[quote:920cebfdfb]Originally posted by bignaf:<BR>[b:920cebfdfb]Yeah Puccini!<BR> the voice is the most natural way of expression you don't have to ponder a vocal piece as much since the real expression comes out more easily. .[/b:920cebfdfb][/quote:920cebfdfb]<BR>I'm gonna get all technical on you now! In all actuality, the production of sound that we call language is the least natural ritual process we have as humans, and singing is a complicating progression from that. We take an organ (the vocal folds) originally intended to keep anything but air out of the lungs and use it to make sounds and communicate with each other. The tough part of singing is to make such an inherently <I>unnatural</I> process <I>seem</I> natural and comfortable, while at the same time getting a message across to the listener on multiple levels simultaneously, and being able to do that for sustained periods consistently. Even though singers don't have a visible appendage that produces music like an instrumentalist does, the vocal instrument is an exceedingly complicated and subtle instrument with scores of variables that affect its performance. In complexity I compare it to a bassoon. So many keys to concentrate on, and one false move and you stick out like a sore thumb! Vocal production is very similar in that respect. To get that Pavarotti ring, richness and presence in the voice takes a lot of attention to a multitude of details. Oh yeah, and then we're supposed to emote and be musical. By comparison, how you strike the key, fingering, which pedal(s) are employed when, tempo, dynamics and rythm, while being no small feat to master, lack the subtleties employed in good vocal production. Let me know if I need to back that up with specifics (not that I haven't focused a good portion of my energy over the course of my life so far on this stuff). Sorry if I get a little over-exuberant about this, but I love it!