Why is Celing Dion "good" and Bob Dylan is "bad"?

Dave, do I have the record for you. I have a stack of old After Dark magazines (a "men's lifestyle" mag from 70's–80's that really was a gay mag but never used the word gay) that had an ad for a dreadful looking LP by a girl named Lena Zavaroni (sp?). Months later I actually found the record in a street sale and bought it for a laugh... ye gods, what an abomination. She's 10, she belts out ballads, she's perfectly awful. I gave it to my freind Doug who collects kitsch LPs, and he was thrilled.

I also can't believe we both just mentioned After Dark magazine on separate threads, Sean! Norma Mclain Stoop! Alright!

I like Lena Zavaroni. She invented the whole Kinderwhore look. Her and Christina Amphlett from Divinils.

i actually really dislike classical and opera singing, a pure and unjustified prejudice i am not v.proud of, but not big-voice soul- diva stuff, and i *love* the R&B robo- technicians

cue dan perry surely

There are people out there who do great character things with their voices. Kurt Cobain was definitely one, and others include Mark Almond, Perry Farrell, Anthony Kiedis, Maynard Keenan (although I suspect he's got some vocal training), Robert Smith, Macy Gray (in her upper register ONLY), Janis Joplin, Grace Slick, Bjork, Thom Yorke...

Things would probably be clearer if the terms "good" and "bad" were replaced with "consistent/reliable" and "inconsistent/unreliable". No matter what, you know exactly what Celine Dion is going to sound like at a given performance. Bob Dylan could be at one of many levels of croaky incomprehensibility and the voice presented on his recent recordings bears almost no resemblance to the voice presented on his earlier recordings.

Willie Nelson has been singing out of tune for over forty years, and he still makes it sound easy and heartbreakingly beautiful. I was misled on one record into imagining that he was in tune, but only because he was duetting with Dylan at the time.

I think only the people who can't sing did this, actually.

Bob Dylan is a better singer than Celine Dion,

That is LUDICROUS. Bob Dylan has better songs than Celine Dion about 99% of the time, but there is no metric you can name where Bob Dylan is a better singer. Celine is stronger, more consistent, more in tune, and these days more passionate about her (admittedly horrible and cloying) material. Bob Dylan is a great songwriter, but he's not a singer and has never been one.

Lou Reed is a better guitarist than Jimmy Page,

Honestly, their styles are so different that it would never occur to me to compare the two.

Jerry Lee Lewis plays better keyboards than Keith Emerson.

Not only would it never have occurred to me to compare the two, but I don't believe that Jerry Lee Lewis is technically inferior to Steve Emmerson.

Don't get sidetracked by technicalities, feel the fire and personality and energy and soul.

You know, technical prowess is JUST AS IMPORTANT as "soul".

Willie Nelson has been singing out of tune for over forty years, and he still makes it sound easy and heartbreakingly beautiful.

????? I've never heard Willie Nelson sing out of tune. EVER.

I know this only reveals my ignorance of contemporary Broadway performers, but:

BALKI?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

I had a very similar reaction! He was recently in a production of "Putting It Together" with Carol Burnett, one of the brothers from "Titans", this woman who sang like W.C. Fields, and an older guy whose name is on the tip of my tongue. It was on pay-per-view maybe six months ago and a friend of mine taped it. I kept expecting him to bust into a dance of joy every time he stepped on stage.

1. The material matters.

2. It ain't.

Could Dylan sing "I Think We're Alone Now" like Tommy James or Tiffany could?

Then again, listen to Tori's covers album and you get the good & bad of vocal/material convergence there too.

Would the Marshall Mathers LP have half the bite if the delivery sounded like q-tip?

If you put the greatest opera singer ever against the greatest country-blues singer ever, most Europeans and North Americans would think that the opera singer had the better voice, even if they actually preferred the country-blues singer. But that's because the country-blues singer's technique doesn't count as technique.

(i think we should remove some of this subjectivity and move to a more scieitific measure here: viz ratio of piano notes not hit squarely to all notes sung x 100 = index of bluesiness)

(did you see what i did there?)

Frank: These arguments absolutely exist in the opera world. There are also those who say that the Callas cult has led to an overabundance of thin-voiced, "dramatic" sopranos and the near-loss of much bigger soprano voices in non-Wagnerian opera (Rosa Ponselle- style). The pseudo-Callases sing on pitch, but try to imitate that (unpleasant, to me) reedy timbre.

Hmm. Admittedly, I haven't seen that many live Celine Dion performances, but she's never had those problems in the ones I've seen. In fact, she came perilously close to stealing the first "Divas Live!" show in VH-1, and even though I hate the fucking Titanic song, I've never heard her sing it off. (Then again, it doesn't go that high, but what pop songs not recorded by Sarah McLachlan do?)

I don't think ego is a bad reason to do such a thing (we don't insist that our pop stars be humble, do we?), but it probably has roots in gospel technique, I'm assuming from the African American tradition (Gregorian Chant has melisma too, but I doubt for the same reasons or to the same effect). I'd guess that it relates to calling forth the spirit or being possessed by the spirit (which can be the opposite of ego, since if the spirit is inhabiting you then it gets the credit, not you, and in some religious contexts the idea of "possession" is taken literally). I hope that someone who knows more than I about gospel and African religion will elaborate.

melisma: where is the one-note-per-syllable rule anyway?

It always mystifies me how so many people can think not only that Mick Hucknall can actually sing, but is actually a great singer. He's the ultimate example of a voice that sounds like fingernails down a blackboard.

I like Lena Zavaroni. She invented the whole Kinderwhore look.

-- Arthur, Tuesday, February 26, 2002 8:00 PM (5 years ago) Bookmark Link

teenpop thread before its time???

no, kinderwhore would be grunge

Amateurist, why I are you comparing me to Geir and criticizing me in one paragraph and then agreeing with me about the deterioration of Dylan's voice in the next?

is there a deleted post here?

i'm trying to find what amateurist is talking about but i can't find it

There is no deleted post; amateurist just isn't making very much sense.

my own answer to this is that loud, strong, clear singing has been favored for centuries; the introduction of the microphone happened what, 100 years ago? that's not very much time for an entirely new style (whispered, croaked, growled, etc) to gain hegemony. even after people had been singing into microphones for a few decades they still had to compete above the din of radio static or record crackles so somebody like chuck berry, who had a voice like a horn section even if it wasn't very trained, had a kind of clarity that could pierce through all of it; that clarity's not technically necessary at all any more

(in popular music)

anyway this thread is legendary for Custos' assertion that there is a tribe of Michael Bolton fanatics called "Boltheads"

and mark s's "floor / ceiling" pun

Dan you wrote: " but there is no metric you can name where Bob Dylan is a better singer. Celine is stronger, more consistent, more in tune, and these days more passionate about her (admittedly horrible and cloying) material. Bob Dylan is a great songwriter, but he's not a singer and has never been one."

This implies that Dylan, even before his voice began to deteriorate significantly, was "not a singer." Kogan, above, makes the case that Dylan was actually a very fine singer. And I'm troubled that you are able to conflate certain standards of "good singing" with, well, good singing, or singing period.

I'm sorry my earlier post seemed incoherent to some. Maybe I should have quoted the posts I was referencing.

Kogan makes Dylan sound like a blues singer on par with Odetta. He is not and never has been. His techinique is not solid enough to give consistent performances. That, to me, is what makes him a "bad" singer; I don't like him as a singer because I pretty much fundamentally disagree with every aesthetic aspect of his vocal production. I hate his nasal tone, I hate his approximation of pitch and the way he doesn't commit to the notes he's singing so you can't tell if he's singing an intentional blue note or wandering off of the pitch... there's absolutely nothing about what he does as a singer that I find appealing.

that seems a very different matter from asserting that he's "not a singer." as i write above: " it also makes me wonder if the sort of classical training dan has, necessarily does damage to many people's sensibilities in giving them false confidence in their ability to discern good from bad."

btw have you seen concert footage from the 60s? i'm struck by how consistently dynamic and inventive is singing is.

amst, Dan Perry GETS PAID to sing, he knows whereof he speaks.

tracer otm

There are few things I want to see less that Dylan's concert footage from the 60s. I don't really care that other people love him; I don't. It has nothing to do with any "training" I've received; I have always disliked him and have made fun of his singing from when I first heard him in grade school outside of giggling at "Everybody must get stoned!"

Taking one hyperbolic-for-rhetorical-effect statement and using it as the foundation for a thesis that is batshit insane ("studying music renders people incapable of evaluating it accurately") is maybe not a rhetorical stance you should invest any more time in.

I'm glad Dan is gracious enough to admit that Dylan is a good songwriter, given the fact that Dylan has committed a larceny or two over of the course of his songwriting career. But I personally prefer his singing to his songwriting. I would much rather hear Dylan sing a Celine Dion song than the other way around. (Except for comedy-related purposes, of course...)

Whether somebody like Dan thinks Dylan is a good singer or not is a moot point- the real problem is when some guy claims to be the number one Dylan fan and THEY apologize for his lousy singing.

amst, Dan Perry GETS PAID to sing, he knows whereof he speaks.

not sure if this is sincere or...droll. but, i would trust dan a bit more if he were discussing janet baker and ian bostridge than bob dylan. i don't have kogan's acumen so i'm not going to convince anyone that dylan is a fabulous singer. i just worry that dan's formal education has led him to look for certain qualities and not others, and to put more faith in the objectivity of his criteria than others might....

I've been paid to sing and I think his voice is shite!!! omg quandary!

do dylan-haters also hate howlin' wolf on the basis that he doesn't sound like ella fitzgerald?

martin’s list of either-ors up thread is too easy, though. i like the velvets more than zeppelin, but jimmy page has qualities that lou reed doesn’t.

I understand what amateurist is getting at here, he's wondering if Dan's education in and valuation of certain "metrics" is hindering his ability to enjoy the sound of someone's voice in an unmediated way. There's also the idea that the metrics themselves are arbitrary. Dan, are you willing to say that someone's voice is pleasurable to listen to even if there is not any metric by which that person could be considered a "good" singer?

Of course he does -- he likes Robert Smith, Dave Gahan, and Neil Tennnant!

Haha, true.

I was going to say!

just the phrasing of this thread question is so funny

I would much rather hear Dylan sing a Celine Dion song than the other way around.

I prefer hearing Roger McGuinn singing Dylan's songs.

As for Celine Dion, I prefer not to hear neither her voice nor her songs at all. Although "My Heart Goes On" sounds better with Sissel Kyrkjebø singing.

The trouble with Dylan is that, for years, he was denigrated as not being able to sing - "Love his songs, can't stand his voice" - when he obviously could sing, that eventually there was a counter-reaction... now his singing is hideously overrated by his more ridiculous supporters, once again proving that the worst thing about Bob Dylan is Bob Dylan fans

No mention of phrasing, rhythm, intonation? Using speech-like patterns while singing?

All of which are part of technique, and which Dylan is good at and, to my UNTRAINED ears, Dion and Houston are BAD at.

Dan (admittedly FIVE years ago) seems to be implying that control of pitch and timbre are all that "good singing" amount to.

Obv you can have all of it (Aretha, Missy Elliott ...)

There is also technique in all sorts of off-the-wall or extreme singing, even if it's damaging them nodules.

In fact this is an aesthetic problem in for some people - constantly striving for an untutored, raw, unmediated "natural" form of expression, but finding that whatever you do, you find "specific methods or approaches when working with materials in creating works of art", to grab a random definition of technique off the internet, in doing it.

Bolton has a good *voice*, but is a terrible singer. Dylan has a terrible voice but is an amazing *singer*.

i think you've got this the wrong way round, except that dylan hasn't either. but he is wailing/coughing/sneezing some beautiful words, and that's where any worth he has comes into it.

The problem with hearing Dylan, and indeed Lou Reed, another "bad" singer with really great phrasing, sing his old stuff is his constant need to mess around with the phrasing so as not to repeat himself (I guess). When it was so good in the original performances, this is painful, and was one of the many, many reasons why seeing the reformed Velvets was so terrible.

Simpler than that, Lou Reed can't sing anymore, he actually could at one time

Well, messing around with the timing on "Venus in Furs" was exhibit a, the lack of messing on "Guess I'm falling in love" as he hadn't sung it since the mid-velvet days.

Not being able to hit more than three notes doesn't help

OK, but one of the reasons he can't sing anymore, or rather, one of the ways in which he can't sing any more, is rhythmically.

And I'm not sure I buy it, because he's great on Songs for Drella which was only three years before I saw the Velvets at Glastonbury, when he was awful.

He's good on "Drella" on the ones John Cale sings

Haha

Moving on: so, one of the reasons I, on the whole, don't like melisma, is that it messes with the way the singer adresses the rhythm of the words and syllables. There's all this extra guff (which can admittedly be spectacular) getting in the way of that.

This is more to do with the specific pleasures I get out of hearing a singer sing than anything to do with technique or the original question.

No mention of phrasing, rhythm, intonation? Using speech-like patterns while singing?

Mentioning those things tends to make most people's eyes roll back in their heads and summarily dismiss everything else you are going to say because they think you're trying to flex some magical music education on them.

Haha

Since I have no musical education at all, I'm sure that won't be the case here!

I'm sure there are whole threads about melisma, but the search isn't showing any up.

I'd like to know more about the alleged gospel roots of that style, because you don't hear it so much in 60s gospel-trained soul singers. Or maybe you do, and I don't know my stuff, but you don't in Aretha Franklin's 60's hits for example.

I think it's pretty obvious that rhythm is a key part of singing technique. And the words I used are pretty general ones that anyone without a musical education would be able to understand.

I don't like Dylan OR Dion. Just thought I'd say.

to most people without training (include me) dylan sounds like he sings through his nose, and may not even know all of the words or notes. and half the notes he does know, he can't reach.

i don't know the technical terms for this, sorry.

This is getting silly, but anyway, singing through your nose is not necessarily bad singing. Look at this "how to" guide!

http://www.traditionalmusic.co.uk/how%20to%20sing/how_to_sing6-7.htm

I don't like Dylan OR Dion.
Agreed. They should both be airbrushed off the cover of Sgt. Pepper.

along with john lennon

Now that I think about it, there is a really great quote from Dylan on the Dion boxed set.

Bob Dylan: If you want to hear a great singer, listen to Dion.

This guy has the full text of those liner notes.

Look under the rubric "Cover Versions"

Bassplaying ruins listening music in general!