The Voice Science Podcast

How much challenge helps a singer learn—and when does difficulty get in the way?

In this episode, we explore Guadagnoli and Lee’s Challenge Point Framework and its implications for singing practice. The same exercise can present very different demands depending on the singer’s skill and the conditions in which they practice.

We consider how attempts provide useful information, why too much difficulty can interfere with learning, and how blocked and interleaved practice can serve different needs. We also explore why an advanced singer learning an unfamiliar task may still benefit from blocked practice.

The practical question is how much challenge this singer needs from this task at this point in their learning—while remembering that performance during practice and retention afterward are different outcomes.

Research discussed: Guadagnoli, M. A., & Lee, T. D. (2004). Challenge point: A framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 36(2), 212–224. https://doi.org/10.3200/JMBR.36.2.212-224

Explore more voice science: https://voicescience.org

Keep Singing Smart.

What counts as deliberate practice—and why does the definition matter?

In this episode, we explore K. Anders Ericsson and Kyle W. Harwell’s 2019 response to research questioning how much practice contributes to expert performance. Their argument centers on a distinction: activities grouped together as “practice” may have very different goals, feedback, and teacher involvement.

We unpack four types of practice—deliberate, purposeful, structured, and naive—and consider why a performance test needs to match the skill being practiced. We also examine their reanalysis, which linked accumulated practice to 29% of performance variation, rising to 61% after statistical correction for estimated measurement error.

Finally, we return to the genetics debate and ask how the musical abilities researchers choose to measure shape their conclusions.

Featured paper

Ericsson, K. A., & Harwell, K. W. (2019). Deliberate Practice and Proposed Limits on the Effects of Practice on the Acquisition of Expert Performance: Why the Original Definition Matters and Recommendations for Future Research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2396.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02396

Season 3, Episode 5 · The Voice Science Podcast
https://voicescience.org

Keep Singing Smart.

Practice Does Not Make Perfect

The Voice Science Podcast · Season 3, Episode 4

What can identical twins tell us about practice and musical ability?

Following our episodes on Ericsson’s deliberate practice research and Macnamara’s meta-analysis, we examine a different perspective: Mosing and colleagues’ 2014 study of approximately 10,500 Swedish twins.

Across the sample, more practice correlated with higher musical ability scores. Within identical twin pairs, however, differences in practice were not associated with statistically significant differences in the abilities tested—even when estimated lifetime practice totals differed substantially.

Understanding that finding means looking closely at what the researchers measured. Their tests assessed pitch, melody, and rhythm discrimination. These auditory abilities differ from skills developed through practice, such as playing an instrument, reading music, and memorizing pieces.

In this episode, we explore:

• How participants’ reports were used to estimate lifetime practice.
• Why comparing identical twins helps investigate the relationship between practice and ability.
• What the musical discrimination tests measured.
• How genetic influences may help explain both musical discrimination and the inclination to practice.
• How these findings fit into the wider discussion of deliberate practice.

Research discussed

Mosing, M. A., Madison, G., Pedersen, N. L., Kuja-Halkola, R., & Ullén, F. (2014). Practice Does Not Make Perfect: No Causal Effect of Music Practice on Music Ability. Psychological Science, 25, 1795–1803.

Read the paper

Keep Singing Smart.

Deliberate practice matters—but how much does it explain?

Following our two episodes on Ericsson, Krampe, and Tesch-Römer’s influential 1993 paper, we explore Macnamara, Hambrick, and Oswald’s 2014 meta-analysis of deliberate practice and performance.

Across 88 studies involving 11,135 participants, the researchers found that deliberate practice was an important predictor of performance. For musicians, it explained 21% of the variation in performance between individuals. The remaining 79% was not explained by deliberate practice in this analysis; it should not be interpreted as a measure of talent.

In this episode, we discuss why the relationship was stronger in more predictable activities, how retrospective practice estimates introduce uncertainty, and why differences in the definition and measurement of deliberate practice matter.

Practice matters. It does not explain everything.

Keep Singing Smart.

References

Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.3.363

Macnamara, B. N., Hambrick, D. Z., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). Deliberate practice and performance in music, games, sports, education, and professions: A meta-analysis. Psychological Science, 25, 1608–1618. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614535810

In Part 2 of our exploration of Ericsson, Krampe, and Tesch-Römer’s landmark 1993 paper, we turn to Study 2 and its comparison of expert and amateur pianists.

The experts practiced more and performed better on piano-related tasks. But their advantage did not extend to general reaction-time and cognitive-motor tests. That distinction helps us understand what years of practice may develop—and what these studies can actually establish.

In this episode, we explore:

The 5.2-hour overestimate: Both expert and amateur pianists overestimated their weekly practice compared with their practice diaries.

7,606 versus 1,606 hours: Estimated cumulative practice by age 18 differed substantially between experts and amateurs. These were group averages, not a universal threshold for expertise.

Task-specific advantages: The experts’ stronger performance appeared in skills related to piano practice, rather than a general motor advantage.

Starting early and catching up: Earlier starts create more time to accumulate practice. Closing that gap becomes difficult when experienced performers continue practicing too.

Expertise as something acquired: We examine the authors’ argument that extended deliberate practice can explain abilities often attributed to innate talent, including their discussion of physical adaptation and perfect pitch.

The causality caveat: A strong relationship between practice and performance does not establish that practice alone caused the observed differences.

Starting later does not put improvement out of reach. The authors’ model allows for substantial gains when deliberate practice begins, while recognizing the demands of closing a large accumulated practice gap.

Next, we’ll continue this series with more contemporary research and responses to the original paper.

Until next time, Keep Singing Smart.

Referenced research

Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406. Read the paper via its DOI.

The Voice Science Podcast is back, and we’re kicking off the new season by dismantling one of the most repeated ideas in learning theory.

The 10,000-hour rule is everywhere. And it’s a misreading of the original research.

In part one of this two-part series, we go back to the source: the 1993 Ericsson, Krampe, and Tesch-Römer paper that started it all. The real finding wasn’t a magic number. It was that the most accomplished violinists had accumulated substantially more highly relevant, effortful practice over the course of their development, and that the quality and structure of that practice mattered as much as the quantity.

This episode breaks down what deliberate practice actually is, how three groups of university violinists differed in their practice habits and cumulative hours, and why the 10,000-hour figure has been so thoroughly misunderstood. Part two looks at a wider range of skills and ages through the lens of amateur to expert pianists.

Sources:

Ericsson, K.A., Krampe, R.T., Tesch-Römer, C., 1993. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review 100, 363–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.3.363 Gebrian, M., 2024. Learn Faster, Perform Better: A Musician’s Guide to the Neuroscience of Practicing, 1st ed. Oxford University Press, Incorporated, Oxford.

voicescience.org

A quick but important update from the VoSci team — and a preview of what’s coming in September.

The Voice Science Podcast is taking a summer break. When we return, expect a more frequent and more focused series with some topics we’re genuinely excited about: how to maximize your practice time, what baritones can learn from trombones, and how a 500-year-old vocal exercise may be the best tool for developing your mixed voice.

In the meantime, the full episode archive, the VoSci Lexicon, and all the practice tools are waiting for you at voicescience.org.

See you in September.

Last episode, the premise was simple: when it comes to breath, more is almost always the wrong answer. This episode makes good on the promise — finding the leak and fixing it.

In part two, Josh Manuel gets diagnostic. The episode traces breath waste back to its most common source — the onset — and explains how the way you start a note largely determines how much air you’re about to burn through. From there it covers the full diagnostic tree for “I keep running out of air,” how to build toward firmer fold closure in singers who need it, why what you feel while singing is often the opposite of what’s actually happening, and a deep look at what breath support actually buys you once the work is done.

This one goes deep. It’s built for singers who want to understand the instrument, not just survive the phrase.

voicescience.org

“More air. More support. Bigger. Push more. Give me more.” If you’ve spent any time in a voice lesson or choir rehearsal, you’ve heard it. And according to Josh Manuel, founder of VoSci — it’s almost always the wrong answer.

In part one of this two-part episode, Drew Williams-Orozco walks through Josh’s ground-up breakdown of how breath actually works, why the “more” instinct betrays singers, and what’s really happening when a phrase falls apart. The episode covers the mechanics of inhalation and exhalation, what breath support actually is and which muscles are doing the work, why tension isn’t the enemy, and the subglottal pressure principle that reframes everything singers think they know about air.

Part two goes diagnostic — finding the specific leaks that are costing you air and what to do about each one. But first, the foundation.

voicescience.org

Not all students want the same thing — and assuming they do is one of the most common sources of frustration for both teachers and students.

In this episode, contributor Timothy Wilds introduces a diagnostic model developed by Juilliard-trained violinist and educator Fedor Ouspensky that helps teachers identify what a student actually wants from lessons. Built around two simple questions about goals and mastery, the model produces four distinct student types — Dedicated, Hobby, Casual, and Experience — each requiring a different teaching approach and a different kind of relationship.

Timothy walks through each type in depth, shares how his own teaching assumptions have had to evolve over four decades, and offers practical guidance for the most common scenario teachers face today: the student who wants the result without the skills — and what to do when that student is standing in front of you.

Whether you’re a teacher trying to retain students while holding your standards, or a student trying to figure out why lessons haven’t been clicking — this one is for both of you.

voicescience.org

Ready when you have the link! 🎙️

Vocal strain is one of the most common complaints singers bring into the studio — and one of the most misunderstood. In this episode, Drew walks through the mechanical cause of most strain, why the advice to “breathe deep and support” can actually make things worse for contemporary singers, and what to do instead.

The episode covers the hyperfunction loop, the relationship between breath pressure and vocal fold closure, why singing softly is more physically demanding than it sounds, and how redirecting tension into the torso changes everything. Practical, science-grounded, and immediately applicable.

If your throat gets scratchy on certain passages, if high notes feel like a fight, or if you hit a wall somewhere in the middle of your range — this episode is for you.

Anyone can legally teach voice lessons in the United States. No degree. No clinical hours. No exam. No license. In this episode, contributor Timothy Wilds makes a direct and sometimes uncomfortable case for why that should change — and what a more professionalized field could look like.

Timothy draws a pointed comparison between the credentialing standards required of speech-language pathologists and those expected of voice teachers, argues that the overlap between the two professions is larger than the industry acknowledges, and challenges the commonly cited reasons for keeping voice teaching unregulated. He also shares how his own teaching was transformed by pursuing deeper training — and why he believes evidence-based tools and voice science have a critical role to play in raising the bar for teachers at every level.

Whether you’re a voice teacher, a student, or simply someone who cares about the integrity of the field — this episode is for you.

Ready to go deeper? VoSci Academy gives you structured Practice Paths, real-time pitch and interval feedback, and biweekly Q&A calls. Learn more at voicescience.org

When someone tells me they can't sing, I usually hear: I tried, it didn't sound right, so I assumed the instrument was broken. It almost never is.

This episode unpacks why singing lives much closer to speech than most singers think, why what you hear of your own voice isn't what's coming out of your mouth, and why the first year of lessons is mostly about removing habits — not building new ones. We get into attractor states, the diaphragmatic breathing problem for pop and musical theatre singers, what every other instrument in the practice wing knows about fundamentals, and the research showing that how you practice matters far more than how long.

Whether you have a teacher or you're going it alone, the path forward is the same: short sessions, specific goals, daily, and a recorder you're willing to listen back to.

Ready to go deeper? VoSci Academy gives you structured Practice Paths, real-time pitch and interval feedback, and biweekly Q&A calls. Learn more at voicescience.org

Presented by: Drew Williams Orozco

Written by: Josh Manuel

Your Choir Director Is Your Real Voice Teacher — For Better or Worse | The Voice Science Podcast

Has your choir director ever told you to "open your mouth," "create more back space," or "raise your soft palate" — and you had no idea whether you were actually doing it right? You're not alone. And the stakes are higher than most people realize.

A 2019 study by Chorus America reported that 54 million US adults and children sing in choirs. That means for the vast majority of singers, the choir rehearsal — not the private lesson — is where all the voice training is happening.

In this episode, contributor Timothy Wilds unpacks what that really means: for choir directors, for choir members, and for the long-term vocal health of anyone who has ever stood in a section and tried to follow their director's instructions.

You'll learn:

• Why the choir rehearsal is the primary site of voice training — and why that matters
• The real vocal knowledge gaps in choir directing, and why they exist
• A practical three-part framework for decoding the most common choral directives:

• "Open your mouth / drop your jaw" — what the director is after, and how to test it
• "Open your throat / create more back space" — the anatomy behind the instruction, and how to find it
• "Raise your soft palate" — what that actually means physically, and how to know you've done it

• Why singers consistently overdo these adjustments — and what happens when they do
• What choir members should expect from their directors, and how to advocate for themselves in the room

👉 Want structured training between rehearsals? Check out Practice Paths at https://voicescience.org/

🧠 Topics Covered:

• Chorus America 2019 data on choral participation
• Why most singers' vocal education comes from choir, not private lessons
• Director knowledge gaps: church, school, and theatre contexts
• Oral cavity opening — the one-finger test
• Pharyngeal anatomy: dimensions, flexibility, and function
• Velopharyngeal port, velum, and the "ng" soft palate test
• The "Goldilocks position" across all three directives
• Why oversized breaths and exaggerated adjustments undermine the goal

🔥 Helpful for:

• Choir singers trying to understand what their director is actually asking for
• Choir directors looking to be more precise and effective in rehearsal
• Voice teachers working with students who have a choral background
• Anyone whose primary vocal training has been in an ensemble setting

Overview

A complete rework of Episode 1. Expanded with two new sections — symptom mapping (what failing breath support looks and sounds like) and studio observations (teacher-focused patterns and honest expectations). Original content restructured to lead with the diaphragm myth as the primary hook. Estimated runtime: 18–22 minutes.

Key Concepts

• The diaphragm is an inhalation muscle that relaxes during singing — it cannot "support" the voice
• Breath support = voluntary regulation of exhalation to manage subglottal pressure
• Your body already produces enough pressure; the job is managing and extending it
• The muscles you can actually control: external intercostals, pectorals, lats
• Smaller controlled breaths > maximum breaths for contemporary styles
• Failing support shows up in the body before it shows up in the sound
• Too-small breaths are rare — running out of air is almost always a management problem
• Results possible in session one; automation takes months; never fully automatic

Research Notes

• Traser et al. (2020): subglottal pressure for singing = 5–35 cmH2O; maximal inhalation = ~30 cmH2O recoil force
• Fiz et al. (1993): healthy individuals produce up to 204 cmH2O; trumpet players up to 288 cmH2O — 8x+ the max needed for singing

Why Technically Perfect Singing Is Boring — And What Actually Moves People | The Voice Science Podcast (Title A — A/B test against: "What 'Phrase It Better' Actually Means — And How to Do It")

Timothy once attended a choir performance at Juilliard. Every note was in place. The tuning was immaculate. The blend was flawless. And it was boring. So what's the difference between technically correct singing and singing that actually moves people? One word: phrasing.

In this episode, Josh Manuel breaks down what phrasing actually is, how to teach it, and what singers can do right now to start making more intentional, expressive choices — regardless of genre or level.

You'll learn:

• Why "phrase it better" isn't an instruction — and what to say instead
• How to find the keyword in any phrase, and why it changes everything
• The tools singers actually have: dynamics, rubato, onset choices, consonant weight
• Why self-discovery is the most important principle in teaching phrasing — and how to protect it
• The breath problem that shows up the moment students start working on expression
• Why phrasing is completely different in classical vs. contemporary styles
• Why you should always learn the song as written before making any artistic choices
• What mastery in phrasing actually sounds like — and how to know when a student is getting there

👉 Want structured practice built around how your voice is actually performing? Check out Practice Paths athttps://voicescience.org/

🧠 Topics Covered:

• Phrasing defined: the bridge between technical execution and storytelling
• Text analysis: speaking the lyrics as a sentence to find natural emphasis
• Keyword identification and why students surprise you
• Dynamics, tempo rubato, glottal onsets, consonant intensity
• The self-discovery principle and why you never demonstrate first
• Breath choices as a storytelling tool — and the disconnect of the diaphragmatic breath in emotional contexts
• Genre conventions: classical vs. contemporary phrasing rules
• Learning from multiple recordings to build artistic taste
• Mastering the score before departing from it
• What mastery sounds like from the teacher's perspective

🔥 Helpful for:

• Singers who've been told to "phrase it better" and didn't know what that meant
• Voice teachers looking for a concrete framework for teaching expression
• Students who sing technically well but feel something is missing in their performances
• Anyone crossing genres who needs to understand why the rules change

Production Notes

Written by Josh Manuel. Read by Drew. Audience: intermediate-to-advanced singers and voice teachers. Covers phrasing from first principles through mastery. Practice Paths CTA. Estimated runtime: 18–22 minutes.

Are you a soprano? A baritone? A mezzo? If you’ve ever found yourself obsessing over your voice type, you’re not alone — and this episode is exactly what you need to hear.

Written by Timothy Wilds, this episode of The Voice Science Podcast takes a deep dive into voice classifications: what they are, where they came from, and why treating them as a fixed identity might be quietly holding your voice back.

We trace the history of voice types from early choral music through the evolution of opera, explore why the classical SATB system simply doesn’t apply to contemporary commercial music (pop, rock, R&B, country, and beyond), and make the case for a more expansive, freeing approach to understanding your own voice.

Whether you’re a beginner singer looking for answers, an amateur trying to break through a plateau, or a voice teacher looking for fresh language to use with your students — this conversation will challenge the way you think about vocal identity.

Topics covered in this episode:

- The origins of voice classification in choral and operatic music
- What soprano, alto, tenor, and bass actually communicate — and what they don’t
- How commedia dell’arte shaped operatic voice typing
- Why CCM singers should largely ignore classical voice type systems
- Why your speaking voice and singing apps are unreliable guides to your vocal range
- How to think about your voice in a way that promotes freedom and exploration

Ready to go deeper? Sign up for our free 365 Days of Voice Science email series — one practical lesson delivered to your inbox every day. Start for free at voicescience.org/free.

Written by Timothy Wilds

Presented by Drew Williams-Orozco

Most voice teachers teach the same lesson to every student. Same warmup, same exercises, same repertoire suggestions. It's efficient, it's comfortable—and it shortchanges the fundamentally different instrument sitting in front of you.

This episode tackles individualized teaching honestly: not the idealized version where you run comprehensive diagnostics on every new student, but the realistic version where you're juggling a full studio and a mortgage payment. We cover how deepening your voice science knowledge is the highest-leverage investment you can make, why the music doesn't adapt to your student's anatomy (so you have to), when to stick to your teaching style and when to send a student to someone better suited, and the real consequences of cookie-cutter pedagogy—including the misclassification problem that silently damages voices for years.

Practical takeaway: start creating exercises from your students' actual repertoire instead of relying solely on generic warmups.

Sign up for The Singing Email: http://www.voicescience.org/free

Written by Timothy Wilds
Performed by Drew Williams-Orozco

Voice training has the potential to be deeply rewarding—for students and teachers alike. But too often, that early excitement fizzles into disappointment and a disappearing student.

In this episode, veteran voice trainer Timothy Wilds explores why that happens and what both sides can do about it. The answer starts before the first lesson: most students have no idea what voice training actually entails. They think they'll just sing songs. They don't realize it involves understanding how the voice works AND deepening their musical intelligence—and that both take real time and effort.

Timothy makes a case for clarity (give students specific, bite-sized practice directives), honesty (tell them the truth about the timeline), and structure (a 90-day minimum commitment that benefits everyone). He also addresses when students—especially children—are truly ready for private lessons, the damage consumerism has done to music education, and why voice trainers need to stop lowering standards.

Whether you're a teacher or a student, this episode will reshape how you think about the voice training experience.

📧 Sign up for The Singing Email: voicescience.org/free

Presented by Drew Williams-Orozco

"Descend on that high note like a leaf gently falling onto a lake."

Beautiful image. But what does a singer actually do with that?

In this episode, we tackle the imagery debate head-on. We share a personal story of doing breath support exercises for years—lying on piano benches with heavy books, dutifully tensing abs—only to discover that less than 10% of breath support actually comes from the abdominals. Within a week of learning what was really happening, dynamic control improved and a full step was added to the top of the range.

That experience reshaped everything about how we approach imagery in teaching.

We break down: → Why imagery is wildly inconsistent from student to student → The difference between "tangible" and "abstract" imagery → Why most voice teachers rely on imagery (hint: it's often the only tool they were given) → A simple framework for using imagery more intentionally → What singers should know about finding the right teacher for how they learn

Imagery isn't bad. But it's not enough on its own. This episode helps you figure out when to use it—and when to dig deeper.

Get 365 free voice lessons: https://www.voicescience.org/free

Presented by Drew Williams-Orozco

Written by Josh Manuel