Now, it seems like there is a vast difference between getting voice training (which I haven't) and trying to imitate a style that is not your own (which I have.) Some friends of mine who got voice training, but might prefer to remain in the closet, didn't end up sounding any different (their style and the texture and phrasing of their singing didn't change.) They sang with more strength, more breath control and plain old confidence. The only real noticeable difference was that they sounded better. They are walking advertisments for getting vocal training.

Singing in a style that is not naturally yours is something that every human on earth has done. We all started out singing along with music on the radio or records, imitating the inflection and phrasing of the singer. We weren't trying to do "impressions," it's just natural to imitate the singer when you sing along with a record. When I first started singing folk music, I stupidly tried to sound like I was 70 years old, had false teeth and lived in the Southern Appalachians. Now, I get shivers down my spine, like someone squeeking chalk on a blackboard, when I hear someone adopting a completely unnatural dialect. We have all been influenced by the style of singers and musicians whose music we love. That is good... it is how the tradition is carried on. But, at some point the good singers and musicians move beyond imitation and create their own style which owes some inspiration to the tradition, but is new and unique. Their singing will in turn influence younger singers who will create a new style that still carries a sense of the tradition in it, no matter how subtly. Sometimes when I hear a singer, I'll hear someone else in them. When I heard Bobert's singing, I heard Buddy Holly in there and commented on it. I heard right. Tradition isn't something you preserve, like pickles. It's something you absorb and renew.

Jerry