There are a few things I don’t much like about myself:
the sound of my voice on recordings, which doesn’t sound like I think I sound;
the fact that I’m not great at impressions; and
the fact that I’m not great at singing.
So: what’s it like for folks who are great at impressions, or singing?
If I could deliver dead-on impression of celebrities – to the point where jaws would drop and folks would swear I had it exactly right – would it sound a bit off to me while I was doing it? If I tweaked it so it sounded perfect to me while I was doing it, would listeners then say, uh, no; you had it perfect; why are you now slightly off?
Same thing with singing: if every listener agreed that I was perfectly mimicking, oh, say, Mick Jagger – what would that performance be like for me? Would I think I sound a bit off, until I tried to make it sound like perfect mimicry to me – at which point everyone else would ask why I’d suddenly stopped singing it right?
Most people hate the sound of their own voice. The reason it sounds off is that when you hear your own voice, you aren’t just hearing the sound as it travels through the air. Mixed in with that are sound vibrations that travel through your body tissues and bones and mix inside your ears with the sound that came from the air.
Any sound you make is going to conduct through your body tissues and bones and will distort what your ear hears.
It’s mostly the lower frequencies that conduct better through your body tissues and you skull, so an impression of a celebrity in your ears will sound like it has the bass knob turned up, and compared to what you hear, to other people it will sound like it has the bass knob turned down. Most people still recognize celebrity voices when they come through cheap speakers or speakers that have the bass boosted though, so it probably won’t really sound “off” so much to either of you. It will just sound different.
Since you hear your own voice all the time, that sounds much more off to you.
To a singer, their recorded voice will always similarly sound a bit tinny and off from what they are used to, for the same reason.
It’s simple acoustics, and since there’s no way to acoustically isolate your inner ear from your skull, you’re kinda just stuck with it.
I think I knew that last part – the why of it – but it’s the ramifications that fascinate me. So you think I have it right? That singers, while hearing themselves while singing, would always be thinking, man, this is so close to sounding perfect when it does sound perfect; and oh, this sounds perfect whenever it doesn’t?
That impressionists would always be thinking this doesn’t quite sound like his voice if they’re completely nailing it – and yes, that’s flawless when they’re wrong?
I’m not a singer, but I was trained as a clarinetist, and the issues are similar. Because the mouthpiece is in contact with your upper teeth, you get a lot of bone conduction. The sound you hear while playing isn’t the same as the sound your audience hears. You definitely have to use a tape player to hear yourself or have someone listen and and give feedback. If you develop your technique based solely on what you hear while you’re playing (i.e. so it sounds perfect to you while you’re playing), it won’t sound optimal to the listener.
My voice usually sounds a bit high to me while I’m speaking, but very deep and kind of goofy when I listen to it in recordings. Probably why I don’t like to talk much.
This is no help: according to Cecil, as you get older, your eardrums lose their elasticity and everything goes sharp. Feel better? I don’t.
As far as impressions, you’re in luck. You don’t have to have the voice perfect, but you DO have to include mannerisms, facial tics, other vocal quirks I don’t feel like listing (mostly because I can’t remember what they’re called at the moment), and maybe THIS:
When Kevin Pollak does his Peter Falk impression, he has trained his one eyeball to go off-kilter :eek:. THAT is dedication to your craft. (ick)
Disclaimer: I’m not a singer, I’m not very good at it.
That said, I have sung for my own amusement in the past, and have recorded music featuring me singing. I think that when you start hearing your recorded voice a lot, it doesn’t sound so strange and you get used to what it sounds like. You start associating the sound you hear in your head with the sound that gets recorded.
I would also think that an impressionist is never going to be perfect and they can record their voice to get a sense of how it sounds to others. Then they just need to associate the most accurate recorded impression with what it sounded like in their head, and I think if they do it enough they’ll do it without thinking. Minor adjustments based on audience reaction would also work.
Additionally, an impression is as much or more about mannerisms than it is about getting the voice right. This is why Christopher Walken is easy prey, his mannerisms are so strong that the actual voice can be well off and no one notices.
Edit: See Alan Rickman for another example of someone with strong mannerisms who therefore gets impersonated relatively frequently. Trump would fit the category as well, with his pursed mouth and sniffing etc.
Impressionists don’t rely very much on the actual sound of the voice. They can make up for a deficiency in that, by nailing a lot of other speech characteristics, like cadence, choice of words, facial espressions, etc. and the audience will hear" the person they are imitating, regardless of the voice. If you start out by saying “There you go again”, your audience is already convinced you are doing a perfect Ronald Reagan. Or “Wonnerful” for Lawrence Welk. It’s a lot like being an illusionist.
I had a (male) friend whose mother was German, and he could “do” his mother perfectly, without making any effort to do her voice. All the other elements were there, and everyone who knew his mother knew who he was imitating.