# Lennon Was A Poor Vocalist



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I really have little patience for all these rock and roll singers with little talent. They tend to be fantastic composers, and perform from the heart, but they lack the pipes that mainstream Artists have, who lack good songwriters...(I'm secretly making a point here, )

Lennon was, imo, a case of the above. Paul is the only great singer in The Beatles, unless he's killing his voice out on Helter Skelter.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

You should hear Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau sing Dylan's _Like a Rolling Stone_. Breathtaking!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I prefer Lennon over McCartney. Songs like A Day In The Life, Strawberry Fields, In My Life, She's So Heavy wouldn't be the same without John Lennon. Paul was okay for the lighter, pure pop songs.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

I can’t go along with the criticism. There was often a raw passion and honesty in John Lennon‘s vocals that I greatly admired. Listen to the down-to-earth rawness of Norwegian Woods... and his voice would sometimes break or crack with feeling. He was also a good counter-balance to Paul McCartney’s more benign vocals. Those who weren’t alive when he was on the planet will probably never understand his importance to that generation. And his death was a tragedy because of his wit, openness, and idealism. A tremendous loss. He was the hardest, the edgiest rocker in the group.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Larkenfield said:


> I can't go along with the criticism. There was often a raw passion and honesty in John Lennon's vocals that I greatly admired. Listen to the down-to-earth rawness of Norwegian Woods... and his voice would sometimes break or crack with feeling. He was also a good counter-balance to Paul McCartney's more benign vocals. Those who weren't alive when he was on the planet will probably never understand his importance to that generation. And his death was a tragedy because of his wit, openness, and idealism. A tremendous loss. He was the hardest, the edgiest rocker in the group.


I do understand, I just prefer technically proficient vocalists.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Lennon was not a great singer (and certainly not a great man) but he had a talent for putting a song over. Look at the sales!


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

John was a proficient vocalist, since he signs in tune, unlike Bob Dylan. But it is the interpretation that make them both great singers. I heard Paul himself accepted John as the better singer. He made Oh Darling! to compete with John.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Beware, this is known to raise tears


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

While not having the greatest vocal chops, John did possess a distinctive vocal that had its own rock and roll "soul" to it. His voice also had a certain sense of urgency to it, giving a lot of Beatles music another point of tension. I'm guessing that the threadstarter is not an early Beatles fan because that's where John's voice is best featured.

Besides, no one, and I mean no one, has ever done a better vocal on _Twist and Shout_. The vocal IS the song.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Room2201974 said:


> While not having the greatest vocal chops, John did possess a distinctive vocal that had its own rock and roll "soul" to it. His voice also had a certain sense of urgency to it, giving a lot of Beatles music another point of tension. I'm guessing that the threadstarter is not an early Beatles fan because that's where John's voice is best featured.
> 
> Besides, no one, and I mean no one, has ever done a better vocal on _Twist and Shout_. The vocal IS the song.


I know all their albums pretty well. I agree, he sounded better in the pop years.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

Lennon's voice was perfectly suited for the rock genre. Nothing more, nothing less.

I never found anything interesting in his solo music.


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

There are some songs in which Lennon's voice is so distinctively unique that despite the vast myriad of covers in the last 50+ years, it's hard to name one vocal performance that's better than the original. The aforementioned _Twist and Shout_, _Help_, _You've Got To Hide Your Love Away_, _When I Get Home_, _Come Together_, _Yer Blues_ are just a few examples.

A "poor vocalist"?????? That's a heavy lift. Ringo is a poor vocalist! Robbie Robertson is a poor vocalist! Leonard Cohen is a poor vocalist! Leo Kottke is a poor vocalist! And none of them could sing _Yes It Is_!!!!!!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Room2201974 said:


> Besides, no one, and I mean no one, has ever done a better vocal on _Twist and Shout_. The vocal IS the song.


I do believe that the Isley Brothers still have the edge in sheer mania and hyperenthusiasm. I have fond memories of working overtime late into the night getting a publication ready for press and having the tinny old AM radio on the shelf in the office levitating as the Isleys shouted and screamed out that immortal song at maximum volume. John and the Beatles were good, but the brothers were better. Still a great song today!


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

Strange Magic said:


> I do believe that the Isley Brothers still have the edge in sheer mania and hyperenthusiasm. I have fond memories of working overtime late into the night getting a publication ready for press and having the tinny old AM radio on the shelf in the office levitating as the Isleys shouted and screamed out that immortal song at maximum volume. John and the Beatles were good, but the brothers were better. Still a great song today!


No one edges James Brown in sheer mania and hyper-enthusiasm.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Well, I actually wish Lennon had played harmonica on more songs but apparently they gave up on that.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

philoctetes said:


> Well, I actually wish Lennon had played harmonica on more songs but apparently they gave up on that.


I'd rather hear Yoko 'sing'.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

What is the definition of a poor vocalist? It's really irrelevant in pop/rock music. I like Leo Kottke's singing. Nobody else sounds like him. I love the way he sings Louise. That recording has always moved me. 

The really bad singers I've heard are some famous instrumentalists who have chosen to sing on their records. Larry Coryell, Tony Williams, Al Di Meola, Joe Satriani. I have no problem with Lennon, and I don't mind Ringo either. He exudes a certain amount of charm that I find appealing. Same with Randy Newman, who is not a very good singer but he's got something to say.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Red Terror said:


> I'd rather hear Yoko 'sing'.


This is the kind of response I expected. Feels good to be right, thank you.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I liked Lennon's voice - it had a vinegary quality which especially enhanced much of his more personal material.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

starthrower said:


> What is the definition of a poor vocalist? It's really irrelevant in pop/rock music. I like Leo Kottke's singing. Nobody else sounds like him. I love the way he sings Louise. That recording has always moved me.
> 
> The really bad singers I've heard are some famous instrumentalists who have chosen to sing on their records. Larry Coryell, Tony Williams, Al Di Meola, Joe Satriani. I have no problem with Lennon, and I don't mind Ringo either. He exudes a certain amount of charm that I find appealing. Same with Randy Newman, who is not a very good singer but he's got something to say.


Jackson Browne is a bad singer. But he's also a great songwriter whose songs and voice are inseparable. We're talking about so-called singer-songwriters here, and the list of croakers with great songs is endless... Muddy Waters... Joni MItchell... Greg Brown... if you don't like em, you should just avoid folk music entirely...

It's kinda funny, the more skills a musician has, the more they open their skills up to criticism. There really is no definition, singing is just an extension of speech and poetry, and anything goes in the wide world of expression. Whether the listener approves is quite subjective as with all text and speech.

Which makes me wonder if the nature of musical disagreement is related to the political kind in some subconscious way. Anybody see the story this week about the guy who shot his roommate over music?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Joni Mitchell is a great vocalist. Jackson Browne I never cared for. He sounds rather generic to my ears.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

starthrower said:


> Joni Mitchell is a great vocalist. Jackson Browne I never cared for. He sounds rather generic to my ears.


Yet he can move people on a massive scale, with that fragile but sure quality that Lennon has, and his lyrics often hit an emotional bulls-eye. If you hear him live it's obvious.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Phil loves classical said:


> John was a proficient vocalist,* since he signs in tune, unlike Bob Dylan.* But it is the interpretation that make them both great singers. I heard Paul himself accepted John as the better singer. He made Oh Darling! to compete with John.


Dylan's singing out of tune was part of the act and part of what made him great. It fit the songs and made them real.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

philoctetes said:


> It's kinda funny, the more skills a musician has, the more they open their skills up to criticism. There really is no definition, singing is just an extension of speech and poetry, and anything goes in the wide world of expression. Whether the listener approves is quite subjective as with all text and speech.


I tend to listen to vocalists that can accompany themselves with sharp instrumental skills. So I like Bruce Cockburn, Richard Thompson, Joni Mitchell, etc... Bob Dylan, Neil Young and the like are harder for me to really dig into despite the fact that the songs are good to great.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Roy Harper is another favorite. And Bert Jansch, although not really a great singer, he's got that sound that draws people in.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Dylan does not sing out of tune. You may not like his timbre but he does not miss the notes. If your main love is "classical" singing then you're really missing the point of non-classically trained voices.

Btw, in response to the OP. John was not a poor vocalist.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Barbebleu said:


> Btw, in response to the OP. John was not a poor vocalist.


True. He was worth millions! But seriously, he possessed a rich, warm vocal style that appealed to many.


----------



## Guest (Dec 21, 2018)

So is Tom Waits a poor vocalist?


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

Victor Redseal said:


> So is Tom Waits a poor vocalist?


I don't know if he's a poor vocalist, but I'm pretty sure that Tom Waits for no man!


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

philoctetes said:


> Well, I actually wish Lennon had played harmonica on more songs but apparently they gave up on that.


If only Dylan had had the same wisdom.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Victor Redseal said:


> So is Tom Waits a poor vocalist?


No. Tom Waits is not a poor vocalist.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Lennon was by no means a poor vocalist. He was a rich vocalist.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

Barbebleu said:


> No. Tom Waits is not a poor vocalist.


Tom Waits just apes Howlin' Wolf.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> Tom Waits just apes Howlin' Wolf.


That's a cheap shot. He doesn't really sound like Howlin' Wolf, and he's not a straight blues man. Although his earlier music is blues influenced, he's a creative artist and songwriter not trying to emulate Howlin' Wolf.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Should I throw up my hands in despair or just throw up?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

philoctetes said:


> Should I throw up my hands in despair or just throw up?


Whatever floats yer boat. If anybody carried the banner of Wolf it was Captain Beefheart, not Waits.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

...............


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

How about Satchmo? I'll bet some would think he is a poor vocalist, but he has been called one of the best singers, in Jazz no less, and not in some cheap pop music.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Phil loves classical said:


> How about Satchmo? I'll bet some would think he is a poor vocalist, but he has been called one of the best singers, in Jazz no less, and not in some cheap pop music.


Satchmo invented jazz vocal improv or scat singing. The gravely timbre of his voice is besides the point. His phrasing, timing, creativity and humanity are why he is immortal. Not to mention he was the first great jazz trumpet virtuoso to connect with the public at large. The squares finally caught on with Hello Dolly, but he was already a legend for 35 years by that time.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

It sounds to me that Tom Waits apes Tom Waits just like John Lennon aped John Lennon. Both have unique voices suited for the unique songs they wrote. Fortunately, neither of them ever tried to be a good vocalist and sing opera, nor was the good vocalist Pavarotti a Beatle. Lennon was a total musician who not only sang but played guitar, piano, harmonica, and was one of the greatest songwriters and lyricists of all time, not only the melody but the words. 

The Beatles album "1" is a compilation of all Beatles songs that made it to Number 1 in either the UK or the USA, a total of 27 No.1 hits with Lennon being the primary driving force behind that amazingly successful and popular group, and I hear his vocals with Paul McCartney as spot on in pitch, feeling, and harmony, not to mention his solo work that could be sensitive as well as hard. He was a good enough vocalist to end up becoming a cultural icon for what he accomplished and stood for. Did I mention he was a genius? Oh, yes.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Satch was good enough to sing with Ella... and make her more listenable for me. I had one date with a gal in SF who kept insisting that Ella was better than any opera singer, of which she knew nothing... one date and one date only.

It goes on and on,,, the dumb comparisons... the binary logic... why why why? I howl at the moon. I know, it's just pseudo-intellectual reflex, but doesn't anybody ever stop themselves?

I'm pretty sure that the people who criticize folk singers have no idea how difficult it is to sing "off pitch" and yet become a legend who can inspire deep contemplation or a social movement, win a Nobel prize or create controversy among people who are too young to remember them. They must think it's just luck.

I call your Tom Waits and raise you one Neil Young.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I don't make comparisons in my mind when listening to someone unless the musician really has no personal voice and is merely a copycat. Opera never enters my mind listening to Ella Fitzgerald. And I don't think of Howlin' Wolf unless I'm listening to him.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Again, doesn't sing off-pitch. I get that you're not a Dylan fan but give it a rest please regards intonation. Have a listen to Lance Ryan if you want to hear ropey "classically trained" singing. Even Pavarotti had a tendency, when pushing, to sing slightly sharp. And don't get me started on ..........

Have a cool Yule and a prosperous new year.:lol:


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Good singing is more than an ability to sing in tune. You need to convey emotion too and there are a truckload of singers out there who fail on that ground alone.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

"Opera never enters my mind listening to Ella Fitzgerald"

I guess you never have dates with Ella fans...

"And I don't think of Howlin' Wolf unless I'm listening to him."

So you're listening to him as you type about him? You hear a lot of music in one day...

"The squares finally caught on with Hello Dolly"

That would be my mother, Mr Hip. 

So, the question remains can anybody post about this topic without taking collateral damage?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Relax, man. It's only an internet forum.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

And this is just another discussion in the forum. Do you like what I'm wearing?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Is that Ella listening to Tom Waits? I want one of those Philoctetes coins! I have a friend that might have one.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

I have yet to hear the Marvels with Lucinda Williams. I'm actually afraid to play it. Her first album was terrific but she is now a Bad Larynx on a Gravel Road and I can't get over that Frisell and Lloyd would team up with her. I may dare give it a try over the holiday...

There are no coins available, but I'll trade you call options on them for your CDs.

Gonna watch some NFL now... my xmas wish is that frogs will awake in the night and sing Schnittke's Concerto Grosso #2


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

I can't understand a word he's saying.  But still crazy about his songs and presence after all these years. He'll probably still be trying to sing when he's in his coffin.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I'll just leave this here.


----------



## YTS (Oct 22, 2017)

John had a unique chimey voice.


----------



## brahms4 (May 8, 2017)

John Lennon`s chum Harry Nilsson had what I would consider a great pop music voice.THE worse voice of a lead singer that I have ever heard would be Jim Dandy of Black Oak Arkansas back in the 70s.He was ugly and didn`t play an instrument to boot!


----------



## BalalaikaBoy (Sep 25, 2014)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I really have little patience for all these rock and roll singers with little talent. They tend to be fantastic composers, and perform from the heart, but they lack the pipes that mainstream Artists have, who lack good songwriters...(I'm secretly making a point here, )
> 
> Lennon was, imo, a case of the above. Paul is the only great singer in The Beatles, unless he's killing his voice out on Helter Skelter.


I think The Beatles were just poor all around.


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent (Feb 28, 2008)

Dylan had his moments. I don't much care for his style of the last 30 years, but I don't think he was a bad singer. He might not have had the nicest voice, but it had a quality that I think suited the songs. Then some time in the late 70s it's like he blew it out, and it sounded more gravelly and nasally.

I think this was kind of the end of his best era, in my opinion.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

starthrower said:


> That's a cheap shot. He doesn't really sound like Howlin' Wolf, and he's not a straight blues man. Although his earlier music is blues influenced, he's a creative artist and songwriter not trying to emulate Howlin' Wolf.


A cheap shot? Sure, but he still sounds like an impersonator to me. Wolf and Beefheart did it better, Waits is just light fare for those who don't like the real stuff. His whole 'eccentric old man' persona is ham-fisted and tiresome.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Regarding Bob Dylan: Bob is a phenomenon; his fecundity as a songwriter almost defies rational commentary, and his voice throughout its "evolution" is always--by definition--the authoritive vehicle for the song. The best way to continue to appreciate Dylan beyond _Blood on the Tracks_ is to just listen to that post-_Tracks_ output--so many good songs.....

"Bad" voices: Some more candidates are Billy Corgan and J. Mascis--horrible voices! But does it matter? Not at all. Not one bit.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> His whole 'eccentric old man' persona is ham-fisted and tiresome.


Maybe so, but I don't think it has anything to do with Howlin' Wolf.


----------



## Count Vlad (Dec 24, 2018)

Lennon is no Pavarotti and Pavarotti was no Lennon. But they both liked panzerotti and filled their pipes full.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Count Vlad said:


> Lennon is no Pavarotti and Pavarotti was no Lennon. But they both liked panzerotti and filled their pipes full.


The truth is, if you love it, it's great!


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

But from a technical and scholarly perspective, Lennon was a poor singer.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Captainnumber36 said:


> But from a technical and scholarly perspective, Lennon was a poor singer.


Have you heard classically schooled singers rape pop/rock standards? Pop/rock puts totally different demands on the voices. To judge singers like Lennon "from a technical and scholarly perspective" is nonsensical.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Captainnumber36 said:


> But from a technical and scholarly perspective, Lennon was a poor singer.


It's rock n roll, who cares about scholarly critiques? The scholarly approach has already killed creative jazz to a large extent. All these young cats graduating with their music degrees that have nothing to say musically. What did Miles do? He quit Julliard and learned on the bandstand from Dizzy and Bird.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

brahms4 said:


> John Lennon`s chum Harry Nilsson had what I would consider a great pop music voice.THE worse voice of a lead singer that I have ever heard would be Jim Dandy of Black Oak Arkansas back in the 70s.He was ugly _and didn`t play an instrument to boot!_


I beg to differ...


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

starthrower said:


> Maybe so, but I don't think it has anything to do with Howlin' Wolf.


Excise Howlin' Wolf, then. My secondary point still stands.


----------



## brahms4 (May 8, 2017)

elgars ghost said:


> I beg to differ...


If he could just find his shirt he could really put that old washboard to good use!


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

Captainnumber36 said:


> But from a technical and scholarly perspective, Lennon was a poor singer.


I can't see the relevance of this. I mean you could say the same thing about most rock/pop stars! I'll extend this to also include pop music going back to vaudeville including the Great American Songbook!

From a technical and scholarly perspective, Bing Crosby was a poor singer! So was Frank Freaking Sinatra. (Hey, where is Frank anyway? No activity since 12/17.)

Methinks you doth protest too much!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> Excise Howlin' Wolf, then. My secondary point still stands.


As your opinion, yes.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

starthrower said:


> As your opinion, yes.


You don't say, Captain Obvious? That's what most online forums are for.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> You don't say, Captain Obvious? That's what most online forums are for.


You like being dick, don't you?


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

starthrower said:


> You like being dick, don't you?


Haven't had the pleasure. He must be an admirable fellow.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Merry Christmas, Vlad. I'll see you later.


----------



## Count Vlad (Dec 24, 2018)

Captainnumber36 said:


> The truth is, if you love it, it's great!


The truth is John stole Pavarotti 's pipes and boy could he do Nessa Dorma and Paul was so jealous that O Darling couldn't cut it. And Pav could only do Twist and Shout to the disappointment of the classical set.


----------



## Count Vlad (Dec 24, 2018)

Count Vlad said:


> The truth is John stole Pavarotti 's pipes and boy could he do Nessa Dorma and Paul was so jealous that O Darling couldn't cut it. And Pav could only do Twist and Shout to the disappointment of the classical set.


But they got together over some panzerotti and made up... They came together... back then... over tea and pans.


----------



## Count Vlad (Dec 24, 2018)

Merry Christmas to you too!


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

A most appropriate song to go with the postings in this thread:


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Room2201974 said:


> A most appropriate song to go with the postings in this thread:


Sounds like he knows how to sing. And he was a nicer guy than Vlad The Impaler.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

starthrower said:


> Sounds like he knows how to sing. And he was a nicer guy than Vlad The Impaler.


Surely nicer than our resident Sun Ra, too.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> Surely nicer than our resident Sun Ra, too.


 I was speaking of the historical Vlad, now lets drop this foolishness.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

starthrower said:


> I was speaking of the historical Vlad, now lets drop this foolishness.


A coincidence. Imagine that.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> A coincidence. Imagine that.


At least I hope you haven't impaled any of your neighbors.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Since we've posted about the historical Vlad the Impaler, here's a fun tale about Vlad. Legend has it that a small delegation of foreign emissaries appeared at his court, seeking an audience to convey to him some message from their ruler. When told that they must remove their hats while in his presence, they refused, saying that the tenets of their religion forbade them from complying--the hats would remain on. So Vlad had them seized and bound, and then had their hats nailed to their heads--he said, "to anchor them more firmly in their faith." What a guy!


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

Strange Magic said:


> Since we've posted about the historical Vlad the Impaler, here's a fun tale about Vlad. Legend has it that a small delegation of foreign emissaries appeared at his court, seeking an audience to convey to him some message from their ruler. When told that they must remove their hats while in his presence, they refused, saying that the tenets of their religion forbade them from complying--the hats would remain on. So Vlad had them seized and bound, and then had their hats nailed to their heads--he said, "to anchor them more firmly in their faith." What a guy!


Such humor! Everyone must have had a good laugh about it.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I read somewhere that as boys Vlad and his brother were kidnapped and sodomized. So in eternal vengeance, Vlad loved to impale thousands by having stakes pounded through their rectums. His sadistic behavior can be traced back to child abuse.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Continuing the thread drift, impaling one's enemies, prisoners, etc. was standard fare in the Balkans at the time. In 1453, during the successful siege of Constantinople by Ottoman Sultan Mehmet II, Mehmet several times had captured defenders impaled upon long stakes which were then upended to vertical with their unhappy victims atop, forming a grotesque palisade. The painter Goya also shows us examples of impaling during the guerilla warfare stages of the Napoleonic French invasion and occupation of Spain.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Room2201974 said:


> A most appropriate song to go with the postings in this thread:


Loved this performance! Great vocal and lyrics. The planet was much better with him on it.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

I impaled this Canadian goose for trespassing. However, we subsequently made peace and I pardoned his life. We had a good laugh about it too!


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> I impaled this Canadian goose for trespassing. However, we subsequently made peace and I pardoned his life. We had a good laugh about it too!


Excellent presentation. Matched only by the consumption of, one likes to presume.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

starthrower said:


> I read somewhere that as boys Vlad and his brother were kidnapped and sodomized. So in eternal vengeance, Vlad loved to impale thousands by having stakes pounded through their rectums. His sadistic behavior can be traced back to child abuse.


Interesting. It leads one to ponder the origins of Ra's ridiculous, ham-fisted behavior. Hopefully it had nothing to do with 'poundings' and 'rectums' -- against his will, of course.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

elgars ghost said:


> Excellent presentation. Matched only by the consumption of, one likes to presume.


Yes, I subscribe to the 'brutalist' aesthetic.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> Interesting. It leads one to ponder the origins of Ra's ridiculous, ham-fisted behavior.


Yeah, creating all that great music was just ridiculous!


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

starthrower said:


> Yeah, creating all that great music was just ridiculous!


No mention of music in my post, fella.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Lennon's voice was what it was. He sang with all his heart and he knew how to sing the songs he wrote and songs he didn't write. He articulated all his attitude and emotions superbly well. 

He could also belt out songs like twist and shout that nobody else could without lacerating their vocal chords.

So dont tell me that the singer of one of the great songs of the 20thC - Imagine - was a poor vocalist.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

stomanek said:


> Lennon's voice was what it was. He sang with all his heart and he knew how to sing the songs he wrote and songs he didn't write. He articulated all his attitude and emotions superbly well.
> 
> He could also belt out songs like twist and shout that nobody else could without lacerating their vocal chords.
> 
> So dont tell me that the singer of one of the great songs of the 20thC - Imagine - was a poor vocalist.


Couldn't agree more
Comparing pop/rock singers with classically trained singers seems like comparing F1 cars with a Mini, both have 4 wheels and 
an engine but are totally different beasts


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda (Jul 12, 2017)

I have to disagree with this sentiment to an extent. What lennon lacked in range or technicality, he made up for in expressiveness.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

I remember well the day Lennon died - its not often I lament the early passing of a pop star, excepting the human tragedy of course - but Lennon at 40, for the pop world - was like Mozart or Schubert dying young. the album he did before he died sounded like a tribute to Yoko - but I'm quite sure having got that out of his system - he would have gone on to do more amazing stuff.


----------



## Rach Man (Aug 2, 2016)

IMHO, John Lennon had one of the most beautiful plain voices that I have heard. Understand that I mean this as a major compliment. His voice does not seem to be extraordinary; his voice does not seem to be that spectacular, but it is.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

The situation in Popular Music, and moreso in that part of Popular Music that is generally called Rock, is that if we like the song package: song plus singer, we like the voice of the singer in that context. We may hate that same voice if we do not know who it is, or if it just doesn't seem to work in some other song. I noted Billy Corgan and J. Mascis as having horrible voices, yet they work well enough in their oeuvre, though doubtless others might sound better. Classical vocal music offers far less room for variation.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Rach Man said:


> IMHO, John Lennon had one of the most beautiful plain voices that I have heard. Understand that I mean this as a major compliment. His voice does not seem to be extraordinary; his voice does not seem to be that spectacular, but it is.


This is a pretty good description of his voice I think, for me in a similar way I enjoy Roger Waters voice.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I think Lennon should have belted out more of the Beatles later rockier material rather than McCartney - _Sgt. Pepper_ title track and reprise, _Helter-Skelter_, _Oh Darling_...


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

elgars ghost said:


> I think Lennon should have belted out more of the Beatles later rockier material rather than McCartney - _Sgt. Pepper_ title track and reprise, _Helter-Skelter_, _Oh Darling_...


But that would be going against the well established pattern of whoever wrote the song is the one who sang it. There are a few minor exceptions like Paul singing the bridge in _A Hard Days Night_ because Lennon couldn't hit the high notes. But other than that I'm not sure that John would have been happy singing Paul's silly love songs.

BTW, this guy (who has one of the best voices in rock) and this song in particular has always reminded me of John singing:


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Room2201974 said:


> _But that would be going against the well established pattern of whoever wrote the song is the one who sang it._


True - it was just a thought. I once read that Lennon thought he could have done a better job on _Oh, Darling_.


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

elgars ghost said:


> True - it was just a thought. I once read that Lennon thought he could have done a better job on _Oh, Darling_.


Yeah, I think you're right. It would have grittier that's for sure! As I posted earlier in this thread, Lennon's voice had a plaintive appeal that lent tension to their songs. He would have ripped through _Oh, Darling_ and shredded his vocal cords like _Twist and Shout_.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Here's Lennon at his best, making a guest appearance on the Bonzo's LMUABF.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Now HERE is a REAL SINGER: Tom Jones!


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Yes, he's a natural - but I still wish he hadn't have churned out all that MOR/cabaret guff so early in his career.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Would _Norwegian Wood_ or _For the_ _Benefit of Mr Kite _sound better with a 'better' vocalist? Lennon always had George Martin double-track his voice, because he knew his limitations.

I agree with the post a page back opining that what he lacked in technicality, he made up for with expressiveness.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I can't put Lennon's voice on some kind of "level playing field" to compare him with others and judge him as "good or bad;" for me, his voice represents his "being," and that "being" was unique and special. It's instantly recognizable as Lennon.

In the past, his voice would never have been questioned or compared. It's only now, in this age of the "internet ego" empowerment that this could happen. It's _heresy_ to me.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

eugeneonagain said:


> Would _Norwegian Wood_ or _For the_ _Benefit of Mr Kite _sound better with a 'better' vocalist?


I think Norweigan Wood would have sounded better with Bobby Goldsboro singing; and _For the_ _Benefit of Mr Kite _would have been better with Andy Williams.
Here are some more improvements:
_
Goodnight: _Jimmy Durante
_
Mother Nature's Son:_ John Denver
_
Come Together:_ Louis Armstrong
_
Revolution:_ Mel Torme


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

millionrainbows said:


> I think Norweigan Wood would have sounded better with Bobby Goldsboro singing; and _For the_ _Benefit of Mr Kite _would have been better with Andy Williams.
> Here are some more improvements:
> _
> Goodnight: _Jimmy Durante
> ...


Thanks for the laughs MR.:lol:


----------

