So it’s been a long time coming, but Kerry and I would like to share the outcomes of our research.

Title

Exploring the benefits of the silicone phonation tube for singing teachers and students: an initial study of use over a three-month period.

(keywords: singing, teaching, phonation tube, SOVTE)

Abstract 

This study explores the initial introduction and use of a silicone phonation tube with a range of singing students working in one-to-one lessons, and one community ladies’ choir. Existing research suggests that vocalising through a tube into water can help to relax and reduce tension in the voice, allowing a more safe and efficient use of the voice (Sihvo 2017). In this study, a phonation tube was used over a three-month period in lessons and rehearsals and participants were surveyed to explore their experience. The study findings suggest that using a silicone phonation tube in water has significant potential as a tool for use in singing tuition, enabling students to develop greater understanding of the physical aspects of vocal technique and work more effectively and safely as independent learners.

Introduction

As singing teachers working in a range of educational contexts, we are each committed to finding new and effective ways to support the technical, artistic and musical development of our students. We recently explored the use of the phonation tube in a range of vocal lessons to assess the effectiveness of this tool for singing teachers and students. This article presents the background to the study, including the development of the phonation tube as an approach for helping voice-users and its potential for helping with some of the most common concerns for singing teachers and students. We will also present findings from a survey of singing students and singers, completed after the introduction and initial use of the tube in singing lessons and practice sessions. In conclusion, based on the study findings, the article will provide recommendations for the potential use of the tube as a teaching tool for singing teachers and effective practice device for students.

The phonation tube and semi-occluded vocal tract exercises                                                                                                                                             

Phonation into glass resonance tubes was introduced as a form of voice therapy by Professor Antti Sovijarvi at the Department of Phonetics at the University of Helsinki during the 1960’s. Initial research explored the impact of glass tubes with various lengths and diameters on children and adults with a range of voice problems. Sovijarvi (1965) made recommendations concerning the inner diameter and length of the glass tube according to the age and voice type of the patient. These glass resonance tubes were used for the treatment of professional singers and patients suffering from vocal fatigue as well as those suffering from vocal nodules and vocal fold paralysis (Sovijarvi 1977, 1989).

This form of device continues to be used in various types of treatment, whether the aim is to achieve a normal well-functioning voice or as Simberg and Laine (2007) suggest, in the case of patients with neurological disorders, to help delay the deterioration of the strength and quality of the voice (2007, p.166).

In 2004/05 Marketta Sihvo, a Finnish Voice Therapist working at Tampere University Hospital, researched the effectiveness of a silicone version of the tube, which she called the Lax Vox© in helping referred voice patients recover the use of their voice (Sihvo 2017). In Sihvo’s approach, a length of silicone tube of 35cm with a diameter of around 1cm inserted into a receptacle of water of varying depths, although 3-5cm depth was suggested initially. Patients are encouraged to phonate through the tube, whilst keeping the water bubbling constantly. The device is recommended for those who have existing vocal problems and also for general use in warming up, cooling down and relaxing the voice and also for the prevention of vocal problems and incorrect vocal habits. She also advocates use of the tube to maintain the voice as ‘a functional tool of vocal communication’, and ‘when learning to control your voice and your behaviour’ (2017, p.68). Her work provides a record of improvement and rehabilitation for patients suffering from a range of voice complaints including fatigue and loss, hoarseness, laryngeal sensations, effortful speaking and voice break. While the introduction of a silicone version of the tube can be regarded as a positive development since the tubing is readily available and affordable from hardware stores, is easily stored and reduces the risk of breakage, it is worth noting that Simberg and Laine (2007) suggest that the use of silicone tubing may not be as effective as the glass tube since the material seems to absorb the sound, which they suggest ‘makes the auditory feedback blurred’ (2007, p.169).

In addition to developments around the use of the resonance and phonation tube, a wealth of research has taken place to explore the effectiveness of using semi-occluded vocal tract exercises(SOVTE) in voice training or as part of voice therapy (Simberg and Laine 2007, Titze 2006, Dargin and Searle 2015, Fantini et al. 2017). According to Simberg and Laine (2007), exercises of this kind used in voice therapy can have ‘a positive effect on the voice because they enhance a more efficient and economic voice production’ (2007, p.170).

Titze (2006), explored traditional exercises of this nature used widely by singing teachers, including lip trills and humming in voice training (spoken) and therapy, concluding that ‘a semi-occlusion in the front of the vocal tract (at the lips) heightens source–tract interaction by raising the mean supra-glottal and intra-glottal pressures’ (2006, p.448) Phonating whilst using any exercises where the vocal tract is occluded, practically-speaking, involves a raising of glottal pressures which in turn allows for a more efficient use of the vocal cords.

In a study of voice users by Calvache et al.,(2019 in press) it was concluded that ‘Phonation into a tube submerged deep in water promoted the highest increase in vocal economy’ with the ‘benefits of increased acoustic output, non-proportional increase in vocal folds adduction and an effortless voice production’ (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30738783). Most interestingly, perhaps, is that this conclusion was not limited to those with impaired speaking voices, as healthy subjects were also used.  Similarly positive findings are presented by Fantini et al., (2017) in a study of a trained commercial singers who used SOVTE, ‘showing immediate advantageous effects on singing voice of a semi-occluded vocal tract exercise with a ventilation mask in terms of acoustic quality, phonatory comfort, and voice quality perception’ (2017 p.336). The Fantini et al. (2017) research chose a group of singers to establish whether a SOVTE helped the voice immediately after use and did not explore the longer-term effectiveness of this approach.

A recent review by Mendes et al. (2019), concluded that ‘phonation into glass tubes immersed in water, straws, and Lax Vox tubes promoted positive effects on the voices quality in singers, such as more comfortable phonation, better voice projection, and economy in voice emission’ (2019, p. 381.e1). Similar findings were reported by Goncalves et al, (2019), who found that ‘phonation exercise into a silicone tube caused an immediate positive effect on gospel singers’ voice and comfort phonation’ though both the Mendes and Goncalves et al, studies focussed on the immediate impact of such devices rather than potential for use as a tool in singing tuition and practice.

The findings in this study, inspired by existing work around the benefits of SOVTE for singers (Chapman 2012), suggests that the phonation tube can be a useful addition to a singing teacher’s tool kit, as well as a device that can offer its user and observer/teacher significant insights, via bio-feedback into important aspects of fundamental technical issues. The use of the device for student singers and singing teachers can perhaps be further refined, not just to increase voice efficiency but to aid with more intricate issues involving understanding and control over the unseen vocal instrument and supporting respiratory system. As Shewell (2009) describes, teachers ‘encourage clients to listen in a different way, by feeling a sensation. Clients need to ‘tune into’ body or breath, or the link between voice and feeling’ (Shewell 2009, p.20). This study suggests that the phonation tube is a tool which can be useful in relation to the specific technical concerns and issues experienced by singing teachers and students.  

Common technical concerns for singers and singing teachers

It is accepted that as teachers, we are committed to ‘bringing out the best possible voice in a student and to knowing as much as possible about the field’ (Shewell 2009, p.8). The active role of the teacher is central in the process of developing technical skills and understanding in student singers. Rose (1971) highlights the significance of the teaching process, suggesting that ‘knowledge alone is not enough’ and proposing that the teacher must have, ‘the ability to observe, analyse and reject that which does not produce results’ (Rose 1971, p.22).

Fundamental vocal issues highlighted in the literature in this field include efficient breathing, dealing with constriction, register breaks and maximising resonances within the vocal tract. It is generally agreed that effective voice production requires a healthy degree of tension (Shewell 2009). In many vocal pedagogy guides, the skills needed to produce optimum voice, singing or otherwise, are explored in specific order, with a general agreement on those suggested by Houseman in ‘Finding your Voice’ (2002) – body, breath, support, releasing the sound, resonance and articulation.  

Being able to use the full range of voice including high notes is an issue all singing teachers need to address with their students. Husler and Rod-Marling (1976) suggest that the ‘high range is the product of a special co-ordinate action of various muscle-systems’ and ‘a number of actions can easily obstruct it’ (1976, p.104). Rose (1971) also highlights the need for increased tension in the breathing muscles but recognises that the untrained singer ‘rarely increases these tensions sufficiently’ (1971, p.147). Smith and Chipman (2007) also address the technical issues students can experience with singing higher pitches. Here, the pedagogic response is ‘it’s not how high you get- it’s how you get high…without the sensation of resistance, with the air-flow lifting the soft palate… the goal is to get the sensation of free-flowing air’ (2007, p.73-74).

Smith and Chipman also offer the following observation on soft-singing: ‘We learn…and develop a habit of decreasing airflow and increasing tension whenever we sing softly. Unfortunately, decreased airflow and increased tension are the opposite of what we need to do’ (2007, p.73-74). The idea of airflow being essential to producing a tone of quality is backed up by Rose (1971), who proposes that ‘correct breath flow through control of inspiration and expiration’ is necessary in producing a good quality sung note (1971, p.261).

The phonation tube submerged in water provides the opportunity to view the free-flowing air in its flow of bubbles during phonation. The tube inside the mouth around which the lips are required to make a seal for the device to function properly, also provides a basic mouth position which cannot easily be altered and gives enough space ‘to keep the jaw joints relaxed during the exercise’. The fluttering sensation, felt within the cheeks during use, makes for relaxation of the musculature of the mouth and cheeks which can be areas of tension. Using the tube, individuals are able to identify and resolve areas of tension through bio feedback, allowing greater vocal and facial resonance. 

The study

The aim of this study was to explore the potential of the phonation tube as a tool to help singing teachers and students address technical issues in lessons and practice sessions. The key research questions relate to whether students find the device useful and whether they perceive any benefits in their singing as a result of using the tube.

The study involved singing students in a range of teaching contexts where the two researchers are involved as singing teachers, including private students of varying age and ability, students aged 7 – 18 in an independent school, individual singing students in a girls’ grammar school, undergraduate singers in a university music department and members of a local ladies choir. The researchers introduced the device in lessons over a period of three months in Spring 2019, working with a total of 62 individual singing students plus 12 volunteer members of the ladies’ choir.  Singing teachers working in the same institutions also agreed to introduce the device to students during the same period. Participating students received a tube which was used during lessons and were given instructions on its use in independent practice sessions. Each individual was encouraged to practice exercises and sections of repertoire, alternating between singing into the tube (with one end submerged in water) and singing without the device. During lessons the researchers as practitioners demonstrated using the device and observed progress, sharing experiences and feedback with each other during the process. Volunteers from the ladies’ choir were each given a tube and instructed on its use. They were then encouraged to use the device during choir warm ups and in independent practice sessions.

An online survey was designed and distributed to students via email towards the end of the three-month period to address the initial research questions. The survey link was sent directly to older students and choir members (with the appropriate permission from each institution) and via parents to younger participants. The survey asked participants to reflect on their initial impressions of the device, any notable impact from use and the use of the tube in practice. Finally, participants were asked whether they would recommend the device to other singing students / singers. While some questions, such as the age and gender of participants gave a selection of possible responses, the majority allowed for comments to allow greater insights into the experience and perceptions of participants. The survey findings were analysed using comparison and filtering tools to establish general trends and explore the responses of participants where relevant. Where responses were missing the analysis was performed using only existing responses rather than making any attempt to infer or generalize from any missing data.

Ethical issues

The researchers were aware from the outset that their position as teachers in this context could compromise the validity of any findings as the students involved might be unduly influenced by the teaching relationship. Specifically, the student (especially a younger or more impressionable student) may seek to provide a favourable response for the teacher or the response they think is correct, rather than reflecting openly on their own experience and perceptions. It was therefore vital that the survey was anonymous and that the teacher was removed from the completion process. For this reason, the survey was only available to complete online and student participants were reassured that their responses would be anonymous and that all views were valid and vital to the study. Furthermore, the researchers were conscious that as singers and singing teachers, each also working with the device during the period of the study, their perceptions might influence the outcomes of the study. For this reason, the survey design allows each participant to be able to comment, in an attempt to fully represent their voice in the findings rather than the perceptions of the researchers.

Care was taken to ensure the positive experience of participants, specifically in relation to the perception of the project goals as relating to the potential use of the device rather than the ability of the individual student. It was anticipated that some individuals may feel that a less favourable response might imply some lack of progress or practice on their part. Participants were reassured that their perceptions of the phonation tube were the focus of the research rather than their ability or performance and the survey questions focussed on what participants thought of the device rather than on their perceptions of their own singing or progress.

The sample

The survey was sent out to all students using the tube in lessons and rehearsals over the three-month period. There were 43 survey responses in total, of which 84% were female and 16% male students, corresponding with the male / female ratio in singing students involved in the study. The age range is also representative of the sample, with 7 participants from the under 12 age group, 15 aged from 13 to 18, 9 from 19 to 24, 3 from 25 to 50 and 9 aged 51 and over. The age range therefore reflects the various contexts in which the device was introduced.

Participants were asked to identify their level of experience or expertise from three given options. The responses reflect the age range and institutional contexts of the survey as 17 participants identified as beginner singers, 22 as more advanced singers or singing students and 3 as professional voice users. The majority of participants participated in singing lessons and additional singing activities such as choirs and singing groups. While most were introduced to the phonation tube by a singing teacher or choir director, the device was recommended to some by participants in the study and they subsequently volunteered to take the survey.

Using the tube – experience and perceptions

Asked to reflect on their initial impressions of the tube, participants commented that it seemed strange or weird but most were intrigued to explore the possible benefits to their singing. The responses with regard to the experience of using the device in the first session reflect an immediate impact with participants describing ‘immediate freedom in movement and tone’ and ‘a ‘freeness’ and ease in the voice that is otherwise very difficult to recreate’. Participants also describe feeling ‘significant increase in sound production’ and the majority describe experiencing an immediate impact on breath control and projection during the initial use of the device. For some, the introduction of the device was transformative, as described in the following response, ‘I found that the strain I was putting on my voice in order to sing higher notes was reduced and phrases and shapes of the music became easier especially regarding to breathing’. Others describe a physical response as the phonation tube ‘instantly engaged the core area’, helping participants to ‘figure out where to sing from’ and identify what they had been ‘doing wrong for so long’.

Asked whether they have continued to use the device in their practice since the initial introduction, 8 suggested that they use it in every session while 33 respondents indicated that they had used it sometimes or often. Only one participant suggested that they have not used it in practice. Participants suggest that the device is easy to use in practice sessions, with most using it during warm-ups and to work on problematic passages or phrases as described in this participant’s response, ‘It is very easy to use – a tube in a water bottle! In practice I have used the tube to work on reaching higher notes that I normally find difficult to sing. I have also used it to see my breath control – more so the lack of it- as this can be seen in the bubbles that singing into the tube creates’.

With regard to more general impact on the singing voice as a whole, the majority of participants describe improvements, including an increase in tone, sounding ‘richer and stronger’, feeling the breath coming ‘from the stomach area’ and greater freedom across the vocal range. In addition, responses suggest that the device ‘immediately relaxes the tone and helps ease and place the voice’ and is helpful with ‘finding ‘space’ in the upper register and creating a sense of ease in more difficult passages of music’.

41 of the participants suggested that there has been a positive impact on their singing as a result of using the phonation tube with improvements including a clearer, stronger tone, increased support and less strain, a more relaxed sound and more freedom on the whole, especially in the upper register. 40 respondents stated that they planned to continue using the device in their regular practice routine and all 43 participants confirmed that they would recommend the tube to other singing students and singers.

From the teachers’ perspective

The original idea for exploring the phonation tube as a singing teaching tool came from a desire to help students develop a much deeper understanding of the use of relaxation within the vocal mechanism. Existing research had suggested the therapeutic effect upon voices and increased voice quality brought about by increased vocal cord adduction (Mendes et al. 2019, Fantini 2006, Calvache et al. 2019). This study provides new evidence which confirms the benefits of the tube as a tool for singing students, singers and singing teachers.

As a learning tool, it became clear during this study that the tube helped separate the emotional and technical aspects of the singing voice, allowing students to explore the familiar physical act from a different perspective (Shewell 2009). This, in itself, was of enormous benefit as psychological issues can really interfere with the process involved in developing the voice. The novelty of the device helped relax the students and they seemed to enjoy this approach to technical work, engaging with the physical process and encouraged by the increased understanding of breathing through immediate bio-feedback. Using the tube in lessons allowed teacher and student to focus on the technical aspects of voice production in a relaxed and at times fun way while each were aware of the process and of the impact of the device. Once students understood that all postural habits associated with good singing applied, and that the mouth was to remain as relaxed as possible to enable ‘cheek fluttering’, using the device meant that further instruction could be given to develop even more efficient breathing. Furthermore, it was easier to correct errant posture and mouth tension habits because the focus was on the process rather than the product, allowing work on technical issues without the censure of an unpleasant outcome.

Breathing regulation is a potentially difficult area for student singers because until the individual understands the sensations and how to control various parts of the breathing anatomy, it can be a frustrating process which is not necessarily assisted by the audio feed-back gained from singing (Rose 1971, Smith and Chipman 2007). For many participants in this study, the phonation tube helped to identify where and how the breath was being used and enabled student and teacher to assess weaker or in some cases missing aspects of the process.  Students can potentially understand the theory of effective breath control but have little idea about how to affect this in practice and teachers commonly adopt a variety of strategies including imagery to be able to communicate technique, especially with younger singers (Emmons 1988, Peckham 2010). O’Connor (2019) suggests, ‘At first, most vocal students view breath management as a difficult, unnatural activity that they must somehow attempt to do while trying to sing, as though the two are separate tasks that they must train themselves to do simultaneously’, (Singwise 2019). The phonation tube provides immediate bio-feed-back in the production of a steady stream of bubbles, enabling the student to connect the breath and the voice in one physical act. The regulation of breath through the tube creates the correct muscular tension sensations which enable students to discover what they need to do without strain or damage. This in turn means that the student is able to work independently, reinforcing technical work without the assistance of the teacher and constantly developing both technical ability and understanding of the way in which their voice works.

Accessing the upper register and maintaining a consistent tone across the whole vocal range and into the upper voice can be a real concern for students and teachers of singing (Husler and Rod-Marling 1976, Rose 1971, Smith and Chipman 2007).  Sirening (sliding slowly up through the voice to higher pitches) using the device was a particularly helpful exercise in this respect. The use of sirening in combination with the tube is advocated by Sihvo (2017) and is also commonly employed as a warm up strategy by singing teachers, since as Williams (2013) suggests, the ‘higher range can be encouraged with the use of non-singing ‘noises’ such as whooping, wailing, sighing’ (Williams 2013, p.49). The use of sirening in combination with the tube revealed to some students that they often expected the voice to raise in pitch with very little breath support. Because of the tube and water, it was clear to see through the decrease or lack of bubbles in the water the breath that was passing through the vocal mechanism. In some cases, the bubbles completely stopped, showing them that if there was a product, it was produced without the necessary breath. It often came as a surprise that the notes did not function but pointing out the lack of air gave a tangible reason. This aspect of the device as a teaching and learning tool is particularly interesting, since as Kayes (2004) comments ‘during singing it is not always easy to monitor what is happening with the larynx’ (2004, p.18). For some students, the tube provided a real and useful indication of the physical process involved in the form of bio- feedback, and enabled them to monitor and regulate the connection between the breath and the voice whilst singing. As a result, high notes came much more easily through the tube which then gave increased confidence and most, if not all of the students were able to sing higher in their sung voice, as a result of phonating higher in sirens and other exercises though the tube.

One of the most noticeable effects of the use of the tube in almost all students was the immediate difference in the quality of the singing voice after using it for warming up. Voices responded by being more efficiently supported with fuller and better-quality tone in all registers, particularly middle and upper. Williams (2013) identifies inconsistencies in tone as a key area of concern with younger voices, suggesting that breathiness ‘is often an issue …the teenage girl will have a strong and well-developed lower range and a comparatively weak and breathy upper range’ (Williams, 2013, p.60). Working with the tube, students with ‘breathy’ voices were among those who seemed to benefit most. The simple fact that they found a much more ‘on the body’ support meant that their vocal cords had the required pressure to fully adduct freely. Existing voice breaks in the upper passaggio in younger female students were also tackled using the tube. Singing notes which were unstable and not fully functioning through the ‘break’ were sung with apparent ease through the tube. The combination of relaxation and increased breath support seems to have a particularly positive impact on work in this ‘break’, providing an essential confidence boost for the students.

Another benefit discovered whilst working with the tube was in the realm of resonance across the vocal range. The optimal use of the tube requires the cheeks and mouth area to be relaxed and slack. It was the freedom of these areas promoted by the need for relaxation which helped promote some students to find a much more frontal resonance area adding to the fullness and carrying-power of the tone. Using the idea of recreating the mouth position meant students with tight production in the jaw and mouth were able to experiment with a looser approach. In addition, the tongue position which can be an issue when using words, once tucked with its root at the bottom teeth seemed to be less of an issue when using the phonation tube.

Conclusion

As a voice therapist, Sihvo (2017) articulated her original aims in the development of her approach was, ‘to find some magic wand or something that people would always remember from the first session, and even after a single session understand more about their voice than they did before… They should take responsibility of the progress and the success themselves training every day at home’ (2017 p17). For many participants in this study, the phonation tube was indeed a ‘magic wand’, providing immediate and transformative help with technical issues such as breath control, support, tone and resonance. The most common feedback from participants relates to feelings of ease and freedom experienced as a result of using the device. This freedom and ease, along with an increased awareness of the way in which the breath connects with and supports the voice, represent real benefits for many participants and their understanding and confidence have been enhanced as a result.

Based on the introduction and initial use of the device, the study findings suggest that the silicone phonation tube can be a valuable tool for use in singing teaching and learning, allowing students to engage on a practical level with the technical aspects of their singing and facilitating increased independence in the development of safe, effective vocal technique.

Recommendations for further research

This is a small-scale study of singers in a localised area, already involved in some form of vocal tuition, the majority in traditional one-to-one formal singing lessons with a focus on more classical repertoire and technique. As already stated, the majority of participants were known to the researchers, who as singing teachers participated in the study through the introduction and use of the tube, monitoring progress and providing feedback throughout the process. Some survey participants however were not known to the researchers having been recommended the tube by fellow students or friends. The survey responses suggest that these individuals shared the positive impressions of the device as a singing tool.

The study is also limited in the time frame, focusing primarily on the introduction and initial use of the phonation tube over a three-month period only. Having established that there can be significant benefits involved in the use of the device for singing students of various ages and abilities as represented in this study, it would now be of interest to extend the research, perhaps across more institutions or organisations, or a wider network of teachers, to assess the impact of long-term use of the device as a tool for singing teachers and students. The smallest group represented in the survey sample is professional voice users. It might be useful in future to further explore the use and potential benefits of the device for this professional group, perhaps via a professional body.  There is also potential for a similar study to explore the use of phonation tubes for singers working in other styles and contexts such as pop singers, folk singers and in group tuition, voice workshops or choral warm-up sessions. Also, participants suggested that the device might be useful for players of brass and wind instruments, especially with regard to breath regulation and support. This study concludes that there is clearly potential for further research regarding the effective use of the phonation tube in a range of contexts.

References

Calvache, C., Guzman, M., Bobadilla, M. and Bortnem, C. (2019 in press). Variation on Vocal Economy After Different Semi-Occluded Vocal Tract Exercises in Subjects With Normal Voice and Dysphonia. Journal of Voice. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30738783 (epub ahead of print)

Chapman, J. (2012). Singing and Teaching Singing. San Diego: Plural Publishing

Dargin, T. & Searle, J. (2015). Semi-Occluded Vocal Tract Exercise: Aerodynamic and Electroglottographic Measurements in Singers. UK: Journal of Voice, 29 (2)

Emmons, S. (1988). Breathing for Singing. Journal of Voice, 2 (1)

Fantini, M., Succo, G., Crosetti, E., Borragán Torre, A., Demo, R. and Fussi, F. (2017). Voice Quality After a Semi-Occluded Vocal Tract Exercise With a Ventilation Mask in Contemporary Commercial Singers: Acoustic Analysis and Self-Assessments. Journal of Voice, 31 (3), pp.336-341

Houseman, B. (2002). Finding your voice. London: Nick Hern Books

Husler, F. & Rodd-Marling Y. (1976). Singing: The Physical Nature of the Vocal Organ. London: Hutchinson

GONCALVES, Daniela Macedo dos Rios et al. (2019). Immediate effect of phonation into silicone tube on gospel singers. CoDAS [online]. 31 (6)     [cited  2020-01-30], e20180117. Available from <http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2317-17822019000600309&lng=en&nrm=iso&gt;.  

Kayes, G. (2004). Singing and the Actor. 2nd edition: London A. & C. Black 

Nelson, S. & Blades-Zeller, E. (2002). Singing with your whole self. Maryland: Scarecrow Press Inc.

Peckham, A. (2010). The Contemporary Singer: Elements of Vocal Technique. Boston: Berklee Press

Rose, A. (1971). The Singer and the Voice -Vocal Physiology &Technique for Singers. Bristol: Western Printing Services Ltd.

Shewell, C. (2009). Voicework: Art and Science in Changing Voices. W Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell

Sihvo, M. (2017). History of the Lax Vox© tube exercise. Mauritius: Lambert Academic Publishing

Simberg, S. & Laine, A. (2007). The Resonance tube method in voice therapy: Description and practical implementations. Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology, 32, pp.165-170

SingWise. 2019. http://singwise.com/cgi-bin/main.pl?section=articles&doc=EffectiveAndProperBreathingForSinging. [ONLINE] Available at: http://singwise.com/cgi-bin/main.pl?section=articles&doc=EffectiveAndProperBreathingForSinging. [Accessed 24 August 2019]

Smith, W. S. & Chipman, M. (2007). The Naked Voice: A wholistic Approach to Singing. New York: OUP

Sovijarvi, A. (1965). Die Bestimmung der Stimmkategorien mittels Resonanzrohren. Kongr Phon Wiss.  pp.532-535.

Sovijarvi, A. et al., (1989). Instructions for vocal exercises. Helsinki: Publications of Suomen Puheopisto.

Sovijarvi, A. (1977). Some observations of the treatment of functional dysphonia. Publications of the Finnish Society for Phoneticians ad Logopedists. pp.19-22

Titze, I.  (2006). Voice training and Therapy with a Semi-Occluded Vocal Tract: Rationale and Scientific Underpinnings. USA: Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 49

Williams, J. (2013). Teaching singing to Children and Young Adults. Oxford: Compton

As the academic year draws to a teaching close for me, I am finding that I am again reflecting on the digital tools which have proved useful (nay, essential)for me personally.

Voice Record Pro

A free app which as the name suggests is not only a voice recording app, but also an easy way to make simple edits to recordings. You can choose to record in a number of ways, but to save space (and at the censure of some more Techie colleagues) I use MP3’s. VRP is also a convenient way to store your music, backings, performances etc. offline for use without the need for WiFi. You can sort your recordings however you want and relabel as you like.

Music Tutor

A free app which is massively helpful to students to learn to read music. You can set up the things you want to be tested on, treble clef notes for example, the range, and the amount of time you are tested – 1 min, 5, or 10 minutes. Then the app just shows (and plays) notes while you select which letter they are. The recognition skills after using this app are astounding. Even the child who finds reading music really hard can enjoy visibly getting better, with a total score and accuracy percentage given at the end. If you log in, it logs your progress too.

ABRSM Singing

If your pieces are included in the ABRSM song book plus publications, this is a useful app to provide accompaniments, which it is possible to change the tempo or key on at the touch of a button. The app itself is free, but you pay for the accompaniments either as a whole book, or per song.

ABRSM Aural Training

Whether you are a youngster or seasoned exam-taker, its always useful to have lots of practice in hearing the way aural tests will be presented in an exam. As a teacher I love this app, because it means that I have the full array of exercises at my fingertips in an instant and my students don’t have to put up with my inaccurate piano playing! In the upper grades whether you take ABRSM or Trinity exams, there are exercises on modulations and cadences which are incredibly useful. In the Grade VIII exercises, the singing of the lower part is also presented in such a way as you can use this as sight singing practice for lower grades. The Trainer for Grades I to V are really progressive and offer the kinds of comment which students would be expected to offer in an exam, so even the choosing of the appropriate features of music is informative, providing candidate with a suitable vocabulary and ideas as to what to listen for or comment on.

ForScore

Since becoming the proud new owner of an IPad Pro at the beginning of the academic year, this app has been amazing for storing all the music scores and PDFs I use in lessons. A very kind and tech-savvy colleague shared books which I had copies of myself, direct to my Ipad in the matter of seconds via IDrop. It means that as a teacher I have a significantly less heavy bag to carry into work! Using this app is brilliant as all the functionality needed to make a musicican’s life simple is here. You can add multiple recordings to songs, which can appear by themselves or within a book, using the bookmark tab. You can mark up a score on the app, and send the new marks to your student and then easily remove them afterwards. You can also assign recordings on various online storage devices like Box to particular songs. Importing from audio sent via email is also possible. You can then play that track whilst you scroll through the music. You can even get the page to turn over at specific points in that music. Your onboard camera can be used to add music to your library which are immediately converted into PDFs and easy to share. This is an app for serious musicians but would also be amazing for any student who wants to store their own music online in a single app. The price tag of around £15 is completely worth the outlay.

Box

Online storage. Once you’re logged in, use it to store all your backings; instantly accessible and can be sent at the touch of a button.

Many musicians, artists of all sorts, writers, actors are feeling the pinch at the moment. Performing work finished for many of us weeks before total lockdown in the UK began and there is little sign of it picking up in a way that means any of us can earn a living from performing. When it does pick up, the nature of it will undoubtedly be changed in the short term and probably impact long-term Arts policies and employment opportunities for Artists and Musicians.

Musicians began to try to replace the performing they need to be involved in by posting online performances, sometimes as a means to get choirs, instrumental ensembles and community music groups working towards a goal and others simply taking many of the parts by themselves just as a personal creative outlet. Mostly, the process involved in these performances are the fundamental reason for their being. The product is not always artistically satisfying but serves as a monument to the continuing love and commitment that we share for our music-making.

Unfortunately online performances, even of the highest quality, including those from the Royal Opera House, of opera and ballet, the National Theatre and Professional Music Theatre shows are not earning money. The shows are being aired – from our front room we are able to view quality shows from corners of the earth without cost. I’m sure we are all grateful that in these bleak times, lacking the ability to get our ‘art fix’ in the flesh, that we can log on to stream these events instead. Sadly though, as every artist expected to work without pay knows, exposure does not pay bills. At some point we have to face the emergency we are rapidly moving towards at an alarming rate. The Arts cannot survive on fresh air alone.

So the issue is not just for those who are performing is it? We are seeing a very real symptom of the problem in the form of collapsing Music Services, educational establishments like the York Minster Song School, who provide choristers for York Cathedral closing down through financial hardship. As parents tighten their belts with possible redundancies in the offing, music lessons are shelved. Online lessons rightly or wrongly viewed as perhaps less effective than face-to-face options. Additional choirs and orchestral groups being unable to work together in real time because of the time latency issue. Teachers of instruments which are large and usually accessed by pupils in school and learners do not have at home have been unable to move lessons online.

For those employed, furloughing is a short-term pay protection, for those who were lucky enough to qualify for the Government Self Employed payout, again these are short-term fixes for a problem which is not going away until musicians and music teachers are able to work properly again. If you had an income from both employed and self-employed work, your income will most certainly have shrunk but despite the tax burden on self employed earnings, unless the earnings are over 50% of your income, there is no help available to you. The vast majority of music teachers are on zero hours contracts. The day of reckoning will come when we see the returning student numbers in September. If you are employed, when your student numbers shrink, there is currently no safety-net and your performing work has dried up….these are the realities many of us are facing.

All schools are worried about the process of normal education. Sadly the delivery of ‘extras’ like music lessons are understandably perhaps not a priority for all establishments, especially against a backdrop where there is simply not enough space even for 3 year groups with depleted numbers in primary schools. Appointments and work for musicians and music teachers hang in the balance as we wait with baited breath for the latest positive spin on the risk-factors involved in playing musical instruments and singing, not just for professionals, but also for amateurs and children. The uncertainty of it all is not only mentally exhausting but scary – livelihoods and vocations are threatened. Many of us will not survive and will have no option but to do something else. When that happens the wealth of our Arts culture with be further impaired as the need to put food on the table will overtake the ability to go back to our beloved vocational jobs – this will impact on society in ways we have no way to measure.

Arts at Universities and Conservatoires are working out what they can offer their students on perfomers’ courses. We have yet to see whether University student numbers will be impacted and whether this will also be an on-going issue for the desire for students to spend their university loans on courses for which there is currently no employment…

The big names of Simon Rattle and Mark Elder have begun to wake people up to the desperate state of the Arts but many people will be asking themselves why they should be worrying about the Arts, given they are a luxury, aren’t they?

One thing I know: this whole pandemic situation has shown is that people NEED the Arts more than ever. Whether it’s Netflix, the written word, streaming of arts programmes, crafting, music, learning a new instrument or relying on your individual music lesson as an emotional crutch to get you through the week, the Arts are necessary. The NHS looks after our physical health. The network of Arts helps looks after our mental well-being and a world where the Arts are not valued will be a bleak and unhappy place to survive when the dust settles.

At the end of the working week, it’s true, no sane person wants to re-live any lessons they have given but it’s such an informative process and comedic at the same time.

It’s not that during the lesson you’re not fully aware that you are on screen the whole time or can’t see yourself, but focus is always on the student – as well as compensating for the technical glitches or audio limits of online lessons and doing your best to say what you mean in a way that can be received well, you can’t be expected to monitor every look or nuance.

I began reviewing bits of lessons for other reasons to begin with; looking for the moments that I thought I might send to the school special needs co-ordinator to show exactly the behaviour I felt needed flagging up to show a particular student’s difficulties. I have to confess though, after reviewing the footage, I wondered whether I actually wanted anyone viewing my own performance!

It made me realise that sometimes the things we do to reinforce what we’re trying to say which probably work in face-to-face interactions, might not be the same in our online interactions. The resting face we usually present is the one that our students come back to when they look up. If your resting face is as scary as I saw mine to be, it’s good to know! Another colleague has referred to this as her ‘resting bitch-face’ and I immediately knew what she meant when looking at my own footage. Thankfully, mostly our students don’t see that – they’re concerned with the business of thinking and learning but in a recorded lesson, they can watch this part of your reaction and sometimes it’s not pretty!

I am usually very animated in the flesh – of course that hasn’t changed, but perhaps on a small screen that animation might be more focussed! I guess the most cringey moments are when I need a student to stop because they have something not quite right, a note, a vowel, a pronunciation etc…. I necessarily want to grab their attention and often hold my hand up or wave, or in desperation seem to shout ‘STOP’ more times than is necessary…. but then you have to realise that the recording is recording both parts in real time, so the video does not necessarily see the same things at the same time as I do. I’ve also notice that my poker face when I wish students have practised more (or at all) could do with some work! And my hand gestures to get my point across at times has led to a distinctly red face when reviewed after the lesson.

As I’ve said before, having supportive colleagues whom you can call up at the end of the day is essential to one’s sanity. They always have plenty of essential advice. Whatever you do, sometimes lessons just don’t go the way you hoped, and that’s the same as in face-to-face interactions. It is however, very important to FINISH the video call before making comment on the lesson when it’s being recorded, a colleague of mine wisely advised this week after a tense few moments reviewing the captured under-the-breath exasperation which he was not sure had been clear….

It’s also important to review the things you got right. The moments when you paid a compliment and watched the student visibly smile. The moments when finally the hurdle is overcome and your relief is palpable which the student knows is the positive judgement on their work. That moment of ‘well done’ is worth replaying for yourself – you helped get your student there and can enjoy that success with them.

You can’t recreate the synergy you feel in the room when you work with each student, but you can do your best to make that relationship come alive and try your best to bring your personality out without over-compensating for not being in the same room with your student.

I began my online school compliment of teaching in earnest this week. The directive from my main source of teaching was to use teams and record the lessons within this app. Although there are some issues with the idea of systematically recording lessons, the argument put forward by the establishment that I work for which I found most compelling is the protection issue. Music teachers delivering lessons do need to feel that they won’t be accused of inappropriate behaviour. Reservations that I had about anyone being able to access these lessons are probably not worth worrying over; the only people who have access to the recording are you and those added to the lesson.

So what are my top tips?

1. Add your lesson to the student calendar and badger them to accept the invitation. This calendar facility is great; both you and your pupil are pinged when the lesson is created and 15 minutes beforehand. It’s worth knowing too that on a mobile device you can only record the lesson if it is scheduled as a meeting.
2. I often set up the recording when I enter the meeting, not necessarily when the student arrives. This means that you set up the expectation that students will arrive on time. When I arrive, I give them a minute to join. If not, there is a handy tool to nudge them with a call direct to the meeting – just select participants, click on their name and there will be a ‘invite them to join’ option. It also means that should someone not be happy that their lesson has not been the full length, you can show that you were there waiting.
3. If a student does not arrive having accepted the meeting and you can’t raise them using the above process, I usually stop the recording and restart, I then proceed to give them the lesson that I was hoping to give. This might be a recap on pronunciation, a description of musical context and translation, a suggestion of breathing places, talking and modelling tricky phrases which you instinctively know will be an issue. I might also use that time to create or send other resources; a learning track, a pdf of a new song, a call and response with gaps, detailed look at the melody, anything that will assist. At the end, I will leave time for me to email that student telling them that there is a lesson for them to pick up at their leisure. This also protects you from having to find another window to take that lesson, having already wasted 5-10 minutes of your time checking if the student will actually appear. Recorded sessions at these times are also extremely useful; they can be re-accessed as many times as the student wants in the week.
4. If the connection is bad or IT is not working on your student’s side, you have a couple of choices – do what you can to carry on, sort out the issue or record the lesson as above so at least there is something positive. Alternatively, as it’s an issue which is beyond their control, or at your discretion, you could abort and offer to reschedule if you are able.
5. I have a team of singing students in the same organisation. You can add resources to the ‘files’ tab for the team which you may need in the lesson or for downloading at another point. This means that students can be more proactive about getting their resources ready. You can only add the files from a PC though, not iPads…. I have to confess I do email resources across if asked, but obviously this does mean you can direct them to a resource that is usable immediately, rather than waiting for a file to arrive.
6. When timetabling, do yourself a massive favour and add a minimum of 5 minutes between lessons. This gives you room if someone arrives a bit late or there are organisational or technology issues which you don’t want eating into the lesson or essential breaks to get up, make a drink, go to the loo or my favourite – sit in the sun or run round the garden!
7. The lesson depends on meticulous organisation, try to email resources ahead and ask for them to be printed out/accessible for the lesson. Don’t forget to print out the resources they need your end, so you know you have everything you need. If working with youngsters, add breath marks, bar numbers and any thing useful so it’s easier for them to pick up where you want them to.
8. Try not to overrun. This is a big issue for me as I think, I will just bring things to a natural close, but the reality is, you have probably given a lot more time sending resources than in the lesson, don’t be afraid to finish a few minutes early to do that ahead of next week so you are fresh for the next student.
9. Take a look at a few of the recorded lessons and look for ways to improve. It became very obvious to me after looking at one lesson why my throat felt tense after teaching like this. I think the frustration of things being less immediate makes us all speak more loudly and be more tense generally. I realised that I could speak less and listen more and the lesson would be equally useful and more satisfying for the student. Your own areas for improvement will be glaringly obvious to you. It’s a great way of getting CPD without paying for it!
10. A pupil’s second device for digital resources is essential really. It also provides a back up if one device fails.
11. Direct your student to the recording at the end of the lesson as a means to recap anything they forget or model their future practice. In the same way you can see your own faults, they should be able to see theirs! Recap main points you want worked on – do not add to your workload by writing notes to students afterwards, get them into the habit of writing their own notes. Use the recording to your advantage.
12. Keep positive – try not to get anxious if technology fails or there are glitches which are inevitable. Remember that the teaching experience is not the same as the learning experience and your student looks to you to determine how effective what they are doing is. If you look fed up and constantly moan about things which can’t be helped, they will also find those things bug them. If you don’t mention them, they will merge into the background. Enjoy the moments when you are able to praise your student. Remember to see how important that is to them by their smiles and posture and congratulate yourself inwardly on doing something nice for someone today. Don’t forget that teaching is a way of enabling and instilling self-confidence.

How is it going?

In the main, as a teacher, I am feeling more empowered using the online platform. I am much more confident with the technology needed, have another digital device to hand should I need to quickly email across a resource which the the student might find helpful. I’m becoming an expert in enabling original sound (zoom) on various devices so that notes do not cut out and efficient at note-taking for both myself and the student, which I photograph and email at the end of each session and keep in a folder so that I know absolutely where we left off last session, it’s also useful to set goals and model practice sessions for my students like this.

The lessons seem to flow more easily than they did at first, as my students fall into an easier pattern of exchange between ourselves. An unlikely advantage is that students are becoming much more adept at identifying what needs correcting. They are confident at offering a critique of their own work and this in itself facilitates a quicker development of their skills. They are ready with the equipment needed to make their session more useful to them and find their way around their own set up much more quickly. Also I find that they somehow have a more intense experience as they are ready to go, accepting of and dexterous at the process and exchanges necessarily have to be that much more relevant and interruptions timely.

I have developed (with the expert help of my pianist husband) backing tracks which can come with me singing as a guide, or without. Somehow that ‘here’s how it goes with the accompaniment’ means that students feel supported and when they are ready to try solo, they can do it, hopefully having had the song modelled by someone who can give the idea of style, take the time for full breaths, offer the correct pronunciation and show that it’s possible to come up with a proper PERFORMANCE even with a backing track. Of course it’s not interactive in the way you can work with an accompanist, but it is the best we can do without the frissant between 2 live performers. It has also been a time when I have blessed YouTube! There are some excellent accompanying resources out there too. Proper musicians, playing proper instruments and being able to view them makes the student interaction much more certain. Knowing your rhythm and counting was never so important!!!! (My husband will laugh that I have made that comment!)

I am enthused by these online lessons but they do come at a heavy time cost. The preparation involved in providing digital support for students of a quality nature is VERY TIME-CONSUMING. My school online individual teaching begins next week and I have had to turn my thoughts to a) organising lessons with students from as far-flung areas as Hong Kong, making sure they have even the printed resources which they left in the UK in haste and b) making sure there is audio support for their up-coming lessons. The pressure is different this time; I know that I can give quality online lessons and so that is no longer my worry. Now I am making sure they have everything they need to make their lesson as satisfying and productive as it is face-to-face.

As a singer, my accompanying has always been a necessity, not a work of art! I never thought I would see the day when I would miss accompanying students on the piano, but that day has come…

Online lessons are not worse or better, but have their own strengths.

Like many of my colleagues in the music world, the events of the past few weeks have made me re-evaluate and change all my singing teaching from face-to face interaction to online lessons.

To tell the truth, unlike many, I found the challenge somewhat exciting. Of course I didn’t want to stop seeing students in the flesh, but I could see a raft of advantages. Not least of them being that neither me or my student had to travel. I had visions of swathes of time being freed up as I didn’t need to make the journey into work. I could stay in my lovely front/music room all day surrounded by my own scores, snacking at will and petting my furry friends between lessons.

Was I in for a shock! After frantically setting up what I thought was the perfect set up, it became clear that all was not as I imagined.

In a family where 4 of us are using our serviceable (but not super-duper) internet, the worry was that the system would not cope with our demand. My husband, also trying to conduct meetings was relegated to the kitchen and the children, their rooms to work. The signal although it sometimes glitches was just about able to cope but I ended up having to ditch the iPad Pro and phone to use my daughter’s laptop because I had to set up various settings on zoom to prevent loss of volume. Most of my school work had to take place via teams but I found I could do this and use zoom which proved to be the most helpful platform. I realised that I still have much to learn about how to split screen, have a waiting room and many other things, but in truth, the system worked. (Apart from the comedy moment when I found myself looking at a screen which I had zoomed 250%, with the top of the student’s head having been popped off by the now ridiculously big text and no earthly idea how to sort it!)

So what’s different?

The time-lag is a big issue, especially as the nature of singing teaching often necessitates giving students support in the form of piano or voice cues. There is no ability to accompany in real-time at all. This I knew from trying out the platform with my husband – in the next room. I could hear the real time voice and then a second later the on-screen version! So this means that backing tracks on the side of the student become your friend. Of course you need to make sure that you send these beforehand and that your student can play them their side.

So this means that not only do you as a teacher have to be super-prepared, but your students also have to take more responsibility in their lesson. They need to have downloaded and stored any files you’ve sent in an easily accessible place so they are instantly ready to call upon on a DIFFERENT DEVICE from the one on which they are making their online call. Well, of course that hadn’t always happened so it can be a frustrating old time sitting watching your student make a frantic search on their phone or ipad to find the email you sent through a week ago ,or try to read music from an iPhone! The more organised your student is, the more effective your lesson is and the better the outcomes for all concerned. I have been incredibly impressed that some students have immediately realised this and are business-like in their acceptance of their part. Likewise, those who find the organisation of their time and resources difficult for face-to-face lessons are being forced to get these skills up to the mark and I hope when online lessons are no longer necessary, we will see a marked change in their skills in this area.

So I’ve noticed that different learners find the lack of immediate encouragement and support very hard. I often sing along, or play along and make encouraging comments in my lessons as students are singing. This just isn’t possible, so those who immediately have to start again after one mistake or constantly self-doubt are being forced to carry on. What I notice is that once you have started a backing track, the pause button is your friend! And if you miss the first round of exercises because you weren’t ready, leave the thing going and join in as soon as you can afterwards. Familiarity with the backings you are sent is invaluable, so using these as a resource for your own private practice is a must. I was impressed that a backing I had sent to a student had been sufficiently listened to and worked with, for that student to realise there were repeats not shown in the music which I hadn’t pointed out. It is also great that if I need to send a backing track, or PDF it is more or less there instantly, so no need to nip out to the photocopier!

The online platform means that not only can your student see you throughout the lesson, but they can see themselves. What an excellent resource! I no longer need a mirror to point out the tension, the student can immediately see it and this makes correcting it, in theory, much more of an instant process. I’m finding that the modelling I do, pointing out relaxed jaw, head position and mouth positioning is a particularly successful part of the teaching I’m doing like this, as students are forced to watch you at close quarters.

The interesting thing for me is that although I am used to hearing voices live and analysing them, that I hear things slightly differently through the screen. Obviously the sound quality is never the same through any online platform, yet the way the sound reaches me can magnify the faults I hear. It has made me more picky about precision in vowel shapes and maintaining a homogenous sound throughout the range, this is great for correcting languages. It also shows me where students are unsure of music, don’t get the right interval or where their intonation is likely to go off, which then leads to a technical correction, which may never have been picked up live. These things you can easily miss when you are providing support at the piano and your focus is split, or the support removes the problem enough for the student to get away with it, despite there being an underlying fault which needs addressing.

The other thing that has become clear to me is that online teaching is certainly not an easy option for teachers. I find the actual teaching much more intense, despite not accompanying and the preparation time is a lot more. I’m hoping that as time goes on, if we are forced to continue in this way, it will become a lot easier and less time-consuming…. we’ll see!

I am enormously grateful though for the excellent input of many colleagues, online YouTube tutorials and the students continuing to trust that I can offer them something worth having in these troubled times. I have had more chats with colleagues in the past week or so, than at any other time, so that is a serious up-side.

Here you see a lovely student demonstrating siren slides of a fifth which can be used as a warm-up on the phonation tube.

Notice how important it is to take time over the siren and to make sure the facial muscles are relaxed.

Hi I’m Harriet. I really benefit from using the phonation tube – it helps to open my throat and stops me from squeezing which gives me a better over-all sound and it takes the stress off my voice and makes it easier and more enjoyable to sing.