Hi all, while browsing other forums i came across this statement:
(from www gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/803766-whats-your-opinion-about-changing-songs-key-fit-vocalist.html )"The singer is the single most important element of a song. Gtr licks, bass notes or kybrd gymnastics are not."
and reading further, people seem to agree completely. Which kinda bothers me, cause i never felt it such way.
Let me explain. I have allways been "alternative" musician, basically it means i never cared for pop music, or radio songs in general. Granted, if you take away vocals from any pop hit, there´s nothing left.
However, i had been allways fan of "weird" bands like Current 93, Comus, Legendary Pink Dots, Skinny Puppy, Tom Waits etc. None of these sound "radio friendly top notch" vocalist, but still Tom Waits is one hell of an influential artist, and in their genres, Skinny puppy and Current 93 were some of most influential bands too.
I am experimenting musician and my vocals kinda sucks. But i always hear music itself first, vocal is mere another instrument to me. Yet now i see "vocal is everything, screw the music" as generally accepted opinion. To be honest, almost every "top notch production" professional radio hit that has great vocals i ever heard, used very few simple phrases to express absolutely uninteresting lyrics about "i love you and allways will" blah blah something like this.
Thus, it seems what the lyric says doesn´t matter, or better, they don´t have to say something ineresting or important, rather the opposite - they dont have to pass any sense not to distract from actual "vocal performance".
Lyrics has to be crap but sung professionally :-) , kinda sad to me.
NOw, lately i moved to listening and writing folk music, which has been allways about "civil" vocals with focus on text itself.
So, whats your point of view on subject ?
Does these claims apply only to "pop" music ?
Or does "bland" vox ruins everything regardless of genre ? Regardless of what lyrics are about to say ?