Music: Singer's Voices: Do they matter?

[Elvis P]

Singer's Voices: Do they matter? I'm gonna say no.

1. I don't think we can agree on who has a bad or good voice. I like Aretha Franklin, Ray Charles, Elvis Presley, Sam Cooke, John Lennon, and Marvin Gaye, but someone will disagree. Pat Benatar was an opera singer, but someone will reply that she has a bad voice. Some people may not like Mariah Carey although she used to have a huge range. I think Whitney Houston had a good voice, but some may not like her. Some feel that Adele's singing style is too dramatic.

2. I think the quality of the material is more important. Some singers have non-traditional voices such as Joe Cocker, Bob Dylan, Geddy Lee, Axl Rose, Tom Waits, and Neil Young, but they're very popular. I like Dylan, Young, and Lee's singing, but I admit they're no opera singers. Rolling Stone has Dylan ranked as the seventh best singer of all time. Someone will reply that they all have good voices.

Click to read more...

 

[Jumptheshark]

times have changed

it is all about the auto-tune now

A buddy of mine just retired after nearly 50 years of being a sound engineer here in London and he has recorded some of the biggest artist off all time. He worked a lot with the female motown singers that recorded in the 70's and 80's and he said they would spend weeks getting the sound just right. He said he recorded one female singer last year where she came in--spent all of about 3 hours doing what he thought was "rough work" on a few songs only to find out that those were the recordings and that the other engineer would come in and "Clean up" the vocals--meaning Auto tune and computerize the songs.

Even some of the top acts now, when you listen to their songs--you can tell they have been cleaned up

 

[Elvis P]

times have changed. It is all about the auto-tune now. ...Even some of the top acts now, when you listen to their songs--you can tell they have been cleaned up

I agree, but there are some singers who sound great live and posters who admit they don't like them personally say their voices are bad and play the auto tune card.

 

[Jumptheshark]

I agree, but there are some singers who sound great live and posters who admit they don't like them personally say their voices are bad and play the auto tune card.

lady gaga is the one that blew my mind--I thought she was the queen of the auto tune--but I caught her during rehearsals--not during the actual gig in 2014 here in London--I was in the O2 meeting a few people on the floor making final arrangements of about 200 buses that were bringing people from London area hotels to the gig and she blew my socks off-she can actually sing

 

[Elvis P]

lady gaga is the one that blew my mind--I thought she was the queen of the auto tune--but I caught her during rehearsals--not during the actual gig in 2014 here in London--I was in the O2 meeting a few people on the floor making final arrangements of about 200 buses that were bringing people from London area hotels to the gig and she blew my socks off-she can actually sing

I just accidentally discovered some non-auto-tune youtubes of some very popular current women, but the only one who sounded bad to me was Katy Perry so the rest were a pleasant surprise.

 

[Jumptheshark]

u want have some fun

listen to the k-pop videos that have the live vocals

 

[Natey]

lady gaga is the one that blew my mind--I thought she was the queen of the auto tune--but I caught her during rehearsals--not during the actual gig in 2014 here in London--I was in the O2 meeting a few people on the floor making final arrangements of about 200 buses that were bringing people from London area hotels to the gig and she blew my socks off-she can actually sing

LIGHTS is the same. I remember when she first got popular. So much auto-tune and effects added to her songs that's it's really not enjoyable. And then I saw her live as well as her releasing some acoustic videos on YouTube and she blew my mind. I was very wrong. I grab her acoustic albums/songs now (completely skip her studio ones).

 

[John Price]

Yes. Tom waits is a terrible singer and his products are crap as a result. You ever hear his rendition of downtown train?

 

[Scandale du Jour]

u want have some fun

listen to the k-pop videos that have the live vocals

I prefer my blood in my body and not coming out of my ears.

 

[JDinkalage Morgoone]

I think the singer definitely matters. Whether their voice is "good" doesn't necessarily matter, it matters how it fits in the context of that song I'd say. I wouldn't classify David Byrne as a good singer, but he fits so well in Talking Heads songs.

 

[Acadmus]

I've found by my inability to listen to a lot of today's popular bands, that yes, voice matters. It's not that they have to have the greatest singing voice in the world, but I have to be able to listen to it.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Some of my favourite singers don't have objectively good voices.

But try to tell me that Louis Armstrong and Howlin Wolf aren't all-time great vocalists, and you'll have a fight on your hands. What made Louis such a great singer was his improvisational chops, and Howlin Wolf had power and emotion that hit you right in the gut.

 

[Elvis P]

...But try to tell me that Louis Armstrong and Howlin Wolf aren't all-time great vocalists, and you'll have a fight on your hands. What made Louis such a great singer was his improvisational chops, and Howlin Wolf had power and emotion that hit you right in the gut.

100% agreed. Armstrong is great. I'm a huge Blues fan and every time I hear the Wolf I ask myself why I don't consider him my favorite Blues singer.

 

[Ozz]

Of course it matters, whether it's for one reason or another.

You can't teach the difference between cookie-cutter folks you see on all these stupid singing TV shows and someone like, as suggested above, Louis Armstrong. Take your pick of "non-traditional" or "imperfect voices" who are legendary, there are plenty.

 

[Elvis P]

Of course it matters, whether it's for one reason or another. You can't teach the difference between cookie-cutter folks you see on all these stupid singing TV shows and someone like, as suggested above, Louis Armstrong. Take your pick of "non-traditional" or "imperfect voices" who are legendary, there are plenty.

Agreed, but there will always be those who say that if you can't identify something that it doesn't exist.

 

[Xelebes]

To me, it matters. The words can often mean little to me (and they often do) but if there is a voice, I can dig it. And yes, the voice can interfere with an otherwise excellent song as has been shown in the OP. Can't stand those recordings.

 

[Elvis P]

To me, it matters. The words can often mean little to me (and they often do) but if there is a voice, I can dig it. And yes, the voice can interfere with an otherwise excellent song as has been shown in the OP. Can't stand those recordings.

A Canadian not liking Young and Rush!?! Say it ain't so.

 

[Xelebes]

A Canadian not liking Young and Rush!?! Say it ain't so.

/spins Boule Noire and Rankin Family

 

[Hounsy]

When it works the right voice and a good song are paired correctly and listened to by the ears it was meant for. What those voices, tunes, and ears is could be many different things.

 

[Dr Pepper]

Rage Against the Machine split up around ten years ago (give or take a year).

Their "reunion" project, Prophets of Rage, featured all original members, sans the lead singer. Instead they brought on a singer from a different group.

They were in town a few weeks ago, but I couldn't bring myself to go see them because the original lead singer wasn't a part of it.

It's just not the same.

 

[sully1410]

I think it matters because the lead singer is what gives the band it's unique sound.

 

[Mikeaveli]

I would agree that it matters within the context of the record. For example, I love the 2 Neutral Milk Hotel albums but I'm not sure if Mangum's voice would work as well with any other band.

 

[Shareefruck]

I would take Bob Dylan's voice over Roy Orbison's voice personally.

It matters, just like anything else matters, but how good of a singer someone is has nothing to do with how technically proficient or opera-like their voice is. In fact, that can sometimes make a voice feel more artificial and bland (I don't particularly care for the chops that people keep giving Lady Gaga or Adele kudos for, for example). I've noticed that I have a tendency to prefer the voices of singers who aren't technical more than I like the singers who are, personally.

What matters is the expressiveness/character/personality/aesthetic/ability for the voice to sound 'right' in the context of the music.

I dislike Rush too, though.

 

[Hyack57]

Voices do matter. Chad Kroeger -Nickelback- and Scott Stapp -Creed- both have strong rock voices and it covered up some really unremarkable music and lead them to make millions selling generic rock music. And I hate their music. Meanwhile Michael Poulsen -Volbeat- has a good voice but it doesn't match the heaviness that his band seems to produce and feels mismatched.

Take Volbeat's song Evelyn (demo) featuring Bruce Greenway on vocals for the first verse and then it goes to Poulsen for the chorus. It goes from F*** yeah music to "holy **** is this nickelback" in a split second.




On the other hand, I've listened to some really good metal songs only to be put off by horrible screaming and gutter growling by the lead singer and I just turn off the song.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

The character of the singer's voice matters for sure. The quality of the singer's voice also matters, but less so depending on the forum/style.

And while I suppose there are objective ways of measuring a singer's quality, both character and quality remain subjectively good/bad.