Belting Technique
'Belting' is a contemporary singing technique that produces a high-intensity, 'big', 'powerful' (e.g., loud) vocal sound. Belted singing can be found in all contemporary genres and styles of singing, including jazz, folk, pop and rock, although it is most commonly associated with musical theatre (sometimes referred to as 'Broadway belt'). However, not all singers of these genres belt when performing or recording.
This manner of singing may once have served the purpose of allowing the female vocalist's low-middle range to be heard over a brassy orchestra at a time when amplification (e.g. microphones) and other sound equipment either weren't available or simply weren't used. Today, because of the standard use of amplification in all contemporary genres, belting is no longer considered necessary in order for a singer to be heard. It can therefore be assumed that belt singing has survived now for centuries in the 'non-classical' singing world because there is a quality in the sound that the audience likes and now expects to hear.
There are several types of belt production, created with different vocal tract configurations and making different use of the breath and glottal closure, and therefore producing slightly different qualities or aesthetics. This also creates some confusion (if not further debate) about how to accurately define belt, and it may be defined differently by different people. For example, some may view belting as little more than singing loudly, which requires no special technique or training, just increasing air pressure to create more loudness, as one naturally would. Others may listen for a distinctive quality in the sound or resonance tuning (e.g., first formant-second harmonic resonance coupling).
The subject of belting has become a matter of heated controversy amongst singers, singing teachers, and methodologies. Unfortunately, the belting debate has now become a war between contemporary and classical schools (methods), with each side having harsh criticisms of the other, some founded on scientific fact and some not, and neither side being willing to budge on its position or embrace the possibility that there may be room in the singing world for two different approaches to singing. Teachers of contemporary styles believe that the technique is worthy of medical and scientific study, pedagogic support, and critical artistic review. They push to legitimize the technique, arguing that belting is safe and that classical technique doesn't adequately prepare singers to compete in the contemporary music industry because classical training doesn't produce the 'natural' sound that is desirable in today's styles of music, while classical instructors express concern about the safety of having a longer closed phase of the vibratory cycle and of the greater muscular body tension and constriction during belted singing. Some teachers of contemporary methods are convinced that classical technique instructors oppose belting not solely because they believe it to be dangerous, but also because they don't like listening to and singing contemporary genres. They believe that classically oriented vocal technique instructors can't appreciate the belt sound and do not enjoy contemporary music such as pop and rock.
I should note before I continue any further in this article, or before this entire article is dismissed early on by the reader as a completely biased perspective, that even though I teach a more 'traditional' singing method as a foundation for all healthy vocalism - a foundaiton that is 'tweaked' in accordance with the singer's aesthetic goals - I neither find the sounds of belt voice aesthetically offensive nor am I opposed to its use. I, myself, sing in contemporary styles only - this has always been the case - and make use of belt technique in my own singing. I do not object to the 'idea' or concept of belt, but to the poor and unhealthy execution of it. I originally set out on this research path with the intent of learning precisely why so many belters suffer vocal injury, and why so many of them end up at my studio in dire need of vocal rehabilitation. Is there simply a myriad of bad (i.e., improperly trained) belters out there, or is there something inherent within belting itself that puts undue stress on the vocal instrument?
Belting is such a hot - by hot, I mean both popular and controversial - topic that I'm offering my readers some research-based information about the technique, as well as my personal perspective on the subject as a vocal technique instructor. My aim is to treat this topic as fairly and as objectively as possible, despite my professional objections to how the technique is sometimes taught by some (but not all) teachers and employed by many singers.
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN BELTING AND CLASSICAL TECHNIQUE
Different voice techniques are required to activate the muscles and produce the sounds necessary for a variety of singing styles. These styles employ very different techniques, and consequently differ acoustically, aurally and kinesthetically (e.g., the physical sensations that are experienced by the singer) in some very significant ways.
In order to create a belt voice, voice technique must be measurably different than that used in classical singing. In belting, both male and female singers use bright ('chiaro'), speech-like sounds, a text-driven approach to repertoire, a non-continuous vibrato, and a thyroarytenoid (vocal fold shortener) dominant vocal source. In classical singing, however, tall, round vowels that enable a singer to sing a self-amplified sound are used, tone is more balanced between bright and dark qualities (chiaroscuro timbre), vibrato is initiated at onset and continues to offset, and the vocal source is cricothyroid (vocal fold lengthener) dominant in the upper-middle and head registers.
In the following sections, I will be discussing and explaining in more depth these numerous differences between contemporary and classical singing.
AURAL AND ACOUSTIC CHARACTERISTICS
Because acoustics (the study of sound, including its frequency of vibration or pitch, loudness, and timbre) and aural characteristics (those of, relating to, or perceived by the ear) are closely tied, I have decided to combine the analyses of these two characteristics in order to simplify this discussion.
Belting differs timbrally from operatic singing in many interesting respects. Belt voice is a brighter, more conversational phonation, resonation, and articulation than classical singing. There is a lot more emphasis on consonants in belted singing than in classical voicing. Even though the tone is still carried through the vowel primarily, the vowels and consonants remain quite speech-like and present, whereas in higher tessituras in opera, composers often abandon lyrics for 'vocal gymnastics' (coloratura/florid passages) performed on only a single vowel sound because the beauty of the vocal line takes precedence over the song's lyrics. (While the vowel is the 'musical' component of the word, the consonant is what delivers the meaning. In musical theatre, in which much of the story line - if not all of it - is conveyed through song lyrics, consonants are especially critical.)
Because phrases are shorter and more speech-like, legato (an Italian word meaning 'tied together,' suggesting that the transitions between notes should be smooth, without any silence between them) singing is not as essential to belting as it is to classical singing, where smoothness of line is part of the expected style, interpretation, and execution of songs. (This is not to suggest that legato is never a technical goal in commercial styles.)
Vowel modification is treated differently in belting versus opera. In belting, singers attempt to maintain speech language vowels (vowels that are pronounced in the exact same way that they would be during speech) throughout most of the scale, and vowel modification is typically delayed and yields different modifications, as compared to opera, which seeks to achieve acoustical vowels (in which the pitch of the vowel - all vowels have pitch - coincides with the harmonic values of the pitch). Additionally, the modifications made in belting generally seek to raise the first formant in order to keep the second harmonic below it, whereas classical singers generally stabilize their resonance frequencies formants in order to allow the second harmonic to rise above the first formant as pitch ascends, thereby tuning to formants above the first. As can be expected, these two resonance strategies produce different acoustical outcomes. The vowels and resonance balance are markedly different and serve the aethetic goals of the styles.
Belters are taught to sing with a feeling of 'forwardness' in the mask, or to change the typical placement of the voiced sound in the mouth, bringing it forward into the hard palate. Many classical technique instructors also teach this feeling of forwardness or the sensation of sympathetic resonance in the bony structures of the front of the face, referred to as forward placement, but not all agree that it is good or accurate pedagogy since sound and resonance can't actually be directed to specific points within the vocal tract. It is the entire vocal tract that acts as a resonator for the sound that is initially produced in the larynx (voice box) by the vocal folds. Attempts at placing the voice usually produce unnatural configurations of the vocal tract, which tend to lead to tensions, as well as an imbalance in tone (such as hypernasality, thinness, or shrillness).
What instructors who teach belting may mean by 'placement of the voice' is that the vocal tract is configured in such a way as to encourage the presence of higher formants (overtones or harmonic partials), likely through the creation of certain narrowing at certain parts along the vocal tract, as I will explain in the section below. (Information about how to shape the vocal tract to encourage chiaroscuro timbre can be found in Singing With An 'Open Throat': Vocal Tract Shaping and in Vowel, Vowel Formants and Vowel Modification.)
How the vocal tract is shaped during belting and classical styles leads to significant differences in the acoustic characteristics of each technique. Acoustic research reveals that classical and belt sounds create different frequencies, formants and harmonics.
The belt is highly 'chiaro', or bright, in tone. This brightness results from the particular configurations of the vocal tract, including a narrowed aryepiglottis, a slightly elevated larynx, and a narrowed pharynx, that are used in belting technique, which I will explain in greater detail in the following section about the physical characteristics of belting. The acoustic result of this vocal tract shaping, as well as the longer closed phase of the vocal folds during phonation, is a rise in the frequencies of all formants - which, in turn, produces a characteristic brightness in the sound.
According to a number of voice researchers (e.g., by J. Estill, I. Titze, K. Bozeman, D.G. Miller, S. Austin, etc.), in belted voicing, the first formant is sometimes raised all the way to the frequency of the second harmonic and would perceptually appear to be quite edgy on a spectrogram (an image that shows how the spectral density of a signal varies with time). Spectral analysis of belted voicing shows that the enhanced partials contribute to the fundamental frequency (that which is most associate with pitch) having relatively low-amplitude, which allows the higher formants to be emphasized and perceived by the ear quite readily. A Master's thesis candidate, (who was advised by the speech therapist PhD Silvia Rebelo Pinho), observed no significant changes in frequency and amplitude of the first formant (f1), but did see significant increases in the amplitude of f2, f3 and f4 in the belted voice. In frequencies for f2, those voices that were perceived as being louder were correlated to an increase in amplitude of f3 and f4.
The classical approach to singing the same pitches, on the other hand, is characterized by a relatively low first formant, consequential of the 'lower than rest' laryngeal posture that is taught in classical techniques, and would be perceived as sounding comparatively darker, or more 'oscuro' and warmer.
Titze and Bozeman have noted what they call a divergent resonator tract shape in belting - a 'megaphone' shape - in which the mouth opening is larger and the pharynx is narrower. Leon Thurman, a pedagogue from Minneapolis who specializes in teaching musical theatre belt technique states (www.ncvs.org, 2005): "In order to avoid acoustic overloading of the vocal folds, the mouth part of the vocal tract must gradually widen as the pitches rise, becoming quite open even in the middle of the singers' capable pitch range. In addition, subtle, intricate variations in the vocal tract adjustments can produce a variety of subtle 'fuller-brighter' qualities."
During high-intensity singing, the belter uses a larger buccal (mouth) opening that produces a narrowed pharynx, since a lowered jaw actually constricts the back of the throat. The formant structures of the individual vowels then change, and the tone becomes brighter. (This concept is explained further in 'The Jaw' in Singing With An 'Open Throat': Vocal Tract Shaping.) As Thurman explains and teaches, this wider mouth opening helps to prevent the brightness of the tone from becoming unpleasantly bright (shrill), even in the middle of a singer's range, where, in classical technique, the articulatory definition of the mouth would more closely simulate those of speech.
A narrowed pharynx and a more horizontal mouth position for vowels and consonants - an 'east to west' spreading of the mouth, as opposed to the 'north to south' position for tall, round classical vowels - helps to make this brighter resonance choice of belting possible. This bright resonance posture is a major factor in most (but not all) variations of belting, real or faux, and for both men and women.
In classical singing, the singer employs what Titze and Bozeman refer to as a convergent resonator tract shape, in which the mouth opening is comparatively smaller while the space in the pharynx is larger. The gradually increased jaw and mouth opening are reserved for the higher part of the range because it prevents the clashing of high frequencies (pitches) with lateral (side-to-side) vowels that would otherwise make the voice's tone overly bright (chiaro), thin, or shrill at higher pitches - an aesthetic that would not be compatible with the expectations of opera styles. Opening the mouth more when the larynx is low and the pharynx wide has the effect of elongating the vocal tract, making close vowels (tense vowels) more open (less-tense), raising the first formant, and consequently allowing the tone to remain more chiaroscuro (balanced in colour) than bright. (See Formant Tuning in the Female High Range in Singing With An 'Open Throat': Vocal Tract Shaping.) This technique is part of vowel modification, which I explain in Vowels, Vowel Formants and Vowel Modification.
In belt technique, higher frequencies are also produced by an increase in the closed quotient (phase) of the vocal folds (the amount of time that the folds are touching during one vibratory cycle). High, loud belting can have frequencies as high as 10 kHz, which in turn produces brighter tones. Classical sounds do not normally exceed 4 kHz, yet classical singers are perfectly capable of being heard over entire orchestras without amplification, (such as microphones that are typically used in all contemporary styles of singing), because their resonance is tuned effectively.
PHYSIOLOGY OF BELTING TECHNIQUE
There is so much going on physically during belted phonation that I need to break down my descriptions, explanations and comments into several sub-categories.
INTRINSIC MUSCULAR ACTIVITY
The muscle activity in belt voice is quite different from that of classical singing.
The vocal folds are continuously changing dynamic and stretching and thickening based upon pitch, loudness, resonance and register demands. Two primary muscles are responsible for vocal fold activity: the thyroarytenoid muscles and the cricothyroid muscles. The thyroarytenoid muscles are responsible for relaxing, shortening, and thickening the vocal folds by drawing the arytenoid cartilages forward toward the thyroid, thus producing sound that is commonly associated with chest voice in both men and women. The cricothyroid muscles tilt the cricoid cartilage around the pivot formed by the cricothyroid joint, causing the arytenoid cartilages to move away (backwards) from the thyroid cartilage. This action lowers, stretches, thins, and stiffens the vocal fold structure, increasing both the length and the tension of the vocal folds, and producing the sounds that are commonly associated with head voice and falsetto. The glottal adductor and abductor muscles also play a role in phonation. To understand more about how the larynx and the vocal folds work, read The Larynx: Structure and Function
There are many theories and explanations of how the belting voice quality is produced. Belt is described most commonly by classical technique instructors as extending the lower (chest) register upward past the first passaggio and employing the laryngeal function of that lower register to produce pitches that are usually associated with higher registers in order to create more powerful sounding notes. Whenever the laryngeal muscles and the vocal folds are not permitted to adjust or to naturally change vibratory patterns (registers) at the lower passaggio, the singer enters the 'call of the voice', in which he or she must increase volume, or begin to call or shout, in order to maintain steady phonation (without the voice breaking or shifting registers).
Those who teach belt technique argue that belt production is not purely 'chest' and is not created by the pulling up of chest voice into the higher part of the range - by register abuse, which would cause tensions and lead to injury - but by the use of 'mixed' voice qualities (a blending of chest and head resonance, or first and second formant tuning), or by the use of a head voice that is made to sound heavier for higher notes. (Not all teachers of contemporary methods are in agreement, and not all condone belting.
Research on belted voicing disproves the hypothesis that chest voice function is always carried up much higher in belted phonation than is recommended in classical singing, (although belting by new, misguided or untrained singers is often mistakenly produced through this kind of dangerous register abuse). This current research does, in contrast, support the theory that 'correct' belt is not purely 'chest voice' singing, which is seen to have a neutral to low laryngeal position, wide pharynx, elongated mouth position and sympathetic chest vibration. (As I will explain in a few paragraphs from now, different vocal postures from these are used in belting technique.)
There is some debate over whether or not men actually belt. Registration in the male voice differs from that of the female voice mainly in that men sing with a shortener (thyroarytenoid) dominant arrangement unless singing in head voice or in falsetto, where the thyroarytenoid cartilage becomes more or less inactive and disengaged. In order to belt, men are not required to change vocal registers, as they can remain in the chest register, which is considerably longer than that of females. (Female singers, on the other hand, usually must have a register shift into their middle register in order to belt.) Narrowing of the pharynx and brightening the classical sound, thus creating the 'forward' tone and increase in twang, when belting and emphasizing the informal, speech-like phrases popularly used in contemporary singing is all that is needed for a male singer to belt. Shortener dominant sound being the primary vocal function for men results in male classical singing being comparatively closer to male belt singing than female classical singing is to female belt singing.
Although, in both men and women, the vocal fold function of belting is predominantly thyroarytenoid (shortener, chest voice, thicker mass) dominant, a balanced belt sound also requires that the cricothyroid (lengthener, head voice) action remain active in order to keep the vocal folds from 'over-thickening' and the voice from becoming too heavily weighted. The cricothyroid's participation increases as the pitch ascends, although its involvement is still less than it would be in ordinary (non-belted) middle and head voice singing (i.e., vocal production remains thyroarytenoid dominant). Additionally the closed quotient of the vocal folds must not increase as pitch ascends.
Because belting is thyroarytenoid dominant, the vocalis muscle - a medial component of the thyroarytenoid muscle that runs parallel to the vocal ligaments and provides fine tension control in the vocal folds, possibly by stiffening the body while slackening the cover of the folds - still retains considerable mass when belting. As a result, belted phonation is always limited in range, especially at the higher end where the cricothyroid (lengthener) muscles need to assume complete control in order for the vocal folds to be able to elongate and thin and for high pitches to be successfully sung. (With proper use of vowel modification, particularly a strategy that involves raising the first formant, this range can be extended.) Not finding the correct balance may stress the voice and produce a pressed tone, or there may be a dramatic change in tone quality between the registers - a 'flipping' or 'breaking' at some point. If only a heavily weighted, thyroarytenoid vocal fold posture is used, voice production will be imbalanced, and excessive tension and strain, particularly in higher pitches, will be present. This is why achieving a mixed voice production as a foundation for belt is critical.
Teachers of belt technique recognize that there are certain tendencies, especially in new and untrained/poorly trained belters, which may cause strain and injury to the voice during belting. Many new belters often drive too hard with the breath and mistakenly extend their TA-dominant sound (chest voice) without incorporating enough of the lengthener (cricothyroid) activity, thus pushing the chest voice up too far and losing balance. Uninformed or misguided vocalists may confuse the forced sound of registration abuse with an acoustically considered, muscularly balanced alternative... with ruinous results. Teachers must be able to differentiate between these pushed sounds and those of a balanced belt.
Unlike in belt technique, classical technique encourages a blended middle voice sound that is achieved not through increasing muscular control but through 'aggiustamento' principles that involve subtle adjustments of breath control and vowel modification around the passaggio. Although classical vocalists can employ both the thyroarytenoid and cricothyroid muscles simultaneously, especially around the primo passaggio and in the middle range of the voice, the classical singer favours the lengtheners, (whereas the shorteners are favoured by contemporary vocalists). The different lengthener/shortener balance or mix is how two types of voicing that sound, feel, and look vastly different from each other are created.
Jo Estill, a researcher on the singing voice, has studied belting and has noted that there is also a downward tilt of the cricoid cartilage (a ring of cartilage around the trachea that provides attachments for the various muscles, cartilages, and ligaments involved in opening and closing the airway and in speech production), with a larger cricothyroid space in belted singing.
OTHER MUSCULAR ACTIVITY
Voice researcher and singing teacher, Jo Estill, described the belting voice as an extremely muscular and physical way of singing. When observing the vocal tract and torso of singers, while belting, Estill observed several indicators of muscular tension and/or strain, as well as many other confirmations that the technique of belting is indeed physically demanding. Belters use what Estill terms 'torso anchoring', which involves maximum muscular engagement of the torso. Estill also observed head and neck 'anchoring,' which suggests that belters attempt to stabilize the larynx by relying upon the muscles in the head and neck. Estill found that belters also use a maximum muscular effort of the extrinsic laryngeal muscles and minimum effort at the level of the true vocal folds, which suggests that intrinsic laryngeal muscle tensions are reduced through the engagement of muscles outside the larynx. Most vocal instructors agree that muscular tension of any sort during singing is a sign of bad technique and can negatively affect the singing voice over time. If any muscles of the torso are held rigid, breath management may be also impacted because a singer is unable to breathe lower into the body. This means that the singer who employs neck and torso anchoring must ensure that the body's muscular is being used in balance.
Vocalists who are experimenting with belt for the first time are quickly made aware of the new sensations, including those related to increased body tensions, TA dominance higher in the scale, longer closed quotient of the vocal folds, increased subglottal pressure levels, 'forward' sensations, and narrower pharynx. Oftentimes, they are encouraged to avoid practicing for extended periods of time because belting requires a new muscular activity that will cause them to tire easily. They are told that the muscles of their bodies need to be conditioned and that stamina needs to be built slowly, as in any new physical activity.
In belt technique training, increased stamina and muscular control may be developed through overloading the muscles. (This is not true of all methods for teaching belt.) The philosophy behind this overloading is that, because muscles cannot be trained without demanding more from them than they are used to giving, greater overload increases their functional capacity over time. By stimulating the muscles more intensely and over a longer period than normal, the desired response will be elicited. The body will gradually adapt to the given workload. The application of overload in a training program is supposed to be gradual, discontinuous, and progressive (e.g., hard training days should be followed by easy days with sufficient rest each day for adequate recovery). In other words, because belting is so demanding on the vocal instrument, students are encouraged to balance 'voice use' time with 'voice restoration' time.
I am not in agreement with this 'overload' method of training belting. If proper technique is being employed, days of voice rest following a practice session should never be necessary, especially if voice rest is required due to discomfort, pain, swelling on the vocal folds, hoarseness, or loss of voice - all signs of vocal abuse and/or overuse, and the vocal instrument's way of attempting to protect itself from further injury. I believe that a more reasoned approach for the new belter involves belting for very short periods of time (e.g., only a few minutes at a time) each day, and then gradually increasing the amount of time spent belting as the singer's coordination improves. It is also wise for a teacher to increase a new belter's twang and decrease the aesthetic until the student is comfortably accessing the TA and is not tempted to implement classical technique on a belt laryngeal posture.
Belters with incorrect technique may not even be aware of the negative effects of their singing technique until it is too late and serious damage has already been done. A study presented at the American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's Annual Meeting & OTO Expo in Washington, DC, found that untrained and non-professional singers - the subjects in this study ran the spectrum of musical tastes, including country, rock, pop and gospel - are significantly less likely to identify (or take note of) signs that their vocal practices might be leading to serious vocal problems. These indicators may include very subtle changes in the voice that they either may not notice or may write off as mere fatigue and assume that some rest will resolve the problem. When these same singers return to their singing tasks after a time of rest and recovery, they use the same techniques and continue to encounter the same issues, and then assume that these problems and discomforts are a normal part of singing. (I have actually had adult students come into my studio and be surprised to learn that singing doesn't have to feel uncomfortable or be difficult and stress inducing because all of their lives they have sung with a high degree of tension brought on by incorrect techniques and training.)
THE LARYNX
Estill and other voice scientists (e.g., Ingo Titze, Kenneth Bozeman, D.G. Miller) have also observed that the larynx is higher in belting than in classical singing. Where a classical sound requires a relatively low and relaxed laryngeal position, belt calls for the larynx to be higher than 'at rest'. Belters should not, however, be instructed to consciously attempt to raise their larynxes during vocal production, as the specific adjustments made to the vocal tract in belt technique encourage this raised laryngeal posture and will keep it in balance.
Most experts on the singing voice believe that a high larynx position is both dangerous to vocal health and produces what many find to be an unpleasant sound. A high-larynxed approach to the higher range of the voice (i.e., the upper middle range and the head register) can lead to numerous vocal disorders, including general swelling of the vocal folds, pre-polyp swelling, ballooning of capillaries on the surface of the folds, or vocal nodules if it is extremely high and/or accompanied by supralaryngeal constriction. (More about the healthy position of the larynx during singing can be read in Singing With An 'Open Throat': Vocal Tract Shaping.) However, a slightly higher than 'at rest' larynx is not necessarily something to be afraid of and can serve the technical needs and meet the aesthetic goals of the CCM singer. In fact, the singer who is able to achieve balance within the vocal instrument during belting is able to raise the larynx and narrow the pharynx without feeling as though the throat is tight and squeezed.
VOCAL FOLD ACTIVITY
Research conducted with video-fiberoptic observation of the vocal instrument during belting has indicated that belters have a closed quotient (the time that the vocal folds are closed during each cycle of vibration) that lasts for an average of about seventy percent or more of the cycle, which is significantly longer than in any other type of phonation - longer than in conversational speech patterns and also longer than in classical singing. The longer closed quotient contributes partly to the brightness and loudness of the belted voice. This prolonged closed phase leads to an increase in subglottal pressure (air pressure beneath the larynx).
In Comparisons of Pharynx, Source, Formant, and Pressure Characteristics In Operatic and Musical Theatre Singing (J. Sundberg, P. Gramming, J. Lovetri), published in Journal of Voice, Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages 301-310, the articulatory and phonatory characteristics of both classical singing and belting were investigated. Video-fiberoptic observation of the pharynx, inverse filtering of airflow, and measurement of subglottal pressure were conducted on a female professional singer trained in both the operatic and belting styles, as well as in an intermediate vocal technique ('mixed'). The results of this study reveal that belting is characterized by very high subglottal pressures and sound levels, and apparently also by a comparatively high degree of glottal adduction (firm and longer vocal fold closure). Comparisons with other investigations of related aspects of belting and operatic singing support the assumption that the data obtained from this particular subject are representative for all singers using these vocal techniques.
Although belting is characterized by high subglottal pressure levels, these levels must be kept manageable. The singer must learn to be able to balance out the expiratory and inspiratory forces in order to keep the subglottal pressures appropriate for the task and in balance with the glottal resistance efforts. Also the singer should avoid an overly long closed quotient and too high a degree of compression at the glottal level. When glottal adduction efforts are excessive and the closed quotient overly high, the singer may get the feeling that he or she can't move enough air through the glottis and may then feel as though air pressure is 'stacking up' beneath the vocal folds. Flexible adjustments of the entire vocal instrument must be permitted.
Secondly, in belting (and in many other contemporary technique of singing), there is typically no continuous vibrato, except for what the singer adds to colour the sound. The singer of contemporary commercial styles typically permits vibrato only at the end of a sustained tone, (whereas in classical styles, vibrato is encouraged to shimmer in the voice from the onset of each note, and not just for sustained notes). I suspect that delaying vibrato better enables the singer to be able to 'lock into' a given resonance tuning.
Vibrato is a sign of healthy vocal fold activity during singing and is believed by voice scientists to come into vocal production as a natural relaxant principle when the body has a need for periodic muscle relaxation during heavy-duty or intense vocal activity. Vibrato helps the musculature of the vocal instrument cope with the demands being placed on it. Although intentionally suppressing vibrato may be a conscious artistic choice, when no vibrato is present (i.e., its absence is not by choice) or when vibratory rate is inconsistent (variable), it may also be a sign of imbalance in voice production. Since belting is a highly muscular activity, the voice needs vibrato. Given that vibrato is the body's way of protecting itself from strain of the laryngeal muscles (caused by rigidity and excessive tension, as well as strenuous 'work' or effort), vibrato should remain a part of all voice production, and especially so during belt phonation, which is very taxing on the vocal instrument.
OTHER PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BELTING
Jo Estill's research has found that the pharynx is narrowed and the tongue position is high and wide during belted voicing.
Finally, there is a narrowing of the aryepiglottic sphincter (the 'twanger'). Belt singing is very 'chiaro' or bright in timbre. It is distinctly different from the warmer classical sound. This brightness is associated with 'twang'- a term given to the sound created by an intended tightening of the aryepiglottic sphincter and shortening of the vocal tract (i.e., laryngeal elevation). (The aryeppiglottic sphincter is responsible for sounds like the baby's cry, witch's cackle, and duck's quack.) It may be assumed that a narrowed aryepiglottis is what results in the narrower pharynx (because the larynx rises during twang production) allied with the acoustic characteristics of belting. More information about the aryepiglottic fold can be read in The Larynx: Structure and Function. It is suggested that, to avoid a troubled register transition, twang should be increased and volume reduced before passing through the passaggio (Bartlett, 2005), which requires even more tightening of the aryepiglottic sphincter.
The Master's thesis research advised by PhD Silvia Rebelo Pinho also frequently found the same vocal tract adjustments like velar (soft palate) lowering, pharyngeal wall narrowing, laryngeal raising, and aryepiglottic and lateral laryngeal constriction.
THE DEBATE CONTINUES...
As I suggested at the beginning of this article, I am not opposed to belting. What concerns me is the 'pulling chest' and forcing the breath type of phonation that many untrained and poorly trained singers mistake for belting. This type of phonation results in what I call an 'unmusical yell,' in which the voice is locked into an overly thick, pressed, pushed coordination. Although this 'locking' may give the singer the feeling of stability, it’s actually a sound that lacks true control, flexibility, vibrancy, and any potential for artistry. This is not good belt technique. This is simply yelling, or shouting.
Belting may indeed be a 'soft yell,' similar to a child's playground voice - and according to many researchers, it shares the same resonance coupling of yelling (first formant-second harmonic).
If produced properly (i.e., well-trained, well-'supported,' and correctly 'placed' in the 'mask'), belting can be safe and healthy. Many singers, however, mistake physical exertion for musicality and expressiveness, believing that singing needs to look and feel difficult in order for it to appear and sound good. A pressed sound is common amongst misguided belters
A yell, regardless of how 'soft', is still a yell, and is not sustainable for long without stressing the vocal instrument. In order for an adult to yell, he or she must enter what is termed the 'call of the voice', which involves pulling the lower or heavier mechanism of the voice (chest voice) up into the middle and upper middle range. Whenever a male singer, for instance, carries his chest voice up into his zona di passaggio and approaches his head register without making progressive or gradual acoustic and muscular (i.e., laryngeal) adjustments, his voice will become increasingly loud, as he must use his call voice, or shout, in order to maintain unbroken, non-cracking phonation. He could probably continue this kind of phonation throughout his zona di passaggio and a few notes upwards yet, but with increasing difficulty and tension, and the voice will begin to sound more and more strident and tight with ascending pitch, and will feel increasingly uncomfortable and strained. If belting is to be deemed 'safe', then this notion of a soft yell must be abandoned, as it will lead to new belters pushing the heavier mechanism of their voices (chest voice function) too high in the scale. Remember that volume is increased by using greater breath pressure against a more resistant set of vocal folds.
As has already been established in this article, true and 'healthy' or 'safe' belt is not purely chest voice singing, but a mix. However, this mix is still more heavily thyroarytenoid dominant (as has been established in numerous studies, including those by Estill), meaning that the muscular function during belt is still very similar to that used in chest voice, with the vocalis muscle retaining a great deal of mass during belted phonation in the middle range of the voice. While this 'mix' - adding in some 'head' tones to an otherwise heavily weighted function or mechanism - may create a 'soft yell', as opposed to a full 'call' voice, it still poses risk to the health of the vocal instrument. Any kind of 'yell' voice is not sustainable over the long term. And while yelling may be a part of our 'natural' or instinctual vocal abilities - necessary for survival and sometimes for simply behind heard - this fact should not be interpreted as license for using this ability frequently or extensively.
Most singing teachers, both of the classical schools and of the contemporary schools, understand that carrying the lower mechanism of the voice up too high will likely cause strain and injury to the vocal instrument. In order to maintain the same speech-like vocal quality of the chest voice at pitches above the first passaggio, the laryngeal muscles must work very hard, and the voice begins to develop a 'shouty' quality, which gives it the characteristic 'big' sound of incorrect belting. Yelling or shouting above the secondo passaggio (i.e. in the head register) will subject the singer's instrument to serious abuse, which means that a 'yelled' belt sound is innately and necessarily limited in terms of range.
I have also read teachers of belting technique recommending that students who experience excess tension should be guided toward an ideal 'flow' phonation as in any pedagogical approach to the teaching of singing. However, true flow phonation is impossible to achieve during belted voicing because flow phonation, by definition, requires appropriate levels of airflow (low sub-glottal pressure) and healthy vocal fold closure (neither pressed nor insufficiently adducted). In belting, the vocal folds are closed for too long, making subglottic pressure levels too high. Furthermore, flow phonation traditionally produces a more balanced (chiaroscuro) tone, in which resonation is enhanced through an open vocal tract configuration, that is not characteristic of the belted voice due to the greater amount of muscular constriction and tension - a tightened and shortened vocal tract - that creates the characteristic brighter (chiaro) tone of belting. Attempts at teaching flow phonation during belting seem na�ve and futile, as the technique itself opposes the traditional elements of flow phonation. (Of course, this doesn't preclude the teacher from instructing his or her students in more free flowing singing technique in addition to belt technique, as some teachers may.)
Teachers who support belting as a legitimate artistic practice are convinced that it is safe. And for the properly trained belter, it can be. However, the incidence of vocal injury is higher in untrained and contemporary singers than it is amongst classically trained singers, including those singers trained in classical technique who sing in contemporary genres of music such as pop and rock. The research by Sundberg, Gramming, and Lovetri confirms that belting is frequently associated with disturbances of voice function. In most cases, when singers suffer vocal fatigue, strain or injury, their incorrect vocal technique is more likely to be the root cause than their demanding performance schedules, as a singer with poor technique and unhealthy vocal habits is more likely to become 'out of commission,' having to cancel tour dates due to vocal nodules, acute vocal fold hemorrhages, or similar vocal fold injuries and dysfunctions. The incidence of such stories in the popular music world seems to be on the rise, as fewer recording artists are vocally trained in good technique and as more of them attempt to belt without being trained how to do so safely.
Properly trained singers tend to have much longer careers and suffer fewer vocal problems than do their untrained and improperly trained counterparts. This means that vocal health is maintained through good technique, and those who use correct, healthy technique sing for longer and seldom have the need to cancel performance engagements.
Two principles underlie a balanced, natural vocal technique. First, voice is a natural function of the body, with the goal of technique being to allow free and healthy functioning at any intensity. Conscious actions in singing should not interfere with natural functions. Second, singing study should train the individual aspects of the art so as to avoid one interfering with another. Any technique tht subverts either or both of these principles will introduce unnatural tensions that impede free functioning of the vocal instrument. Since every vocal concept is connected to another, it makes sense that if one aspect of technique is incorrect or out of balance, it will have a domino effect on the rest of the vocal instrument. Breathing, vocal fold function, laryngeal position, pharyngeal opening, jaw, tongue, and soft palate postures all affect each other.
So, correct training in belt technique is critical to the success and vocal health of the singer. Both the teacher and the singer need to be able to discern imbalances in voice production that may cause stress on or injury to the instrument.
However, it is possible to teach the mixed muscular control of belt technique in the middle range (along with a full shift into head mix function when it becomes necessary) without the vocal tract constrictions or the rising larynx, thus producing a 'faux belt' sound, and there may be circumstances in which doing so might be beneficial for given students and circumstances. (As I wrote at the beginning of this article, there are several types of belt sounds, and what I call a 'faux belt' is what many teachers and singers actually call a healthy belt, with a change in registration, as well as 'forwardness', 'twang' and 'sob' qualities, but without excessive air pressure, too firm a glottal closure, etc..).
VOCAL REGISTRATION AND CONTEMPORARY TEACHING METHODS
Unhealthy techniques are often formulated on the premise that the vocal instrument can be made to do whatever the singer wants it to, even if that means defying natural physiological and acoustical laws. (From reading the articles and FAQ answers on numerous instructors' websites, it is evident that not every teacher of voice is on the same page when it comes to vocal registration.)
It is clear that belting requires the resistance of 'natural' registration events through the extension of a TA dominant range and through the raising of the first formant above its speech language value (frequency). TA dominance - that which is associated with chest voice - is carried up higher and the closed quotient of the vocal folds remains relatively long higher up in the scale than it would be in classical singing and than it would naturally for most voices. (Were the goal not to extend their belt ranges as high as possible, most singers would naturally allow their voices to transition into a CT dominant coordination around the break - A4/Bb4/B4 for most females singing most vowels and E4/F4/F4 for most males singing most vowels. Instead, they train their coordination - especially vowel modification - to enable/assist this belt range extension.) This defiance of the natural tendencies of the voice isn't unhealthy in and of itself. It is only when the singer becomes locked into an inflexible coordination as pitch ascends above the passaggio that it becomes periolous. This 'locking' has always been my concern because it is abusive to the vocal instrument, as it forces the instrument to function inefficiently. (I am aware that absolute mechanical efficiency is not always the goal of all techniques or styles of singing. However, a voice that consistently operates from a place of imbalance - which causes the voice to operate inefficiently - can cause premature wear and tear on the vocal apparatus.)
The belter needs to make gradual adjustments to his or her coordination in order to ensure that the extension of the TA dominant range is not an abusive practice that may potentially lead to injury. These adjustments are made mainly to the vowel resonance (adjustments to the vocal tract's shape that produce alterations to the vowel), which allow the singer to continually raise the first formant (up to a certain point), and dynamic adjustments of breath pressures according to the changing needs and in balance with the glottal resistance efforts.
There are a couple reasons why singers might see developing head voice as irrelevant and unnecessary, and why they might instead choose to remain in chest voice at all costs. First, in most contemporary songs and styles of singing, head register is not typically needed. The use of head voice is very rare in contemporary genres - falsetto is more common - and is typically reserved only for embellishments that are intended to impress the listener, not for entire lines of text (with some exceptions, of course). Head voice may also be seen as unnecessary because most contemporary songs are written within a relatively small range of pitches (within the range for the chest through upper-middle ranges), because the characteristic tone of head voice is not necessarily deemed suitable to most contemporary styles, and because sopranos, who make the most use of the head register, do not tend to dominate the contemporary singing world as they do the operatic world.
Although belted singing is TA dominant, a well-conditioned head register can't be neglected. Belters are not exempt from developing a strong head voice, as the more resonant and 'connected' their higher notes (above 'the break'), the better and more balanced the belted notes in this range will be. Technical problems and range limitations can occur when singers neglect their head voices. For example, if a CT dominant coordination is not trained, the singer will have difficulty with both singing pitches above the belt range with a clear, 'connected' tone and connecting the registers seamlessly. Inconsistencies in range and the inability to sing at softer dynamics in the range in which he or she belts (because the vocal instrument has difficulty adjusting to non-belted phonation because the lengthener-shortener 'mix' is different) is also not uncommmon. By learning the physiological and acoustical adjustments necessary to develop their head registers, the singer is more likely going to be able to find a good balance in belted phonation that allows for some freedom of the instrument and artistry.
Because of the range limitations that belted singing places on the voice, students are often reminded that their definition of 'high notes' needs to be re-evaluated when belting. Belt repertoire from the 1950's is very rarely written above B4 ("As Long As He Needs Me" from Oliver), while contemporary musical solos for female belters often rise up to E5 or even F5 (e.g., Defying Gravity from Wicked). These notes coincide roughly with the upper passaggi for mezzo-sopranos, the most common female voice type, meaning that belted singing never requires that a vocalist sing within the head register (as defined by classical tradition), and that head voice is not necessary in most contemporary styles of singing except to colour the vocal phrase a given way.
When the singer finds that he or she must sing above his or her current belt range, it is acceptable, safest, and most effective to sing in what is sometimes called a 'faux belt' - a CT dominant coordination that maintains a long closed quotient (that matches that of the legitimate belt range) and increases twang. (It is preferable to attempting to strain and force the sound in order to sing higher in a TA dominant belt.) Because the closed quotient is consistent with the true belt range, the transition into a CT dominant 'faux belt' can be made smoothly and seamlessly. Use of a CT dominant 'belt' throughout the range (i.e., in lieu of a TA dominant belt), however, is not desirable, as it will not create the precise sound that directors or producers are seeking and that will help singers gain employment as legitimate belters. It's not as hard hitting as a TA dominant belt. Because traditional Broadway belt, as well as the kind of belting heard in pop and rock singing, is always 'shortener-dominant' - as opposed to a loud 'lengthener-dominant' sound - 'faux belt' is seen to merely add twang to an otherwise classically-based sound. However, I believe that correct treatment of the vowel, (along with keeping a consistent subglottal pressure, closed quotient, and degree of glottal compression) will make all the difference, preventing the CT dominant belt from producing a classical head voice timbre.
BELT/MIX
As I wrote earlier in this article, there are many aesthetics of belting. For me, I tend to identify belting with a bright, brassy, trumpet-like blasting sound. It is a sound that is represented by a first formant-second harmonic tuning, and has chest mix (with a raised first formant) as a foundation and is coloured by twang (created by aryepiglottic narrowing). This type of belting is sometimes referred to as belt/mix.
On the SingWise Vocals YouTube channel, I have posted a video series on twang and another on mixed voice. These two aspects of coordination will get the singer prepared for learning belt technique. At some point soon, when I have more time to revise this article, I will write more about how to belt. However, I believe that belting is best learned under the guidance of a qualified teacher.
THE PRESSURE TO PRODUCE A 'BIGGER', MORE POWERFUL VOICE
More and more singers are belting, and there is a push to legitimize the technique, which has long been considered an inferior, 'low brow' and commercial style of singing to classical technique, the two styles being on opposite ends of the vocal style spectrum. Singers of contemporary commercial music, (abbreviated as CCM), often regard the ability to belt as the 'Holy Grail' of singing because they feel that it is necessary in order to compete in a world where bigger is often presumed to be better; a world in which the intrinsic beauty of lighter or lyric vocal weight and quality are not as highly valued.
The quest for bigger voices has changed how our culture evaluates the talent of its vocalists, as well as how singers approach their craft. Belting has practically become a requirement in order to succeed in the theatrical and popular singing worlds, particularly as 'legit' musicals (e.g., Phantom of the Opera and Les Mis�rables) are growing less popular. As a result, belters dominate the industry. Belting is becoming so commonplace that listeners almost expect vocalists of certain contemporary commercial genres to belt.
This quest for a more substantial sound (loudness) from singers has also changed the world of voice pedagogy. Many prospective singers want to develop voices that have commercial appeal, and so they actively seek out teachers who will provide them with the necessary tools, such as the ability to belt, that will help them compete with others in the music business. Knowing that the demand is so high and because they need to compete with other instructors for students, many teachers are responding to pressures to offer their students training in belting technique. This is certainly understandable, as is the desire to continue to 'upgrade' one's skills. The major problem, however, with teachers experiencing this pressure is that many of them are not trained to teach safe belt technique, but attempt to do so anyway because they fear losing students to other teachers who can offer them guidance in this desirable technique. (Many of the students in my own studio who are in dire need of vocal rehabilitation due to injury from poor technique are products of these untrained belting coaches who misguide their students.) Other teachers, like myself, offer instruction in belting because we understand that if the student of voice is going to belt, he or she should at least learn to do so properly, and so we take on that professional responsibility of ensuring that our students learn it correctly.
Many instructors are riding on the popularity and desirability of belting, offering pre-recorded training lessons, (typically marketed via the Internet), that promise bigger vocal production to those who buy them simply because they know that these programs are guaranteed to sell. There are numerous 'learn to sing' programs and methods on the market that aim primarily at teaching singers how to belt and how to increase the number of notes that they will be able to hit in a belting voice. Discussions on the topic are also common in forums. Those teachers who wish to make a good living by teaching contemporary techniques know that these videos and programs will attract viewers or customers because they promise to give them a commercially viable sound.
The belief that belting is a necessary skill to have is reinforced by certain 'talent' competitions, like American Idol. During a past season of the show, three of the judges - Randy Jackson, Paula Abdul and Kara DioGuardi - repeatedly made comments to several of the show's contestants about how they had wanted to hear more 'power notes' during their songs because their 'big, powerful' voices are what sells them or makes them stand out. They told these same singers that their voices sound best when they are hitting the high 'money notes' or when they are belting, and that whenever they don't project a big sound, there is something missing in their performances.
Vocal dynamics (e.g., variations in loudness and tone, as well as adjustments in vocal technique that ought to accompany those dynamic changes) and unique song arrangements are not regarded with as much appreciation as loud, powerful voices. I'll admit that I was very pleased when American Idol's fourth judge, Simon Cowell, insightfully told the other judges that they shouldn't expect the contestants to sing 'big' all the time because it would make for a boring overall performance, with no room for dynamic changes, or no 'build' as the song progresses.
As a listener, I want to hear a vocalist singing both the highs and the lows of a song - both those related to pitch and those related to dynamic intensity or volume levels. There needs to be some balance, and there needs to be room for quiet, soft singing as well as for intense and energetic singing that, together, express the full spectrum of emotions, colours, and textures behind the lyrics and music. If the verses start out big, there is then no place for the singer to go, dynamically speaking, in the chorus (and later in the bridge) because the song can't properly build. If a singer only ever belts throughout a song, those high 'money notes' become almost anticlimactic because they sound almost no different than the rest of the notes being sung in the song. If belting is the only way in which a person sings, then his or her song performances will be dynamically and artistically limited on many levels.
Many singers who belt can only 'belt,' and have little control over their voices when singing softly, partly due to technical underdevelopment, and partly due to what improper belting as a regular practice can do to the vocal apparatus - the damage that it often inflicts over time can make the voice sound shaky, thin, and weak whenever soft singing is attempted. Furthermore, if belting is the only way in which the singer is able to sing and sound good, then he or she is likely very limited in terms of technical skills. (This is where the three judges may have failed to accurately diagnose the real problem in the performances of those individual contestants whose voices weren't as impressive when they weren't belting.) If a singer fails to captivate or loses the attention of the audience during verses or other sections in which he or she is singing softly or at a moderate volume (in non-belted production), assuming that the melody of the song is well-written and catchy, it is likely that his or her vocal technique is not developed enough.
While the former American Idol judges may have wanted to select a variety of singers when they were 'casting the show' - an expression that Simon Cowell himself used - they managed to find only voices with similar capabilities and styles. It's as though the judges expected all the contestants to be able to belt, assuming that audiences only want to hear these kinds of voices, and that puts pressure on singers (and reduces the variety of styles that the audiences gets to hear). Record companies and producers for recording studios are just as guilty of seeking out and demanding this kind of vocal production from the artists who enter into contract with them. What listeners hear on their radios and I-pods are only those vocal sounds that have been approved by the industry and deemed to be commercially marketable and therefore valuable to the record label as a business. (The recording industry determines what is 'in.') The vocal models that become available to young singers, then, are selective and mostly limited to belters.
There are several methods of singing that do not teach belting technique, and they are often harshly criticized and devalued because the voices that they produce are not big and powerful; rather they are clean and 'easy'. However, not everyone desires a booming voice, or one that is capable of begin used in metallic modes, and for these singers, those methods of singing are more than adequate at training them to produce the kind of vocals that they desire, and that their genres demand. There is room in the voice study world for more than one method that will yield different results in the individuals who use them.
As a vocal technique instructor, I find this trend in contemporary singing in which most singers feel the need to belt all the time disturbing. It troubles me that competitions like American Idol perpetuate the faulty notion that only those singers with big, powerful voices are good singers. It encourages young singers to adopt unhealthy technique because they attempt to sound 'big and powerful' before their instruments are ready and without proper training, which creates technical and artistic limitations, as well as vocal health concerns. (Young and untrained singers, in observing the faces and bodies of singers who belt, also come to believe that good singing must necessarily be difficult or strenuous, and requires a great deal of muscular tension and face pulling.) It also makes those who either can't or are unwilling to belt, feel vocally inferior and artistically less desirable. (There are many singers who have had successful recording and performing careers who do not belt. Of course, this differs from style to style.)
Equating volume and visible muscular strain with good singing is a dangerous and limiting way of thinking. It suggests to lighter and lyrical voices that their natural vocal qualities must somehow be artificially altered in order to be considered good or worthy of attention, and in order to meet the expectations of a music industry that demands that everyone have big, explosive voices. It is unfortunate that many Broadway and pop singers feel the need to belt in order to compete and be successful, and even worse that many vocal instructors are going along with this trend and perpetuating this flawed way of thinking, pushing their students for louder and louder singing, whether their voices are able to handle the rigours of belting or not.
In addition to instructing my vocal students in healthy singing technique, I also help them to rethink their expectations of their voices and to evaluate and understand the pressures that they feel to sound 'bigger' and 'louder'. I help them to accept the natural or innate qualities of their individual voices and to stop emulating other singers whose vocal instruments are simply not built the same as theirs. When my own instructor did this for me a couple of years into my training, I stopped feeling inferior as a singer and gained a greater appreciation for the lighter, 'sweeter' instrument that I am naturally endowed with, and though I continued to work very hard to improve it - and yes, even to learn how to belt! - I stopped attempting to change it into something that it wasn't designed to be. Only then - after I had removed these pressures from myself - did I begin to see real improvement and to truly find myself as an artist. A voice can still be very strong and wonderful, even if it is not as 'big' as others.
Let me be absolutely clear: It isn't that I necessarily object to well-produced 'big and powerful' voices, nor to belting itself. I have a great appreciation for those belt voices that are well-produced. What I do protest is the pressure that comes when a singer can only equate 'good' with 'big and powerful.' Sometimes having a big voice is nice and serves the singer well, but there is merit in having sweeter, lighter vocals, too. There is room in this world for both types of voices, as there are many who have an aesthetic appreciation for different types of voices. (Consider also that there is a significant difference between a 'big' voice and a 'strong' voice.)
CROSSING OVER
It is believed that for a singer to assertively compete for employment in the musical theatre and pop industries they must be versatile and be proficient at more than one style of singing. If the classically trained singer is unable to cross over to a shortener dominant sound, there will be fewer performance opportunities for that singer.To a certain extent, it is true that teachers who claim that if a student learns to sing classically, he or she can sing anything are somewhat mistaken. Belting requires muscle coordination that is not readily used in classically trained singing, which is why some opera singers, especially those of higher vocal Fachs, find learning to belt extraordinarily challenging. Classical singers often have difficulty attempting to belt because they apply classical technique (e.g., lowered laryngeal posture, open throat/wide pharynx, round and full vowels, etc.) accompanied by a shortener-dominant muscular arrangement (i.e., they attempt to carry their chest voices up higher in the scale instead of employing a mixed voice coordination). It goes against their training and how their muscles have learned to negotiate ascending pitch. However, their previous training doesn't necessarily preclude them from learning to sing with a different type of technique. It will simply take some time, patience, a lot of work, and acceptance of the new sounds emitting from their own mouths and the unfamiliar sensations experienced in their bodies.
Above all, voice teachers need to guide their students toward the most effective and healthy way to sing their music - whatever the style. If there is a way to produce a fuller, louder singing voice without the risk of damage to the vocal instrument, it makes sense to attempt to have such a technique in one's arsenal.
My philosophy is that it is always more beneficial in the long-term for a student to become a truly better - more technically proficient and healthy - singer, not simply someone who, at first listen, merely seems to sing well but who can't keep up with singing demands over time due to vocal health problems or technical limitations. A certain balance needs to be struck when teaching vocal technique. If coordinated, bio-mechanically efficient vocal technique is learned, in which the singer uses the correct muscles of the body in good coordination, breathes completely, and maintains and produces voice without interfering with the formation of words, the student will have fewer limitations and better vocal health. He or she will also have many vocal styles and colours at his or her disposal, and can therefore be more versatile. Once correct vocal technique is secured, a true belted sound can be introduced as one of the available 'colours,' as can 'extreme' vocal effects. If one is only interested in learning to belt, however, one will always have limitations as a vocalist.