Question about Singing "Sad" Music

I had a question about something that we discussed during the last lesson. We've been talking about allowing the emotional content of the music inform our performance, with the chief example of that being the slight smile which also opens up the nasal resonators, etc. However, what if you are singing sad music? There seems to be a conflict there.

I also wanted to let you know that I've been putting things together a little bit more and have experienced some real success, and not just in practice sessions. I've had two singing events in the last two days, and I was able to finish them with far less fatigue than I've been experiencing in the last few months. I was finding that I had better control, and that the style of singing did tend to more or less adjust itself to the context. I dare say I was even having some fun rather than feeling that it was just hard work.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am very glad to hear that things are already coming together for you. Being able to experience what we are talking about in action is the best reinforcement. And the added benefit of having fun while singing is the best confirmation.

Your question is a common one I get when I present this information. The first thing to remember is we are talking about OUR emotion. The individual singer. Not the emotion of the character. The act of singing comes naturally from the emotions of joy, love, enthusiasm, excitement. These types of things. The character can have any emotion, but WE still need to love to sing, enjoy singing, be enthusiastic and excited about singing. It is the same as what you mentioned about the style of music naturally adjusted itself to the context. The emotion of the character adjusts itself to the context, but you have to provide the enthusiasm or this will not happen. We certainly cannot let the sadness of the music become our emotion or that will conflict with the act of singing. We don't sing when we are sad, we cry. (And yet there is an element of crying in good singing) So the act of singing is a physical manifestation of emotion. And in order to ensure we experience the necessary flexibility and freedom in the act of singing that we need, the emotion has to be positive. Negative emotions will cause us to have a physical response that is counter-productive to our singing.

If we stimulate the heightened emotion that causes the physical response of singing while keeping in mind the mood of the song, we can express the emotional content while personally feeling enthusiasm, excitement and joy in the act of singing. You can test this by doing an experiment. Try to go from laughing and a feeling of joyfulness to singing. Then compare that to trying to go from a feeling of sadness and crying to singing. Most likely the second one will not feel very good. The only difference we need to make is a slight adjustment of the expression. We don't actually smile. (Although when we sing we shouldn't really be smiling either. It is a pleasant expression that has an element of smiling in it, but we go from smiling to opening the mouth to pronounce while continuing to lift the face under the eyes and along the nose. This feels like we are still smiling in the face and eyes but not the lips) We can easily morph this expression into one of sadness. When we are sad and cry we can still lift the face in the same way. I see it every time my little girl cries. So the expression is essentially the same, it just has a different meaning behind it and in the eyes. The problem is as we get older our faces get less expressive, so when we are sad we tend to tense the throat instead of stretching the face like a child. I think this is because as we get older we have a tendency to get more self-conscious and stifle our emotions instead of letting them out freely like children.

I hope this gives more clarity to these concepts. Thanks for asking.

Follow Up from "Difficulty Speaking" from Last Post

This is the follow up email exchange from my last blog post. I thought it might be worthwhile to post because I explain these concepts more in depth.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Micheal

Thank you so much for your answer. I'm sending you a recording of me some 4 hours after class - as you can hear, I'm in pretty bad shape. If you could give a specific demonstration of how I can, say, "turn up" the volume of my voice without forcing so much air out, I would appreciate it.

Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK, I hear what's going on. It is the same qualities I noticed when we started working together. I didn't want to make a big deal about it, but I did mention that your speaking habits could be a problem. Basically the breath and the larynx are not meeting each other effectively. There is an unstable quality in the voice. What makes the voice stable? Sufficient energy from the proper breath pressure combined with instinctive action of the larynx. When we apply an appropriate breath pressure to the larynx it reacts by stabilizing against the pressure. But this reaction only happens if we stop the normal respiration cycle first. If we try to speak while still breathing normally the larynx will have an incomplete stimulus from the nerves and the breath will be loose. This is pretty much what is going on for you. If we "use more breath" with this condition we just increase the amount of breath that escapes through the larynx. We get a louder sound but not an increase of intensity. And we also increase the level of abuse to the voice. We need to stop normal respiration and then compress the breath up towards the larynx. Like I said in the previous response, I like to feel like I am pressing the breath up against my collar bones. This helps to keep any tension away from the larynx. The voice needs to be provided energy from the breathing system, not actually breath. Breath is just the mode of transferring the energy to the voice. This is what happens when we compress the breath, it turns into energy instead of being just breath. So when we say that we need to eliminate the extra breath from the voice it doesn't mean that we use less activity from the respiratory system. It is actually the opposite. There is actually a stronger, more positive action from the breathing muscles to hold and compress the breath to provide a steady energy to reinforce the voice and feed the vibration.

When the larynx is active and the vibration is being fed a steady supply of energy from compressed breath the vibration has intensity. This intense vibration causes the air inside the pharynx and the open spaces of the skull to sympathetically vibrate. That is resonance. If the vibration is what we typically hear from most speakers and singers the resonance is only felt in the pharynx and mouth. If the larynx is pronouncing clearly and the source vibration is intense it is felt on the lips and in the bones of the skull. This is what we want. To the listener this gives clarity to the sound and subsequently to the words. To the singer or speaker this intensity almost seems aggressive and nasty. Because of the almost ugly sound in our head we tend to avoid the very thing we should be doing. This is the key to self-amplifying your voice and being easily audible in large spaces. It doesn't give the impression of trying to talk louder, like yelling. The sound is louder, but through intensity it is still focused and concentrated. Not dispersed like when just being louder. Signs of good resonance from intense vibration is the buzzy tickle of the tone on the lips and in the bones of the face around the nose, eyes and center of the skull. The sensation of buzz around the nose is often mistaken for nasality when first experienced. It is not. Nasality exists when the breath is loose and the vibration lacks intensity. Then the tone is confined, through partial closing the throat, in the nose space. Because we have been warned that pronouncing through the nose is undesirable we tend to also avoid the healthy buzz around the nose. The reverse exists as well. Some people who have been taught that it is good to have tonal vibration sensations around the nose mistakenly believe they are achieving them by placing the tone in the nose. This usually has negative results because of the closing of the throat necessary to trap the tone in the nasal chamber. Lamperti described this very well when he said that you can't blow the tone into the head with loose breath and you can't avoid the heady buzz with compressed breath and intense vibration. 

Again, it comes down to HOW we use our breath. If it is loose it will be ineffective. We need to speak with energy. How do we do this if we can't seem to feel it? Well we need to look at other natural functions that rely on compressed breath. We have blowing the nose, laughing, crying, vomiting, coughing, sneezing, clearing the throat. I'm sure we can all identify many more. Observe what your torso feels like when doing these things. We can easily pretend to do them as well, and make what is naturally involuntary a deliberate action. Then take what you feel happening with these other functions and do it while making a vocal sound. Start with sounds first before trying to speak or sing, because that is how we develop in life. Think of pronouncing clearly and with purpose on the lips, but not beyond. If the tone is not on the lips it is not intense enough to reach them. Do not try to place the tone, or get it, on the lips. We also do not want to pronounce beyond the lips. This is a symptom of spreading and using loose breath. Think of the positive result and make it happen by speaking clearly and with intensity. By thinking of speaking on the lips we can stimulate the larynx without bringing muscular interference to it. If this is done well there is the experience of the breath compression happening because we are saying something, almost automatically as a reflex. You will notice that if there is any holding in the throat the strong pressure from the compression will feel like interference. This is a sign of something that needs to be let go of. Then the voice will be free to function unencumbered. If the relationship between the voice and the breath is working correctly you will start to feel the tone spontaneously filling the skull like light fills a room when the electricity is turned on. The buzz is kind of like an electrical current that you feel in the bones of the face and head. But it is controlled in the midsection. It is also dependent on the pleasant expression that lifts the face in a slight smile. This lift along the sides of the nose and under the eyes opens the upper resonator which allows the tone to reach the bones of the face. The lift of the face also has an influence on the tongue to stay up out of the throat. This allows much more freedom and flexibility in the primary vibration of the vocal folds giving a greater sense of ease in the production. 

Question About Difficulty Speaking While Teaching

I would like to ask your advice about something. I'm already back at my homestate, and I have recently returned to my old job. I have a light schedule (9 hours a week) but even so I'm experiencing a greater degree of vocal fatigue than I'm used to. For 2 weeks or so, ever since I started teaching in a regular basis again, I have been leaving the classroom at the end of lessons with a "raspy" voice, and my throat hurts too. I drink lots of water, but that doesn't stop the pain from coming. I remember one of the points you made in our last session was that I needed to be "aware" of my speaking habits and how they could get in the way of a balanced vocal production - or something similar. However, I left without a very clear notion of what I was supposed to do... I'm pretty sure my speaking habits aren't any worse than they were before, but this is the first time I experience vocal fatigue after work. Does the "awareness" you spoke of have anything to do with experiencing physical pain? If my speaking habits are in anyway abusive, does it mean that I had some kind of resistance to vocal abuse and now I don't anymore? I don't understand... Could you please give me some indications as in how I could minimize the pain, or prevent it from coming?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As far as your discomfort speaking since you started teaching. Well, the things we talked about all apply to speaking as well as singing. For instance, it is likely that you are not finding effective resonance to amplify your tone so you don't have to make the voice do so much work to make sound. This depends on stimulating both the larynx and the breathing system to activate and work together to produce an intense vibration that will resonate in the  open spaces of the skull. The resonance actually removes much of the burden from the voice itself and also reinforces the vibration. It may seem to be louder to you because of the increased intensity. But if it is balanced it will also feel easier to accomplish and less fatiguing. The aspect that probably needs to be addressed is what people call "support". The proper application of breath pressure to feed the vibration of the voice is critical to the free function. Remember to always keep the abdomen leaning in, pressing the breath up towards the voice. I feel like I am pressing the breath up against the collar bone to avoid getting tension interfering with the larynx. This use of the breath is the source of energy that feeds the vibration of the voice. Without it the voice gets confused and loses balance. Without it the vocal folds tend to be too loose and allow too much breath to escape. Most people I observe use "loose" breath to feed the voice, rather than "compressed" breath. This is the main cause of fatigue and the "raspyness" you mention. The key remedy for eliminating the pain is to have healthy, balanced function when you speak as well as when you sing. 

You ask an interesting question about having some kind of resistance to vocal abuse before and not having it anymore. I have observed exactly this in myself and others over the years. When we have poor habits our voices tend to withstand the abuse, so well that we don't notice the abusive habits. But after we develop greater understanding and better coordination we often notice that our voices don't hold up to that old, habitual way of doing things and we suffer more discomfort from the same vocal abuse. I'm not sure if perhaps the body does some healing to a more healthy condition, and so is not as resistant to the abusive function. Another possibility is that you are more functionally aware, or sensitive, and so you notice the discomfort more. I would guess it is a combination of the two.

I would say the thing to do is make sure you are pronouncing thoroughly when you speak. We all have a tendency to be lazy when we talk, which results in an incomplete activation of the vocal mechanism and the breathing system. If we allow this to happen the inefficient function will place a greater burden on the body, which causes the discomfort. Our physical discomfort is the body's way of telling us that something is wrong. It doesn't like what you are doing and it is rebelling against it. This is why I emphasize function so much in my writing and teaching. Healthy function is the basis of a comfortable voice that you can use it as much as you like with no problems. Make sure you are pronouncing clearlyl and using your breathing effectively. If you do these things correctly you will experience flexibility and a complete lack of discomfort when you speak.

You are welcome to send a recording and I can reply with a demonstration based on what I hear. Let me know if you would like that.

Question About Hesitation to Get Voice Training

I am professional musician in the Ann Arbor area (in that I blessed to make a living doing music); and though my training is principally in keyboard instruments, my current job as a music director at a church requires me to sing frequently as well. I had voice lessons for a brief period at the time my voice was changing, but my training has otherwise come entirely through being in choirs and the little tips one comes across while working with other musicians. I am told that I have a naturally pleasant voice, but I am concerned that due to my lack of training I am slowly damaging my voice, especially now that I am singing multiple times per week (both classical hymn/sacred repertory and contemporary popular worship music). I am intrigued by the information presented on your website, and I am wondering whether I might be able to benefit from your services. My goal is to develop a healthy voice so that it is at my service for years to come, but I am not aspiring to learn the finest details of the art. I have been encouraged by a music director mentor to get some further vocal training, but I have always been leery of doing that -- I have heard many unpleasant "trained" voices, and I have repeatedly heard of the risks of bad voice teachers (echoed on your website), so I have been hesitant to commit myself to lessons. Thank you for your consideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nice to hear from you. I can appreciate your hesitation in committing to training. It is not unusual for it to create more problems than it fixes. Then there is also the problem of being taught to sound a particular way. This is a very common trait in voice training. This is a common complaint from non-classical singers when they try voice lessons. They rebel against the fact that the teacher is trying to make them sound like a classical singer. And I have to admit that it is a legitimate complaint. Then there is the equally common problem that is the same issue, just in the opposite direction. We regularly hear Musical Theater teachers directing singers in how to sound like a Musical Theater singer. Again, this is dealing with imitation of a sound concept. Neither of these approaches are dealing with the function of the instrument. They both neglect the healthy behavior of the body in search of a particular sound concept that is accepted as the norm. This is the unfortunate state of vocal training.
That is why I have no interest in teaching some technique about how to sing. The body already knows how it wants to operate. What we need to do is learn how our body is designed to function vocally. Then we can reinforce nature with our understanding rather than impose our opinions onto our body.

If you have survived this long already, then you probably have some natural sense of how to get your voice to work. When you understand how the parts of your body involved work together you can make sure you are functioning well to meet the challenges of your frequent singing. 

The concern you express is a legitimate one. Just like an athlete that advances to more frequent and challenging competition risks injury and break-down in the body, the singer that increases the frequency and duration of their singing puts themselves at risk for vocal break-down. The answer to this is to have a solid functioning vocal equipment to meet the challenge.

The goal you share is exactly the kind that will serve you the greatest. Ultimately, if we enjoy singing we should want our voice to last as long as we live. This will only happen if we keep it healthy though intelligent, natural function to avoid overuse damage.

What Role do Physical Traits Play in Singing?

The discussion about castrati and their supposed physical advantage made me think. There is one issue about singing ability that has worried me for some time now - I don't believe it is addressed by many teachers, and I would really like to hear your opinion: How (un)important a role do physical traits play in the act of singing?
I recall your comment that all of the great singers from the past who were trained in this school of singing were singers from Nordic countries - where people are usually tall, with a large bone structure. I don't mean necessarily that everyone from Sweden or Germany is able to sing Wagner, but they certainly have a physical advantage to produce voices suited for this kind of repertoire (you can't find Heldentenors in Latin America, for instance, unless they have German ascendance). What about people from ethnic groups that do not play such an important role in opera history (people with indian ascendance, like me, who tend to be short, with a smaller bone structure), are we less able to sing because of our physical traits? Do smaller people have less resonance space or breath capacity, therefore are in physical disadvantage for singing? I know this is a very dumb question, and I know it sounds kind of eugenic, but personally it bothers me a lot. Could you please tell me your opinion on the subject?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a great question. I think the physical make-up of a person has an influence on the result of their singing but is not a determining factor of whether they can sing or not. I think of voices as an instrument. And like other instruments they can come in different sizes. Take the family of string instruments as an example. You have the violin, viola, cello, and bass. They are essentially the same instrument, played the same way, more or less. Their function is determined by the same principles, just like all voices function by the same principles. The only difference is the size of the instrument. This changes the resultant tone relative to the difference in the physical structure. But there is also a sameness, a similar quality between the different instruments that we can recognize. This is a fundamental truth that applies to voices as well. You mention Helden voices compared to singers with smaller physical structures from Latin countries. To me it is a pretty logical relationship. This doesn't mean we will never see an exception, but the tendency makes sense. This also doesn't mean that the smaller instrument cannot be used with intensity. It just means that when it is, it probably will still not be appropriate for the more dramatic expression of the Helden category. There are times for dramatic expression in Rossini and Donizetti and the like. Just as there are plenty of opportunities for lyrical expression in Wagner and that type. So for me singing is singing, and it should include the ability to sing with sweetness and lyricism as well as dramatic intensity, regardless of the size of the instrument. The natural characteristics will determine where in the spectrum of vocal music the individual voice will be suited. But having the physical structure of a smaller instrument doesn't mean that it is less capable of singing. It is just capable of singing to a lesser degree of intensity. Just as a voice of a larger physical dimension is more capable of singing, it just naturally has a higher degree and may have difficulty singing at a lower degree of intensity. So one should not sing things for which it is not well suited and stick to what it is suited for. (This does not mean larger voices always sing loud and smaller voices always sing quiet) Just as a larger instrument is not well suited to the lighter music and can in some cases find it taxing to sing. It would be rare to have a cello play violin music, although perhaps it could do it. It is common to warn singers against singing repertoire that is too big for them, as we would find with a light voice trying to sing dramatic music. But I feel it is just as risky to have larger voices singing music that is too light for their instrument. This is not to say that singers should never explore rep outside their fach, or that they aren't capable of it. Once someone has developed their skill in coordinating the instrument they are capable of exploring a much wider range of rep. But for the developing singer that has a larger instrument it can create just as much of a problem trying to sing music that is too light for them as a young lyric voice can by singing things that are too big. It is all about learning to listen to what the voice and the body are telling us by their behavior. We need to watch out that we don't ask for things that impair the natural behavior of the individual voice. And as we all know, each voice has its own characteristics and qualities that we need to recognize.

Response to "Detailed Explanation of the "Farinelli Breathing Exercise"

Here are several responses by the individual who originally brought up the Farinelli Exercise. I will insert my responses.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It was a very good explanation. I just don't agree with the statement that castrati didn't have a "sui generis" physique. There are good reasons to believe their physique was beyond normal for the time, because of the secretion of growing hormones. Also, the iconography somehow shows it. Their stature and rib cage, it is said, were much developed. They could be described even as giants, reaching 1,90-2 meters, something incredible at a time when most men were 1,60-1,70 tall. There was, some years ago, online, an interesting article on the medical aspects of castration for singing. A doctor explained all the stuff that made castrati physically superior to the singers at that time. Also, of course, the special emphasys on breath exercises at the conservatoires, as you mentioned certainly helped. But let's remember that in Venice women were taught singing consistently too. And in Naples, men not castrated (mostly orphans) were also musically educated by the same teachers.
We can only compare castrati with women. The other voice categories were not settled then, except the bass, and if flexibility and coloratura were expected from men, certainly not to at the same degree of a female voice. Only after opera buffa and Rossini the coloratura tenor (leggiero) became a reality, singing above the staff in falsetto.
If you wish to know in which magazine the article was published, I'll send you to Hortus Musicus website. The name of the article, in italian, is: "La fabbrica degli angeli". It is divided in two parts.
About your teacher having passed to you these tips about the Farinelli exercise from Calve, I would like to understand better. Did she read it in Calve's "Memoires -Sous le ciel..." or she actually had lessons with Calve? I wonder how old is your teacher, 'cause Calve died in 1942. I didn't read her memoirs, but from a source, an incredibly well-researched and old book on singing in portuguese, I learned she had lessons with Mustafa, indeed a famous castrato at Sistine Chapel.
It was a very good contribution. And reinforces the view that silent exercises are a must to learn the basics, the foundation. I do not believe that a singer like Cecilia Bartoli can sing all those fireworks in her discs and concerts without a thorough practice of breathing exercises.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your response. First let me point out again that this was a guest contribution, not from me. So I can't answer your reply directly because I did not write the post about the exercise. I agree that much of what we have available about the Castrati tells us that they were larger than average because of the hormonal difference. But Bea (the author) did not dispute that fact. She said that castration did not increase their ability to sing long phrases or give them huge voices. I would agree as well, these things are more an issue of function and skill. But I would guess that their physique may have given them a better starting point for singing. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rereading the post, one doubt arises: when exhaling the chest (solar plexus, fontanella) collapses, doesn't it? And the air is all expelled, isn't it? Otherwise, it would be almost impossible to do that, I think. The solar plexus would be locked and the choking sensation unavoidable.
In my case, I noticed that the greatest difficulty is inhaling slowly after the third set (8 counts) and also exhaling fast the rest of the air available...how hard it is! Very hard! It is much more simple extending the exhalation...
I don't know if I take too much air at the first set and it creates a snowball effect and I can't take the half breaths after because I'm engulfed...
Whatever...I'll try to solve it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is important to clarify what is being referred to here. The chest and the solar plexus are different parts of the body. The objective is to exhale without collapsing the chest. The lower abdomen is what we want to come in as we exhale. It is as if we are emptying the lungs from the bottom up. It is only when you stop the breath by pushing down do you get a choking sensation. I'm not sure where you got the idea to exhale the breath as fast as possible. This exercise is all about learning to breath slowly. And also, the idea is to take a comfortable breath slower, not take more breath as the counting increases. I find it is helpful to remind yourself to take less than you think you should.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One other question: When you talk about immediately inhaling after one set, you are considering the suspension that one always feel between the exhalation and the breath renewal as counting, don't you?
Furthermore, it is very important for others who are reading the blog have it clear that the lips ought to be parted and not holding back the pressure, as well as the throat.
I used to practice an exercise similar to this holding back with the lips and the throat. IT IS DETRIMENTAL. VERY DANGEROUS. And a very common mistake.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I found that part to be the most challenging. I guess that is what practice is for, to train the body to acclimate to the challenge. Your warning is a good one. That is not the purpose of this exercise. There is another exercise that can be done that resists with the lips, but there should never be resistance with the throat. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I proposed this exercise to 3 friends of mine, singers. Guess what? Only one of them could follow it without interrupting between sets, but could only do it to the 4th set. He is a swimmer from childhood. And all of them have more than 4 years of singing. An ultimate proof to me that today's vocal pedagogy don't treat the breathing issue accordingly.
It is almost impossible for someone who has not built stamina from isolated exercises on dosing the exhalation to attempt the Farinelli exercise.
I myself could only reach the third set, with great difficulty, and I suspect I did it only because I've been practicising silent breath exercises for 2 years every day.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To wrap up this discussion on breathing exercises I would like to add my own thoughts on the topic. I feel that these kinds of exercises can be very helpful for the development of coordination for singing. But I would add the caveat that they are not the end-all-be-all. What I mean is doing breathing exercises has less to do with good singing than most tend to believe. That is just my personal feeling. The reason I feel that way is from my observation that too many people believe singing is all about the breath and learning how to use the breath. In a way this is true, but not in the way we tend to believe it is. The breath is not the tone. So the projection of the breath does not improve the projection of the tone. Getting the breath out more does not free the tone. Doing things with the breath does not necessarily improve the singing. Long phrases are not an issue of having more breath in reserve to keep it "flowing". So often I hear the remedy for a problem is "more breath" when in fact it should be LESS breath, but balanced with the larynx. It is easy to assume that the flow of breath coincides with the flow of tone. A well functioning voice sounds like a continuous flow of tone. This leads us to the belief that the way to accomplish that result is to have a continuous flow of breath. The relationship tends to be something like this: the listener observes or hears a flow of tone. Then they change from being the observer to the doer. They don't feel a flow of tone but they can feel a flow of breath, so that becomes the focus. This then becomes the roadblock that this line of thinking can never overcome. The reason is because these are opposing concepts. The flow of tone is a result of a perfect balance between the breath and the larynx. The flow of breath destroys that perfect balance. They can't both exist at the same time. The important part of this exercise, in my opinion, is not so much the slow release, but the holding of the breath with the breathing system and not the throat. This is the part that really transfers to the act of singing. The slow release is not quite the same because we don't relax and exhale when we sing. We should be resisting the collapsing of the breathing and keeping a steady, continuous compression. The breath is not let out as much as gently squeezed out. Another challenge in this situation is the fact that you don't feel the larynx when it is functioning correctly. You can feel it with Irregular vibration, but not with Regular vibration. This is where the occasional use of the vocal fry can be helpful. This Irregular vibration can give us the sensation of where the vocal folds are in our awareness. We can use this awareness of location to improve the balance with the breath. The only purpose the breath has is to transfer energy to the vibration of the vocal folds. Nothing else. If it is trying to be the sound by projecting beyond the larynx it will create a problem. Any breath that goes past the larynx as breath is wasted. Only the puffs of air that are a natural part of vibration go past the larynx. This is like exhaust from a car engine. And like the sound that the exhaust from a car makes the exhaust from the voice makes the tone when amplified in the resonator of the pharynx.


Please keep writing with your comments, everyone. Thanks.