aperture no matter the air direction. ....But what do you think of this? Do you have thoughts, or opinions as someone who has extensive training in theory and practice?
This was interesting to me, because my brother has his doctorate from Boston University in Vocal Performance. He studied with David Blair McClosky and others. He always makes a big deal about "natural" vibrato. My vocal vibrato is "not" natural, according to him. I'm a violinist, so I tend to make my vibrato in a way that sounds like my violin concept of vibrato.
Interesting to compare vocal vibrato with the mechanical vibrato found in a pipe organ, where mixtures are used. in a mixture several pipes sound simultaneously around one “note” (usually 2-5 pipes). The effect sounds strange if playing a melody in isolation, but when played together with harmonic chords, the melody stands out, even when everything is just as loud. A vibrato for a vocal soloist has the same effect-standing out amidst harmonic textures, rather like a golden thread in a woven piece of fabric.
I think that the answer to the question is not a musical answer but a logical one. Many people want to sing but not everyone is able to develop the ability to control their voice to sing well or sing professionally, one needs to have a natural talent as a first step. Singing is not just a question of learning a technique, otherwise everyone could learn to sing, but it isn't happening. Therefore, if someone has a natural talent to be able to sing well or to learn to sing well, then based on that ability they will be able to produce vibrato or learn to produce vibrato. So, vibrato is an extension of the natural ability to control the voice, therefore it's also natural.
You've gotten to the heart of a fierce debate in the vocal community -- is singing a natural gift or can it be taught? You'll find arguments for both, but I happen to believe it can be taught. I have no idea how (there's a reason I'm not a teacher!) and certainly a natural gift will give you a head start, but especially in opera, I don't think it's necessarily a requirement.
I think it is a natural when in a relaxed state, but as you said, we often have to learn to relax. However, just having vibrato isnt enough. Opera singers are professionals that learned a technique (not natural) that combines vibrato with resonance and other manipulations of resonance and alternating relaxation and tension of muscle groups. I also think some vibrato is forced and artificial. Personally, my original raw singing style was straight tone. I also wonder why some people's vibrato wobbles wide in pitch and why some is fast or slower than others. If vibrato is being slightly higher or lower than the specific pitch (off pitch), why is that good, rather than straight tone (on pitch the whole time)? Our ear wants to be on pitch and most of us start straight tone and learn vibrato. So whether it happens from relaxing or not, for most of us, it is a learned style.
I came across your video in the pursuit of finding what natural vibrato sounds like. My daughter is currently singing with a small worship team and she has a wonderful low tone voice like Adel I guess (probably didn’t spell that correctly) but I feel like she’s holding back her natural vibrato out of fear. I can’t find an example currently of what I’m talking about but it seems like some lower tone rock singers have an almost slightly nervous sounding natural vibrato that doesn’t seem learned at all. Literally opposite of opera but completely natural sounding. What makes it so beautiful is that it’s not perfect almost uneven if you understand what I’m trying to say.
Vibrato is as natural as _singing itself_, which you have to learn. Using clearly _culturally learned_ speaking habits to say "that's natural" while then singing that works differently is not, is entirely arbitrary. No. Our speaking is then just as unnatural. Especially noticeable illustration in many Western countries, a naturally loud infant voice gets taught _restriction_ while being raised, because people don't like nasty loud children/persons. But there are regional differences to that just in the US, let alone world wide. I have heard many a child who's voice would have, I'm convinced, kind of "naturally" turned into a golden age Broadway voice (minus the musicality part), had they not been hampered with that way. And it makes sense for humans to be naturally good at loud & far _calling._ Some people mean by vibrato being natural that it likes to occur "by itself". Which doesn't seem so wild. TL;DR - one absolutely can experience an oscillation that is audible as a vibrato that wants to "run loose" on its own. Especially lower in the range, with more relaxation. That doesn't mean that's the end product or generally useful. Muscles get trained, in coordination, by excercises to work towards vibrato ability. But once it's there, you're not quite doing exactly those exercises when singing with vibrato - there is a lot more "kept in check, running on its own" feeling to it. Which _could be_ an illusion. But training the muscles might just as well set up a better tuned mass-&-springs system that likes to oscillate but can be controlled to adequate degree, as opposed to train merely automated movement patterns. We don't actually have that of a good, detailed understanding of this aspect of why things have been trained that way they were long before any attempts at scientific investigation of these phenomena were made. (even in rather recent books on the subject I saw, they are hazy on the details here.) As for healthier - well, according to some extremly experienced vocal pedagogues (who were worth their salt), singing straight tone typically results in less durable voices. For instance, Joseph Klein - interestingly, mostly training choir singers, in the days when they had proper voices. I guess he does not have rigorous records, it's just his recollected experience. It definitely feels that way if you sing with a big voice - forcing a straight tone for long is _a lot more tiring_ than singing with vibrato. Perhaps it has some massaging effect, and gives you micro-reminders of when something is even slightly off (which will block vibrato, to dependent degree), and helps re-adjust. So always having a fluid vibrato "on" is your, perhaps not entirely conscious, guide to sing without problems. Stay on track, always. *"Vocal Placement"* is a haphazardly dreamt up concept that has nothing to do with acoustics. C.L. Reid gave a number of good explanations of why, even if it were a thing, it can't possibly be of use for someone training their voice, in "The Free Voice". Whether one likes the author's other ideas or not, the logic can hardly be denied. I don't have the quotes ATM. My own objections start with the _how_ of human audio directionality perception and how that could possibly be useful for this concept, or the latter in conjuntion with the former, be repeatable between individuals, as to being indicators of correctness of what one is doing. Due to unrelated goals of 1) building a voice that is to be heard by the audience, vs. 2) optimize for vague notions of direction, partly dependent on parts of the individual anatomy that don't contribute to 1) - useless sacrifice. A, OTOH, real and tangible concept is that of _formant tuning._
I agree with you! Vibrato isn't natural and like every other aspect of singing, should be treated as a skill. There are different types that are acceptable, in general (or rather it's more common), for pop singing and not aesthetic for operatic/classical singing. Voice scientist have documented that many golden age opera singers have approximately 5-7 cycles of vibrato per second, and a distance from the primary pitch of a half step above and Maj 3rd below (or more). Additionally, there is an accent on the peak of the cycle. This more or less is the equation for optimal vibrato = "bigger" sounds
I'm late to this show, but damn, this video is healing so much classical-vocal-training trauma around vibrato and my struggles to 'find it'. The pressure and shame the field wields around this one feature of singing is intense and I did both physical and emotional damage to myself trying to force my voice into that shape while feeling broken, confused, and 'not good enough' throughout my adolescent and university training years. It wasn't until I finished my undergrad and stopped singing professionally and just sang for my own fun that I felt free and safe enough to explore my voice on my own, and that's when I was able to relax and create vibrato. it's still a process. I still have deep insecurities around it, and my voice isn't yet at a place of stability, consistency and ease across my range that I want, but it's a transformed voice from what it was while I was studying. Thank you for this. I can't believe someone finally explained WHAT VIBRATO ACTUALLY IS AND HOW ITS DONE. My mind is blown and my heart is so validated
Really had to 'work' hard to relax my neck muscles in order to learn vibrato. So I think vibrato is not a natural phenomenon, but rather just an after effect of vocal muscle relaxation. Great video!
I’m using this for my intro to opera course. Such great video for non-singers to grasp these difficult concepts. Thank you thank you!
Fun video! Thanks for sharing.
You could maybe do a followup video if you look into oscillating frequency traditions from around the world, including Kobushi from Japan, that are very culturally relevant in their cultures but may run counter to Western classical pedagogy.
I'm curious about two techniques. First the "overtone" singing. Singing two notes at once that can move independently of each other. I hear it as a regular voice, plus a resonant head/sinus tone. Two separately used apertures where we commonly just use one at a time. The second one, is that I have heard singing done on both the (normal) exhale, and then one the corresponding inhale. It makes sense that it is possible, because air is passing in an aperture no matter the air direction. ....But what do you think of this? Do you have thoughts, or opinions as someone who has extensive training in theory and practice?
Fantastic visuals! I will be using these as I teach. Thank you!
This was interesting to me, because my brother has his doctorate from Boston University in Vocal Performance. He studied with David Blair McClosky and others. He always makes a big deal about "natural" vibrato. My vocal vibrato is "not" natural, according to him. I'm a violinist, so I tend to make my vibrato in a way that sounds like my violin concept of vibrato.
Interesting to compare vocal vibrato with the mechanical vibrato found in a pipe organ, where mixtures are used. in a mixture several pipes sound simultaneously around one “note” (usually 2-5 pipes). The effect sounds strange if playing a melody in isolation, but when played together with harmonic chords, the melody stands out, even when everything is just as loud. A vibrato for a vocal soloist has the same effect-standing out amidst harmonic textures, rather like a golden thread in a woven piece of fabric.
Very interesting and thorough explanation, made a confusing topic clear
I think that the answer to the question is not a musical answer but a logical one. Many people want to sing but not everyone is able to develop the ability to control their voice to sing well or sing professionally, one needs to have a natural talent as a first step. Singing is not just a question of learning a technique, otherwise everyone could learn to sing, but it isn't happening. Therefore, if someone has a natural talent to be able to sing well or to learn to sing well, then based on that ability they will be able to produce vibrato or learn to produce vibrato. So, vibrato is an extension of the natural ability to control the voice, therefore it's also natural.
You've gotten to the heart of a fierce debate in the vocal community -- is singing a natural gift or can it be taught? You'll find arguments for both, but I happen to believe it can be taught. I have no idea how (there's a reason I'm not a teacher!) and certainly a natural gift will give you a head start, but especially in opera, I don't think it's necessarily a requirement.
I think it is a natural when in a relaxed state, but as you said, we often have to learn to relax. However, just having vibrato isnt enough. Opera singers are professionals that learned a technique (not natural) that combines vibrato with resonance and other manipulations of resonance and alternating relaxation and tension of muscle groups. I also think some vibrato is forced and artificial. Personally, my original raw singing style was straight tone. I also wonder why some people's vibrato wobbles wide in pitch and why some is fast or slower than others. If vibrato is being slightly higher or lower than the specific pitch (off pitch), why is that good, rather than straight tone (on pitch the whole time)? Our ear wants to be on pitch and most of us start straight tone and learn vibrato. So whether it happens from relaxing or not, for most of us, it is a learned style.
I came across your video in the pursuit of finding what natural vibrato sounds like. My daughter is currently singing with a small worship team and she has a wonderful low tone voice like Adel I guess (probably didn’t spell that correctly) but I feel like she’s holding back her natural vibrato out of fear. I can’t find an example currently of what I’m talking about but it seems like some lower tone rock singers have an almost slightly nervous sounding natural vibrato that doesn’t seem learned at all. Literally opposite of opera but completely natural sounding. What makes it so beautiful is that it’s not perfect almost uneven if you understand what I’m trying to say.
Amzing... Ma'am
Vibrato is as natural as _singing itself_, which you have to learn.
Using clearly _culturally learned_ speaking habits to say "that's natural" while then singing that works differently is not, is entirely arbitrary.
No. Our speaking is then just as unnatural. Especially noticeable illustration in many Western countries, a naturally loud infant voice gets taught _restriction_ while being raised, because people don't like nasty loud children/persons. But there are regional differences to that just in the US, let alone world wide.
I have heard many a child who's voice would have, I'm convinced, kind of "naturally" turned into a golden age Broadway voice (minus the musicality part), had they not been hampered with that way. And it makes sense for humans to be naturally good at loud & far _calling._
Some people mean by vibrato being natural that it likes to occur "by itself". Which doesn't seem so wild.
TL;DR - one absolutely can experience an oscillation that is audible as a vibrato that wants to "run loose" on its own. Especially lower in the range, with more relaxation.
That doesn't mean that's the end product or generally useful. Muscles get trained, in coordination, by excercises to work towards vibrato ability. But once it's there, you're not quite doing exactly those exercises when singing with vibrato - there is a lot more "kept in check, running on its own" feeling to it. Which _could be_ an illusion. But training the muscles might just as well set up a better tuned mass-&-springs system that likes to oscillate but can be controlled to adequate degree, as opposed to train merely automated movement patterns. We don't actually have that of a good, detailed understanding of this aspect of why things have been trained that way they were long before any attempts at scientific investigation of these phenomena were made. (even in rather recent books on the subject I saw, they are hazy on the details here.)
As for healthier - well, according to some extremly experienced vocal pedagogues (who were worth their salt), singing straight tone typically results in less durable voices.
For instance, Joseph Klein - interestingly, mostly training choir singers, in the days when they had proper voices. I guess he does not have rigorous records, it's just his recollected experience.
It definitely feels that way if you sing with a big voice - forcing a straight tone for long is _a lot more tiring_ than singing with vibrato.
Perhaps it has some massaging effect, and gives you micro-reminders of when something is even slightly off (which will block vibrato, to dependent degree), and helps re-adjust. So always having a fluid vibrato "on" is your, perhaps not entirely conscious, guide to sing without problems. Stay on track, always.
*"Vocal Placement"* is a haphazardly dreamt up concept that has nothing to do with acoustics.
C.L. Reid gave a number of good explanations of why, even if it were a thing, it can't possibly be of use for someone training their voice, in "The Free Voice". Whether one likes the author's other ideas or not, the logic can hardly be denied. I don't have the quotes ATM. My own objections start with the _how_ of human audio directionality perception and how that could possibly be useful for this concept, or the latter in conjuntion with the former, be repeatable between individuals, as to being indicators of correctness of what one is doing. Due to unrelated goals of 1) building a voice that is to be heard by the audience, vs. 2) optimize for vague notions of direction, partly dependent on parts of the individual anatomy that don't contribute to 1) - useless sacrifice.
A, OTOH, real and tangible concept is that of _formant tuning._
3:17
I agree with you! Vibrato isn't natural and like every other aspect of singing, should be treated as a skill. There are different types that are acceptable, in general (or rather it's more common), for pop singing and not aesthetic for operatic/classical singing. Voice scientist have documented that many golden age opera singers have approximately 5-7 cycles of vibrato per second, and a distance from the primary pitch of a half step above and Maj 3rd below (or more). Additionally, there is an accent on the peak of the cycle. This more or less is the equation for optimal vibrato = "bigger" sounds