Singers in bands Do they make a difference

Jalapeno

No slight intended I promise - I think you're at cross purposes with what the others are saying.

Tom Waits isn't a pure singer, but he's a songster nonetheless.  His persona and delivery is still key.

Drew_TNBD

I think you guys are missing the fact that we do have a vocalist - I'm not flying some instrumentalist flag here. Just making the point that a vocalist is just one part of what makes a band interesting, and I don't buy that most people are only interested in the vocalist. It just isn't true.

They may only know how to vocalist appreciation for the singer - because singing is something we ALL can do - but the vast body of evidence we have suggests that people do response to other elements. They just don't know how to really talk about it.

(specially when they're pissed!)

octatonic

Drew_fx said:

I think you guys are missing the fact that we do have a vocalist - I'm not flying some instrumentalist flag here. Just making the point that a vocalist is just one part of what makes a band interesting, and I don't buy that most people are only interested in the vocalist. It just isn't true.

They may only know how to vocalist appreciation for the singer - because singing is something we ALL can do - but the vast body of evidence we have suggests that people do response to other elements. They just don't know how to really talk about it.

(specially when they're pissed!)

I think it massively depends on the band.

No-one really listens to Dire Straits for Mark Knopfler's voice.

It is all about the guitar playing and the narrative- sure, he sings the song but his voice is pretty average.

Compare that with Clutch.

Neil Fallon is IMHO the best front man on the planet.

Absolutely no-one else can sing those songs because it is ALL about the delivery.

Absolutely electrifying stage presence.

He also isn't a particularly technical singer- but his delivery is very powerful nonetheless.

Drew_TNBD

Yeah - basically agree with you there Jim. I really don't like Clutch as it happens; I left their gig at the KOKO a few months back, earlier than I've ever done so before in the history of bands.

But yes, Neil Falon is a GREAT front man. So I can happily segregate the musicians from the frontman aspect. But I cannot segregate the singing aspect from the rest of the band. They're all sounds, and are all part of the music.

octatonic

Drew_fx said:

I really don't like Clutch as it happens

You are dead to me.

Drew_TNBD

)

Jalapeno

Drew_fx said:

So I can happily segregate the musicians from the frontman aspect. But I cannot segregate the singing aspect from the rest of the band. They're all sounds, and are all part of the music.

I'll happily agree with that !

Grunfeld

tonyrath said:  I am interested because based on posts here I wonder singers are trouble than they're worth or the public don't care that much. Latest guy is in a covers band who are now getting paid gigs. 

I think what's coming across pretty clear is that for some genres the singer is not so important but for any functions or covers work the singer is crucial -- if it were even possible to put a figure on it I'd guess 75-90% of the band's ability to keep an audience interested would be a focus on the singer.

And in the functions and covers world at least you've got to have the ability to hold a note; the ability to banter to the audience and give them a positive feeling; and the ability to be a "front man" too. 

And some tricks.  Our singer is a lovely bloke but he was killing his voice on some songs and we physically had to drag him to watch other bands and go, "Look, that other bloke doesn't try and hit the high note in "livin' on a prayer" he just holds the mic out to the audience and gets them to do it."  Stage craft.

stickyfiddle

Anything with no vocals is technically not a song, it's just music. That's absolutely fine, but anyway. 

I'm muchly a believer that the singer/frontman is 80% of the band as far as a good one can carry the others and a bad one makes it irrelevant who is playing behind them. The other 20% is split fairly equally. But you need that 20% to make a good singer shine. Witness Springsteen in the 90's for proof. No E Street band and the whole thing is significantly less good.

That said, the really properly great bands are great because every single member is excellent, and it gels together to become more than the sum of its parts.

mike_l

I think a singerist who is passionate about their music is most important.

because when they're passionate, they'll put in the effort to be the best they can be.......

Same with any musician.....

Grunfeld

mike_l said:

I think a singerist who is passionate about their music is most important.

because when they're passionate, they'll put in the effort to be the best they can be.......

Needs a bit of talent though.  I'm thinking of a fella at a jam night who's intense about his singing, does the max effort thing, but unfortunately the best he can be still sounds like a washing machine.

mike_l

@Grunfeld Sounds a bit like my guitaring...