Quality Of Singing At An All-Time Low

Without waxing nostalgic about a former time of superior vocal splendor, we clearly live in a time where the art of singing in all genres is in real peril. There are of course, outstanding singers performing today. A handful of exceptional artists always manage to emerge in every generation, regardless of the unfavorable artistic circumstances.

During its regular season, I often tune in to the live, Saturday broadcast from the Metropolitan Opera House in New York. After repeated listening, what has become painfully obvious is that, to an alarming degree, and despite notable exceptions, the performances from the world’s premier opera house is far from exemplary. It’s not simply that screeching tenors, wobbling sopranos, and screaming baritones are sometimes heard from this legendary opera house, it’s that the overly nasalized voice—small, reedy, colorless, passionless—has come to represent the modern aesthetic ideal of opera singing. How could several centuries of artistic, opera singing have led to this sad state of affairs? And then there’s nonclassical, commercial singing.

Exceptional singing is not what commercial music highlights: it’s concerned
only with hit songs. And the reason is clear: the public pays to hear them. But does
it necessarily follow that the public is indifferent to quality singing? The music
industry certainly acts as though it does.

Whereas in the past, fudging on the artistic side was not business as usual, today, by contrast, it’s common practice. With the help of sophisticated recording technology, even a horrible singer could be made to sing on pitch, keep proper musical timing, and phrase reasonably well. And when bad singers have to “sing live,” then “lip-syncing” with prerecorded tracks is common practice; otherwise, poor or amateur singers sometimes hide their meager talent by cleverly blending their voices with those of on-stage, background singers.

For many music executives, exceptional singing is really beside the
point—the point being to make a profit by enticing fans of commercial music
to buy music (becoming increasingly difficult) and/or to attend concerts (and to
purchase merchandise while they are there). It’s true that the business of music
is, and should be, about making as much profit as possible; that’s how capitalism
works. But why should quality singing and good, commercial songs be mutually
exclusive? And could they continue to be mutually exclusive? It should be clear
by now that, despite its love affair with great songs, the buying public loves them
most when charismatic artists with exceptional voices are singing them. Bing
Crosby, Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, Michael Jackson, Elton John, Mariah Carey
and scores of other talented singers, and singing-based bands, like The Beatles,
The Rolling Stones, and Led Zeppelin have done extraordinarily well for the music
business. In fact, it doesn’t take much insight to see that authentic singing artists—
ones who can sing well and have attractive voices—have largely been the driving -
force in the music industry.

Today, by contrast, much time, energy, money, and skill is devoted to faking
music, to marketing virtual talent who simply entertain, and who are incapable
of delivering heart-inspiring artistic experiences to the audience. Although this
strategy may be less expensive and lucrative in the short-run, ultimately it’s
shortsighted, which is one of the reasons why the music business has been in an
economic free-fall in recent years. If this is true, then it seems reasonable that one
way to aid the ailing music business is to promote genuinely talented artists who
sing excellent commercial songs; of course, this requires that we stop resorting to
tricks—like producing virtual singers—to try to deceive the buying public.

But there is deeper, darker secret as to why quality singing has been pushed
to the sidelines. With the ever-intrusive dominance of the Internet and other
visually-orientated mediums, popular culture is now, more than ever, turned-on by
the shock-and-awe of the provocative image. Music, particularly, is increasingly
about what appeals to the eye rather than what appeals to the ear: with image-driven
entertainment commanding much of our attention, it’s only natural that the popular imagination is focused more on what it sees rather than on what it hears.

Quality singing is one of the most battered casualties of a culture obsessed with the
thrill of visual stimulation.

Nevertheless, as long as the passion for authentic music remains essential
to the human spirit, the desire to hear great singing will not die. Despite the
musical and cultural orientations that work against the singing art form, artistic
singers—ones with extraordinary voices—will eventually re-emerge in spectacular
fashion. But, alas, there is a final stumbling block that stands in the way of this
possibility: the success of highly damaging voice coaches and the popularity of
their misguided voice coaching regimens.

Image source: Elnur/Shutterstock.com

Comments

[Builder Auckland]

Low quality of voice is create a complexity and normally build bad impression on listener's mind. I really like this so nice post. Builder Auckland

[Gary Catona]

Thank you for reading, Builder Auckland!