Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1234 6> |
| Author | |||
rogerthat 
Prog Reviewer 
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
 Posted: July 27 2014 at 08:46 |
||
|
^^^ The thing is, the attributes Gerard mentioned are very broad and not specific, so it's not just some box to tick. Let's look at it this way: if a singer cannot write good lyrics, does not have a great voice, does not sing over a large range, lacks expression, has poor diction and also does not perform passionately, would he/she still be able to impress? Quite improbable, I would think. What works in the context of a specific song is rather different from what a singer needs to make a mark in his/her own right. Great folk songwriters wrote great lyrics, great soul singers had great technique, great punk vocalists were passionate.
|
|||
 |
|||
|
tamijo
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: January 06 2009 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 4287 |
Posted: July 27 2014 at 01:16 |
||
This
|
|||
|
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
|
|||
|
|||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 16594 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 13:03 |
||
I have a hard time considering "singers", and mandating to myself that they have to be compared to the scale of notes in order to be considered "singers". Going back as far as even Bertold Brecht and Kurt Weill, it was almost a form of "rap" in the sense that a lot of it was "spoken", and not sung, which I have always felt was a comment that not everyone was a singer, anyway!
Later in the 50's and 60's, there were a lot of theatrical companies experimenting with diction. A lot of this ended up in rock music, not intentionally I don't think, but it's hard to think that the Marlon Brando's screaming Stelllllllllaaaaaaa, or the James Dean attitudes did not enter rock music, because IT DID! MORE THAN EVER! AND, it's still alive in different clothing!
Rock music, more than any other discipline, showed the vocal abilities and prowess that opera never did, or could! It didn't have the imagination!!! But rock music DID! And later, some of the progressive things that we heard, involved an even more different vocal concept that did something that most music was not doing, and it became famous in its own right, and deservedly so. Edited by moshkito - July 26 2014 at 14:32 |
|||
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com |
|||
|
|||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 16594 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 12:12 |
||
Earlier in the week we reached 95 to 100 over here in Portland/Vancouver. Yeah ... it was HOT.
Now back to our regularly scheduled programming! On the front, there was a progressive ... Edited by moshkito - July 27 2014 at 09:41 |
|||
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com |
|||
|
|||
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 08:49 |
||
|
I think a lot of that is down to his unique diction. He did not try to sing in an artificially smooth way, he just went with his native accent. The way Gabriel sang was, even if flawed, very natural and that gave it its personal quality. Now, people make a whole checklist of hundreds of boxes to tick for a good singer. Not a knock on your thread by the way, I am really thinking of the kind of critique I often see in music competitions on TV. There is too much focus on specifics and in pushing for a certain kind of 'acceptable' sound rather than the overall impact and effectiveness of the performance. Individuality in a performer is sought to be discouraged and purged rather than encouraged and that is having a detrimental impact on the overall singing craft in pop and rock music. Another aspect is perhaps idol worship was not so pronounced in the Gabriel/Anderson era and they were more comfortable just being themselves. But today, aspiring singers want to hit THAT note on Neon Knights the way Dio did, they want to nail Halford's Victim of Changes scream, so on and so forth. And in trying to imitate their idols, they forget to bring forth their own personality in their singing. And if some of these aspirants go on to become singers in bands, the results shouldn't be very surprising.
Oh, sure, karaoke singers rule!
 I recall the old saying of fools rushing in where angels fear to tread. Often times, really bad singers who simply cannot sing at all are the boldest and most unhesitating in taking up opportunities to sing. Those of us who can sing half decent stuff but would not consider ourselves professionals are more reserved and critical of ourselves so we don't come forward unless pushed by friends. Anyhow, the point was only that singing in tune is not really some rocket science and there are lots and lots of people who can do that. In fact, there are people who can sing in tune but otherwise sing in such a crude and unmodulated way that listeners may still not consider them good singers. Edited by rogerthat - July 26 2014 at 08:52 |
|||
|
|||
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010 Location: Barcelona Spain Status: Offline Points: 5153 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 08:16 |
||
|
As for Gabriel, I think is Pop success had more to do with his business cleverness and good contacts (and perhaps a bit of luck) than his ability as a songwriter or singer, although if anything I would say that it was the fact that his voice is so personal which helped attract audiences. And although songs like Solsbury Hill or Biko were hits, he did not achieve real Pop success until So.
Maybe this is an element we have not specifically discussed so much in the thread, "uniqueness" and "personal" timbre and way of singing, rather than the more aesthetic or academical meaning of timbre beauty or singing technique. Gabriel is one of those singers who while not having a timbre of the type one would readily define as "beautiful" nor a technique one would readily define as "great", his singing is extremely personal, as made clear by the few clones he has such as The Watch Simone Rossetti or Citizen Cain's Cyrus, when we hear them we immediately say that they sound like Gabriel and like nobody else.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010 Location: Barcelona Spain Status: Offline Points: 5153 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 08:02 |
||
|
Well, having worked for Japanese for 25 years, for my despair I have had to spend quite some evenings and late nights at karaokes and I tell you, seeing the average quality of singing in karaokes you would not so quickly state that every human has the ability to sing (including myself of course, I hated being pushed to sing in the karaokes, most of the songs in the catalog were too unknown to me (to the surprise of my colleagues) and I had to end up singing stuff like Sinatra's My Way). However I did sing in our mates amateur band doing backing vocals and also lead vocals in the long periods we did not have a lead vocalist, and even if my timbre is s*t I did enjoy it and the guys said that I was not too bad, at least I sang in tune, something our lead vocalist mate did not always do
 (we were in it just to enjoy as friends and Prog lovers, never with the meaning of being "a band").
|
|||
|
|||
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Penal Colony Status: Offline Points: 11415 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 06:39 |
||
|
I have to admit that Peter Gabriel evinces more grudging respect than affection in this poster. I saw him live at the Glasgow Apollo in 1980 at the outset of his solo career and he was every bit as irritating and method school 'weird' as I had envisaged from the Genesis legacy. (A sixth former poet who raided his mom's wardrobe). He is however, clearly a very resourceful man who had the foresight to realise that Prog was dead in the water as early as 1974/75 (ish) and therefore bailed to poppier pastures like many of his commendably prescient contemporaries. From memory (yep, I can't be f*cked to look it up) he invested at least a quarter of a million pounds of his own money into bringing the WOMAD festival to reality. Now that is impressive testimony to someone who puts up where most shut up but lets take a judicial step back: is there a more wearingly spurious and irrelevant source of cultural output from any extant genre of foisted contemporary creativity than 'world music'? The likes of Fela Kuti et al are viable because their first world apologist journalists are too scared to call out bland ethnic fondant forgeries for what no Guardian/Wire reader should ever be witness. Gabriel (unwittingly and with the best motives) unfortunately bequeathed a whole heap of anointed dispiriting crap to the world.
Edited by ExittheLemming - July 26 2014 at 16:11 |
|||
|
|||
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 05:56 |
||
|
No problem!
That's pretty hot, by the way, hotter probably than Mumbai today.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator 
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 05:54 |
||
|
,,,which is where training and practice comes in.
[sorry Roger, the temperature in the room my PC is in has just hit 38 degrees, I'm going to have to answer your previous post later as I need to take a shower and put fresh clothes on]
|
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 05:49 |
||
|
^^^ I agree with that. There are indeed lots of good singers in the world and we just happen to be aware of the ones who are able to make it and attain some substantial level of popularity. There are so many people singing old songs for nostalgic listeners in auditoria across my city. Some of them are very, very talented and perhaps have only been unlucky or made bad decisions not to break through. But yes, singing on tune over a decent range say 1 and 1/2 octaves or such is no big deal. Almost anybody can do it and without even much preparation. What is tough is singing on tune even when the music is intricate and keeping it up over a 2 hour concert and having technique robust enough to do that day in day out without the voice going out.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 05:45 |
||
True in part, but it is a generalisation and plays to the stereotype, I try to avoid that where possible. If you are only referring to solo singers then the backing musicians are certainly chosen for their ability alone, Simon Cowell doesn't pick random musicians off the street with no regard for their ability to play - he wants musicians who can do the job and pays them handsomely for it. In Pop groups (does such a thing exist any more?) selection of the individual members is seldom done by any rigid selection process - just like Prog groups they are formed informally from people who know each other or are known to each other - it is a matter of happen-stance and gradual line-up changes that result in a cohesive musical ensemble of musicians.
I didn't put a number on it or even imply one and I the only time I used the word "great" it was to state that training [alone] will not make you a great singer. I believe there are lots of good singers in the world. The number of applicants to all those ubiquitous tv talent shows is evidence of that -- sure those programmes thrive on the voyeuristic appeal of showing the really bad ones alongside the select few who get selected, but the numbers that apply and the numbers that turn-up for the auditions is huge - all of them believe themselves to be good singers and most of them probably are - the key thing is all of them want to sing. If a band cannot find a good singer then perhaps they're just not looking hard enough. [pointless anecdote]
[/pointless anecdote]
|
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 05:21 |
||
|
I cannot really comment on the live shows because I have never seen him live. However, I do want to say that what is large and small is also relative rather than absolute so when I say his voice has a smaller presence, it is more in relation to other singers who can belt powerfully. I wouldn't say he could belt like Dio or Paul Rodgers, no.
As for immediately grabbing the listener's attention not being his style, ok, fine, but that also underlines the difference in approach between him and a good pop singer. Pop IS about instant catchiness, it is not supposed to take too long or too much effort for the listener to relate to the song. So if it is indeed not Gabriel's approach to grab the listener with his voice, it only bolsters my argument that his success had more to do with his songwriting skills. If Gabriel sang a popular old hit song like say Can't Take My Eyes Off You in the way that he sings on Genesis or his own solo tracks, I doubt there would be many takers for it. I have never heard that kind of bright, punchy singing from any of the celebrated prog frontmen of the 70s (not counting Gilmour there, he did have it and it helped Floyd cross over). Ian Anderson at times, perhaps and certainly Phil Collins which again is no surprise. Prog lovers are fond of arguing that pop singers or musicians lack the technical skills to handle the complexity of prog epics. By the same token, unless I hear it, I would be less inclined to conclude it as only a choice or preference and not also something to do with lacking ability in that direction. In short, yes, Gabriel can deliver hits by being as clever and intelligent as he likely is but he can't sing an absolutely mundane and banal Nothing's gonna change my love for you and sail through it on the strength of his voice. THAT is what labels look for in a pop singer because that makes their life easier...no risks involved in pushing boring love songs.
Edited by rogerthat - July 26 2014 at 05:34 |
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 05:07 |
||
I can't say that I agree with you about Gabriel but that is wholly a matter of preference, I don't believe his skill as a song-writer had that much bearing on his pop success - any more than his adroit choice of video (Sledghammer), subject matter (Biko) or singing partner (Don't Give Up) - the record buying public bought his singles and albums because they liked his singing - hit singles are bought for the way the singer sings the songs not for how the writer writes them. I'd also not describe his singing voice as nasal and I maybe too forgiving for the timbre of his head-voice when he does use the upper registers but that has always sounded throaty rather than nasally to me (and that will always sound weaker and more forced than trained singers no matter who the singer is, but as I recall he seldom uses it). Having seen him dozens of times over the past 37 years in venues both large and small I can attest his voice has a large enough presence too fill a stadium and that is more noticeable live than any studio recording. He's always had the vocal power to belt out a song to reach an audience and when he emotes there is sufficient presence in his voice to move you even when stood in a field in the pouring rain. Early in his solo career when he was playing small venues stripped of theatrics, costumes and trick lighting his voice alone was sufficient to lift and carry an audience.
Gabriel has never been about immediately grabbing your attention - he's too introverted a character for that and that's not his style. His songs are invariably about the build up, as if he is working up his own confidence from natural introversion to theatrical extroversion (hence the costumes in Genesis), and in doing that he brings the audience along with him. This is perfectly illustrated in live versions of Lay You Hands On Me - the audience roar when he stage-dives at the climax of that gradual build up still sends shivers down my spine when I hear it, that's what charisma sounds like. I didn't want to dwell on him too much for fear of being accused of sycophancy (thou' that in itself could be seen as an indicator of some charismatic quality), but there you go, I am an unapologetic fan boy.  |
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010 Location: Barcelona Spain Status: Offline Points: 5153 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 04:12 |
||
I admit my sentence "a good singer can easily shine on Pop" was certainly wrong, that's not really what I meant. I meant that the Pop world is more concerned with recruiting good vocalists than with recruiting good instrumentalists, while in Prog often the opposite is the case. Besides, your first sentence seems to imply that there are tens of millions of great singers in the world, and that I find a bit stretching. The fact that most humans have the ability to sing if they receive some training does not mean that every band can find a good singer around the corner.
|
|||
|
|||
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 03:43 |
||
|
Gabriel did well as a pop artist because he was such a good songwriter. On the other hand, INXS had barely anything original to offer so if at all they still succeeded, a large part of the credit has to go to Hutchence. Anyhow, the reason I don't consider Gabriel's timbre to be particularly great is it's too nasal and does not have a large presence. As I said earlier, this is more noticeable when you follow up a Gabriel-sung track with that sung by a singer with a powerful voice. And it's NOT because he is singing within himself, even at full tilt his voice somehow feels small. It also loses shape pretty early into his upper register, though that has more to do with range. He is artful in using these limitations in a way that appears to suit the music but limitations he does have.
I understand that charisma is not perhaps the right word but I am struggling to come up with an alternative term to describe what I have in mind. Could be aura, maybe, individuality, presence, etc. I don't know, just that some singers have the knack of grabbing a listener's attention right off the bat. I agree with you that in both pop and prog, diversity has gone down substantially over the last few years. It's partly that a lot of singers have learnt to sing well technically, where singers like Gabriel had a somewhat flawed approach. But what was human and endearing about a singer like Gabriel is lost in the process as singers are not balancing technical perfection or near perfection with great stylistic traits in diction or phrasing or riffs.
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 03:32 |
||
 isn't Peter Gabriel better known (in the public eye) as a Pop singer than as Prog singer? He's definitely had more UK top 10 hit singles than INXS. Timbre is a difficult quality because it is, as you say, subjective and is referred to using terminology that is related to emotive response to the perception of the frequency spectrum in its tonal quality, which is called "colour" but is describe by words such as "warm", "thin" or "shrill". Timbre can be measured empirically but it is a complex time-dependant multi-dimensional parameter that is difficult to use for any comparative judgement - it can be used (and is used) to assess similarity and difference but not good and bad. Timbre forms part of the overall tonal character of a singers voice along with formant and resonance - the timbre can change during the duration of a note and from note to note. Singers like Bowie and Gabriel can vary timbre considerably from song to song. In recent years the timbre of pop singers has become more homogenised (which is why many think all Pop singers sound the same - they don't sound the same, it's just the timbre is less varied from singer to singer), before there was far more variety in timbre. Prog is not immune from this homogenisation of timbre - there is less variety in timbre in some Prog subgenres, especially between modern bands. Charisma is not a term I would associate with the singing voice, it is a personality characteristic not a vocal one. A voice can be called a charismatic voice but that more often applies to speakers (ie actors) rather than singers - Christopher Lee has a charismatic voice but not when singing. Charisma is not a defining feature of a good singer even if more pop singers than prog singers have it. However, for a vocalist charisma is related to stage presence and that's something you've either got or you haven't - From seeing them live on stage I'd say that Fish has it and Hogarth hasn't though both can sing (and that is a purely subjective opinion, however I'll make no judgemental comparisons between their ability to sing or the quality of their voices). Prog has its charismatic front men and it has singers with a strong stage-presence but I admit they are few and far between and would possibly be those who have successful solo careers as well as group careers and are measured to some extent by their overall popularity. Damian Wilson has a superb voice, is a great character singer and has a most charming personality on and off stage - [I took my wife and daughter to a Threshold gig, they weren't fans and frankly he's not that good-looking, but they couldn't take their sodding eyes of him
] - he has stage-presence but I'd not say he was charismatic in the manner of .'Percy' Plant or (your choice not mine) Michael Hutchence. |
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 9869 |
Posted: July 26 2014 at 01:46 |
||
|
I largely agree with Gerard on the point that pop singers tend to better in terms of great timbre. I cannot prove what is better or worse with regard to something so subjective but (a) I can feel it when I am hearing the singers, especially Peter Gabriel followed by talented pop singers and (b) prog is not a genre that really emphasises the personality of singers. It may be more open to different and unconventional styles as compared to pop but a singer is not expected to stand out. It is often enough if he is pleasing enough and gets the job done. A pop singer is the front for a successful commercial enterprise and it is imperative that he/she should offer something distinct. Charisma, as it's called. I wouldn't say any of the well known prog frontmen like Gabriel, Andersons (both) or Hammill had voices as charismatic as say a Michael Hutchence. How much that kind of approach to delivering a pop hit or creating a pop star is relevant today is a different story. But to the extent that it is, it tends to emphasise great timbre much more than is the case in prog.
I also want to add that the situation is different in prog metal, where a lot of singers have great, wholesome and powerful voices and where they may not be so attractive is in using only a very non descript accent (Gabriel or Hammill compensated for a less attractive voice with great and distinct diction) and not doing particularly interesting things with their phrasing or variations.
Edited by rogerthat - July 26 2014 at 02:04 |
|||
|
|||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: July 25 2014 at 16:18 |
||
pft! It's not well written it's got a stupid sodding spelling error in it.  Wanna n'other homily? Don't stay obsessed with all that popularity nonsense, just do what the rest of us do: listen to the music and not concern ourselves with what other people are listening too.
|
|||
|
What?
|
|||
|
|||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Offline Points: 16594 |
Posted: July 25 2014 at 15:41 |
||
Very nice and well written.
We should just about make this an important part of the PA's understanding and definition of music for the masses, instead of top ten!
|
|||
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com |
|||
|
|||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1234 6> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Singers: voice, techniq, melodies, lyrics, passion
Topic Options
Finnforest wrote:
...well.. no.