Before I start, I should point out that I mean piano teachers who have not studied singing, but think that after accompanying so many singers, they are fit to teacher singing.
I have only recently started teaching and I was wondering if any other singing teachers struggle with it? My old singing teacher said that she spends half her life correcting the mistakes taught by piano teachers teaching singing. In my own experience, I've been on here before talking about one of my young students, a 10yr old singer. She turned up to the first session, and sang exactly as I would expect a beginner to sing, her voice was completely raw. After the lesson, the mother told me that the girl had been taking singing lessons for a year and she had sung through the whole grade 2 book, could I please pick the songs for grade 2 and enter her for June. I was horrified that someone could have a year of lessons, yet sound so raw. There was no way I was putting her in for grade 2! With a bit of diplomacy I talked her out of it. At the next lesson, I quizzed the pupil and found out that it was her piano teacher who taught her and they had just sung four songs from the grade 1 book and then moved onto the grade 2 book. I'm so angry that this teacher led both mother and daughter to be believe that she was grade 2 standard when in fact she isn't even grade 1 standard! What a waste of a year's worth of lessons, thankfully the teacher did no damage, but she didn't do anything at all! What a waste of money. And I seriously worry about the teacher's methods in general when her only focus in the exams. The mother isn't musical and so she seems to have been led to believe that exams are all that music is about. It's such a shame for a girl of only 10. She's currently studying for grade 5 theory and her grade 6 piano.
Verity
X

I don't disagree with you but I wondered what you meant by raw.

With young students at G1 level I try and keep them sounding as natural as possible. We work on some technique for warming up the voice, breathing and if necessary some neck anchoring or retraction to help pitching. I wonder what people might think of my students if they took them on later. Especially since I am also a piano teacher.

Another piano teacher here. I don't teach singing - but my own singing teacher thinks I should.
I might have to decide not to risk it in case any future teacher of a possible future pupil has bad things to say about me.
But then my singing teacher is seriously qualified and so perhaps her opinion is worth something.

What does "raw" mean?

Right, one of my major bugbears

First of all: There is a difference between a singing teacher who also happens to be a piano teacher at the same time (or vice versa). They have the necessary skills required to teach both instruments. We are not talking about those.

There are quite a few pianists out there though who think that being a song teacher is the same as being a singing teacher - it isn't, and it annoys me greatly if I "inherit" students who (at best) have learned nothing or (at worst) have been vocally wrecked.
Teaching a song musically, and maybe a bit of phrasing, is NOT the same as teaching singing technique. And yes, it IS a massive, and very common, problem. I wonder how many piano teachers teach the trumpet - why do they think singing is any different? Truth is, it is often just used as an additional source of income if the piano teaching alone doesn't do the trick, and I personally find this unethical, but hey...

If you are a repetiteur, that's different, but they tend to work with singers who already have half-decent technique, and usually on musical aspects.

I cannot say what you mean by "raw" of course, and I would also say that the voice of a singing student so young should be kept fairly natural, so it is quite hard to judge in that case without hearing the student. You CAN hear though if someone has just been taught songs, or if they've actually been taught healthy voice production.

I'm a piano teacher who teaches singing, but then again, I'm a singing teacher who teaches piano At the end of the day, I'm more interested in whether they can do a good job rather than what combination of things they teach. I can't say I've come across many piano teachers teaching singing 'on the side' but no doubt it happens. Most of the trouble I've had has come from singing teachers (or in one case, a violin teacher who taught singing).

Sadly, there are many 'rogue' teachers out there and there's little we can do about it except make sure we do a good job ourselves. Certainly I've inherited plenty of pupils from supposedly well-qualified teachers who've learnt nothing. The same old debate about qualifications continues...

As teachers, we will always inherit pupils who've had a not-so-good teacher in the past - it's part of the job. What's important is that whilst not ignoring what they've already done, we do move on. Some of these situations might make me angry, but I wouldn't say anything directly to the pupil or parents because partly it's none of my business, and partly I know I only hear part of the story. Whatever you think personally, be positive and move on.

Best to move on from where you are now, fill in any gaps you feel are missing etc. Unless you know exact circumstances (or even if you do) it's best not to too verbal about a previous teacher and I assume this is her current piano teacher that she is still with? The girl sounds musical, so enjoy.
And look on the bright side, being taught singing by a piano teacher, she may even be able to read the music..

Possibly only if the notes have numbers above them though

May I ask what neck anchoring is? Sounds rather dangerous....






This would concern me more

Why? Do you mean because she hasn't got the theory out of the way by now? What if she's well-paced to be taking it a term or two before the Grade 6 practical?

Regarding singing, us string teacher have to get pupils singing. I've started taking this to the extent of actually giving them songs to learn, and I've plucked many from the Grade 1 repertoire simpy because I don't know enough to judge the level otherwise. However, I'm certainly not presenting it to them as 'teaching singing', just getting them used to using their voices, especially in relation to pitches, intervals and tonal centres.

Maybe one or two of them will unintentionally misrepresent this to others, in that their violin teacher 'also taught/teaches them singing', but I can't help that.

Blimey, it's not as easy as it used to be to start a squabble on here is it??



It seems to me that singing teachers more than any other kind tend to disagree with their colleagues about methods. There are simply more ways of teaching and learning singing than there are of teaching and learing the piano, perhaps.

I don't think personally that there is anything at all wrong with being a 'song' teacher for young kids while also giving some very gentle hints about breathing and voice production, this can be done while 'doing no harm' and keeping the voice natural.

Maybe the piano teacher can do this! Or the violin teacher!

I know a LOT of good songs for violinists! I'll write a list when there's a minute...

Of course everyone can teach musicianship through a bit of singing, but at no point should student or parent be made to believe this is the same as teaching singing (technique). Needless to say that parents themselves sometimes don't understand the difference

"Gentle hints about breathing and voice production" also imply actually being equipped to give these, and having sufficient knowledge about the voice. As soon as you teach voice production, you are not just teaching musicianship through singing anymore.

It's like the difference between teaching someone to "somehow" play a tune on the piano (can also be done without harm to the student), with no focus on posture, handshape and fingering, and actually teaching them to do it with proper technique. Both are okay, depending on goal

There are many people who can help a singer at any given point, not all of them teach technique (I coincidentally wrote a blog about this recently). It has to be clear though what's required, and student expectations and what the teacher can offer need to be matched. If the student wants to just sing a few songs and isn't bothered about technique, a song teacher is okay. If they want to learn singing technique, they need someone who can teach it. Quite simple really.

It's right though: If you get a student who's been taught bad (or no) technique, you should just try to undo it as best you can and not dwell on it, especially not in front of the student. You can't help but wonder sometimes though - and occasionally think you should also start teaching any instrument you ever laid hands on

1) Possibly - since there is more than one genre of singing. Classical vocal setup is not the same as pop belt, as Broadway belt, as rock, etc. That includes breathing methods, too.

2) Well, maybe. Nothing wrong with teaching songs per se, but how many times have we heard on the Voice forum about school music teachers expecting little Susie to learn a song which has notes in it she finds uncomfortably high? One size does not fit all. And Mrs Mother might well not differentiate between Susie learning songs and learning to sing. As far as she is concerned Susie is having singing lessons, and talks, and before long teacher has more "singing" pupils. Nice addition to her/his income! With a view to handing them on to "someone who knows what they are doing, of course," after about grade 3 (words actually said to me by a piano teacher). So no harm done?

I'm not sure what you mean about "gentle hints about breathing and voice production". Do piano/violin/pick your instrument teachers who have not studied singing know about this - I mean properly? And how to handle young voices - even some singing teachers shy away from this, or carry on in blissful ignorance, at worst ruining a voice, at best making no improvement.
I once asked a piano teacher to accompany some of my younger pupils at a festival. When she came to the rehearsal she asked me for some tips - "because I am not a singer, you know." Some years later I had a new starter who had had several years of singing lessons from the above teacher and really needed remedial work!
Another pupil had had four years of lessons with a different teacher - this time a drama one. it took me a year to get rid of her wobble, while another student who had been to the same teacher couldn't sing more than five notes without taking a breath!
Not picking an argument, Violincjj - you just kindly brought up a few points I wanted to answer from the other perspective.
Sorry - I'm with the OP and Dugazon on this one. I am allegedly around grade 8 standard on the piano (former piano teacher says) but I wouldn't dream of teaching it, even if I were down on my last penny. Leave it to the experts, I say. Trouble is, as everyone sings, some think they know how to teach it - or at least not do any harm. In my opinion, these can be the most dangerous kind of teachers because they are unaware of the harm they may cause.
I wonder what a (proper) singing teacher would say about how other-instrument-teachers-of-songs sing? Food for thought.

Because she's 10 years old and it sounds like she's been pushed through exam after exam. Will be surprised if much of that had been truly learnt and understood

Sorry, by 'raw' I meant that her voice is completely untrained, exactly what I would expect from someone who has never had a single singing lesson. It seems that this teacher just got her to sing through the songs, just learning the notes and the words, nothing else. She sang me her favourite song that she had even performed (I do not know where) and I got her to sing it to me the next week as well to check that it wasn't just nerves but she was breathing in the middle of phrases, struggling to pitch a lot of the notes, no dynamics, completely blank facial expression etc etc - basically apart from the words and the vague melody, nothing was right. I'm also very concerned that she's just being forced through the exams and missing a lot an awful lot of what music is about. But what her piano teacher does is none of my business except that I'm concerned about the child and her mother's expectations of singing. I refuse to do the same with singing. I will do put her in for grade 2 until I think she's capable of it, because if I had put her in for grade 2 this June like her mother asked, it would have been a real shock.

In some ways, for me, that would be a bit of a relief because it's something to work with from scratch.

And it begs the question - what have the parents been paying good money for? Especially with all the other issues VerityG has pointed out. Money for old rope! They might as well have taken a ten pound note and set fire to it every week.

Yes, I am relieved that I do not have to undo any damage, but I'm angry that they've paid for a year's worth of lessons and have nothing to show for it other than the belief that the girl is of a grade 2 standard when she's not even grade 1! I am not looking forward to explaining this to the mother!
I am also rather concerned about this particular teacher's approach to music - that you simply go from one exam straight to the other. I'm worried that this will conflict with my teaching if the mother expects me to do the same thing, as I definitely won't. I suppose in that case it's probably better that we part ways and she finds a teacher who will, it's just a shame for the poor girl in the middle.

Sadly, this seems to be relatively common

I read 'Gentle hints about breathing and voice production', in the context of an instrumental teacher and a reluctant singer, to pretty much mean confidence-building. Enough to actually produce a note, any note, with their voice.

Surely it depends how long she has been at it? On the BBC Young Musician programme it was mentioned that one competitor went from Grade 6 to 8 in 6 months aged 8. He appears to have understood it all since he got to the keyboard final.

I know a couple of oboists whose first instrument was piano. One started aged 7 and the other 2!

I'm quite certain there are exceptions - but given the context of the OP concerns, it rather sounds to me like this girl has been pushed through exams beyond her level. And that this trend is about to continue with Grade 6 piano and Grade 5 theory is, I think, a cause for concern.

I'd still like to know what neck anchoring is if anyone can tell me....?

I think it might be a trade secret, and we have to take singing lessons to find out

I think you may be right. This web site http://singingself.wordpress.com/category/vocal-health/ seems to think you can take two words and apply a trade mark to them (a typically American stance).

Although I wasn't the one who brought it up:

All forms of anchoring, of which neck anchoring is a part, are a way to take stress off the larynx/vocal folds via muscular support. Neck anchoring means stabilising the vocal tract from the back (Semispinalis) and front/sides (SCMs) - the latter are the muscles which some people have trouble telling apart from bulging neck veins .

http://www.getbodysmart.com/ap/muscularsys...s/tutorial.html

The page Arundodonuts posted also explains it, although it might leave you under the impression it can feel rather tense, which it doesn't if done properly. It's certainly not a "secret", but you are unlikely to come across it if you don't take singing lessons (which maybe proves a point about the difference between teaching technique and teaching songs. You don't have to bombard your students with jargon btw in case anyone thinks so - you simply show them what to do ).

If you want to delve a bit deeper, maybe have a look at "Singing and the Actor" (although here, the term used is "external anchoring"), or think about an Estill workshop.

As piano teachers we cannot teach singing technique (unless we are also trained singing teachers) and we have no inerest in teaching songs as songs (except maybe to entertain a mixed class in school on a wet afternoon).

But what we do need to do is get our students to accurately pitch the notes of a tune with the voice, as a preliminary to finding them first-time with the fingers on the keyboard. But as we do so little of it, and in such a limited tonal range, it is hard to imagine that we could be damaging anyone's voice.

No, and that's absolutely okay - I don't think any singing teacher would have problems with this (I certainly don't!). My personal gripe is with the ones who sell "song sessions" as singing lessons, leaving their customers under the wrong impression they actually teach singing technique. Instead, they do all sorts of weird (and sometimes damaging) stuff along the way for lack of knowing better.

I guess I mean things like the things that my school class music teacher told us in the days when we all sang songs in music lessons? They didn't profess to be expert 'singing teachers' but they encouraged everyone to find their voice and enjoy using it. This doesn't seem to happen any more

I am sure I don't know everything at all about teaching kids singing (as well as violin) but I am sure I am not doing any harm. They seem to be doing well, I have some who got into NYCGB and another has a Choristership at a specialist music school, they get good marks and comments in exams and festivals.

They don't sing innappropriate songs in unsuitable clothes accompanied by arm waving either, unlike the pupils of a local teacher who is Very Qualified! I think one cannot generalise about all this really.

As a non-expert, I find it very difficult to judge what standard a singer is. With most instruments, I think you can reasonably say that if someone can play a range of pieces at a particular grade, then they are more or less at that standard. If a parent said to a new piano teacher "my child can play everything in the grade 2 book, so please can we pick three pieces and do the exam" I don't think anyone would find it particularly surprising, so I can see perfectly well why a parent might not understand that the same doesn't apply to singing, especially when their child plays another instrument.

I know it doesn't apply because many years ago I sang songs now on the grade 7 and 8 syllabuses at choir auditions (we had to re-audition every 3 years). They were songs I liked and I thought they suited my voice and were well within my capabilities. I didn't think they were at all difficult (I was amazed when I saw where there were on the syllabus) and probably practised them only 2 or 3 times in advance. I know I sang them well in the sense that I sang the right notes at the right time, in tune, and with some dynamics and expression. But that doesn't (unfortunately) make me a grade7/8 level singer. I have no technique - have never had a lesson and know I don't breathe or support my voice properly.

*small voice*

Some of us do try...

Well I do know about anchoring and am fairly familiar (and do own a copy of) the Gillian Kayes book - but I've never heard of neck anchoring. If anything, and I do understand what you are saying about the neck muscles, I'd personally look to avoid ANY anchoring in the neck and would feel it safer, perhaps, to target other areas in the body to increase support (such as the shoulder/back muscles)

And there you might be unwittingly causing problems - shoulder tension is one of the most common problems for singers, especially untrained ones, but experienced singers can suffer, too. Personally, I never mention shoulders, unless there is a problem. I believe that mentioning an area, be it shoulders, neck, tongue, whatever, puts unnecessary focus on it and, in fact, can cause a problem where none existed before (don't fix what ain't broke ). That's why group lessons, in my opinion, are unwise. And why technique is best left to a "proper" singing teacher who can HEAR in the voice where the problem is in the body and offer bespoke remedial action.

I have a list of people to be cloned when I finally invent a cloning device and rule the world. I shall add Cyrilla to this list, issuing one Cyrilla per school

Nahh - lots of presumption here.

*whispers* How did you know about my Plan for World Domination???

p. 75 ff: Same thing really, just a different name - she describes the use of the neck muscles there. If you don't use them at all, your (intra-)laryngeal muscles are likely to take over instead.

I guess it also depends on how you define "anchoring in the neck": You can use it in a rather gentle way (more like focusing on proper head-neck alignment, and it's hard to do that without using the neck muscles at all, unless your head is not attached to your neck ), or in a stronger way, like e.g. in Belting.

I agree about the importance of the back though, or torso anchoring as a whole. I think we can do this without making the student feel insecure, or focusing too much on certain parts of their body.

I've been meaning to go back to the book has haven't read it for a few years. Thanks for the reference