# Good voice.... born or trained?



## jurianbai

I can sing a song, technically, but my voice tone (or some say voice color ) is bad. So, a good voice, like Franks Sinatra, is it physical factor and you born with it , or can be trained ?


----------



## david johnson

both! many difficulties are overcome by simple techniques - open your mouth wide, take a good and relaxed breath, get a pretty tone on the vowels, don't force the sound.


----------



## jurianbai

when you said both, then it's mean a physical good throat is a must? again, technically many people can sing a note correctly, but to sound like that heavenly voice, not everybody can.


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent

First, you need to find what your vocal range is. I would recommend a singing teacher to find out what your vocal range is. Then you need to learn. Hitting the right notes is very good but you still need to learn how to use your voice to it's fullest potential. Playing a note on the piano does not make a person a good pianist. The same goes for any instrument. Mastering any instrument or even your own voice is way easier if you are taught than if you are learning on your own. 

If you smoke or drink and you want to be a singer, give up those habits. Diet is also an important factor. 

I have not taken vocal lessons but I plan to.


----------



## Lukecash12

You make yourself what you want to be, mostly. I sang in choir for a decade, brought my range up to 4 1/2 octaves. It just takes intuition, you have to go about it the right way. If you act like it's some sort of fantasy rather than find out the logistics of it, than you're doomed from the start.

I can tell you that you'll need to relearn how to breath. You have to inhale very deeply, and it has to be a habit. You need to do lung exercises, breath from deep inside, not as if you were just drawing a shallow breath using your throat, but drawing it into your core region.

You will also have to learn how to form vowels all over again, and in several different languages (it's not so fun tackling all of the different accents, but it's doable). Also, you will want to always warm up properly, and use the times when you're not prepared yet to do the most range stretching (just like learning to play a piece on the piano "cold", it's great to test yourself a bit before you've entirely warmed up).

Get involved in programs, too! The folks at Immanuel Reformed Church in Ripon CA, near where I live, give performances of Handel's Messiah every Christmas, and I join them most times. There are plenty of amateur groups around that sing oratorios, masses, short holy pieces, and even things like Ravel's compositions from time to time.


----------



## jurianbai

thanks. 

I've been singing in church for long time, and now perhaps already a 'senior'. It is just when we do recording and review my voice (and other member also), it's just sound amateur and laughable. But yeah, getting rid of daily accent is difficult.


----------



## david johnson

jurianbai said:


> when you said both, then it's mean a physical good throat is a must? again, technically many people can sing a note correctly, but to sound like that heavenly voice, not everybody can.


mainly just a throat that knows what it's doing in a non-tense way.


----------



## Lukecash12

david johnson said:


> mainly just a throat that knows what it's doing in a non-tense way.


Well said!


----------



## seosecrets

All of us can sing but not all of us has a great voice tone. All things are being learned, so if you say that you can sing bu not sure if it is good for others, the best thing for you can do is to enroll in a voice class where you can enhance and at the same time learn different techniques in singing. Some singers are born with good voice but most of the singers I know, were only trained.


----------



## dmg

I think genetics makes up a very large portion of it, but I also think that most people can become decent (not necessarily great or even good) with appropriate training.

Also, someone can have all the anatomy & physiology lined up, but never even attempt to sing. I witnessed an audition for a musical in college, where an individual (not really well liked by the others) who mainly participated on the technical side of theatrical productions decided to actually audition for a musical performance. It was advised by the technical theatre instructors that those seeking training in technical theatre participate in the performance side just to get that perspective.

She had no idea what to do when it came to singing. She tried, and I'm not sure what exactly came out, but it was as though she never even hummed a tune in the shower. The voice instructor pulled her aside for about 10 seconds, she came back out, and she sang extremely well (shocking everyone) - better than most who were actually auditioning because they wanted to perform (and many who took voice lessons and choir). Unfortunately she doesn't have anywhere close to a look to be a professional these days, nor did she really want to be a performer, but she had the inherent ability - she just needed someone to show her how to use it.


----------



## guitargeekette

dmg said:


> I think genetics makes up a very large portion of it, but I also think that most people can become decent (not necessarily great or even good) with appropriate training.
> 
> Also, someone can have all the anatomy & physiology lined up, but never even attempt to sing. I witnessed an audition for a musical in college, where an individual (not really well liked by the others) who mainly participated on the technical side of theatrical productions decided to actually audition for a musical performance. It was advised by the technical theatre instructors that those seeking training in technical theatre participate in the performance side just to get that perspective.
> 
> She had no idea what to do when it came to singing. She tried, and I'm not sure what exactly came out, but it was as though she never even hummed a tune in the shower. The voice instructor pulled her aside for about 10 seconds, she came back out, and she sang extremely well (shocking everyone) - better than most who were actually auditioning because they wanted to perform (and many who took voice lessons and choir). Unfortunately she doesn't have anywhere close to a look to be a professional these days, nor did she really want to be a performer, but she had the inherent ability - she just needed someone to show her how to use it.


I have to agree. Besides, you have the cases of those who were never taught, had instruction, however they are just able to find their part in a song, or just harmonize with you because it 'sounds right', and it happens to be right. Some people, however, can't do this unless they are taught...hmm lol Nature vs Nurture almost. Basically it varies in each person the ratio of genetics and training.


----------



## jurianbai

genetics, anatomy and physiology factor in making a person has a good voice, that's what I am trying to ask so far. somebody with good teeth formation, strong voice surely physical rather than trained. also how about the tendency that certain genetic also superior (or at least good) in singing, like the black / african race?


----------



## Lyricsop

jurianbai said:


> I can sing a song, technically, but my voice tone (or some say voice color ) is bad. So, a good voice, like Franks Sinatra, is it physical factor and you born with it , or can be trained ?


I'm a formally trained First Lyric Soprano who is going to debut at Carnegie Hall in January with my choir in a benefit concert to help impoverished people of third world countries and who is living breathing proof that a good voice can be honed with years of great classical singing technique. Either you can be born with the voice as they call it or you can formally classical train in vocal performance and it develops over time.


----------



## superstar88

jurianbai said:


> I can sing a song, technically, but my voice tone (or some say voice color ) is bad. So, a good voice, like Franks Sinatra, is it physical factor and you born with it , or can be trained ?


I could say that its a natural talent but "not always". There are always exemptions to the rules. Some people just really can't sing. But with proper training, you can be a good singer. Especially if you have a naturally good singing voice. Then you can be great.


----------



## Tom Rasely

*everybody sings*

In my universe, everybody who can speak can sing...even monotones! I've actually proved that. And everybody does sing at one time or another: in the shower, in the car, and when was the last time anyone "laid out" when Happy Birthday was being sung?

My vocal teacher said, "Singing is merely extended talking." There is also a listening component. If one learns to extend the sound of a word and turn it onto a note (which can be taught!), then that one next needs to learn to listen: to themselves and others.

The one great problem with all this is that we have to learn to get used to the instrument that we were born with. It's not like you can go into a music store and purchase a voice from off the rack. Some voices will never be great, or velvety, or even steady. To learn to use what voice you have, however, is not only possible, but rewarding.

Possibly another hurdle to get over is that singers don't PLAY and instruments, we ARE the instrument. And that can be very intimidating. A good teacher can really help not only with the tone production, but also with the confidence factor.
IMHO
Rasely


----------



## jurianbai

actually my initial question is about *good voice*. I've seen people who technically can sing but his voice is not good enough to be put on stage. in opposite I've seen enough people who average in singing but can safely sing on stage because he/she already has their born with voice.

I know in the end we will come out with philosophy statement, able to sing = good voice, but it will required a training.


----------



## Saturnus

I don't know if Frank Sinatra is such a good example because he never had to sing very strongly, and was also recorded with ribbon mics, who smoothen the voice and are still, despite being considered outdated, used by many radio stations for the smoothness they provide to voices. 

About your question: It's both actually. Voices that are small or ugly to begin with can only become mediocre with even the best technique and Great voices can be destroyed by bad techniques, and I have seen/heard this happen at a music University! (Never accept a technique that feels unnatural or painful with your voice, NEVER)

What's important in your case to get clear is whether your voice is actually bad or not, because only a good teacher can really hear that. Maybe your vowel use is just improper or you're using your voice unnaturally. Certain types of "e"'s sound ugly with every voice for an example.


----------



## harry

A singing voice is a physical product of birth. Vocal cords have to be the right length and move correctly when the air moves over them. Proper singing technique can make singing easier, but cannot produce a natural beauty in the voice.


----------



## dmg

I think the biggest thing about having a 'good voice' is the ability to control what you have. You may not have been born with the proper vocals to sing at The Met, but with the proper training, and with the knowledge and understanding of what you DO have, you can at least entertain on a different level, or perhaps in a different 'genre' of music.


----------



## rgz

I think this video goes a ways towards answering the question 




Now, I'm not in love with her voice, but the growth is amazing. At the beginning, Ms. Damrau's voice sounds like a fairly talented high school girl ... one who wouldn't get the lead in the school musical but would probably be a featured performer. To go from that to being a regular at the Met is quite an accomplishment and a testament to her hard work.


----------



## sospiro

I like this article from the guy who runs the Bachtrack site.

I'm always in awe of the wonderful sound most opera singers can produce & found David's account fascinating.


----------



## AlbaCountertenor

Just adding my 2 cents.

Genetics plays a big role in how good a singer you will be and also in what field of singing you will excel at. The mass and length of the vocal cords, the size and shape of the head and neck all play a part. It also helps to have good pitch and to be a really good singer this is essential. In pop and rock singing character and tone of voice is generally more important than range or technique. There are plenty of untrained famous singers who barely have 1.5 octaves but are instantly recognisable when they sing. You don't need to be great technically to be a great singer if your tone is memorable and you can impart emotion through it. You can be an untrained singer but if you can convey emotion and feeling via your voice then people will enjoy your performances.

Obviously though, singing opera is a different kettle of fish. Training is rigorous and genetics pretty much determines your voice type or fach; whether you're a bass, a tenor, a mezzo or a soprano. There's no getting away from what God gave you you, although many voices due change with age. Two octaves within your voice fach is more or less essential as is reliable pitch. Anything more than that isn't really required as you will only sing parts that your voice, by birth, is suited to, unless you're unusually talented that is. And generally you won't sing parts that your voice is not suited to, at professional level anyway. Case in point is myself. I am training as an operatic countertenor because my physical and genetic make-up have determined that my voice sounds best in a tessitura from C4 to A5 and above (my eventual countertenor range will probably be from A3 to maybe C6). I can also sing as a baritone and although my voice sounds pretty good at this range it's not good enough for a solo operatic career. I have been told that I'd get work in a chorus at best.

So, to answer the question yes a good singer is generally both born and made. However, to sing opera professionally I think that the voice has to be there in the first place. No amount of training will make a new Pavarotti if the genetic and physical make-up isn't already present.


----------



## jurianbai

@albacountertenor, that's what I'm thinking too.

i also choir and with that operatic voices, it is not much different to my other COLLEAGUE, still have a chance for NOT being recognized and blend into the choir. but when doing rock/pop song, ...it will be a disaster for me to take the vocalist rule.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

jurianbai said:


> actually my initial question is about *good voice*. I've seen people who technically can sing but his voice is not good enough to be put on stage. in opposite I've seen enough people who average in singing but can safely sing on stage because he/she already has their born with voice.
> 
> I know in the end we will come out with philosophy statement, able to sing = good voice, but it will required a training.


Model looks, intelligence, physique/health - all born with it. As with the human voice, I think it certainly helps to come naturally.


----------



## leebug

An example of this would be pop singer Christina Aguilera. She has a nice distinct tone but has a horrible and destructive singing technique. People still like her voice despite the awful technique because she was naturally gifted with one. Beyonce for example has a very ordinary tone but has great technique that has allowed her to become a great singer.

A naturally good voice backed with training is the ideal case.


----------



## jhar26

I think it's different for classical singers as opposed to popular music singers. In classical music there is a sort of ideal sound that everyone strifes for. Whitin that ideal there's room for some relatively minor differences that set one voice apart from the others and gives it it's own individuality. But those dfferences are limited because there are certain rules that can't be ignored. A, say, whiskey soaked gravely voice doesn't sound 'cool' or doesn't 'rock' when you sing Handel or Verdi - it just sounds like a mess.

In popular music however rules are much less strict and individuality counts for everything (or at least a lot) and often a (in the conventional meaning of the word) beautiful voice isn't suited for the music. "Ball and Chain" sounds great when Janis Joplin sings it but it would sound cringeworthy if Renée Fleming would do it, despite her (or even because of) her technically superior voice.


----------

