That's how I approach art in general. It either speaks to me and touches my heart/soul, or it doesn't.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
How do bad singers get away with sounding good?
- Thread starter hbarcat
- Start date
That's how I approach art in general. It either speaks to me and touches my heart/soul, or it doesn't.
Ozzy Osbourne is another unique case. To me, his voice has kind of a vaudevillian character to it. It's very theatrical and it projects well. For some reason, Ozzy sounds to me like a male version of Ethel Merman. Except instead of singing show tunes, he's singing heavy metal.
Ozzy really improved a tremendous amount as a singer. On the first Black Sabbath album, his pitch was all over the place. His voice was dropping clams everywhere.
He steadily improved in the second and third albums, and by the fourth album, he had developed his voice to be far more technically proficient.
I don't know for sure, but I believe that Ozzy is pretty much musically illiterate. I don't think he knows (or cares) what chords are being played while he's singing or has any idea at all about music theory, but he clearly has a good ear and good instincts. Plus, he just radiates charisma and stage presence.
Ozzy really improved a tremendous amount as a singer. On the first Black Sabbath album, his pitch was all over the place. His voice was dropping clams everywhere.
He steadily improved in the second and third albums, and by the fourth album, he had developed his voice to be far more technically proficient.
I don't know for sure, but I believe that Ozzy is pretty much musically illiterate. I don't think he knows (or cares) what chords are being played while he's singing or has any idea at all about music theory, but he clearly has a good ear and good instincts. Plus, he just radiates charisma and stage presence.
Another coin in the jar is.... lyrics.
A singer is telling a story with lyrics. Without the words, while some singers could still be exciting/soothing to listen to as an instrumental voice, many others of these singers would be boring. They need to words to captivate, the listeners hear the words.
A singer is telling a story with lyrics. Without the words, while some singers could still be exciting/soothing to listen to as an instrumental voice, many others of these singers would be boring. They need to words to captivate, the listeners hear the words.
For me, I sort them into vocalists and then (real) singers.
Vocalists are really good inside their own band or own thing. Think Ozzy or Joe Cocker to name a few, there's a lot of them out there. Ozzy is great for Black Sabbath, but he's not going to be coming out with a box set of him doing Cole Porter or Bachrach/David.
Singers on the other hand can cover most everything. Think Tom Jones or Tricia Yearwood. They've got the instrument and the talent where they can make most anything work. Imagine Jones on 'It's Not Unusual' to 'Green Green Grass of Home' to Prince's 'Kiss' or 'You Can Leave Your Hat On'. Singers, like most musicians, usually are at home in one style like the late Tony Bennett, but others like Jones will branch out if done right.
Vocalists are really good inside their own band or own thing. Think Ozzy or Joe Cocker to name a few, there's a lot of them out there. Ozzy is great for Black Sabbath, but he's not going to be coming out with a box set of him doing Cole Porter or Bachrach/David.
Singers on the other hand can cover most everything. Think Tom Jones or Tricia Yearwood. They've got the instrument and the talent where they can make most anything work. Imagine Jones on 'It's Not Unusual' to 'Green Green Grass of Home' to Prince's 'Kiss' or 'You Can Leave Your Hat On'. Singers, like most musicians, usually are at home in one style like the late Tony Bennett, but others like Jones will branch out if done right.
Tom Jones is awesome, that guy is seriously talented for sure. On top of that he had great stage presence as well.
Ozzy's replacement in Black Sabbath would also fit in the "singer" category. This is what he sounded like before metal:
Performance, delivery, originality and emotion count for a lot when it comes to vocals. Or any instrument when you think of it.
Louis Armstrong and Jimmy Durante were the first singers that came to mind when I read this.
I think there really is some kind of indefinable, unexplainable "it" factor involved. I guess you could try to explain it, but I believe some things just...are. Enjoy it (or not) for what it is.
A couple of old bandmates of mine commented on the vocals on hot chocolates you sexy thing, saying that they should have got somebody else in the band to do the lead vocal. My argument was, if that song was sung well, it would not have been as big of a hit.
I like very controlled and nuanced singers (i.e., Johnny Mathis), but I also like singers who sing a bit out of control. Not crazy all over the place, but just a little on the edge.
I agree that the lead vocal on "You Sexy Thing" was the right vocal for that song.
I was trying to think of RB singers who got by with less than stellar voices. That's all I can really come up with. Maybe rick James?
I'd have to disagree with Rick James. Listen to his duet "Ebony Eyes" with Smokey Robinson, and his duet "Fire and Desire" with Teena Marie.
Oh, without a doubt. I know the man can sing, but he tends to let the voice get a little whacked out for lack of a better word on super freak and give it to me baby. I'm sure it's just affectation though..
I went back and listened to ebony eyes, had been a long time. If I didn't know that that was the same voice of super freak, I would never guess.
True!
This discussion is putting me in mind of a debate (at least, that used to exist) among musicologists about medieval music, like troubadour songs. We have lyrics, we have musical notation to indicate melodies, and we have visual depictions of musicians. But we have very little idea what the music actually sounded like in performance, because we don't really know how the singers were trained and some other aspects. So there's always a lot of interpretation and speculation going into modern recordings of this music, depending on how a given ensemble answers those kinds of questions. Was a medieval minstrel more like a proto-opera singer, or were they more like a folk singer? Did they have the same kind of training as church choirs got to sing Gregorian chant, or was it completely different?
One recording I really like is Lo Gai Saber, where they got three different singers with different training to do 12th-13th century Troubadour songs.
Where this pertains to the OP is, I think that a lot of what constitutes a "good" singer is genre-specific. Each style of music has its own expectations for how the vocalist expresses the material. You don't WANT an opera singer to sing a blues song, and you don't want blues singers doing opera.
One recording I really like is Lo Gai Saber, where they got three different singers with different training to do 12th-13th century Troubadour songs.
Where this pertains to the OP is, I think that a lot of what constitutes a "good" singer is genre-specific. Each style of music has its own expectations for how the vocalist expresses the material. You don't WANT an opera singer to sing a blues song, and you don't want blues singers doing opera.
