August | 2014 | Yoga for Vocalists

What makes a great performance? In singing I mean.

I should preface my post today that what I say is just purely my thoughts pouring out, not based on technical expertise. And this is a topic I’ll probably come back to time and again, and may in the future even cringe reading back what I wrote today. I apologise if I sound like a snob. Anyhow…

For now, let’s take away the physical aspects so we focus on the vocal qualities rather than, say, the looks of a singer.

In acting, the tonal quality of a voice may be viewed differently to that in singing. An actor may have a gruffy, scratchy or some other type of voice which may not necessarily be pleasant to listen to, but may be considered a “character” voice suited to the role. So, if the voice fits the role or it adds another dimension to the role, then it may be considered a “good voice” as long as it carries across to the audience and you can understand what is being said.

In singing, depending on the genre, you may have a similar type of voice. Tom Waits, Bob Dylan, Marianne Faithful, Patti Smith, Jimmy Barnes to name a few (sorry, I’m not that knowledgeable with non-classical singers so my range is limited) have very distinct voices that are like their trademark sounds and you can’t imagine them singing in any other way. But would their voices translate to classical singing? If Tom Waits sang Otello, would that be accepted by the opera crowd? Probably not. But he can be more expressive in his songs than some opera singers. I’ve also seen opera performances where the voice is beautiful, but it just doesn’t suit the role because it sounds “too clean / good”.

So what is it that makes some (vocal) performances just good singing, as opposed to something truly amazing that takes you away, moves you to tears (or laughter or whatever – I must admit, my preference is for the tragedy!)?

When I was acting, I sometimes got pulled up and told I was putting too much “colour” into the words. I liked playing with the sound of the words – the tone, emphasis, duration – which to me made them more expressive. But that doesn’t really translate. Similarly, you can’t really play too much with the words in singing. You need clear diction, you need to often change the pronunciation somewhat to creat a strong, open sound. And that, on top of hitting the note!

Which takes me to another point. Personally, it annoys me when singers are slightly flat or sharp. And if they have too much vibrato that you can’t hear the actual note. SO there are some singers hailed as amazing whose voices I don’t really like. I guess that’s just preference. But I also worry too much if a singer shows signs of struggling to hit that high note. Once that happens (the struggle that is) in a performance, I spend the rest of the show worrying. And that takes away from my enjoyment of the show, and of being able to “let go” and immerse myself in the story. Of course, if a voice was technically perfect (perfect pitch, uniform vibrato, correct length of notes) then it probably would sound horrible – and you might as well write a computer program to create the sound. So is it the minute human imperfection that makes a singing voice great? Perhaps. Timbre, vibrato, all that make up the unique voice of a singer, and I’m no expert so I’ll leave that topic to you who have been practicing technique for years. But I think there is more to it.

The word that’s been in my mind lately (having spent a few crazy weeks full of opera) is “inhabit”. Although I practice yoga, those of you who have been to my classes know that I don’t go into full spiritual mode. I don’t invoke gods, I don’t do much of “channeling your inner spirit”. I tend to focus more on the tangible level of human emotions. After all, who hasn’t felt all choked up in the throat from despair; felt a cold sweat from fear; dizzy in the head from disbelief; knots in their “stomach” from anger? Those real emotions I like to tap into (don’t worry, I don’t reduce you to a sobbing mess from distress in the classes!). Not “inhabit” with some astral body thing or divine / demonic possession or the like. And I think that when singers can tap into these real emotions and sensitivities when performing, they “inhabit” the song, the role. Sort of like “method acting” I suppose, although there’s a lot of debate over what that is and whether it is effective or not.

I recently saw the play “Master Class”. In it, Maria Callas exclaims that you must really listen to the music, and understand and feel the words in order to sing well. Basic stuff that everyone knows, but it resonated strongly with me at that moment. The difficulty is that you can’t get all choked up as Butterfly about to top yourself, and be able to sing. You still need to have the control, the openness, all the techniques in place. Cry if it suits, but you can’t let that affect your singing. Your character may be feeling defeat, which you can express in the voice, but not let it weaken or distort the voice. You may be dying, and you should make it convincing, but you still have an aria to sing. Which means, of course, you must have the strong technical basis to be able to inhabit the song without letting it negatively affect the singing.

Actually, maybe it’s the other way around. Great arias have it all: the notes, the lyrics, the dynamism, the composition. Maybe you just need to let it inhabit you, not vice versa.
Some singers are great actors – until they are about to sing their arias, when all the drama and character they’ve built up until that point is diminished as they technically prepare for the song. They can still sing beautifully, but something is lost. They are no longer inhabiting or inhabited. Is it just practice, or have some got the “gift”? The little spark that differentiates them from the masses? Inhabiting / being inhabited so that every little move, every single note and every intention is infused with that character, the role. Callas, Lenya, Piaf – it was more the way they inhabited their songs than (in my opinion) the so-called quality of their voices.

That sadness you have when a season finishes and you have to let go of a role. You miss bringing that character to life on stage even if he / she dies a horrible death each night, and you can’t sleep for hours after a show. Not just from the adrenaline of the applause, but the letting go of that character and becoming you again. Until the next performance, the next show, when you can inhabit and be inhabited.

I had the pleasure of meeting the delightful Ms Judith Hopper on the weekend, and our conversation then started me thinking about “balance”. So this post is my rambling thoughts on the subject, by no means an authoritative thesis on what balance is. Read on, and let me know your thoughts.

The word “balance” can mean a lot of different things across different areas and have different connotations depending on the circumstance and context. And what may seemed “balanced” for one person may seem “un-balanced” to another. And whilst we mainly think of achieving balance, this may not be the case. I don’t know much about art composition, but I’m sure some artists deliberately seek “un-balance” in their artworks to create interest / movement / challenge the viewer or audience.

In the context of yoga…We generally try to find and create balance through the practice, and practice with balance. We do the same poses on both sides so that we are “balanced”. We find our balance through standing balances and arm balances. We balance out the energy fields and channels in our body through yogic practices (not just the asana – poses – but also through other aspects such as breathing, use of mudras, meditation, and so on).

Doing the same poses on both sides is an interesting notion. How often in our daily lives do we make sure that we do the same things to both left and right? Many of us are not ambidextrous and use one hand to write, move the mouse, gesture, pick up the spoon. We often cross the same leg on top when sitting (warning! sitting cross legged is not recommended – although I confess I am guilty of the practice myself). Compared to the 1 – 3 hours you might spend in a day doing yoga balancing yourself out, the “un-balanced” time can be much longer. Does that mean we can’t achieve balance? Or is a little bit of conscious “balancing” better than none?

And even if you do make sure your practice has symmetry, one tends to favour a side. This could be physical (e.g. “my left hamstring is tight so I can only lunge deeply on the right side”) or perhaps there is a mental aspect to this. When I was a dancer, I was a “right spinner” – I was comfortable doing pirouettes to the right, but when it came to turning anti-clockwise, I felt like I was going to bash into a wall, like it made no sense to try to turn that way (maybe it’s just my lack of technique!). I’ve heard some yoga teachers say that if you find it much easier to do things to the right, then you should practice twice as much on the other side. Would that end up balancing you out?

Then there is the actual practice of balancing, like when you stand on one leg in the tree pose (vrksasana) or in the dancer’s pose (natarajasana). You do get better at it when you start to find (subconsciously) the correct muscles to use, the subtle shift of your weight to centre yourself, and also learn to trust yourself. But sometimes, you just can’t balance. I tend to think that this is symptomatic, in that similar to a fever indicating that your body is fighting some infection or disease, your physical balance is a physical indication of some imbalance within.

Which leads to the idea that all things are connected. Your emotions affect your health. Your state of mind affects your health and emotions. Your health can affect your feelings. All interconnected. So, if being stressed and angry can cause you to have a breakdown, develop a nasty cold or shut down your internal organs, then in a much more subtle way it must certainly affect the way you can (or can’t) balance. If your mind is too busy, full of thoughts, racing ahead – then you won’t have the calmness, steadiness and focus to be able to balance. What would be interesting to find out is, how different states of mind would affect balance on the left or right sides, considering we now know that different hemispheres of our brains have different functions. I shall do a bit of digging into that – there must be some research done on this.

On a more practical note, balance in our everyday lives keeps us literally on our feet. And when we start to lose the ability to balance, through age or health issues, then we are more susceptible to falls and injuries and limit our movement. Imbalance even on a small scale can affect posture, which in turn can lead to various disorders and discomforts. Judith mentioned machines that measure balance. Doing a bit of Google research, I found information on lots of simple tests that are conducted to measure balance, which might just involve a stopwatch to see how long a person can balance in different ways, such as standing on one leg. On a higher technical level, there are devices and sensors to mechanically determine your level of balance. This article talks about the many different methods and tools for measuring balance: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3033730/. And if you want to do a fairly basic test, try this: http://www.aahf.info/pdf/Berg_Balance_Scale.pdf. All these tools can help to identify and assess risks from lack or decline of balance.

Then how does one develop / improve balance? We go back to how yogic practices can assist, through the poses, the breathing, and the meditation for physical and mental balance. Not only does yoga deal with the left-right balance, but it also relates to the energy vortexes along the vertical axis of the body: the chakras. Chakras can seem like metaphysical mumbo-jumbo, but the theory is that they are related to actual tangible entities within the endocrine system. Of particular interest to you singers would be the 5th or throat chakra, which is tied to the thyroid, parathyroid and hypothalamus glands. This chakra is connected to communication and expression – essential for the singing performer – and those endocrine glands relate to growth, metabolism, calcium levels, muscle health, hormonal balance… the list goes on. But you don’t just “balance” one chakra, because the imbalance comes from hypo- or hyperactivity of each chakra. So, they all need to be in balance for you to be in balance, energetically and in health.

So… you can practice yoga to balance your body, balance your chakras. But you need to then balance THAT with other aspects of your life. You can’t just do an hour’s yoga each day to justify spending the rest of the day arguing and stressing yourself out, eating badly, not getting enough sleep. Is balance, then, moderation? If we walk the middle line in all aspects of life, are we balanced? That seems RATHER boring (in my humble opinion). One needs challenge, one needs stimulation, one needs to learn from dealing with the various obstacles in life – just as much as one needs quiet time, time out, time to recover and rejuvenate. So, it the peaks and troughs, I think, rather than a flat two-dimensional line. Life is unpredictable as it is; how often would you have a totally flat day unless you’re living in a controlled bubble?

The last thought of the day: so then, are we happy if we’re totally balanced (although that is probably like achieving perfection – a utopian concept)? Would we actively or unconsciously try to shift and challenge our balance just so that we can discover it again? Are humans innately “un-balanced”? Are we “doomed” (or perhaps “blessed”) by imbalance in the same way that we are “doomed” (or again, blessed!) with mortality?

OH dear, will I be able to sleep tonight? I haven’t even touched on the notion of balance = harmony… next time!

Yoga for Vocalists

Yoga for vocalists, singers and performers, with emphasis on the breath.

Monthly Archives: August 2014

That which makes a performance great..?

Balance!