Introduction
The term “mix” is widely used in vocal pedagogy to describe certain aspects of singing technique, yet its definition remains inconsistent across teaching contexts, genres, and individual teachers. For singers and voice educators, the lack of a standardized understanding complicates pedagogy, communication, and research. A clearer picture of how the term is currently understood across demographics and professional settings is essential to advance evidence-based voice teaching practices.
Objective
The purpose of this study is to examine how singers and voice teachers define, use, and teach the concept of “mix.” Specifically, the survey investigates (1) the demographic and professional characteristics of those who use the term, (2) the pedagogical sources and contexts in which the term is encountered, and (3) the range of meanings ascribed to “mix.”
Methods
An online survey was developed and is currently being administered via Qualtrics software to singers and voice educators across multiple professional networks. The instrument included demographic questions and a detailed block of items regarding “mix.” Questions probed first exposure to the term, contexts of performance and teaching, whether “mix” was used in teaching, and definition.  Data analysis was and will be done using SPSS software.
Results
The survey is in progress, and preliminary results indicate that awareness of “mix” spans across age groups and voice classifications, though younger respondents and those with CCM experience report earlier exposure, often via the internet, peers, or college-level instruction. Results from descriptive statistics and chi-square tests characterizing demographic data will be provided. Early findings suggest significant, ongoing ambiguity surrounding the term. While many participants rate “mix” as moderately to extremely useful, a notable subset regard it as problematic or misleading in pedagogy. All final results will be analyzed upon closure of the study in December. Patterns connecting pedagogical setting and genre specialization will be analyzed in both adoption and definition of the term.
Conclusions
The survey demonstrates that “mix” continues to function as a flexible but contested pedagogical term. Preliminary evidence suggests it is especially prevalent in CCM and hybrid teaching contexts. However, the lack of consensus on its precise meaning may hinder pedagogical clarity. Ongoing analysis will further delineate correlations between demographics, teaching contexts, and conceptual definitions. Clarifying these meanings has the potential to inform curriculum design, voice teacher training, and future empirical research in singing voice pedagogy.