BREAKING DOWN THE LOMONACO TECHNIQUE
The internet, social media and platforms like YouTube have revolutionised our world. The arena of singing and singing teaching is no exception. These mediums allow us more access to the inside of a teaching studio. The attitudes, ideas, methodology and personality of a teacher have become more accessible to us than ever before. One of the techniques which has been at forefront of discussion in recent times is the "LoMonaco Technique". The two studios which most publicly claim to teach this method are operated by Craig Sirianni at Sirianni Studios situated in Upstate New York, and the studio of Jeremy Silver. I am basing this article largely on the technical information which has been released by Mr Silver. This is because Mr Silver has been the more prolific of the two in regard to giving detailed information on the technique.
THE LINEAGE
Tenor Thomas LoMonaco studied under Douglas Stanley, who was a student of Manuel Garcia. In regards to this lineage there is nothing fabricated or sensationalised. What is particularly rare about this lineage is that it involves three generations of famous singing teachers and does not feature people who were only famous singers that did not make substantial contributions to teaching. Refreshingly, there are none of the usual absurd claims that the concepts being taught are those of Manuel Garcia and that the methodology was preserved in some type of a time capsule which for a fee can be delivered to students today. Stanley and LoMonaco were both pioneers in researching voice science and made numerous developments and contributions to the approach along the way. The technique being instructed by Mr Silver and Mr Sirianni respectively is predominately attributed to Thomas LoMonaco, although it is acknowledged that many of the concepts have their origins in the work of Stanley. Recordings of Thomas LoMonaco can be easily obtained, as can before and after recordings of some of his students, due to him being a prolific teacher who taught many singers who had excellent careers.
THE TECHNIQUE (as described by Jeremy Silver)
The technique could be described as a deep, fully-engaged, open-throated sound. The technique states there are two registers, chest and falsetto. Much of the focus is on the sound at source (in the larynx). The objective of the training is to develop strong involvement of the chest voice, which for male voices is developed throughout the entire range. Falsetto is also developed in the training. The technique advocates a retracted position of the tongue. The breathing and support advocated is appoggio, as described by Titta Ruffo and Rosa Ponselle. The technique also advocates covering. All of these fundamentals are very sound and standard pedagogical concepts for the training of an operatic sound.
Particular to the technique (as described by Mr Silver) are the following three functions:
1) Reducing constriction through the elimination or reduction of the Valsalva Manoeuvre during singing. The Valsalva Manoeuvre is a medical term which describes the epiglottic sphincter’s innate response to close when subglottic pressure is present. The manoeuvre naturally occurs when lifting heavy objects and during childbirth. This physiological event is deemed undesirable within singing as it creates constrictive tensions. The reduction of this constriction is an objective of the technique and is considered the key to a bigger and freer sound.
2) Pulsations of the vibrato, which are practised as an autonomous function. These pulsations are practised at slower speeds and then sped up. This practice aims to coordinate the accent of the vibrato as well as to bring into effect the desired oscillation of the pitch.
3) Balancing of vocal vectors. These vocal vectors refer to different muscular pulls on the larynx. There is a downward, upward, forward and backward vector. The method operates on the basis of balancing out these vectors. If for example a student has too much downward pull on the larynx there are certain exercises which will be performed that initiate an upward pull. In this scenario, exercises which instigate downward pull will be avoided as they would exacerbate the imbalance.
All of these three concepts again deal with the sound at source and coordinate the desired function in the larynx.
CONTROVERSIAL ELEMENTS
Any approach which is garnering attention will become steeped in controversy. Detractors will often disseminate information intended to discredit the approach. Below are some of the elements which have become controversial.
THE RETRACTED TONGUE
One of the most controversial elements is the retracted tongue, which is central to producing the desired sound. The technique advocates that the middle part of the tongue retracts up and/or back depending on the vowel. This formation does two things:
1) It means that the tip of the tongue is slightly retracted.
2) It means that the root of the tongue moves slightly upward, creating space above the larynx.
I see no reason why this should create
controversy, as it is based in very sound physiological principles and many
great singers have sung in this way.
THE TONGUE INSTRUMENT
Stanley devised a tongue instrument which was and continues to be extremely controversial. It is obvious that the purpose and the role of this instrument has been misunderstood. False information has been deliberately disseminated regarding the tongue instrument; David Jones for example has stated that Stanley had a tongue instrument which pushes the tongue down. This type of deliberate misrepresentation is completely disingenuous. Jeremy Silver has gone on record and explained that the instrument goes underneath the tongue and the student is encouraged to rest their tongue against it. The aim of the instrument is to activate the Genioglossus muscle and deactivate musculature which closes the throat. It is obvious that any instrument which the tongue rests against cannot be pushing the tongue down. The tongue instrument is not central to the technique and does not even need to be used in the teaching of the method. It is however easy to understand how a device like this has been misrepresented by detractors who seek to discredit the method for their own political gain.
THE LOW LARYNX
This concept, which is an essential tenet of any decent operatic technique, has become a politically incorrect term. People who peddle this nonsense like to suggest that this method "depresses the larynx" which has become an en vogue term for those wanting to sound politically correct. To say that this method depresses the larynx is again an outright falsehood. As already stated, the retracted tongue has an upward pull on the lower section of the tongue and therefore cannot depress the larynx. Ironically, this technique has a whole body of information and exercises which are designed to deal with too much downward pull on the larynx. The balancing out of these types of problems is actually an objective of the method. You can listen to Thomas LoMonaco in excerpts from a 1991 London masterclass which are available on YouTube. In these excerpts you can hear Mr LoMonaco identify this issue with a baritone participant. Mr LoMonaco clearly states that the baritone has a tendency to "pull down" and then goes to work on balancing out this problem.
SLOW DEVELOPMENT
This technique aims at producing fully-fledged operatic sounds. The desired sounds are big, free and projective. Developing a voice to this level takes many years of dedicated work. Big sounds like these require the development of strong muscles. The method is physically demanding. Because of this, students are encouraged to practice small sections of phrases with rests in between. The idea is that by singing short bursts in the correct way, the student will slowly develop the strength and coordination to sing complete operas over time. In the early stages of development this approach results in students who can create a large operatic sound for short durations. This element tends to be ridiculed by detractors who advocate a different approach. Personally, I see nothing wrong with it, as it has a very sound logic for its reasoning.
FORCED SOUNDS
In many of my articles I describe a politically correct movement within the world of singing teaching. This trend seeks to make operatic singing more diminutive. As a result, studios that advocate for big, strong, truly operatic sounds are often criticised. The detractors of such approaches like to suggest that these big loud sounds are damaging voices. These detractors are very adept at dissuading potential students from undertaking study from such studios by suggesting that the training will ruin their voices. I have seen a lot of this type of behaviour expressed about this method online. Before you give any weight to these voices I would encourage you to look at the following counter argument. Below is a quote by Ruth Dobson from the book "The Four Voices of Man" by Jerome Hines:
"I have a confession to make. I am afraid that we academics may be destroying a whole generation of young singers. We are afraid to make them sound like real opera singers, because we fear if they hurt their little voices we will lose our jobs."
At the time, Ruth Dobson was the head of the opera department at Portland State University. This statement was made decades ago but it is still relevant today.
If you learn from a teacher who is on
the faculty of a university, understand that they cannot teach you
an operatic technique even if they wanted to. Universities have regular assessments
where students are forced to give recitals. These assessments start in the first year of the course. Additionally, students are expected to sing in
student productions. What
academia does not understand is that this assessment system does not allow for
a voice to develop at its own pace. There
is no university I know that will give you a distinction for
singing a phrase at the end of your first year regardless of how good the sound
may be. As already stated, the LoMonaco technique works
best in an environment where voices can develop very slowly. It is suited
to a private studio where voices can be developed over many years. It is true that the method involves very strong and forced sounds, but
students are not required to give recitals and sing in operas before they are
vocally developed, which makes the approach a safe one. Essentially, the method gets students making big
and powerful sounds quickly while allowing their voices to develop slowly, which is
the key difference.
AN UNDOCUMENTED LIFE’S WORK
Unfortunately, Mr LoMonaco never published a book. This is not uncommon amongst great teachers as they are often busy with the actual job of teaching and understand that nobody can learn how to sing from a book. Singing is taught primarily through vocal demonstrations, and teachers most often do not have time to explain the reason why they are doing something. The "why" however is the element which is required when attempting to describe how the method works. It is the difference between understanding a method and being a product of a method. Mr Silver has publicly stated that he was asked by Mr LoMonaco to complete an unfinished book on the method. I am sure that this addition to vocal pedagogy will be highly anticipated.
SUMMARY
The fact that the studios that teach this method are in direct competition with my own will not stop me from endorsing this method. At this time in history the opera world needs as many good studios as we can get. The LoMonaco method when mastered produces a large projective sound as well as great dynamic control, vocal traits which were exemplified by one of the method’s most famous exponents in Jerry Hadley. Always remember that just because someone instructs a great method there is no guarantee that results are assured. This is because the ability of the teacher is the biggest factor in teaching voice. If you do decide to study this method I recommend that you do your due diligence in selecting the best possible teacher. Luckily, there is a culture of transparency amongst those who instruct this method and before and after examples are usually available. Both Mr Sirianni and Mr Silver are very active on internet platforms. Both have taken part in a podcast from the series "Real Singers on Singing" hosted by Daniel Formica. While they are the most public personalities claiming to teach the method there are undoubtedly others, as Thomas LoMonaco was a very active teacher and taught many people. If you do decide to learn this method I believe it will be a wise choice and I wish you the best.
FOOTNOTE AND DISCLAIMER
Many people will think critically
about the reasons behind why I have published this glowing review. That’s fair enough. After
all this is an uncommon occurrence within the world of singing teachers, who
by and large praise their own teaching and criticise everyone
else for doing everything wrong.
For the record I want to make the following statements. At the time of writing this article I have never met any of the people who teach this method. I also freely acknowledge that I do not know how to teach this method. I wrote this article because I am very interested in vocal technique and I considered this an appropriate topic for my forum. The method, in addition to having great merit, is also surrounded in controversy which makes it an interesting topic for discussion.
Copyright
Brett Goulding 2020
Comments
Post a Comment