Since Seth Riggs and his Speech Level Singing" was brought up, I want to share some information related to that. I've spent years and years combing through all these various "singing schools", and also trying out the methods and techniques they offer. I hope that what I have to say, will save you from following completely false paths and charlatans.
The short answer is, that Riggs' SLS and other "schools" based on that is pretty much a scam. Or, that's least what I and many others think who have tried it, and researched various methods. Before I get to the details why I think this is, here are some guiding principles and thoughts that I think are pretty close to the truth for you to consider:
1) There is no
one "true" singing technique. It all depends on:
- How you want to sound, what style of singing you prefer. If you want to become an expert at some particular style of singing, you probably can not "cross train" that much. This is particularly true between classical/operatic singing and pop/rock/etc. Even inside the classical sphere of singing, there are many different ideals and beliefs of what is the correct 'bel canto' technique etc.
- The genetic and physical "inclinations" of your vocal apparatus; we are all different, and there are clear variations in which ways we can tweak and modify our vocal cords, larynx etc, without it getting too harmful or straining. For instance, some singers are born with a natural talent for reaching those top notes
in their own way which works for them (see next point)
- Humans can produce many impressive sounds with they vocal organs in many various ways; e.g. those top notes and your head voice (what is meant by 'head voice' depends on the style and instructor) can be reached in various ways – some being more straining than others, and producing aesthetically different sounds
=> TO SUM: if the method(s) and technique will give you the results you're looking for, AND you can sing for years and years without loosing your voice - or top/low notes - then that is your "true" technique/method. If not, move on to the next one.
2) Superb singing that gives both the listener and the singer therapeutic satisfaction, with conveying and inducing emotions always comes from the participation of the "emotional center" (not necessarily in Gurdjieffian terms). Which in practical terms means activity of the muscles in the body that become active when feeling strong emotions, to put it simple, the muscles that you use when you cry or laugh. If the singing is just technical, without "visceral activity", it's, to put it bluntly, just organized noise. That is also why singing can be very good for you, since for satisfying results, you need to develop your body-emotional awareness, e.g. through body work and breathing exercises (like EE). And, it works both ways: if you can induce emotions while you sing, those "visceral muscles" will become active / if you consciously activate those muscles, the emotions will more easily be freed up and come to the suface.
=> TO SUM: no matter what the style is, how "ugly" it sounds, true singing that touches our emotions always comes from the "viscera"
ADDITIONAL NOTE: I strongly believe, that even with lesser skills in singing, IF you can make contact with your "core" while singing, it will bring you great satisfaction. No one is saying that you need to be super good and highly trained to enjoy singing!
3) The proof is always in the singing. No matter how convincingly someone explains various techniques etc., if they can not sing themselves the way they are preaching about, they don't know what they're talking about. There's an exception to this rule: very old teachers, say age 70+, can't perhaps sing superbly anymore, but even in that case you can probably hear that the technique is good, but the energy for "full spectrum singing" is just lacking.
So the problem with Rigg's SLS (and similar schools) has IMO to do with points 2) and 3). The SLS-method will almost completely eliminate the use of those "visceral muscles", the singing becomes mechanical and without emotion and intensity. You'll become quite skillful in tweaking your laryngeal muscles to reach those top notes
when vocalizing (doing those SLS-exercises), but transferring that "technique" to a sustainable high note during a real song will probably be a disaster. You'll choke, or at the very least, the voice will sound dull because of no connection to the body.
At some point I tried to find proof in the form of video recordings, where Riggs or his students would sing a whole song themselves, but there were almost none. And those that I found, didn't sound good at all! Riggs brags about e.g. Stevie Wonder and Michael Jackson having studied singing with him, but these two could sing superbly long before they ever met him. So, if you ask me, I don't trust him or his method, nor the "schools" that are similar, e.g. 'Singing Success'. The most laughable example is a video clip, where Riggs compares his vocal technique with Pavarotti's technique, saying how they are one and the same!
