Alexa: [00:00:00] If there's one thing that I find singers preoccupied with more than almost anything else, it's belt. 

Now, I teach predominantly musical theatre, so that's hardly surprising. Belt is a real staple of that genre. But in my experience as a singing teacher so far, I've noticed that belt has almost been placed on a pedestal as though it's this ultimate measure of great singing. 

And I understand why. Belt can be thrilling and deliciously impactful and deeply visceral. But it isn't the whole story. 

So in this episode, I want to explore how we can understand, train, and apply belt in a way that takes it off this pedestal and puts it back alongside all the other skills that make singing compelling. Because, perhaps counterintuitively, that's often what makes a belt sound even more impressive. 

If I asked [00:01:00] you to write down the first words that come to mind when you hear the word belt, what would they be? Perhaps powerful, loud, strong, high chest voice, even difficult, effortful, hard work. 

The way we define something may well shape the very way we expect to approach it. 

For example, and this comes to mind purely because I've been watching the recent series of Clarkson's Farm, if someone were to offer me a taste of some hot chili sauce, I'm probably going to only take a tiny dab rather than squirting the whole damn thing over my cracker, or taking any at all because I can't deal with spice. Why? Because I'm already expecting it to be fiery, intense, and quite a lot to cope with. Unpleasant, if you will. 

Well, belt can work very much in the same way. If we think belt equals effort, [00:02:00] we're much more likely to approach it with effort. If we associate it with pushing, forcing, or working hard we might unintentionally create the very environment that makes belting more difficult. 

As Amanda Flynn has discussed in some of her work with the Voice Study Centre, the term belt is thought to derive from the idea of delivering a belter of a punch in boxing. It implies impact and power and force. 

One of the most helpful ways to reframe belt, I think, is to remember that belt is a vocal quality, not a register. And Emily Kristen Morris will back me up on that one if you go and visit our 200th episode. 

To me, belt is the result of several ingredients coming together rather than a single mechanism that you simply switch on. It's a bit like the sauce on a hot dog. The sauce gives it flavour and [00:03:00] character, but without the hot dog underneath, there isn't much to put the sauce on. Now, I'm a gal who will have ketchup on almost anything. But I think we'd mostly agree between us that ketchup on its own isn't dinner. It's the condiment, not the sausage. 

 So perhaps the first step towards a more impressive belt isn't learning a new exercise at all but perhaps it's redefining what belt means to us. When we stop expecting it to feel like hard work, we might just create the conditions for it to become more efficient and, ultimately, more impressive. 

 So that's tip number one: define and reframe. 

You've probably heard it said before that your voice is as unique as your fingerprint. 

While we all share the same basic anatomy, a larynx, vocal folds, tongue, jaw, and a vocal tract, none of those structures are identical from person to person. They are bespoke, if you [00:04:00] will. They vary in size and shape, and those differences inevitably influence the sound we make. 

Some singers naturally have anatomical features that contribute to a certain type of belt sound that maybe is perceived as weightier or richer, as others may have features that lend more to a brighter or lighter colour palette in belt. Neither is inherently better, they're just simply different, and that's the point. 

Compare some of your favourite singers and you'll hear this immediately. Jessie J, Ariana Grande, Kelly Clarkson, Tori Kelly, Reneé Rapp, Victoria Hamilton-Barritt - the list goes on. Some could be described as broad and heavy sounding, as others are bright and ringing. Some are edgy, others are warm. They're all valid. They're all belt. 

As Justin Stoney says in his very colourful book, Sing Like Never Before, [00:05:00] "We can't swap heads with another person." 

 We can admire another singer's sound, but we can't borrow their anatomy." Nuts. But our job isn't to chase someone else's belt. It's to understand our own instrument and train it as effectively as possible. 

 When we stop trying to make our voice behave like someone else's, we free ourselves to develop a belt that's authentic to our physiology, and in my opinion, that's always going to sound more impressive. 

Tip number three continues with the barbecue analogy because, at the time of recording, it's still approximately 8 billion degrees in the UK. 

 So imagine you're invited to a barbecue where the host is serving burgers and hot dogs, pulled pork, maybe a lovely bit of brisket, and they've popped some halloumi skewers on too. Firstly, where is this party and how do we become friends with this person because they sound like a stellar host? 

[00:06:00] Secondly, they are different foods with different flavours and textures, yet they all belong in this barbecue category. Belt works in the same way. There isn't one belt. 

As we just discovered with referencing some of the singers, the belt sound is going to be different, but there are also tools and strategies that we can use to create variety in our belt. 

So for example, do we want that to sound more open or closed? Referencing maybe the vowel we might use or the shape of our lips. 

Sometimes I think we spend so much time trying to find 'the belt' that we forget we're actually working with a whole family of sounds. 

So referring back to our definition in tip one, it's useful to know what belt is, but not to define it so narrowly that we only allow one version to exist. 

The more flexibility you develop within that category, the more versatile your singing becomes. And ultimately, that's what makes belt [00:07:00] impressive. 

You might even find yourself or a student asking, " but is it a true belt?" 

 If the perceptual quality is one we recognise as belt, then it belongs in that category. Perhaps instead of asking, "Is it a true belt?" a more useful question could be, "What kind of belt is it?" Because that shifts the conversation away from whether it's right or wrong, and towards understanding the qualities that make it unique. 

Cue the mixed belt argument. 

Tip number four really just speaks for itself. Belt is impressive, but it's certainly not the only thing that's impressive. Sometimes I think we become conditioned to equate vocal excellence with whoever can sing the highest and the loudest. But singing is so much richer than that. 

Take the musical Hadestown, for example. What I adore about that score is that it's a celebration of vocal diversity. 

You [00:08:00] hear rich, low female voices, soaring male falsetto, resonant bass voices, and yes, moments of belt too. None of those sounds though are competing with each other. They're all contributing something really unique to the storytelling. 

So yes, celebrate belt. Train it, refine it. But don't neglect everything else your voice can do because an impressive singer isn't defined by one vocal quality. They're likely going to be more defined by the ability to use many, or to be authentic to themselves. 

If something is sung at maximum intensity with no ebb and flow of dynamic, then an audience could quickly adapt and tire, and so could the singer. 

Now there are absolutely styles and songs that ask for a sustained intensity. Some of the Standard Broadway musical theatre repertoire is unapologetically bold from beginning to end. 

But even then, there's shape, [00:09:00] colour, and intention behind the sound. Nobody enjoys being yelled at, however controlled it may be, for three and a half minutes. 

And no, I don't think belt equals yelling. It's just a figure of speech. 

Unless it's juxtaposing for another contextual reason, the music usually tells us where the intensity belongs. Orchestration, the lyric, rhythm and phrasing all provide clues about when a belt might serve and when other choices would actually be more powerful. 

A belt that has no support from the style, the music, or the story can stick out a little bit like a sore thumb. 

It risks feeling like it's there because the singer wanted to show they could, rather than because the character or the song needed it. Now, if showing off is the point, then wonderful. That's still a valid dramatic choice. Just make sure it's a choice that can be weaved into the other parts, like the story and the music-led aspects of the piece too. 

 Because the most impressive belt [00:10:00] communicates something. 

It's easy to see why many singers think that they'll need to take a huge breath before belting. After all, if belt equals big, then surely breath needs to be big too. 

 Not necessarily. 

Some people will describe belt as having relatively high pressure and comparatively low airflow. But that doesn't mean no airflow and it certainly doesn't mean performing a Valsalva maneuver. Ideally, we don't want to shit out a belt. 

Taking an unnecessarily large breath could create the conditions for excessive subglottal pressure, that buildup of air beneath the vocal folds. Then the vocal folds are left with two rather unhelpful options. Either squeeze together as hard as they can to resist all of that air, rather like trying to shut a gate in the wind. Or: be blown apart because there's simply too much pressure to manage. Sometimes a big help for singers is realising they don't need more breath, [00:11:00] just better managed breath. 

One strategy that I've found helpful in lessons when I think a singer might be bracing, overpressurised , or seemingly tanked up on air is to encourage them to start the belt phrase with an aspirate consonant, such as an F. Quite often that small adjustment is enough to puncture the pressure and make the belt feel freer and easier, reducing the risk of that singer actually valving out the air. 

As we've mentioned throughout this episode, belt isn't something that exists on its own. It's the by-product of several things working efficiently together. 

So if belt isn't feeling or sounding the way that you'd like, don't just keep practicing it. Step back and ask, "What else might be getting in the way?" 

One of the things I first like to assess here is vocal fold adduction across the range. 

If the vocal folds aren't coming together efficiently, singers often try to compensate by increasing the volume. The thinking [00:12:00] becomes, "If I'm louder, surely I'll be stronger." But, and this is a fun phrase that I've come across this weekend, it's a bit like turning the volume up on the television when the picture's blurry. 

 You're making more of something, but you're not actually fixing the problem. 

Something belt isn't is breathy. So we want the vocal folds to be able to come together efficiently before we ask them to contribute to some of the more athletic vocal productions. 

 The other area I would like to assess is register function. Can the singer access a responsive, dynamic chest voice? Can they reduce vocal weight? Can they access an efficient head voice, not just a breathy one, but one with good closure when required? Can they blend between registers? Is that transition smooth or negotiable? And can they access qualities such as twang? 

At first glance, some of these things might seem completely disconnected from belt. 

[00:13:00] You or a singer might think, " Why are we working on head voice when I want to belt?" Because belt doesn't exist in isolation. It relies on other things being in place and accessible and usable. 

So before spending another hour trying to force out a higher, louder belt, ask yourself whether the foundations are truly in place. Sometimes the fastest way to improve belt is not to train belt at all, it's to train all the other skills that allow belt to emerge more freely. Strengthen the ingredients and give it time to marinate, and the finished dish is usually much tastier. 

Completing our list of eight tips is twang. But more importantly, using the 'right amount', in bunny ears, of it. 

It's common to see singers using the strategy of pulling, dragging, shoving thickness as high as they can because listening to singers, it sounds like that is what should be happening. But we're missing a very key word: [00:14:00] perception. It's the perceived idea of thickness, not necessarily that said singer is in thick fold the entire time in their range because as we know, the vocal folds will have to thin out as we get higher up. 

 And that's where twang can come in to help. But sometimes we can get into that sticky scenario of over-twanging, getting really narrowed and really squeezed pharyngeally. 

In one of our episodes with the lovely Kerrie Obert, this one on how to sing with twang Kerrie talks about using larynx height as one way in because the singer can actually feel it just by putting their fingers on the front of their neck. The singer can then slowly lower the larynx appropriately to assist with a twang that is present but not something that is completely over-squeezed. 

So it will be the difference between yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And yeah, yeah, yeah. [00:15:00] Yeah, yeah, yeah. 

 Sorry, husband.  

So there we have it. Eight ways to make belt more impressive: define and reframe. Consider your physiological individuality. Belt is nuanced and not just one thing. And it's not the only impressive thing a singer can do. It should have stylistic, musical, contextual intention. You likely don't need a massive breath. Assess your technical foundations realistically, and utilise twang to its advantage. 

If you're a singing teacher or you're a singer yourself, what would you add to the list? What's been the big breakthrough for you and belt? 

Let us know in the comments, or you can send us a DM via Instagram or drop us an email. We genuinely love hearing your experiences. And thanks so much for listening. That's it from me. Until next time