- Tests mainly done on untrained subjects (not managing the passaggio)
- Tests mainly done on classical singers (fixed sound ideal)
- Very sparse material on smooth (!) transitioning between the two

What is quite clear is that M2 has a more shallow vertical phase in vibratory pattern. Only the outer layers of the folds are in vibration and have contact. This is the main difference between the modes. Additionally, without "techniques" M2 tends to have a lower closing quotient compared to M1, but this can be changed dramatically by technical adjustments.

However: some experiments (like the latest CVT ones) indicate that there can be situations of a "reduced vertical phase", which would actually be something like an "in-between" state between the two vocal modes.

And just another word on the term "mixed voice": An interpretation of that term that is still valid is if you consider it "mixing of natural properties". Just think about it like this: The vocal mode for the high notes WILL be M2 at some point and for the low notes it WILL be M1, so you could say that the use of M1 is "natural" in the low range and M2 is "natural" in the high range. Additionally M1 tends to have a high adduction and M2 tends to have a low adduction. M1 tends to have a big vertical phase, M2 has a low vertical phase. So the term "mixing" could refer to one of the following actions:

- bringing adduction (typical property of M1) into M2
- bringing a lowered vertical phase (typical property of M2) into M1
- lowering adduction (typical property of M2) into M1

... and so on, these are all different possibilities to "mix" mode qualities.

By the way, what I was saying is how I relate to bridging NOW. I too have had a struggle for nearly all my life with the g#4 being my highest screamed note. Had I heard bridging then I would say 99% I would have interpreted it like so many other in that you fall out of full voice. It was not until I actually imitated this guy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYagDJhKweM

that I even phonated anything above that. Actually, quite soon after that I found the TMW-forum and now about 2.5 years later, here I am.

The break below A4 that Quentin and Rob and I have experienced in the past (I am still working on fixing it now), is a very real thing and no magic pill is going to remove the problem overnight. I still have the problem it's just higher up and less severe - more around the A4/A#4 and it's simply an unstable shift from chesty mix to heady mix where you feel some kind of closure shed off a bit. There's a long slow process of moving this sort of shedding-off of body up to happen at a higher pitch where the similarities of the registers allow it to be done so much more smoothly that it won't be heard or felt as a break.

Martin mentioned in TMV once how depending on the individual, most males need to transition from M1 to M2 between the A4 and C5. Or else if they try to do it below that (what many TVS folks including Rob have tried to do) it becomes more and more difficult to do smoothly the lower the pitch.

UNLESS you decrease the volume proportionally to the earlier bridge as I think transitioning M1 to M2 also gets easier the quieter is done.

All of this vice versa from M2 to M1 as well.

So that is my current understanding of what is actually happening underneath the WRONG interpretation of bridging, but the realities behind what it really is and how to implement it. It's just attaching the wrong term to something that does exist. But for powerful singing this transition happens so high that it's no longer a transition anymore so then it should ultimately not even seem to exist anymore (only those fancy EGG graphs will pick it up).

The correct bridging is those resonant shifts Mivke mentioned and is a relatively separate thing.

Mivke said

Even though I understand the last two posts here I must also respectfully disagree

quentin said
I should add that the very idea of "bridging early/late" does not make any sense.

To the last part of your sentence I would add, "does not make sense for me". Since for alot of people bridging still feels very relevant even when doing it correctly. Saying bridging does not always mean bridge to falsetto/unsupported headvoice/call it whatever. For me for example bridging is still something I feel very "real", but I bridge to a headvcoie many people would call chest.

As I said, I do understand and agree with the points being made, just be cautios of how you say it or we will be going in circles with the definitions forever

Cheers!

well said Mivke. the key is that when you "bridge" you are still in full voice.

Mivke said

Even though I understand the last two posts here I must also respectfully disagree

quentin said
I should add that the very idea of "bridging early/late" does not make any sense.

To the last part of your sentence I would add, "does not make sense for me". Since for alot of people bridging still feels very relevant even when doing it correctly. Saying bridging does not always mean bridge to falsetto/unsupported headvoice/call it whatever. For me for example bridging is still something I feel very "real", but I bridge to a headvcoie many people would call chest.

As I said, I do understand and agree with the points being made, just be cautios of how you say it or we will be going in circles with the definitions forever

Cheers!

Mivke,

Point noted.
Yeah, all in all, it is how people interpret things, so it sounds a bit like enforcing my own interpretation. But the very word "bridge" seems to indicate that there is a break somewhere, instead of thinking about one continuous voice that you have, for instance, to thin out when you raise in pitch. Owen seemed to pick on the same pattern, and it has led both of us to a host of vocal issues.
But if it makes sense to you, it shows how interprétations can vary from people to people.

quentin said
I should add that the very idea of "bridging early/late" does not make any sense.

To the last part of your sentence I would add, "does not make sense for me". Since for alot of people bridging still feels very relevant even when doing it correctly. Saying bridging does not always mean bridge to falsetto/unsupported headvoice/call it whatever. For me for example bridging is still something I feel very "real", but I bridge to a headvcoie many people would call chest.

As I said, I do understand and agree with the points being made, just be cautios of how you say it or we will be going in circles with the definitions forever

Cheers!

quentin said

I should add that the very idea of "bridging early/late" does not make any sense. When i read TVS is aimed at bridging early and KTVA bridging late, i think that kind of comparison misses the point. If you think you have to "bridge", then it means most of the time that you have picked up the wrong coordinations. I think the idea of bridging is itself a result of the assumption that singing is a tricky art where at some point you are compelled to switch to full M2. Then you have to make the illusion that you are still in M1... If you have learnt to grow the voice properly, there is no illusion to make, because you are still bringing chest musculature and can gradually lean in head resonance.

Really well said Quentin. Dan Formica made a great post awhile back about how you don't really bridge, instead there are "bridges". It is spot on...basically there are "areas" where resonance needs to shift and that's really all this "bridge" is! the trickiest one for most males is F4 so people tend to call that "the bridge" when really as you know that as you get better A#4 can be quite tricky for many males also to get past as there is another shift they have to make.

Thats why i featured Randy in my first post. He is the one i am certain who trained with Rob from scratch and who has an amazing voice. I cannot find other featured coaches/TVS students who trained from the very beginning with TVS. What Sergio is doing in this clip, in my opinion isn't really the sound you get from TVS, there is too much chest in the sound, and requires a very solid support.

This guy trained under Robert Lunte and he is quite belty and chesty. This shows that Rob does not necessarily teach bridging early only. However, KTVA is better

gerardo said

@phil, that makes perfect sense!, i have experienced this when practicing pianissimo and going up, the sound is really almost the same as falsetto, but the coordination I KNOW is 'chest', or to say it in other words, is the coordination i can use to do a crescendo to my regular belting modes, and is perfectly connected IN SENSATION (its not just that i can disguise connection from high to low, the sensation is exactly the same) with my lower speaking notes!
i guess this means im on the right track on this point, also, i think it's really interesting the concept of 'grabing' the coordination with the chest muscles, when we are on pure falsetto -i guess flageolet- and then we can turn it into pianissimo chest -the sound is pretty much the same as falsetto but the sensation/coordination is not-, and start the crescendo to full voice!
thanks for your help

That's it bro! sounds like you're doing well!

Yes geran, that's the idea. If you do the pianissimo on falsetto, you will need to enter in your normal voice to continue to higher intensity, or else you will be stuck on the Bee Gee's voice. Just like Phil said.

In my opinion, it's easier to do everything in your normal voice on that range, so that you don't have to deal with this change. But you can do it both ways, and there is interpretative value on controling both.

However, the video was more about the definition of head voice as something appart from these changes. Was that part also clear?