# Michael Jackson's Pipes



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

He was probably more proficient as a child, but he got more emotional with his pipes in his teens through adulthood I think, sacrificing proper technique for emotional flavorings.

It's not really a good or bad thing, rather more of an observation. Compared to the likes of Aretha or Whitney, he's nothin' imo!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Captainnumber36 said:


> He was probably more proficient as a child, but he got more emotional with his pipes in his teens through adulthood I think, sacrificing proper technique for emotional flavorings.
> 
> It's not really a good or bad thing, rather more of an observation. Compared to the likes of Aretha or Whitney, he's nothin' imo!


I have no clue what proper technique is for a Rock or Pop singer.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Strange Magic said:


> I have no clue what proper technique is for a Rock or Pop singer.


I know what you mean, but what you are stating is exactly what I'm saying. As he got older, he got more unique with his voice with the "he he" and almost crying in other songs.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

With Jackson's reputation is ruins regarding abuse etc - Im surprised anybody really cares about his technique.


----------



## Guest (Aug 26, 2019)

The measure of a pop singer is being distinctive and recognizable. Would anyone suggest that Bob Dylan or Joe Crocker had good "technique?"


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Baron Scarpia said:


> The measure of a pop singer is being distinctive and recognizable. *Would anyone suggest that Bob Dylan or Joe Crocker had good "technique?" *


To me, it doesn't make sense to consider "proper technique" in the abstract outside of the considerations for any given song and what a singer is trying to do with it. In that respect, Dylan had an uncanny talent for sculpting his limited voice to add countless shades of meaning and suggestions to his lyrics. A testament to this is listening to his numerous bootlegs where he could completely change up the delivery and change a song's tone/meaning completely. It's rare that any singer has ever been more in tune with how small changes in "technique" could color the meaning of the words, which suggests to me that Dylan did, indeed, have great technique. This is in spite of his inability to be a vocal virtuoso like the Freddies and Mariahs of the world, which is, IMO, just one (limited and over-emphasized) aspect of what technique is.


----------



## Guest (Aug 27, 2019)

^^^ I would call what Dylan had "style" or "artistry" rather than technique. He had loads of it, obviously.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Baron Scarpia said:


> ^^^ I would call what Dylan had "style" or "artistry" rather than technique. He had loads of it, obviously.


Without elaboration this seems like a distinction without a difference. Any "style" or "artistry" implies a type of technique used to achieve that "style" or "artistry."


----------



## Guest (Aug 28, 2019)

Eva Yojimbo said:


> Without elaboration this seems like a distinction without a difference. Any "style" or "artistry" implies a type of technique used to achieve that "style" or "artistry."


I don't agree. There are any number of Michael Jackson imitators that are basically indistinguishable from Michael Jackson.* They have the technique, but they did not invent the unmistakable style of singing that Michael Jackson developed.

*(People still debate whether the musical performance on an early Simpson's episode was Michael Jackson or a double. The producers claim that Michael Jackson himself recorded the dialog, but that he brought in a double to perform the singing in the episode.)


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Baron Scarpia said:


> I don't agree. There are any number of Michael Jackson imitators that are basically indistinguishable from Michael Jackson.* They have the technique, but they did not invent the unmistakable style of singing that Michael Jackson developed.
> 
> *(People still debate whether the musical performance on an early Simpson's episode was Michael Jackson or a double. The producers claim that Michael Jackson himself recorded the dialog, but that he brought in a double to perform the singing in the episode.)


I'm still not sure what you're arguing here. How do you achieve a "style" without technique? Almost everything you do (or don't do) in music is dependent upon technique, which is literally how you're doing it. There may be a few differences that exist for natural reasons, like the differences in people's natural vocal tones, but even then tone can be radically changed via technique.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Now it seems we are just debating semantics which is never the most interesting of conversations.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

It may be that the terms "technique", "style", "artistry" all imply an intent to sing in a manner other than just opening one's mouth and singing in one's "natural" voice as one would be singing "Happy Birthday to You". Someone like Phil Ochs--to pull a name out of the air who was an early contemporary of Dylan, might be one such who just sang. Some flamenco singers, perhaps most, when I think about it, just sing (Rafael Romero, for instance).


----------



## Open Book (Aug 14, 2018)

Strange Magic said:


> It may be that the terms "technique", "style", "artistry" all imply an intent to sing in a manner other than just opening one's mouth and singing in one's "natural" voice as one would be singing "Happy Birthday to You". Someone like Phil Ochs--to pull a name out of the air who was an early contemporary of Dylan, might be one such who just sang. Some flamenco singers, perhaps most, when I think about it, just sing (Rafael Romero, for instance).


But technique is considered to have the intent of producing a pure and beautiful tone (or volume or whatever), bringing out one's best voice, while artistry is more in the service of communication and finding a unique character and personality.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Open Book said:


> But technique is considered to have the intent of producing a pure and beautiful tone (or volume or whatever), bringing out one's best voice, while artistry is more in the service of communication and finding a unique character and personality.


You may indeed be correct. But my distinction was about initial intent--for whatever reason, in pursuit of whatever goal(s)--versus "just singing".


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Open Book said:


> But technique is considered to have the intent of producing a pure and beautiful tone (or volume or whatever), bringing out one's best voice, while artistry is more in the service of communication and finding a unique character and personality.


I agree.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I think we all know what is meant by "proper technique".


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I think we all know what is meant by "proper technique".


I continue to not have a clue as to what is "proper technique" for a rock or pop singer.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Strange Magic said:


> I continue to not have a clue as to what is "proper technique" for a rock or pop singer.


Well, what DO you know proper technique to mean? In what context?


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I say there ain't such a thing as proper technique in pop or rock. Even respected old crooners like Bing Crosby and Dean Martin had no singing lessons and were completely self taught. Michael Jackson did have a coach. See his training session here:


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> I say there ain't such a thing as proper technique in pop or rock. Even respected old crooners like Bing Crosby and Dean Martin had no singing lessons and were completely self taught. Michael Jackson did have a coach. See his training session here:


My point was to compare the evolution of Jackson's voice to the general understanding we have of what proper technique is, even though the genres of pop and rock tend to focus more on style than good singing technique like Opera singers.

But, there are some like Christina Augillera, Whitney Houston and Celine Dion that do have great great technique.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Captainnumber36 said:


> My point was to compare the evolution of Jackson's voice to the general understanding we have of what proper technique is, even though the genres of pop and rock tend to focus more on style than good singing technique like Opera singers.
> 
> But, there are some like Christina Augillera, Whitney Houston and Celine Dion that do have great great technique.


I'm saying great technique in popular music is subjective. I hate the singing of Christina Aguilera and Whitney Houston and their melismatic styles. Roy Orbison is considered one of the greatest singers in rock, Elvis thought Roy was the greatest, and he obviously had technique which goes well with the music rather than overpowering the music. Tim Buckley has an amazing vocal range and techniques and he also doesn't overpower the music. Overpowering the music is poor singing technique in my opinion. Whitney's and Celine's music is usually pretty slight and made to showcase her voice and singing, which I'm not really impressed with.

I'm never that impressed with vocal techniques in pop or Jazz which use the natural timbre of singers, but more with Opera or Sacred Classical music, there you have a real standard. For me the techniques of Celine Dion pale in comparison with someone like Lucia Popp. Listen to Sarah Brightman, she has good technique, but when she sings opera, it just pales in comparison. Sarah Vaughan is considered a great Jazz vocalist who some say could go into Classical. But since she never did, I doubt she could really sing Classical. I don't like and am not impressed with her sassy style, even though it is considered great by a lot of people. Again I find her singing kind of intrusive. I like Ella Fitzgerald's voice and singing much more, but she isn't considered as technically great as Vaughan's by most critics.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Phil loves classical said:


> I'm saying great technique in popular music is subjective. I hate the singing of Christina Aguilera and Whitney Houston and their melismatic styles. Roy Orbison is considered one of the greatest singers in rock, Elvis thought Roy was the greatest, and he obviously had technique which goes well with the music rather than overpowering the music. Tim Buckley has an amazing vocal range and techniques and he also doesn't overpower the music. Overpowering the music is poor singing technique in my opinion. Whitney's and Celine's music is usually pretty slight and made to showcase her voice and singing, which I'm not really impressed with.
> 
> I'm never that impressed with vocal techniques in pop or Jazz which use the natural timbre of singers, but more with Opera or Sacred Classical music, there you have a real standard. For me the techniques of Celine Dion pale in comparison with someone like Lucia Popp. Listen to Sarah Brightman, she has good technique, but when she sings opera, it just pales in comparison. Sarah Vaughan is considered a great Jazz vocalist who some say could go into Classical. But since she never did, I doubt she could really sing Classical. I don't like and am not impressed with her sassy style, even though it is considered great by a lot of people. Again I find her singing kind of intrusive. I like Ella Fitzgerald's voice and singing much more, but she isn't considered as technically great as Vaughan's by most critics.


What are the individual merits (standards) you apply to Opera singers to judge them?


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Captainnumber36 said:


> What are the individual merits (standards) you apply to Opera singers to judge them?


I'm not a vocal expert, but just from general knowledge, a lot has to do with timbre of voice and interpretation/phrasing. They all have the technical requirements like vibrato, control, vocal range, intonation, power or stamina. I'm pretty sure Whitney Houston, Celine Dion, Adele, Lady Gaga wouldn't have the technique or requirements to be able to make it as an opera singer, while it is easier for an opera singer to use their natural voice and sing pop, like Andrea Bocelli. I don't think Andrea is even a true opera singer. It's easy to hide flaws with pop. Also take Freddie Mercury who many think is a great rock singer, there is no way he could ever make it in opera.

https://www.wqxr.org/story/150730-andrea-bocelli-opera-singer/


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

vibrato, vocal range, intonation, power or stamina

How would you use these criteria to describe the evolution of Jackson's voice?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

In order to help me understand what you are referring to when you discuss "good technique" among rock and pop singers, I would like you to evaluate the following 10 singers as to "technique"--who has good, who has bad, the degree to which each grips their audience, the degree to which "technique" is a factor in gripping that audience:

Geddy Lee, of Rush
Mickey Thomas, of Jefferson Starship
Chrissie Hynde, of The Pretenders
Bob Dylan
Chris Cornell, of Soundgarden
Billy Corgan, of The Smashing Pumpkins
Neil Young
Jimi Hendrix
Ann Wilson, of Heart
Robert Plant, of Led Zeppelin


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Captainnumber36 said:


> vibrato, vocal range, intonation, power or stamina
> 
> How would you use these criteria to describe the evolution of Jackson's voice?


With popular singers now like Ariana Grande, Aguilera, etc. I think the only real thing that separates them from karaoke singers is vocal range, which is what they showcase the most, or else anyone can do it. Intonation can be solved with auto tune, and basic coaching, it is one of the most basic things to singing, a trained ear to pitch. Even I can sing with accurate intonation, but my range, and timbre sucks. Their timbre isn't really anything special, but of course better than the average karaoke singer. Stamina can also be coached to a certain degree, but their stamina can't compare with opera singers.

Michael Jackson has a more limited vocal range, but what makes him more special is it's much higher than normal, and his timbre. He has great control, musical sensibility and can do effects fewer people can impersonate well and way more unique than Christina Aguilera and Ariana Grande. That's why a lot of people can do Aguilera impressions well. Ariana Grande is just a cute face from Disney family that has better than average range, etc. I'm sure there is a lot of singers more gifted than her that you won't ever see because of their average looks or star presence. Lady Gaga is considered by the media to be so up there because she sang the theme to the Sound of Music. There are many Broadway singers who can. She is just the rare pop singer who can.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Open Book said:


> But technique is considered to have the intent of producing a pure and beautiful tone (or volume or whatever), bringing out one's best voice, while artistry is more in the service of communication and finding a unique character and personality.


Personally, I think that's a rather stupid definition of technique. To give an example, in some extreme sub-genres of heavy metal there's a vocal style typically called the "growl" that absolutely requires proper technique in order to prevent doing damage to one's voice. The death growl most certainly isn't about "producing pure and beautiful tone," but it absolutely requires technique to do it at all, and certainly the proper technique in order to do it right.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Strange Magic said:


> It may be that the terms "technique", "style", "artistry" all imply an intent to sing in a manner other than just opening one's mouth and singing in one's "natural" voice as one would be singing "Happy Birthday to You". Someone like Phil Ochs--to pull a name out of the air who was an early contemporary of Dylan, might be one such who just sang. Some flamenco singers, perhaps most, when I think about it, just sing (Rafael Romero, for instance).


Personally, the way of think of these terms is like this:

"Technique" = How (Cause)
"Style" = What (Effect)
"Artistry" = Why


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Phil loves classical said:


> I'm pretty sure Whitney Houston, Celine Dion, Adele, Lady Gaga wouldn't have the technique or requirements to be able to make it as an opera singer, while it is easier for an opera singer to use their natural voice and sing pop, like Andrea Bocelli.


Are there any opera singers who "had the technique to do opera" without actually learning/training to have the technique to do opera? If not, this accusation doesn't make much sense. The above pop singers have trained (to the extent that they have at all) to sing in a different genre that employs different techniques and standards. If they wanted to do opera that would require training/learning to sing in a different way from what they're used to, but I see no reason why or evidence that they couldn't do it. Mariah Carey was actually trained by her mother who was an opera singer and vocal coach. There's also Floor Jansen who studied opera for a year and was a vocal coach before landing the job singing for Nightwish. Further, yes, someone like Andrea Bocelli can "sing pop," but not many consider him a great pop singer the way, say, Freddie Mercury is considered such. In fact, no opera star has ever made the crossover into being a great pop singer either (some are successful, but that's different from being considered great).


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Eva Yojimbo said:


> Personally, the way of think of these terms is like this:
> 
> "Technique" = How (Cause)
> "Style" = What (Effect)
> "Artistry" = Why


I'll buy this...


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

A couple of possibly irrelevant observations. I am a sucker for real or perceived "emotionality" in non-classical/popular music. This may be triggered by the singer conveying a sense of themselves being near, at, or beyond the edge of "holding in" the emotion. Some singers who do this effectively for me are Ian Tyson of the Canadian folk duo Ian and Sylvia in songs like _Brave Wolfe_ and _24 Hours from Tulsa_, Laura Branigan with that "Celtic" catch in her voice, but also letting her voice just blow out into a rasp in a song like _The Power of Love_, Janis Joplin in _Ball and Chain_, and Charice's great cover of the Bodyguard medley. Cante flamenco, of course, is rife with such emotionality, especially in renderings of the _Siguiriyas_. Even Mick Jagger rises to the occasion in _Paint it Black_ and _Let's Spend the Night Together_. Other singers with voices that can express (surprisingly) emotion effectively, given the right song, are Geddy Lee of Rush in _Time Stand Still_ and _Between the Wheels_ and others, and Brandon Boyd of Incubus in _The Warmth_ and other songs. Paul Robeson triumphed often in having overt emotionality powerfully propel a song forward.

I don't know where technique, style, and artistry figure into these songs, but the results move me.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> A couple of possibly irrelevant observations. I am a sucker for real or perceived "emotionality" in non-classical/popular music. This may be triggered by the singer conveying a sense of themselves being near, at, or beyond the edge of "holding in" the emotion. Some singers who do this effectively for me are Ian Tyson of the Canadian folk duo Ian and Sylvia in songs like _Brave Wolfe_ and _24 Hours to Tulsa_, Laura Branigan with that "Celtic" catch in her voice, but also letting her voice just blow out into a rasp in a song like _The Power of Love_, Janis Joplin in _Ball and Chain_, and Charice's great cover of the Bodyguard medley. Cante flamenco, of course, is rife with such emotionality, especially in renderings of the _Siguiriyas_. Even Mick Jagger rises to the occasion in _Paint it Black_ and _Let's Spend the Night Together_. Other singers with voices that can express (surprisingly) emotion effectively, given the right song, are Geddy Lee of Rush in _Time Stand Still_ and _Between the Wheels_ and others, and Brandon Boyd of Incubus in _The Warmth_ and other songs. Paul Robeson triumphed often in having overt emotionality powerfully propel a song forward.
> 
> I don't know where technique, style, and artistry figure into these songs, but the results move me.


You can hear how a pop singer will change the melody, because they think they know better than the composer. Ridiculous.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Poor Laura Branigan, so often ending up lip syncing her greatest hits. She was a child and product of the recording studio and was not in a position to bring vast musical backing forces with her onto the stages of the various venues where she was invited or paid to perform. So lip syncing marks most of her YouTube "concert" video clips. But the studio CDs are where the real Laura Branigan is found.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Maybe, but his voice could work, his beat could be insane, and he sure had some moves:


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Luchesi said:


> You can hear how a pop singer will change the melody, because they think they know better than the composer. Ridiculous.


Example, please.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Example, please.


example: Branigan canceled out the 'music' in the song "Power of Love" with her childish antics. The well-written song builds logically from music theory, but she doesn't understand any of that.

Listen to what Harry Connick Jr. advises. He's a musician.






In our combo we have these problems with singers. They don't play an instrument, but they think they can improve a song with pure emotion, and all that does is make it annoying in the long run. We record it, play it back and then eventually they realize that we're right.

OTOH, a rare example, Michael Jackson improved a poorly written song, "I'll Be There". The song was just a sentiment, I'll be there, and he made it 'musical'. Maybe he had help from others. I don't know. I wish there was a recording of the song as it was originally written.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Luchesi said:


> example: Branigan canceled out the 'music' in the song "Power of Love" with her childish antics. The well-written song builds logically from music theory, but she doesn't understand any of that.


Personal preference in its purest form.  This falls squarely into the always futile attempt to persuade others that they should not/cannot/must not like or appreciate in the arts what they like or appreciate. Leaves me always scratching my head......


----------



## Open Book (Aug 14, 2018)

Strange Magic said:


> Example, please.


All the time with the American national anthem at sports events.


----------



## Guest (Sep 3, 2019)

Phil loves classical said:


> I'm not a vocal expert, but just from general knowledge, a lot has to do with timbre of voice and interpretation/phrasing. They all have the technical requirements like vibrato, control, vocal range, intonation, power or stamina. I'm pretty sure Whitney Houston, Celine Dion, Adele, Lady Gaga wouldn't have the technique or requirements to be able to make it as an opera singer, while it is easier for an opera singer to use their natural voice and sing pop, like Andrea Bocelli. I don't think Andrea is even a true opera singer. It's easy to hide flaws with pop. Also take Freddie Mercury who many think is a great rock singer, there is no way he could ever make it in opera.


This misses the point. Opera singing requires enormous volume to be heard over a large orchestra. Expressiveness is secondary to that physical requirement. In other genres singers are primarily engaged in recording or in live appearances with amplification so the absolute volume of their voice is not important. Of course pop singers don't have voices big enough to perform opera. They don't train for it and it is not relevant to their craft.

And my experience is that opera singers are generally terrible when they do crossover recordings and try to to pop or jazz. They are usually bellowing away as though they are still trying to drown out a full symphony orchestra/


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Open Book said:


> All the time with the American national anthem at sports events.


Not a pop song.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I just <3 MJ, that is all! He's Bad.


----------



## Open Book (Aug 14, 2018)

Baron Scarpia said:


> This misses the point. Opera singing requires enormous volume to be heard over a large orchestra. Expressiveness is secondary to that physical requirement. In other genres singers are primarily engaged in recording or in live appearances with amplification so the absolute volume of their voice is not important. Of course pop singers don't have voices big enough to perform opera. They don't train for it and it is not relevant to their craft.
> 
> And my experience is that opera singers are generally terrible when they do crossover recordings and try to to pop or jazz. They are usually bellowing away as though they are still trying to drown out a full symphony orchestra/


I know what you mean about crossover. Hearing Peter Mattei sing Sinatra songs was the latest interesting but weird listening experience of that type for me.

I wouldn't say opera singers are less expressive than pop singers, it's just different music and they don't usually have a real feel for pop music as they do for opera and other classical vocal music They sound stiff, they can't swing in that way. The pop singers can't muster the requirements for opera, either.

It can't be impossible that there could be artists able to do both, but it would be as rare as someone who could play two sports on a professional level. It would take so much work to master both that it isn't worth it.


----------

