I think you’re missing the point of this thread. A singer’s role is to sell a song, convey whatever message, feeling, mood, or emotion there is in the lyric (unfortunately there’s not a whole lot of substance in many song lyrics, but that’s a different discussion for a different time).It's not my opinion. At least not all the time.
I saw several bands with perfect vocals and perfect instrumentals, not a flaw and it's good, it's better!
For example: Clutch! This man can sing and put on a good show.
Counter example: Foo Fighter.... I love Dave Grohl but he shaged up the lead vocal by screaming all the way.
Often, just like the perfect actor cast for a unusual role, a singer with some kind of limitation can put the song across in an equally perfect manner, especially if the lyrics/song is theirs. If not, a particular vocalist’s idiosyncratic style brings a new interpretation. Perfection can be boring, bland, and superficial.
No matter what she was singing, even if it was an upbeat tune, Billie Holliday always brought the sound of a heart broken into a million pieces and a world weariness with her slippery upper pitch. Joy Division’s Ian Curtis communicated a private sense of dread and frustration that ironically millions could relate to, but unfortunately it became too real for him. Lou Reed’s monotone was street-wise and cynical, yet on a song like “The Bed”, that(plus the way his voice cracks on the high notes)paints a portrait of a person in shell-shock, denial, and resignation over the suicide of his partner, who already dragged him through a living hell, yet he’s still somewhat wistful about her. Lastly, for impending doom and despair, you don’t need any downtuned band, but instead absorb the whispered suboctave drone of Leonard Cohen. You want it darker? He’s your man.
Last edited: