• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

How do bad singers get away with sounding good?

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.
Watched a couple of hours of live metal in the 80s on a show that prided itself on going where no one else dared. Screaming symphony style of vocals and each one woefully out of tune. To this day you can't make me believe that the oogaah style of metal vocals was not born of guitar amp technology far surpassing monitor development. Obviously not the problem today. Yet the vocal mannerism persists because audiences must feel it best expresses the emotions metal is going for.

I guess the last sentence applied to rap as well. Right up until Drake discovered Autotune.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hrodbert696
MusicalTasteIsSubjective.png
 
Apologies to those middle responses... too many to review at this time.
A number of responses mention that a lead singer in a rock band is usually more than a vocalist, aka "the front man". I would bet that if Rod Stewart, Joe Cocker, John Fogerty, or even Steven Tyler as examples might be classified as poor singers if the rating was purely based on the vocal training standard. That said, what would Maggie May, With a little help from my friends (or You can leave your hat on, or Unchain my heart ), Hey Tonight, or Rag Doll be without those vocals... Not too mention the showmanship of those folks, performances that hold an audience.
These are probably not the vocals the OP is talking about, but just making a point on vocal quality. There is a considerable amount of mediocre music out there and with the ability to self promote and publish it's probably going to get worse before it gets better. Being in and out bands and music for the better part of 50 years, it's painfully clear that some folks truly don't hear themselves live or recorded (or can tell if they are on key with the music).
I guess those of us with a discerning ear should be thankful for that ability...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BassAndCigars
There’s something revealing about the use of autotuning by contemporary pop singers chasing some elements of genuine vocal technique. The confidence in charisma over technique is not there.
Think you'll find Autotune has historically been used more for the artifacts than perfectly in tune performances. Coming from that perspective, I couldn't rule out our man using the random melody generation to scratch the Autotune the news itch we all got a moment's diversion from a decade or so back.

Edit: guess we'll know for sure when Autotune gets an AI function built in to plagiarised some hooks for you.
P.S. Someone *please* autotune Dylan—or maybe better yet Ringo—and post it!
Mumbling out of tune/mumbling in tune. Does the Voice of his Generation have anything to gain from a plugin today?
 
Last edited:

I perpetually (clara) bow to the 50 foot wave, that tsunami of sound, that made all the sense in the world, then as it does now, a fond memory, a stupid summer. Serendipitous. Perfect — beyond the need for perfectionism. Stina Nordenstam shares top billing. Sound tracks. And the list, the lean mean highlighting machine, goes on forever. Like a rollings tone.

 
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).

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.

I was over reacting maybe but i really don't think perfection can be boring.
I strongly disagree.
 
Last edited:
"It's amazing how far Led Zeppelin got with such a terrible singer."--A bandmate of mine
Indeed, I find Zeppelin mostly unlistenable because of Plant. However, his screeching did suit the bombastic vibe perfectly, and I can understand why so many people love him.
 
If it feels good than its good. I hear people praise bass players I personally feel I have a leg up on and I'm just okay. They got that certain thing most of us don't though and that's either the hours of time spent trying to get known/connections/style/luck. Also most genres style cater towards normal people and actually good singers are kind of hard to find...
 
It's been said multiple times that a lot of the perceived quality of the singing voice is extremely subjective. If the listener enjoys it, then it's good - at least for that particular listener.

So, I'm genuinely curious about Bruce Sprinsteen's voice. Does anybody actually like his voice, or do his fans simply put up with it because they it's all about the overall vibe and feel, as well as the meaning behind the lyrics.

Personally, I can't listen to Bruce Spingsteen songs because his voice irritates me so much. I've even invented a word that I use to describe how Springsteen sings.

Showling -- A combination of shouting and howling at the same time.
I agree with you about Springsteen. He's almost always either bellowing or straining through clenched teeth.
I like everything he stands for, but I find him pretty dull, musically. Around 1984, there were fans of Bruce and fans of Prince. I was emphatically on the Prince "team."
 
  • Like
Reactions: hbarcat

I agree taste in music is, but I also think there are some objective measures of singing ability. Being able to sing on pitch, for instance, can be measured, and a person is on it or they're not. Ability to control one's volume, and to have a greater range, and so on. That doesn't eliminate subjectivity - whatever a singer's measurable capabilities, they may still be, or not be, "expressive," which is subjective. But if you have someone who can't sing on pitch or can't belt out a song that needs belting, or whatever, it's still fair to say they're limited in their singing abilities.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FilterFunk
one example is Jon Bon Jovi: he's the lead singer, he has the character, but Richie Sambora is a better singer, with better intonation and technique, and that's why he sings all the backing vocals even in ranges extremely difficult for a tenor.
however he's not the frontman, because he can't sing with the same attitude.
I'd argue that JBJ is a better singer for most sensible definitions of better in that case.

With casual listening to this song, it might seem as if Newman is just a bad singer, technically. But, after carefully listening to it about 20 times, I came to the conclusion that every tiny detail of his singing is intentional.
This is what most fail too understand, the ability to manipulate pitch variations is what makes a virtuoso.

Think you'll find Autotune has historically been used more for the artifacts than perfectly in tune performances.
Autotune is all over everything for the last 15+ years if you know what to listen for, it is just most obvious when used specifically for the artifiacting.

I was over reacting maybe but i really don't think perfection can be boring.
I strongly disagree.
The problem is in defining what perfection is. Elevator midi music is mathematically perfectly on pitch and perfectly in time, yet I don't think anyone regards it as better than the actual recording done by actual musicians that isn't perfectly on pitch and perfectly in time.

Being able to sing on pitch, for instance, can be measured, and a person is on it or they're not.
This may be the case but really isn't an accurate description. A virtuoso singer will deliberately song off the pitch to perform expressively and this is the hallmark that separates a virtuoso from someone merely competent. Why do you think none of the current autotune crowd are thought to be virtuosos while being perfectly on pitch all the time?



https://www.youtube.com/@wingsofpegasus does a lot of videos about this topic and seeing how far from "perfect" the pitch of some of the greats actually are may surprise you.
 
I'd argue that JBJ is a better singer for most sensible definitions of better in that case.

that's the point: if we talk about technique and intonation, Richie is a better singer.

if we talk about show/attitude, Jon is a better singer/performer. he's not out of tune, but less precise, a bit limited on range extension and he screamed so much in the early years that his voice was ruined for the years after, so much that he could not sing in the same keys and he's under medical control for his vocal cords since many years.
from 1984 to 1995, wow, he gave everything. the next albums are an example of how a voice can deteriorate, with a limited range and volume, changing the voice characteristics.

here in Italy we have a great singer/songwriter, Antonello Venditti, which is now 75 and still sings in the same keys of the 70's, with perfect intonation and a great attitude, filling stadiums all over the State.
how?
he wrote songs within his range, and even on the higher notes he managed to use a perfect technique, so at 75 he still sings in the same keys as when he was 20, still fulfilling stadiums.

I still listen to the first 10 years of Bon Jovi's discography, I still love his music even after he started to lose his voice (now he just writes bad songs, I couldn't stand his music since 2007 :D ), but it's a shame that a performer as he is deteriorated his voice so much.