[Ineffable]

Not trying to make your point more important than it is, but I’m pretty much 180 from your opinion

I think it’s the very fact that we speak without training that makes the speaking voice the one that is the more natural indicator of what our God-given physiognomy has created to make sound with. Language is the medium… I guess it could be referred to as inhibiting the voice but since it’s the only way to release the voice, I can’t really see it that way. Yes… certain factors can interfere with the natural production of a speaking voice. But I think it has a stronger chance of showing the God-given material

As for singing, I think TC makes clear there are many things the singer can do to interfere with a natural production of The Voice. Most famously on here would have to be the legendary ingolata
Which, whether it bothers you or not, without question can alter a voice significantly.

I don't know about no god given, but it certainly displays the cultural tendencies and habits of the person speaking. Some people speak with a baby voice well-into adulthood; I doubt that's their "god-given material," as you say. Some speak too low; again, I doubt that's "god-given." Some too quietly and mumbled, whereas others too high, nasal, and loud. None of it god-given, but more like habitual tendencies picked up at a young age and then concretized around puberty or a little later. Ideally one should speak how they sing (classically), i.e., vellum up, pharynx open, with little nasal resonance except on N, m, e, etc sounds. People can make a whole range of sounds in speaking--they can in unamplified singing, too, but some of it is unrepeatable do to the nature of the medium. Of course, no one's evaluated on how they sing, so no one really gives a ****.