In taking up this subject, it is not my purpose to give lessons in voice culture on paper. There is, of course, but one way to sing and that is the right way. Every teacher thinks his is the right one. This can be proven only by the result upon the pupil. Does every teacher understand the training of the voice and can he impart his knowledge to the pupil and enable him to acquire a perfect mastery over the tone production and management of sound in singing with this invisible instrument? Can he surmount the technical difficulties and the mechanism of the vocal organs? The inner consciousness is the only safe guide for teacher and student. The strictest attention should be directed in the beginning by all students to the exercise of forethought, deliberation and mental energy, attributes which are of the greatest importance, more so perhaps than physical strength. A conscientious singer is rewarded after arduous work by gaining the power of emotional expression which the human voice possesses beyond any other musical medium. There are two distinct branches used in the study of the voice--the technical and esthetic. The mechanism and healthy production of the voice and its development belong to the first work. Taste and feeling and a sympathetic and sensitive nature, combined with a cultivated musical organization, a poetic temperament and a pleasing personality, with magnetic fire capable of holding listeners enthralled, are of the other work. In my long career in song I have especially noted the appearance of a singer. My first impressions have usually remained. In justice to the fine contralto, Schumann-Heink, I will relate my first impressions of her in song. Mr. L. Sherman of Sherman & Clay sent me, to my great delight, two tickets for the opera of "Lohengrin." I had never heard the opera nor the singer. When I heard her sing her role, her first notes so astonished me I just held my breath, I could not realize the voice of a woman, she sang like a baritone. The opera was given in German, and I thought I never heard such a masculine voice in my life, and the whole opera was spoiled by her number for me, and the impression was so lasting that nothing could induce me to hear her again after that opera. I could not bear to think of such a man's voice in a woman. This was when Mapelson was here in 1884. I never heard her again until 1908 at Ye Liberty. Everybody had lauded her all these years, and I never expressed my opinion but held to my impressions on my first hearing of her work. At last I asked myself, why should all these musical people call her great and praise her tone productions as being so perfect, and I stand alone in my opinion. I resolved, if she ever came again, to hear and see if the fault lay with me. The opportunity was granted me in 1908 and, engaging a box in the gallery, I took two pupils with me to hear the great singer and accord her justice if I had erred. I beheld a wholesome looking woman, but not beautiful.