It is all too easy to forget the spoken result when in the creative flow of writing.
Written and spoken English have some distinct differences.
If you are regular ‘performance poet’ you may well write your poems in a way which helps guide the performance. They may look more like stage directions than verse. It will look fine to you, but weird to anyone else. Anyone listening to your performance won’t see the weirdness, just hear the effect you intended.
If you are comfortable performing it will become more of an act than a recitation. I vividly recall seeing a man performing Poe’s Raven, and in the role of narrator he was dancing along the thin edge of insanity with his body language mirroring the words. He sucked the whole audience into that world.
After he finished there were several seconds where he was clearly finding himself again. And a similar pause before the audience shook off the spell enough to start clapping.
=====
But if you never read out loud, even to yourself, you are missing some useful clues.
Speaking aloud will reveal the little ‘speed bumps’ which disturb the underlying metre. It will reveal which words can be elided together for best effect. For example, there are times when ‘shall not’ reads perfectly, but needs to be voiced as ‘shan’t’.
You may have an unusual vocal delivery, or just a dialect which sounds words differently according to the way you stress syllables within the words.
Once you start listening through your ears, instead of just mentally as you read, your poetry may take on a whole new dimension. You may well find you have two distinctly different versions of the same poem. One for reading silently, and one for reciting/performing.
Even if you have no intention of ever standing up before a live audience treat yourself to an imaginary one and read aloud.
Gyppo