Is the singer single most important element of the song ?

**nomadx** · 01-21-2013

...people that aren't musicians...hmmm...Well I suppose the main reason there are singers is to appeal to the folks that have money. Most musicians don't have any money! BTW- I'm a singer and consider myself a musician. I don't take any offense to your stance, however.

**Xdrummer** · 01-23-2013

Is the singer important? It depends on what your intent for the song is. If you write solid lyrics, then you probably want a good singer to sell those lyrics. Do most people focus on the singer - of course. Given that music is basically melody, harmony and rhythm - with melody normally the most focal point - the singer (melody) has the largest focus.

Some musical genres may not place as much importance on the lyrics or melody - in which case, perhaps the singer is not as important. Clearly the singer is not a factor in instrumental music - but I must assume the original post was not addressing instrumental music.

As a musician I can and do focus on all elements of a song when I listen and can appreciate a creative drum groove or a intricate bass line, etc. - however, most of the listening audiance can not. So, when we write/record is it our goal to appease the masses or to create a piece of music we feel has integrity - regardless of the vocal talent? While I say this somewhat tongue in cheek - I feel that if I write & record simply to satisfy my musical integrity - it is basically musical masturbation. I prefer my music to be heard and enjoyed by as many people as possible - thus, I can't masturbate in public.

I personally write songs with a goal of being published and placed - so I do have to write/arrange with the masses in mind - and I do need a solid vocalist to sell the songs to publishers. in addition, I consider myself a better than average lyricist/storyteller - so I want a good vocalist to be able to bring my lyrics to life.

So - in my view, for the intent of my song, yes, the singer is the most important element.

**folker** · 01-23-2013

ok, fair enough. it's understandable if artist wants best singer he can get to sing his lyrics. Everyone will want best performers for his own songs.
I'm curious to hear how would you approach other people's music, so let me ask pretty greasy question :
If you had to choose between two artists and have to listen to their songs for whole bloody day, who would you choose ?
Option one: Enrique Iglesias (he's considered great singer, isn't he ?)
Option two: good ol' Robert Zimmerman (rather 'decent' one)

...that's kinda unfair i know :-)
(my choice is obvious LOL)

**Richard Monroe** · 01-23-2013

Like a lot of really good questions, the answer is- it depends. The important thing is what the artist is trying to do. Greg L. is at one end of the spectrum. OK, he's a musician. I'm at the other end of the spectrum. I'm a storyteller, and to me, the music is just a vehicle to tell the story. In that sense, folk music, country, and rap share that mission. In the middle are the dance/R&B/disco/pop people, where neither the story nor the music matters. The only question for them is- can you dance to it?

One of the differences between me and the Gerg is that I can see, and value, his perspective, wheras he tends to devalue music where the story is the point. I just try to remember what I'm doing, and what I'm mixing. A lot of mixing engineers will mix folk music so the vocal sits wonderfully in the mix, but only a dog could make out the words. Listen to Sara Watkins on the first "Nickel Creek" album, and you'll hear exactly what I mean. The story is lost, and therefore, the mix sucks. If you are mixing "Baby, baby, baby, I want you so bad, ooh, ooh", the vocal is just an instrument, and you should mix it like one. If you are mixing Juliana Hatfield, the vocal may suck, but it still needs to be up front, because she's trying to communicate- with words. This is true of country pop, also. OK- take a song like "Ain't Goin' Down 'til the Sun Comes Up" performed by Garth Brooks. The rhythm and chord structure is wicked simple, and it does contain a truly badass harmonica break. When that harmonica is being featured, it needs to be up front, but when Garth is singing, everything takes a back seat to it, so that the story isn't lost.

In the end, the artist and the producer are the only ones who decide what matters, and it's the job of the mixing engineer and the mastering engineer to make their vision concrete. Those decisions define who you are as an artist. I care about the story, because that's the only thing I do well. But, I care enough about the vehicle to bring in session people who can drive that car. Every one of them works with me because they believe in my stories, and with one clear exception, they don't have their own story to tell. They are just musicians, and they are secondary to my mission. The difference is that I can see the worth in other people's missions, and I try to track and mix their stuff to create what they want, not what I want. I don't have anything against music, it's just not what I bring to the table. As Joni Mitchell said, "I'm just the chirp".

**FromtheSOUTH** · 01-24-2013

This thread rocks.

The way I see it is like this-

The voice is the oldest instrument. Using the voice to make noises that sound pleasurable to the ear has been going on since humans first grunted, or groaned, or whatever. Everyone who listens to music can identify with some vocalist or another- whether its Bruce Dickinson and his operatic style, or Tom Waits and his rambling, or his throaty shouts. (Tom Waits is just so cool, isn't he?)

So, like it or not, singers remain to be the focal point of MOST music, and it's because (apart from usually being the 'hook') EVERYONE (or almost everyone) has a voice. Not everyone plays an instrument, so its hard to identify those sweet para-diddles that the drummer is doing when you don't know a hi hat from a crash.

That being said, its all situational. A singer can ruin a band, a singer can make the band. Sometimes I feel like vocals and lyrics are just dead, creatively, but then I turn off the radio and pop in a Clutch album.

**grimtraveller** · 01-24-2013

Originally Posted by FromtheSOUTH

So, like it or not, singers remain the focal point of MOST music

Agreed. But does that automatically qualify the singer as the most important individual and the voice as the most important element ?
I stand by my conviction that it's a moot question. Unless it's an accapella piece, the truth is that all the elements work together. I only know one person that likes accapella music exclusively. Many people may well focus on the vocal {I do on some songs} but without the other instruments to shape, frame and surround the vocal, the vocal piece itself is more often than not plain boring. And interestingly, the OP didn't make any mention of backing or harmony vocals which are definitely the poor relation to many people in the vocal pecking order.
It's like a house. What you see on the outside may be what initially attracts you, but it is by no means the whole story..........

**FromtheSOUTH** · 01-24-2013

Originally Posted by grimtraveller

Agreed. But does that automatically qualify the singer as the most important individual and the voice as the most important element ?
I stand by my conviction that it's a moot question. Unless it's an accapella piece, the truth is that all the elements work together. I only know one person that likes accapella music exclusively. Many people may well focus on the vocal {I do on some songs} but without the other instruments to shape, frame and surround the vocal, the vocal piece itself is more often than not plain boring. And interestingly, the OP didn't make any mention of backing or harmony vocals which are definitely the poor relation to many people in the vocal pecking order.
It's like a house. What you see on the outside may be what initially attracts you, but it is by no means the whole story..........

Exactly. Imagine listening to Rush 2012 with no Geddy vox. Or even worse, ONLY Geddy vox.

**grimtraveller** · 01-24-2013

Originally Posted by FromtheSOUTH

Exactly. Imagine listening to Rush 2012 with no Geddy vox. Or even worse, ONLY Geddy vox.

An interesting example. I love that album. I could listen to it {just......} if a gun was put to my kneecaps, without Geddy's vocals, but only because that kind of music has so much space for the instrumental. I could not listen to it without the instruments. I dig Geddy's voice, but I cannot think of Rush as being any one particular element. They are a unit. Take away Geddy's voice, bass playing or synths or Alex's guitars or Neil's drums or pointed lyrics and you don't have that unit.