| Aihe: Onko sopivan opettajan etsiminen mahdotonta? (sorry, englanniks) | 1 |
|---|
|
Hei kaikille!
Onko tämä ok jos kirjoitan englanniksi?
I have the feeling it is impossible to find a teacher for developing the qualities that I like.
I am interested in such type of voice producing as you could hear with old singers: Ann Peebles, Etta James, Chaka Khan, Karen Karpenter, Barbra Streisand. I get it that they are different, but there is something in common there too.
I am not sure "classical" lessons would me, but I am also not sure that contemporary popular jazz/rock whatever lessons are suitable to me either. E.g. what I heard so far in CVT lacks lower tones, it is too much in the head to my liking.
I used to have a teacher when I lived in Moscow, who was a folk singer. Her style suited me somehow. We never discussed breathing too much, but in the end it was there. The lessons were not about explaining how voice works, but she was very demanding on how I used to make a set of exercises, and in 2 or 3 months I could not recognize my voice.
Could somebody recommend me a teacher who would teach some very basic things about the mixed register, how to make the larynx relaxed etc etc etc, but also not push me in the direction of classical singing, neither in the direction of modern effects? I would like to develop a voice prior to singing songs.. too. To me it is an important criteria.
I really would like to learn how to sing, but the problem is that it seems that it is super difficult to find a suitable teacher.. | |
Pick the teacher who sings the way you like. CVT isn't a sound ideal, it's a tool, a pedagogy. "Classical" is usually a sound ideal, a dark covered tone with emphasis on emission rather than expression. With that said there are some great singers who started with classical teaching and gravitated towards contemporary. Is it the best way to go fpr YOU? No-one can say.
If you're open for skype lessons there's a plethora of great coaches out there. If it has to be in person it'll be taking potshots and hoping you land on a teacher that you resonate well with, given that lessons are fucking expensive.
Best of luck to you!
Disclaimer: Pidätän oikeudet puhua paskaa ja huudella mitä sattuu mihin sattuu tietämättä mistään mitään. |  Evaphio
25.09.2018 22:12:01 (muokattu 25.09.2018 22:13:15) | |
|
Khassera: Pick the teacher who sings the way you like. CVT isn't a sound ideal, it's a tool, a pedagogy. "Classical" is usually a sound ideal, a dark covered tone with emphasis on emission rather than expression. With that said there are some great singers who started with classical teaching and gravitated towards contemporary. Is it the best way to go fpr YOU? No-one can say.
If you're open for skype lessons there's a plethora of great coaches out there. If it has to be in person it'll be taking potshots and hoping you land on a teacher that you resonate well with, given that lessons are fucking expensive.
Best of luck to you!
Thank you for advice!)
I actually did take lessons from classical singers before. My Moscow teacher also was teaching the academic manner, but she taught so differently from everybody else. We did not discuss breathing so much, but in the end I started to breath freely, because of relaxation and the right position, and we did not talk about theory too much to achieve that. We just met 2 times a week and did a set of exercises, and she was very demanding and precise with me.
I just got totally lost with teaching methods.
E.g. one of the teachers that I was taking lessons was teaching me to sing "in the high point above the nose" (the opposite to the "entire mask" that my Moscow teacher taught me). For some reason she herself had a bit of a troubled voice... And she did not like questions, as well as I did not seem to have progress, so I had to quit.
Another one was telling me that "head resonators automatically come into place when you breath properly and focus on the chest resonator", but I came to conclusion that such approach deprives the voice of flexibility and of some high overtones, it sounds a bit dim.
So, if anyone could recommend me a teacher (classical could be too), I would be very happy!
PS yes, it is very expensive. I am not sure if it is possible to get same level of control through skype. Is it? |  Khassera
26.09.2018 06:53:48 (muokattu 26.09.2018 06:58:18) | |
|
Evaphio: I just got totally lost with teaching methods.
But did you learn to sing?
And she did not like questions, as well as I did not seem to have progress, so I had to quit.
A teacher who sang bad and didn't like questions? You were right in quitting.
Another one was telling me that "head resonators automatically come into place when you breath properly and focus on the chest resonator", but I came to conclusion that such approach deprives the voice of flexibility and of some high overtones, it sounds a bit dim.
I believe they were trying to get you to adduct, and were using the wrong term to describe the action although the sensation might be very similar. Read this article on adduction by an opera/classical voice teacher. It is VERY applicable to all types of singing. I'm not saying they were wrong in telling you what they did, it might have been their analysis of you at the time and the resulting "treatment" for you... but anyway. Read this:
https://petersenvoicestudio.com/201 … iation-on-a-cord-closure-theme/amp/
So, if anyone could recommend me a teacher (classical could be too), I would be very happy!
Some international guys I think are legit:
Daniel Formica (https://www.yourvocalteacher.com) is a no bullshit career singer of over 20 years and a student of Alexander Kariotis, a student of Paolo. Dan's very humble and a great person and his musical interests I believe align with yours quite well.
Felipe Carvalho is more classically inclined but sings mainly rock and metal. He's awesome too and has some great vids on singing up on youtube.
Phil Moufarrege is a singer/coach with a ton of free practical advice up on youtube and a great dude overall. He's more of a chesty belt type of singer and his approach is very similar to Ken Tamplin's Vocal Academy.
Kegan from Bohemian Vocal Studio is an Australian vocal coach who sounds more contemporary and is also very non-technical and straight-to-the-point. His tone is close to Jamiroquai but he can sing a variety of different styles, his approach is always towards relaxation and allowing the voice to work on its own as opposed to forcing it to do anything. But this goes for all the people I recommend so... He's got some phenomenal vids on youtube and on his website but his tone MIGHT put you off. Don't let it. Watch the vids anyway.
PS yes, it is very expensive. I am not sure if it is possible to get same level of control through skype. Is it?
Well if by "control" you mean learn the same things then yes. A lot of people have done exactly that and its very efficient and costs less than one on ones (usually.)
What I catch from your posts is that you might believe that the pedagogy = sound ideal. The pedagogy is always just a tool, a means to the same end. That end is always to make the student a master of their instrument. A forced selling of a sound ideal is a fault in the teacher, not the method (generally, there are a few exceptions unfortunately), so thinking a technique will restrict your voice is wrong unless you abuse that technique.
Hope it helps mate.
Disclaimer: Pidätän oikeudet puhua paskaa ja huudella mitä sattuu mihin sattuu tietämättä mistään mitään. | Evaphio
26.09.2018 08:47:47 (muokattu 26.09.2018 08:55:38) | |
|
Khassera: But did you learn to sing?
I did learn something with my Moscow teacher. She herself was not the perfect perfect singer, but she could do what I consider important (rich and warm tone without effort), or it seemed so to me, because by now I grew horribly picky and specific... in comparison with then.
But it was a while ago and voice needs constant training... so now I think I can not say my muscles remember a lot....
Khassera: But did you learn to sing? He's more of a chesty belt type of singer and his approach is very similar to Ken Tamplin's Vocal Academy.
I came across Ken Tamplin, and honestly at this stage I think that this approach steals a lot of richness from ones voice... it sounds ok if you have not tried this richness ones yourself...
This is not the modern style, but....e.g.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRGa58KCZPI
I think when one is able to have this rich warn effortless vibration, it is actually possible to do much more.. but I am maybe mistaken????
This is a Russian singer, I bet she does not use only the chest approach, she would not be able to control high notes with only the chest thing.... But I do not know=) I know that she was a student of a famous Canadian teacher.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN9yfp4e6gs
Khassera: Well if by "control" you mean learn the same things then yes. A lot of people have done exactly that and its very efficient and costs less than one on ones (usually.)
I wonder if the teacher can actually understand what is going on with his student well... this is what I mean. Like noticing some mimics of the face or or that the shoulders are too tense and stuff like that.
I think I will try some skype approach maybe just to understand....
Khassera: What I catch from your posts is that you might believe that the pedagogy = sound ideal. The pedagogy is always just a tool, a means to the same end. That end is always to make the student a master of their instrument. A forced selling of a sound ideal is a fault in the teacher, not the method (generally, there are a few exceptions unfortunately), so thinking a technique will restrict your voice is wrong unless you abuse that technique.
Hope it helps mate.
I actually think that some techniques are better and some are worse, but it also depends on better for what and worse for what. I guess different techniques can suit different purposes and people have different tastes. So, I think of course it is important to find a suitable technique.
And I also do not like it when teachers say that only their approach is correct. This normally scares me away.... But I think that voice is like training your muscles mainly, then of course if you have trained your muscles for one thing, you will not be able to do another equally well, of course techniques can restrict voices, in my opinion.
Thank you very very much for the links! I will check them! I also will try to check how skype lessons work for me.... | Khassera
26.09.2018 10:06:11 (muokattu 26.09.2018 11:10:51) | |
|
Evaphio: But it was a while ago and voice needs constant training... so now I think I can not say my muscles remember a lot....
Yeah well, the voice does atrophy but the fine-motor skill of singing is kinda like riding a bike. It doesn't take force, it's more about reminding yourself how it's done and you'll be singing as good as you ever were with this caveat: You have to learn to do it right.
I came across Ken Tamplin, and honestly at this stage I think that this approach steals a lot of richness from ones voice... it sounds ok if you have not tried this richness ones yourself...
Richness is subjective.
This is not the modern style, but....e.g.
I think when one is able to have this rich warn effortless vibration, it is actually possible to do much more.. but I am maybe mistaken????
Thought you wanted to sound like Chaka Khan lol.
When you master your instrument the way this guy has, you can choose to sound like he does. You have options. You can sing like chaka, you can sing like Mr Tango, you can sing like Mariah or Ronnie. You can't ever SOUND EXACTLY LIKE THEM but that's never the point. You CAN DO THE SAME THINGS, that is, use the same coordinations, and you will sound like they do, in your own voice. This is the whole point of vocal practice, and different methods tend to emphasize certain tonalities but mostly every method teaches the same exact thing: To control the basic mechanisms of phonation so well that you can be free to express yourself as an artist.. With that in mind, yes, reread the first sentence of this paragraph. Also, there's no "just one thing" going on with this guy's singing. It's never about just one thing, it's always about a balanced voice, and he leans more towards that type of sound because that's the genre he sings in. With practice, this guy could sing like anyone else, no matter the genre. Everyone can.
This is a Russian singer, I bet she does not use only the chest approach, she would not be able to control high notes with only the chest thing.... But I do not know=) I know that she was a student of a famous Canadian teacher.
You're referring to Ken I believe when you say "use only the chest approach." Ken EMPHASIZES chest voice, he does not "use only chest" nor is his approach "using only chest." Neither is any pedagogy, 'cause it doesn't work. Ken's marketing gimmick is to talk about the tone he calls "chest voice" because that's usually what rock singers think they need.
I wonder if the teacher can actually understand what is going on with his student well... this is what I mean. Like noticing some mimics of the face or or that the shoulders are too tense and stuff like that.
Why couldn't they? And one thing that's pitifully true: If your singing hinges on whether or not your shoulders are tilted at a certain minute angle (because tiny postural details like this are the only thing I can think of in this context) then I have some bad news for you... You need more practice. Because singing well isn't about having a perfect posture, it's about doing the right things with your vocal tract and posture helps towards that goal. The biggest things, like relaxation and expanded ribs, are so obvious and visible that you could spot them through a gameboy camera.
I think I will try some skype approach maybe just to understand....
I believe Daniel Formica does a free 30min consultation with new students, so if it doesn't work out you don't pay anything or don't have to commit. But Dan's just so awesome. Have a song prepared tho, you'll want to sing for him from the beginning so he hears your voice.
I actually think that some techniques are better and some are worse, but it also depends on better for what and worse for what. I guess different techniques can suit different purposes and people have different tastes. So, I think of course it is important to find a suitable technique.
Techniques or pedagogy? Technique is a skilful or efficient way of doing or achieving something (the very definition.) So you might be talking about SOUNDS or tonalities, artistic choices which are subjective, and the fact that you think some are good and some are bad is an example of tonal preference. This is only a problem when someone's forcing you to use it. If a teacher forces you to add more brightness or darkness to your voice you can always say you don't want to, it's not related to learning phonation better and it's your own stylistic choice. The teacher should be able to deal with that.
And I also do not like it when teachers say that only their approach is correct. This normally scares me away....
Yes well, it's a scene-thing. It's sad, but that's sometimes the way they like to present themselves. Daniel, for one, just believes in good singing. Just like the other guys I posted, they just believe in getting the person to sing better. They don't have their own pedagogies, they do stuff that works for the individual.
But I think that voice is like training your muscles mainly, then of course if you have trained your muscles for one thing, you will not be able to do another equally well, of course techniques can restrict voices, in my opinion.
If you do something wrong that causes, say, thickening or a chronic tension issue then yes, that'll have an impact on the ability to adapt and use different coordinations, but singing is a fine-motor skill. It's not as much muscle training as it is learning to coordinate. If you always sing with one sound you will find it hard to deviate from that sound. It doesn't matter it makes the other sounds worse, it means you haven't trained the other sounds.
Thank you very very much for the links! I will check them! I also will try to check how skype lessons work for me....
Hit up Daniel for a free consultation and get to know the guy, he's great.
Disclaimer: Pidätän oikeudet puhua paskaa ja huudella mitä sattuu mihin sattuu tietämättä mistään mitään. | Evaphio
26.09.2018 12:28:20 (muokattu 26.09.2018 12:39:44) | |
|
Khassera:
Thought you wanted to sound like Chaka Khan lol.
When you master your instrument the way this guy has, you can choose to sound like he does. You have options. You can sing like chaka, you can sing like Mr Tango, you can sing like Mariah or Ronnie. You can't ever SOUND EXACTLY LIKE THEM but that's never the point. You CAN DO THE SAME THINGS, that is, use the same coordinations, and you will sound like they do, in your own voice. This is the whole point of vocal practice, and different methods tend to emphasize certain tonalities but mostly every method teaches the same exact thing: To control the basic mechanisms of phonation so well that you can be free to express yourself as an artist.. With that in mind, yes, reread the first sentence of this paragraph. Also, there's no "just one thing" going on with this guy's singing. It's never about just one thing, it's always about a balanced voice, and he leans more towards that type of sound because that's the genre he sings in. With practice, this guy could sing like anyone else, no matter the genre. Everyone can.
No.... I never said I wanted to sound like Chaka Khan. I gave the list of different singers having mentioned that I understand they are different, but I also said they seem to have similar qualities.
Including this tango guy=)
These qualities are: ability to use voice freely, to have a lot of richness (it is an objective characteristic in my opinion, I guess it is characterized by overtones) and to have the feeling of a huge inner space (even when whispering) + they sing and do not shout
What I actually want now is to find someone who would teach me basics, but in this very direction, I will understand later what genre of whatever (I like too many different things...).
Khassera: Why couldn't they? And one thing that's pitifully true: If your singing hinges on whether or not your shoulders are tilted at a certain minute angle (because tiny postural details like this are the only thing I can think of in this context) .................. The biggest things, like relaxation and expanded ribs, are so obvious and visible that you could spot them through a gameboy camera
When shoulders are up, with many people it is a gesture of being tense. It is a bad habbit that a lot of people do not even realize. In my case at least it is like that. Someone needs to say "shoulders relaxed" or "shoulders down" all the time to me during exercises before it becomes a reflex to be free.
So, basically it is the same thing you are saying.
I was just wondering if it is possible to have same level of control to be able to say "relax your jaw" or "add a smile" (it is just an expression, meaning more inner smile, some teachers use it) or things of the sort.
I do not know, so maybe I will try.
Khassera: I believe Daniel Formica does a free 30min consultation with new students, so if it doesn't work out you don't pay anything or don't have to commit. But Dan's just so awesome. Have a song prepared tho, you'll want to sing for him from the beginning so he hears your voice.
Hit up Daniel for a free consultation and get to know the guy, he's great.
Thank you! I might try it.
Even though.... I do not want to sing any songs now. I would like to dedicate 2-3 months only to exercises. This is what I believe works. First you build the basics, then gradually start singing songs.
So, maybe if he asks me to just do some ma me mo mi or da da da it will be enough)
Thank you!!!!!
PS and what do you think about Seth Riggss exercises? I came across Ken because he was criticizing Seth Riggs. And as for me, Seth Riggss approach sound more or less decent.... but I did not dig in deeply at all | |
Khassera:
You're referring to Ken I believe when you say "use only the chest approach." Ken EMPHASIZES chest voice, he does not "use only chest" nor is his approach "using only chest." Neither is any pedagogy, 'cause it doesn't work. Ken's marketing gimmick is to talk about the tone he calls "chest voice" because that's usually what rock singers think they need.
Let me be a bit bitchy...))))
I found one of his students Gabriela Guníková , and I must say she does not almost ever hit the right note when songs require some singing, while with shouting (in the good meaning of the word) she is ok. She looses a lot of her higher vibrations very very often.... though sometimes she sounds more or less ok....
This type of singing sounds a bit harmful to me...
If you compare this to Beth Hart, for instance (I get it that Beth is one of the worlds best, but I think this is the method that matters here, as I am not talking about the range), you can hear that Beth somehow sings... there is no "shouting". She has this freedom and higher overtones or however it is called.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jM6_wOCdD5I
I might be mistaken of course. I just get this impression. | Khassera
26.09.2018 15:26:45 (muokattu 26.09.2018 15:35:20) | |
|
You can't be serious.
https://youtu.be/fshC2mPt6DI
https://youtu.be/JZipjgCrxAA
Beth, to me, sounds like she's done some damage.
In studio records (like this one https://youtu.be/DuDhiHSksaA) she sounds great but very different to Gabriela. And I think the reason is vocal weight, Gabriela is a lower voice type to my ear, but if they both sang, for instance, a song by whitney houston, they'd probably approach it more or less in a similar way. Most career singers are good at imitating voices. Just watch the wheel of musical impressions on Jim Fallon.
They're both great and I can hear the experience behind Beths voice, but to compare them we'd have to hear them both do the same song in a live setting. Gabriela chooses to use the distortion and overcompressed vooce because it's a Ken Tamplin plug. :)
Disclaimer: Pidätän oikeudet puhua paskaa ja huudella mitä sattuu mihin sattuu tietämättä mistään mitään. | Evaphio
26.09.2018 17:30:30 (muokattu 26.09.2018 17:31:30) | |
|
Khassera: You can't be serious.
https://youtu.be/fshC2mPt6DI
https://youtu.be/JZipjgCrxAA
Beth, to me, sounds like she's done some damage.
In studio records (like this one https://youtu.be/DuDhiHSksaA) she sounds great but very different to Gabriela. And I think the reason is vocal weight, Gabriela is a lower voice type to my ear, but if they both sang, for instance, a song by whitney houston, they'd probably approach it more or less in a similar way. Most career singers are good at imitating voices. Just watch the wheel of musical impressions on Jim Fallon.
They're both great and I can hear the experience behind Beths voice, but to compare them we'd have to hear them both do the same song in a live setting. Gabriela chooses to use the distortion and overcompressed vooce because it's a Ken Tamplin plug. :)
I think actually the opposite. Beth sounds much better in her concerts, in the studio recordings she is a bit too "polished". But this is the matter of taste.
About the Gabriela - to me the 2nd video sounds ok, but the on the 1st one according to my feelings she shouts, it seems she is forcing something in her voice, that is why it does not sound as great as it could, it looses its richness and sounds a bit "flat". She probably is a hard-working person, but I think this is not the best method of using voice.
It sounds ok maybe if one wants to imitate the existing singers or fit certain style, but I would like first to explore my voice... and to develop it. It is possible to do through excercises and maybe I would not mind doing something like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pYO9UPSMzo
That is why I gave the list of these singers, who have this ability to sing with this very quality that I like. If you listen to earlier jazz/soul musicians, they even sound close to classical sometimes when the voice can "hang" freely in the air if the singer wants, and even if she/he whispers, you can feel any time it can turn into a very bright vibrant sound. | |
Well there you go. Taste differences. :)
Disclaimer: Pidätän oikeudet puhua paskaa ja huudella mitä sattuu mihin sattuu tietämättä mistään mitään. | |
Khassera: Well there you go. Taste differences. :)
Yes, exactly.
But I think that what affects the sound is the method. I actually have just left a teacher whose approach was the "chest" approach, I liked it at first, but then started noticing it is bringing me not to the right direction.
This is why I gave the list of the singers who sing more or less with the quality that I like.
I have the feeling some "old school" classical teacher would suit me, but this is also very difficult to find, unfortunately. | Khassera
28.09.2018 09:33:22 (muokattu 28.09.2018 09:34:33) | |
|
Evaphio: Yes, exactly.
But I think that what affects the sound is the method. I actually have just left a teacher whose approach was the "chest" approach, I liked it at first, but then started noticing it is bringing me not to the right direction.
This is why I gave the list of the singers who sing more or less with the quality that I like.
I have the feeling some "old school" classical teacher would suit me, but this is also very difficult to find, unfortunately.
The method will affect the sound, you're absolutely right, because usually the teacher, like, for instance, Ken Tamplin, advocates a certain approach that worked for them. This is why most of his students use that tone, but they aren't necessarily restricted to that tone. That's what I mean, and that's what Daniel means when we say that all methods are working towards the same goal, it's only when the student or the teacher forcefeeds that tonality with words like
"Great! That sounded good! I'd love to hear a bit more of that meaty, manly chest voice, try again!" or
"Can you take it back a bit, we don't want to sound like we're in an 80s hair band."
These are things that the teacher has to do in order for the student to sing a song they've picked to sing. When teachers have students work on scales they all work towards the same goals: Purity of the vowel, effortlessness and efficiency of the phonation. That's pretty much what everyone has to build on, and the differences in the final product are due to differences in teachers' methods.
So I agree with you and I'm probably beating a dead horse. The method does make a difference. What I guess I meant to say was that a good teacher is good. A good teacher with a good student is better. If the student knows what they want to do with their voice it's very easy for the teacher (if they know their stuff) to teach.
If a teacher can imitate other singers that's usually a sign that they themselves can sing well, and this is probably totally in opposition of what classical singing is about. It's never about imitation and imitation is almost a cussword. But I admire singers who can sing like someone else, it means they have mastered their ear and their instrument. They can hear the main differences in singers' voices and styles and apply those effects on their own voice effortlessly.
TL;DR: If a teacher can sing like the singer you want to sing like, they can probably teach you how to sound like them. And it's never about singing exactly like someone, but the way you describe the tone of the singers you like will be enough guidelines for the teacher. :) So it's just about finding a teacher who will listen to your wishes.
By the way, I love that you came here to ask this. This side of the forum seems dead outside of the singing sample thread and I love to talk about singing even though I'm not an expert.
Disclaimer: Pidätän oikeudet puhua paskaa ja huudella mitä sattuu mihin sattuu tietämättä mistään mitään. | |
Khassera: The method will affect the sound, you're absolutely right, because usually the teacher, like, for instance, Ken Tamplin, advocates a certain approach that worked for them. This is why most of his students use that tone, but they aren't necessarily restricted to that tone. That's what I mean, and that's what Daniel means when we say that all methods are working towards the same goal, it's only when the student or the teacher forcefeeds that tonality with words like
"Great! That sounded good! I'd love to hear a bit more of that meaty, manly chest voice, try again!" or
"Can you take it back a bit, we don't want to sound like we're in an 80s hair band."
These are things that the teacher has to do in order for the student to sing a song they've picked to sing. When teachers have students work on scales they all work towards the same goals: Purity of the vowel, effortlessness and efficiency of the phonation. That's pretty much what everyone has to build on, and the differences in the final product are due to differences in teachers' methods.
So I agree with you and I'm probably beating a dead horse. The method does make a difference. What I guess I meant to say was that a good teacher is good. A good teacher with a good student is better. If the student knows what they want to do with their voice it's very easy for the teacher (if they know their stuff) to teach.
If a teacher can imitate other singers that's usually a sign that they themselves can sing well, and this is probably totally in opposition of what classical singing is about. It's never about imitation and imitation is almost a cussword. But I admire singers who can sing like someone else, it means they have mastered their ear and their instrument. They can hear the main differences in singers' voices and styles and apply those effects on their own voice effortlessly.
TL;DR: If a teacher can sing like the singer you want to sing like, they can probably teach you how to sound like them. And it's never about singing exactly like someone, but the way you describe the tone of the singers you like will be enough guidelines for the teacher. :) So it's just about finding a teacher who will listen to your wishes.
By the way, I love that you came here to ask this. This side of the forum seems dead outside of the singing sample thread and I love to talk about singing even though I'm not an expert.
Singing is an interesting subject to me as well). There are singers that I like, but finding a teacher is horribly difficult. And, by the way, a lot of them disagree with each other, and I think in the end their students sing differently. So, as we have agreed the method does mean something.
"Imitation" maybe was the way people used to learn before? When there were no schools (especially for every style, because as it seems to me only the classical music had a lot of support and developed education at some period of history).
In any case, I found a girl who teaches online, I will try and see... But I still am interested in suggestions. | | « edellinen sivu | seuraava sivu » | 1 |
|---|
|
|
