|
|
Post by cassie on Jan 3, 2015 1:20:32 GMT -5
Good, better, best. It comes down to definitions and criteria. It also includes personal experience, style and preference. Unless we can agree on how we measure and determine excellence, we cannot agree on the evaluation.
Someone may say that John Doe is the best quarterback because he has the most completed passes per game. Someone else could say John Smith is the best because he has the highest percentage of completed passes per game. Different measurements. Doe throws an average of 100 passes per game and completes 50 of them. His percentage is 50%. Smith throws only 20 passes per game, but he completes 18 of them, for a 90% success rate. Then you have Joe Jones, who has only a 40% completion rate, but it is because the receivers suck, and they miss or drop passes that a competent player would catch. Or what about Peter Peterson who has an average completion rate but also can scramble for running yardage, and is known for his brilliant play calls? And we haven't talked about those fans who like Gordon Gorgeous for his strikingly good looks in the underwear commercials he stars in, or Tim Tango for having appeared on Dancing with the Stars. You get the picture.
Adam currently has an incredibly high awareness level for a pop singer, and an amazingly high approval level, thanks to recent gigs. I am not interested in what some stranger half a world away with no known musical or vocal training has to say about how he compares to Freddie. I have my own ears. My own eyes. My own training. My own experience. I trust ME more than I trust some anonymous internet poster.
I do believe that one possible reason for the criticism we occasionally read is because Adam is so damned good. There hasn't been a singer who has appeared with Queen who could match Freddie for range. Adam's range, at least live, surpasses Freddie's recorded live performances. Adam's voice also sounds like he has more power; something Freddie was known for.
People who have formal voice training and a classical music background can give you plenty of criteria for what makes a "great" singer, and Adam, having so much classical training and singing experience, demonstrates those criteria to a greater degree than Freddie. That's just a fact. However, if a listener does not agree with those criteria for excellence, then Freddie may be the "better" singer. Apples and Oranges.
Then you have the fact that Adam has the theatrical background and stage presence that few pop/rock singers have. Freddie has pretty much cornered the market on that for many years, and Adam is perhaps the first to demonstrate that theatricality, humor and campness like Freddie did. He is not imitating Freddie. He is being himself. But, he is a compelling front man.
Everyone's perception of beauty and sex appeal may be slightly different, but to many, Adam is better looking, more classically beautiful than Freddie. Adam certainly oozes sensuality and sexual power on stage.
Finally, Brian and Roger love Adam. They praise him in every interview. They attribute his talent and personality for the reason they are on tour again. They say their current performances are equal to, if not better than their performances in years past. To some Freddie fans, that sounds a lot like disloyalty or disrespect for Freddie.
I get it that some folks are going to see Adam as a threat to Freddie's legacy. That doesn't mean I agree with their assessment. I also get it that some folks like voices with different techniques, ranges and styles from Adam. And with different stage personas. And different fashion sense. S'okay. There are plenty of artists around for everyone to find a favorite. I think Adam has and will have enough fans to make records, appearances and sing concerts for years to come. That's where my focus is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jablea on Jan 3, 2015 2:04:16 GMT -5
Cassie, your post about all the styles that Queen does and that Adam can easily do them all made me want to ask for some comparisons of the styles of the various songs, what does Adam have to do to adjust, and why besides just vocal range somebody like Paul Rodgers couldn't do them all. But before I got to there I thought, hey I don't think I've listened to many Q&PR songs. So this one came up in my search and I was all Simon Cowell on it. WTHWT? I mean everything seems off and not just on PR's part although he sounds both strained and out of harmony. Is this problem all because of vocal range or is it a style issue too?
|
|
|
|
Post by cassie on Jan 3, 2015 9:38:14 GMT -5
Cassie, thank you for your comments on Adam's performance. It always makes me see things differently, when I look through the lens you create from your own mastery. I am curious about something in Adam's voice and wondered if you had a view. There are times his voice seems to break out of the "ordinary scale" and become "electric and soaring". It seems to channel something beyond human. Do you see that too? And what does it take for a human being to do THAT? IF I knew how to do that, I would be singing at the Met. If I knew how to explain it, I would be earning big bucks as a vocal coach. The sound Adam produces within his body just takes my breath away sometimes. It is like he has a dial that he turns up and an additional resonance chamber comes on line. How does he produce so much sound? All I can tell you is that he is able to build harmonic overtones in a very wide range of highly compatible frequencies. Any instrument when it produces a note, produces the basic frequency that determines the pitch. For example, an A4 that an orchestra uses to tune to is at 440 Hz, or 440 oscillations per second. (A5 is 880. A3 is 220, and so forth) But the instrument also produces harmonics: other "notes" that are heard but not as strongly as the basic frequency. You can often distinguish at least one secondary harmonic or "note" when a metal bell rings. Instruments that produce harmonics that are mathematical multiples of the basic frequency sound pure and clear. Instruments (or voices) that produce harmonics that are not mathematically related to the basic frequency sound harsh and unpleasant. Instruments that produce strong harmonics in high frequencies only sound brittle and sharp. Instruments or voices that produce a balance of mathematical harmonics in a wide variety of ranges sound rich and warm. Adam is capable of producing a crazy amount of mathematically compatible harmonics low to high. It results in his voice having that full, pure, ringing, yet warm sound. It's what we mean when we say there is a lot of resonance and richness in his tone. He has learned how to tap into the resonant spaces in his body. (Which is why I am totally confused when someone says his voice is thin. It is, in fact, just the opposite. At least to my ears. What someone else hears, what nerve cells in their ears are stimulated, who knows.) ETA: I am not for a moment saying that Adam studied the mathematical frequencies of notes and their harmonics. Heaven forbid he would have to master that. With his difficulty with math, he would never have developed a singing voice. I am talking about the physics of sound. Practically speaking, you don't have to be able to add 2 + 2 in order to learn how to produce a resonant tone, thank goodness. |
|
|
|
Post by cassie on Jan 3, 2015 9:54:03 GMT -5
Cassie, your post about all the styles that Queen does and that Adam can easily do them all made me want to ask for some comparisons of the styles of the various songs, what does Adam have to do to adjust, and why besides just vocal range somebody like Paul Rodgers couldn't do them all. But before I got to there I thought, hey I don't think I've listened to many Q&PR songs. So this one came up in my search and I was all Simon Cowell on it. WTHWT? I mean everything seems off and not just on PR's part although he sounds both strained and out of harmony. Is this problem all because of vocal range or is it a style issue too? Wow! That's fascinating. Same group, same song, same key, very different interpretation. This one is, first of all, not a duet between Paul and Roger. They never interact. It's just the two of them singing, sometimes in unison (sorta), sometimes in harmony. There are changes in the melody line because Paul is not a high tenor like Adam, and doesn't have a strong falsetto either, so he has to sing a lower melody. Brian also takes some of the higher melody. During the end of the bridge, no one sings the final high "Why?". It is carried by the keyboards. Roger's voice these days is not very strong, but when Adam is singing with him, it is not as obvious. Paul has a strong voice in the lower register, but is weak on top. He is a baritone after all. He also has a gritty, rough voice with little ring or resonance. Roger has a dull sound to his voice. So with the two, there are no pure clear notes. It sounds very different from the QAL version, to be sure. But the lyrics are gritty, and some folks might prefer this rougher, grittier version. |
|
|
|
Post by cassie on Jan 3, 2015 10:29:24 GMT -5
Part two: Why can Adam do all the songs in the Queen catalog and Paul cannot, or did not? What is it besides range? Well, range is a biggie. When Queen performed with Paul, they lowered the key of many of the songs to fit Paul's lower range. It works with some songs, but with others, it just doesn't SOUND right with the lower pitch. It is missing the brightness and lift when it is pitched down. I imagine Brian at least is very sensitive to the "feel" of different keys, and he would probably choose not to perform certain songs in a lowered key. Some of the songs also have a range that is too broad for many pop and rock singers. It is too high in parts. But, if you lower the key, then other parts are too low. So, you scratch those songs off the possible play list. Adam, with a USABLE, DEPENDABLE 2.5 octave range can perform any song in the catalog. (as far as I know. I am not a Queen expert, and don't know all the songs they ever recorded or performed, so don't argue that point with me.) (Also, yes, Adam's total range is greater than 2.5 octaves. I have heard it. But, in concert, I have rarely heard him sing at the very upper and lower ends of the range. So in a tour, he is not going to choose or arrange songs that would be too taxing, or would be "if-y" on some days.) Paul's voice, as I said, has a lot of grit and gravel in it. That sounds okay on some of Queen's rock songs, but seems incompatible with some of the grandiose, operatic numbers, or some of the power ballads. I don't think it is suited very well for the light, airy songs, either. Unlike Adam, Paul cannot change the tone or style of his voice (as far as I can hear from what I have listened to. Again, not a Paul Rodgers fan, so..), so if he struggles to hit the notes or sustain them, cross out those songs. Paul is also sort of the opposite of "camp." He certainly isn't theatrical. He's a rough and tumble rocker. No way is he singing Killer Queen. I don't think he did Somebody to Love, either. He certainly could not do those glorious high notes. And the melody is also quite challenging to sing at tempo and on pitch. Paul did sing The Show Must Go On. What do you think of his version? He sings it with power, certainly. It sounds like a rough blues song. He looks a little like a body builder hefting and twirling the mic stand. I miss how Adam's voice soars when he sings, "I can fly!" And I sorely miss the theatrics of Adam's version. There is pain, angst, sadness, a touch of hopelessness, yet the spirit of courage and triumph in Adam's version. I find it missing from Paul's. I think both versions are powerful. But Adam's is also beautiful in its rendering of the soaring, almost operatic melody. And, Adam, unlike Paul, touches my heart. www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOshR7YEucc |
|
maya
Member
Posts: 4,014
Location:
|
Post by maya on Jan 3, 2015 11:41:27 GMT -5
Cassie.... what do you think of Idina Menzel's explanation for her "pitch challenged" (per twitterverse) performance of her song on NYE? Not criticizing her live performance at all but I'm just curious about her statement of hitting only 75% of her musical repertoire's notes in theater performances as a whole is to her "a success" presentation of the songs. She, like AFL, is a perfectionist and I just can't imagine Adam hitting 25% bum notes of his overall performance per tour....but then Adam is in a different category  Idina Menzel@idinamenzel This is something I said in an interview a few months ago.  Her NYE performance: www.dailymotion.com/video/x2dt2uy_hd-idina-menzel-let-it-go-rockin-eve-15_music#from=embediframe
|
|
|
|
Post by cassie on Jan 3, 2015 12:26:25 GMT -5
I just heard that bum note today. Yeah, it was waaay off. Just goes to show you that the highest trained, professionals can mess up too.
I don't know that I would agree with 75% correct. That is a "C" in academics. I would expect a top rated pro to be more in the 90-95% ratio. Adam is more like at the .95% or maybe even .095% when it comes to glaring errors like this live. (It is why I was so surprised at the AMAs. Not the sexy choreography, but the bum notes.)
I do agree with her point. There is so much more to a performance than being perfectly on pitch. As someone else on the forum recently said, music is about feeling an emotional response. We like those things that move us deeply. I haven't seen her perform in a musical, but I gather she is very good.
I also agree that you can be a perfectionist, but you have to be able to move on from a mistake, not dwell on it if you want to perform in a live setting. The more you perseverate about a flub, the worse the rest of the performance is apt to be, as your focus is stolen from the present.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2015 14:43:51 GMT -5
I thought Adam's New Year SMGO was his best interpretation of that song. There was only one mistake that I heard him make in the entire nights performance and it wasn't a pitch problem. He came in a second to late in the last 'SHOW...!' www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSe5MUVwSzYI was so disappointed when SMGO was dropped from the NA setlist. I wonder if it was because he kept flubbing the lyrics. He kept finding doorways and windows where there weren't any.  I wanted to hear it no matter what he made the lyrics. |
|
|
|
Post by Jablea on Jan 10, 2015 22:17:01 GMT -5
Interesting descriptions. AdamLambertVzla @glambertvzla 43m43 minutes ago Adam Lambert Voice Technology Analysis "How amazing about his voice ？" por www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBHr0s_oGUk … |
|
|
|
Post by rihannsu on Jan 11, 2015 12:12:31 GMT -5
I just watched the full American Voices program and it was really great. I highly recommend it to all the vocal junkies here. You can watch it online. video.kpbs.org/video/2365399272/ETA: One part I found interesting was in one of the coaching sessions (don't remember the name) the "master" was demonstrating how to control the song or rather control the accompaniment. I think this was a gospel singer. She demonstrated by having the pianist get louder as she was singing and when it reached the point that she was being drowned out she just put her hand up and said "Hallelujah". Everybody cracked up. She said you can never go wrong with a praise. I think she meant that in more ways than one. |
|
