Tom Ekeberg wrote:
>
> Seeing the sense in which Bob Dylan don't know how to sing shouldn't be too
> hard.
This is what I actually disagree with. Not being able to sing very well
and not knowing how to sing are two different things. I think Dylan made
amazingly effective use of a very indifferent vocal apparatus, thus I
think that he knows very well how to sing, he just doesn't have the
larynx to pull it off very well.
In fact, in my experience producing and engineering, the most
interesting performers are not the ones with the best pipes. They are
usually the ones with an odd voice that they were forced to deal with in
order to be effective. I would cite Townes, Willie, and Waylon as three
artists I have recorded who developed strategies for working around
whatever deficiencies they may have had, and in the process became very
interesting to the ear, much moreso than a so-called "good" singer. Most
"good" singers end up doing commercials or being backup chorus singers
because they are not very interesting to listen to.
The exceptions to this would be people like KD lang whose pipes are so
extraordinary (coupled with powerful charisma) that they are
mesmerizing. (We saw her at the Roy Orbison Tribute thing out in LA and
she stunned me with her power over the audience. Seeing her live made me
a believer.)
Another example of the previous point would be Elvis. Our daughter has
been having an Elvis sleepover party (she's 14 and she heard "Love Me
Tender on the radio and said "Mama, Elvis is HOT!"), playing his movies
continously for the past two days. I noticed after listening to him sing
for a few hours that he had a tendency to go sharp all the time. Not
violently so, just a shade sharp. I also noticed that he didn't have the
strongest voice in the world. However, he figured out strategies for
evading those problems and became a great singer.
--
Joe Gracey
President-For-Life, Jackalope Records
http://www.kimmierhodes.com
