[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Al TurHao wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I may be alone in here but... "Time" and specially "In My Defence", have superb vocals. Mind you that In my defence was a One-Take vocal, if you don't count the ad-libs.
[/QUOTE]
You´re not alone in here, and what i find interesting is the fact that people forgot that Freddie was singing "Time" for the musical. So, you hear Freddie singing the high notes the way he wanted you to hear!
When someone showed "Time" to Sir Laurence Olivier (if i´m not mistaken), he said something like: "this is a great actor". So if you read the lyrics of that song you´ll realise why he sings that way.
And all the theories of the trained voice to me means nothing!! What is a well trained vocalist?- someone who took lessons?- They all sound the same.
Freddie was natural!
Of course Freddie could save is voice for the tours. He could just stand still on stage and concentrate purelly on his voice!-got the point?
He gave it all, and what about the "TSMGO"?- The Barcelona album?
And what does Montserrat Caballe- she has worked with the best- says about Freddie´s voice?
Before you guys judge a performance, try to figure out the context of that performance.
On time he sounded like that, but in the same year on the song "It´s a hard life" he reaches the high note easilly!!(I did it for loooove...)- This is what Freddie´s all about.
He created different moods for different songs. That´s the diference between Freddie and the well trained singers- He never repeats himself, and that you can´t learn, you´re born with it!!
Take care
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Absolutely brilliant responses and replies, friends!
I entirely agree with most that has been said, especially about the way he delivered songs and how he sang them.
Out of pure curiosity, I think 'The Show Must Go On' is his best studio vocal and 'Somebody To Love' from Milton Keynes, 1982 was his best live vocal.
Don't get me wrong, there are so many studio songs and live performances to choose from but these two stand out for me.
I mean, 'My Fairy King', 'Spread Your Wings', 'Love Of My Life', 'It's Late', just to name a few more studio performances and all of Live Aid, 'Bohemian Rhapsody' at Newcastle and 'A Kind Of Magic' at Stockholm, 1986, to just name a few live performances!
I entirely agree with most that has been said, especially about the way he delivered songs and how he sang them.
Out of pure curiosity, I think 'The Show Must Go On' is his best studio vocal and 'Somebody To Love' from Milton Keynes, 1982 was his best live vocal.
Don't get me wrong, there are so many studio songs and live performances to choose from but these two stand out for me.
I mean, 'My Fairy King', 'Spread Your Wings', 'Love Of My Life', 'It's Late', just to name a few more studio performances and all of Live Aid, 'Bohemian Rhapsody' at Newcastle and 'A Kind Of Magic' at Stockholm, 1986, to just name a few live performances!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Bobby_brown wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Al TurHao wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I may be alone in here but... "Time" and specially "In My Defence", have superb vocals. Mind you that In my defence was a One-Take vocal, if you don't count the ad-libs.
[/QUOTE]
And all the theories of the trained voice to me means nothing!! What is a well trained vocalist?- someone who took lessons?- They all sound the same.
-------------snip-------------------------
Before you guys judge a performance, try to figure out the context of that performance.
-------------snip-------------------------
[/QUOTE]
For someone who doesn't believe in training, you sure dish out some lessons! All trained vocalists sound the same? To a deaf person, perhaps.
I may be alone in here but... "Time" and specially "In My Defence", have superb vocals. Mind you that In my defence was a One-Take vocal, if you don't count the ad-libs.
[/QUOTE]
And all the theories of the trained voice to me means nothing!! What is a well trained vocalist?- someone who took lessons?- They all sound the same.
-------------snip-------------------------
Before you guys judge a performance, try to figure out the context of that performance.
-------------snip-------------------------
[/QUOTE]
For someone who doesn't believe in training, you sure dish out some lessons! All trained vocalists sound the same? To a deaf person, perhaps.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Fireplace wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Bobby_brown wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Al TurHao wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I may be alone in here but... "Time" and specially "In My Defence", have superb vocals. Mind you that In my defence was a One-Take vocal, if you don't count the ad-libs.
[/QUOTE]
And all the theories of the trained voice to me means nothing!! What is a well trained vocalist?- someone who took lessons?- They all sound the same.
Exactly. Not all trained vocalists sound the same, or we would only have 4 vocalists in the whole world, one for each range. But you can tell when someone singing has been trained or not.
Personally, I'm glad that Freddie never got training....he was so naturally gifted that he would have sounded much different. The emotion that he puts into his songs is something that is amazing. It's just a shame to listen to some of the end shows from the tours, because I know how much his throat had to be killing him at the end of the show, and then having the nodules that could have ended his singing career.
He's still an amazing singer though, and an even better stage performer. The world of music lost a great persona when we lost him.
-------------snip-------------------------
Before you guys judge a performance, try to figure out the context of that performance.
-------------snip-------------------------
[/QUOTE]
For someone who doesn't believe in training, you sure dish out some lessons! All trained vocalists sound the same? To a deaf person, perhaps. [/QUOTE]
I may be alone in here but... "Time" and specially "In My Defence", have superb vocals. Mind you that In my defence was a One-Take vocal, if you don't count the ad-libs.
[/QUOTE]
And all the theories of the trained voice to me means nothing!! What is a well trained vocalist?- someone who took lessons?- They all sound the same.
Exactly. Not all trained vocalists sound the same, or we would only have 4 vocalists in the whole world, one for each range. But you can tell when someone singing has been trained or not.
Personally, I'm glad that Freddie never got training....he was so naturally gifted that he would have sounded much different. The emotion that he puts into his songs is something that is amazing. It's just a shame to listen to some of the end shows from the tours, because I know how much his throat had to be killing him at the end of the show, and then having the nodules that could have ended his singing career.
He's still an amazing singer though, and an even better stage performer. The world of music lost a great persona when we lost him.
-------------snip-------------------------
Before you guys judge a performance, try to figure out the context of that performance.
-------------snip-------------------------
[/QUOTE]
For someone who doesn't believe in training, you sure dish out some lessons! All trained vocalists sound the same? To a deaf person, perhaps. [/QUOTE]
1. Freddie smoked heavily, which toughens and damages the soft tissue of the vocal folds.
2. Freddie drank quite a bit, which dries the vocal folds - not a good thing, especially right before a performance.
3. Freddie did a lot of cocaine, which causes post-nasal drip into the throat and further damages the vocal folds when singing under the influence.
So, he pretty much, due to his lifestyle broke every rule in the singer's vocal care book, and it took it's toll over the years - he had a lot of issues with vocal nodes as well, a byproduct of self-abuse. Compare 1973 Freddie with 1986 Freddie, and you'll see the degradation. On the other end, compare his vocals in 1991, and you'll see that his quitting those bad habits helped his vocals rebound quite a bit, even though he was dying.
So, all said, if Freddie had taken care of his voice as, say, an opera singer would, he'd have never had that gravelly texture to his voice in the 80's.
But he was still the best, and that "strained" line could just as easily have been executed that way for dramatic effect. Listen to Barcelona and you'll see he could still smooth it out when he wanted to for the power notes.
2. Freddie drank quite a bit, which dries the vocal folds - not a good thing, especially right before a performance.
3. Freddie did a lot of cocaine, which causes post-nasal drip into the throat and further damages the vocal folds when singing under the influence.
So, he pretty much, due to his lifestyle broke every rule in the singer's vocal care book, and it took it's toll over the years - he had a lot of issues with vocal nodes as well, a byproduct of self-abuse. Compare 1973 Freddie with 1986 Freddie, and you'll see the degradation. On the other end, compare his vocals in 1991, and you'll see that his quitting those bad habits helped his vocals rebound quite a bit, even though he was dying.
So, all said, if Freddie had taken care of his voice as, say, an opera singer would, he'd have never had that gravelly texture to his voice in the 80's.
But he was still the best, and that "strained" line could just as easily have been executed that way for dramatic effect. Listen to Barcelona and you'll see he could still smooth it out when he wanted to for the power notes.
from what i've learnd freddie WAS a good singer
however
it seems he did everything possible to fuck up his larynx** (**also known as the voice box, the home of the vocal cords/folds)
first of all he was a smoker! all air (includeing smoke) has to go through the larynx to get to the lungs. When and if smoke goes through the larynx (or more spicificly the vocal cords they can dry out and then get cracks.
in order to relise the full extent of the damage this acculay causes you must first under stand how the vocal cords work
the vocal cords/folds work by vibrating together
i.e. for a lower note they vibrate slower as for a higher note well... the higher the note the more VPS (vibrations per second)
the problem these cracks (caused by smoking) present is if one of them works itself out to the side of the vocal cord then the two cords can't close properly and there's a hole in your sound production
wich is........bad
the second thing he did that is a litle less obviously dangerous
like you mentiond in the starting of the artical freddie had moments where he pushed sound out (using mainly the throught, instead of using the lungs and diaphram proplery to produce sound) this is not a smart thing to do becuse the final result can be vocal nodles (wich he had!)
what are nodles?
nodles are.... well.... to put it simplely as i can nodles are bumps that form on the vocal cords/folds and get in the way of the vibrations needed for sound production
well that's all i have to say
oh here's a picture of the vocal cords:
http://english.pravda.ru/img/idb/vocal-cords200.jpg
however
it seems he did everything possible to fuck up his larynx** (**also known as the voice box, the home of the vocal cords/folds)
first of all he was a smoker! all air (includeing smoke) has to go through the larynx to get to the lungs. When and if smoke goes through the larynx (or more spicificly the vocal cords they can dry out and then get cracks.
in order to relise the full extent of the damage this acculay causes you must first under stand how the vocal cords work
the vocal cords/folds work by vibrating together
i.e. for a lower note they vibrate slower as for a higher note well... the higher the note the more VPS (vibrations per second)
the problem these cracks (caused by smoking) present is if one of them works itself out to the side of the vocal cord then the two cords can't close properly and there's a hole in your sound production
wich is........bad
the second thing he did that is a litle less obviously dangerous
like you mentiond in the starting of the artical freddie had moments where he pushed sound out (using mainly the throught, instead of using the lungs and diaphram proplery to produce sound) this is not a smart thing to do becuse the final result can be vocal nodles (wich he had!)
what are nodles?
nodles are.... well.... to put it simplely as i can nodles are bumps that form on the vocal cords/folds and get in the way of the vibrations needed for sound production
well that's all i have to say
oh here's a picture of the vocal cords:
http://english.pravda.ru/img/idb/vocal-cords200.jpg
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]BRYCE ON FIRE wrote: [/QUOTENAME]from what i've learnd freddie WAS a good singer
however
it seems he did everything possible to fuck up his larynx** (**also known as the voice box, the home of the vocal cords/folds)
first of all he was a smoker! all air (includeing smoke) has to go through the larynx to get to the lungs. When and if smoke goes through the larynx (or more spicificly the vocal cords) they can dry out and then get cracks.
in order to relise the full extent of the damage this acculay causes you must first under stand how the vocal cords work
the vocal cords/folds work by vibrating together
i.e. for a lower note they vibrate slower as for a higher note well... the higher the note the more VPS (vibrations per second)
the problem these cracks (caused by smoking) present is if one of them works itself out to the side of the vocal cord then the two cords can't close properly and there's a hole in your sound production
wich is........bad
the second thing he did that is a litle less obviously dangerous
like you mentiond in the starting of the artical freddie had moments where he pushed sound out (using mainly the throught, instead of using the lungs and diaphram proplery to produce sound) this is not a smart thing to do becuse the final result can be vocal nodles (wich he had!)
what are nodles?
nodles are.... well.... to put it simplely as i can nodles are bumps that form on the vocal cords/folds and get in the way of the vibrations needed for sound production
well that's all i have to say
oh here's a picture of the vocal cords:
http://english.pravda.ru/img/idb/vocal-cords200.jpg
[/QUOTE]
however
it seems he did everything possible to fuck up his larynx** (**also known as the voice box, the home of the vocal cords/folds)
first of all he was a smoker! all air (includeing smoke) has to go through the larynx to get to the lungs. When and if smoke goes through the larynx (or more spicificly the vocal cords) they can dry out and then get cracks.
in order to relise the full extent of the damage this acculay causes you must first under stand how the vocal cords work
the vocal cords/folds work by vibrating together
i.e. for a lower note they vibrate slower as for a higher note well... the higher the note the more VPS (vibrations per second)
the problem these cracks (caused by smoking) present is if one of them works itself out to the side of the vocal cord then the two cords can't close properly and there's a hole in your sound production
wich is........bad
the second thing he did that is a litle less obviously dangerous
like you mentiond in the starting of the artical freddie had moments where he pushed sound out (using mainly the throught, instead of using the lungs and diaphram proplery to produce sound) this is not a smart thing to do becuse the final result can be vocal nodles (wich he had!)
what are nodles?
nodles are.... well.... to put it simplely as i can nodles are bumps that form on the vocal cords/folds and get in the way of the vibrations needed for sound production
well that's all i have to say
oh here's a picture of the vocal cords:
http://english.pravda.ru/img/idb/vocal-cords200.jpg
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Fireplace wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Bobby_brown wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Al TurHao wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I may be alone in here but... "Time" and specially "In My Defence", have superb vocals. Mind you that In my defence was a One-Take vocal, if you don't count the ad-libs.
[/QUOTE]
And all the theories of the trained voice to me means nothing!! What is a well trained vocalist?- someone who took lessons?- They all sound the same.
-------------snip-------------------------
Before you guys judge a performance, try to figure out the context of that performance.
-------------snip-------------------------
[/QUOTE]
For someone who doesn't believe in training, you sure dish out some lessons! All trained vocalists sound the same? To a deaf person, perhaps. [/QUOTE]
I never said i don´t believe in training!
I was talking about the tenors. With few exceptions they all sound the same, and that´s not even ther natural voices!
If someone thinks it´s the best for him/her to have training, then do it. But to say that Freddie produced some beautifull sounds, but not on a technical level i really don´t understand the meaning of this. Who created such rules?- I mean, are there any rules, other than your ears and your heart?
My ears tell me that he sings with his heart, and he reaches my heart. That is Freddie Mercury, he reached everybodys hearts, that´s why you see those messages on his site, both men and wemen saying: "We love you".
Who cares if he didn´t follow any rules about how to sing?
Mind you that all the greatest singers (or, more famous, with few exceptions!), and guitarplayers never got any lessons about how to do it. It all came from the heart!
Take care
I may be alone in here but... "Time" and specially "In My Defence", have superb vocals. Mind you that In my defence was a One-Take vocal, if you don't count the ad-libs.
[/QUOTE]
And all the theories of the trained voice to me means nothing!! What is a well trained vocalist?- someone who took lessons?- They all sound the same.
-------------snip-------------------------
Before you guys judge a performance, try to figure out the context of that performance.
-------------snip-------------------------
[/QUOTE]
For someone who doesn't believe in training, you sure dish out some lessons! All trained vocalists sound the same? To a deaf person, perhaps. [/QUOTE]
I never said i don´t believe in training!
I was talking about the tenors. With few exceptions they all sound the same, and that´s not even ther natural voices!
If someone thinks it´s the best for him/her to have training, then do it. But to say that Freddie produced some beautifull sounds, but not on a technical level i really don´t understand the meaning of this. Who created such rules?- I mean, are there any rules, other than your ears and your heart?
My ears tell me that he sings with his heart, and he reaches my heart. That is Freddie Mercury, he reached everybodys hearts, that´s why you see those messages on his site, both men and wemen saying: "We love you".
Who cares if he didn´t follow any rules about how to sing?
Mind you that all the greatest singers (or, more famous, with few exceptions!), and guitarplayers never got any lessons about how to do it. It all came from the heart!
Take care
Elvis is overrated.
OK. Then so is music in general.
um... didn't freddie say once that he wanted to develop a raspy effect on his voice so he started smoking? it worked, but i guess the smoking went overboard. i agree with some of you that at some points his voice sounded strained. i'm no vocals expert, but i can hear the difference. :)
Damn good replies in here...
Freddie is my favorite singer hands down...there's alot of great singers out there, but none that deliver home the songs like Freddie did.
And Elvis?? Please...he wass an innovator with his style of music, nothing more. Had some good songs, but his singing was just...ehh...
Freddie did have alot of problems with his voice live in the mid-eighties...if any of you have the Birmingham show from 1984, that's a prime example. Also there was one or two shows in Japan '85 where his voice was just shot. Smoking didn't help, but touring extensively and being in different countries with different climates will do that to you too. In the studio, the guy was just the eighth wonder of the world, how he could get such notes out of him.
Now speaking of the mid-80's shows/time era regarding his voice...when he had his voice in full force, there was nobody in the world that could have held a candle to that guy, at least as far as rock singers were concerned...maybe Steve Perry from Journey, but that's a whole different subject for another day. Listen to The Last Stand in Japan (5/15/85), and his voice is just unstoppable...Live Aid is a prime example too!!
Freddie is my favorite singer hands down...there's alot of great singers out there, but none that deliver home the songs like Freddie did.
And Elvis?? Please...he wass an innovator with his style of music, nothing more. Had some good songs, but his singing was just...ehh...
Freddie did have alot of problems with his voice live in the mid-eighties...if any of you have the Birmingham show from 1984, that's a prime example. Also there was one or two shows in Japan '85 where his voice was just shot. Smoking didn't help, but touring extensively and being in different countries with different climates will do that to you too. In the studio, the guy was just the eighth wonder of the world, how he could get such notes out of him.
Now speaking of the mid-80's shows/time era regarding his voice...when he had his voice in full force, there was nobody in the world that could have held a candle to that guy, at least as far as rock singers were concerned...maybe Steve Perry from Journey, but that's a whole different subject for another day. Listen to The Last Stand in Japan (5/15/85), and his voice is just unstoppable...Live Aid is a prime example too!!
Well you can't really compare Elvis and Freddie's singing, totally different styles of music and presentation.
Freddie did push his voice very hard and at times it showed. However, Elvis seemed to sing the same type of songs all the time that suited his voice very well, he never really pushed his voice to the extremes that Freddie did.
That being said Elvis was great, but in my eyes Freddie was greater. My opinion only, no offence meant to Elvis fans.
Freddie did push his voice very hard and at times it showed. However, Elvis seemed to sing the same type of songs all the time that suited his voice very well, he never really pushed his voice to the extremes that Freddie did.
That being said Elvis was great, but in my eyes Freddie was greater. My opinion only, no offence meant to Elvis fans.
Has anyone seen the interview with Freddie done during the US Hot Space tour in which he says something like...
"I get told off for smoking, but in the early days I used to try and look after my voice on tour and it would go after 7 or 8 shows. Now I smoke, drink, Im up all night, and that all seems to do the trick".
Not exactly the correct words but along those lines.
"I get told off for smoking, but in the early days I used to try and look after my voice on tour and it would go after 7 or 8 shows. Now I smoke, drink, Im up all night, and that all seems to do the trick".
Not exactly the correct words but along those lines.
> And Elvis?? Please...he wass an innovator with his style of music, nothing more. Had some good songs, but his singing was just...ehh...
The songs weren't his...
The songs weren't his...