review my singing Silent Lucidity - Queensryche - cover for review

[Joe Naab]

Hi everyone! First post to the forum and first submission for review. Any impressions would be appreciated. If there's a section, phrase or even a word that you thought I sung well, please let me know. There's a bright edge coming into my higher range and I'm wondering if it sounds too bright, or squeezed, or forced. Any thoughts?

FYI,- I think it gets better as it goes along. I don't sing low and soft so well, yet.

Anyone know how to embed the Box.com player in this forum? Soundcloud rejected the upload for license issues.

Share URL from Box.com:

https://app.box.com/s/2it19y1ezvsja4ujtpjj8oadzsmkuqg9

[ronws]

Just posting the link here is fine.

Interesting phrasing and melody choices but it is nice to hear a variation.

As for singing soft low, you might make it easier on yourself by making it easier on yourself. That is, relax into it and let the mic do the volume. Don't expect that you will sing the lowest notes as loud as you do others. 

[Robert Lunte]

Hey Joe! Great to see you in here... way to step up and share!  Ill take a listen tomorrow... when I get a free moment!

[Joe Naab]

Just posting the link here is fine.

Interesting phrasing and melody choices but it is nice to hear a variation.

As for singing soft low, you might make it easier on yourself by making it easier on yourself. That is, relax into it and let the mic do the volume. Don't expect that you will sing the lowest notes as loud as you do others. 

Thanks, ronws. I do actually try to sing low notes with a lot of volume. I'll try backing off tonight.

So was there nothing to like about the performance? Did anything in the two pre-chorus/chorus sections sound decent, i.e. good tone/timbre/resonation? Even if you could simply rate my voice on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being "world-class", 5 being "could front a medium quality local cover band, and "0" being "awful beyond imagination", that would help.

No obligation, though, I already appreciate what you've shared!

[Robert Lunte]

Hi Joe, I listened to your "Silent Lucidity".

I rather appreciate your original interpretation. I would not want to discourage that, however...

1). If you are going to "make it your own", you have to still remain within the boundaries of pitch and rhythm. Cutting to the chase here, your recording has too many missed rhythmic cues and intonation issues. You need to tighten this up Joe, just flat out being honest with you.

2). Interpretation should be a delicate balance. It is possible to go to far. I am not suggesting that you did go too far on this, but you pushed the envelope. Something you have to appreciate is not only do you have to do the song a TRIBUTE, but hard core Queensryche fans will tar and feather you for even trying to sing out of the box what so ever, so if you dare to try, it had better be subtle and spot on Joe. QR fans are going to chew you to pieces with this on YouTube.

3). Your Silent Lucidity track is not the best of tracks... I have a bed track of this that is a lot better... click on the bed tracks link on the home page and purchase it there to try this again with a better bed track.

Try it again Joe and don't color out side of the lines so much... watch your cues and for sure... pay attention to the notes, its pitchy.

I know you are working with the new "The Four Pillars of Singing" system and I know this song like the back of my hand Joe... I have sang it a thousand times and have coached it a hundred times. Why don't you do a skype lesson with me. We can review the Pillars training method and content...and work on this song. I have the lyrics and the vowel modifications already marked out.

Coach

[ronws]

Thanks, ronws. I do actually try to sing low notes with a lot of volume. I'll try backing off tonight.

So was there nothing to like about the performance? Did anything in the two pre-chorus/chorus sections sound decent, i.e. good tone/timbre/resonation? Even if you could simply rate my voice on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being "world-class", 5 being "could front a medium quality local cover band, and "0" being "awful beyond imagination", that would help.

No obligation, though, I already appreciate what you've shared!

It depends on the audience. As Robert notes, your timing in the song is markedly different from the original, which most people are going to expect. And your melody line is different than the original, which would also be expected by most. As a work of art, I liked it. As far as world-class, is the original singer world class? Would someone consider Geoff Tate world class? I ask, even though I am big fan of him, prefer his voice over Todd's, even give him quarter in the debacle with Queensryche, like his wine, Insania, like his Roadking (HD Bagger that he rides to Sturgis.) And I have covered two songs by QR, including this one, which was the hardest, because of the low notes.

 

[Joe Naab]

Hi Joe, I listened to your "Silent Lucidity".

I rather appreciate your original interpretation. I would not want to discourage that, however...

1). If you are going to "make it your own", you have to still remain within the boundaries of pitch and rhythm. Cutting to the chase here, your recording has too many missed rhythmic cues and intonation issues. You need to tighten this up Joe, just flat out being honest with you.

2). Interpretation should be a delicate balance. It is possible to go to far. I am not suggesting that you did go too far on this, but you pushed the envelope. Something you have to appreciate is not only do you have to do the song a TRIBUTE, but hard core Queensryche fans will tar and feather you for even trying to sing out of the box what so ever, so if you dare to try, it had better be subtle and spot on Joe. QR fans are going to chew you to pieces with this on YouTube.

3). Your Silent Lucidity track is not the best of tracks... I have a bed track of this that is a lot better... click on the bed tracks link on the home page and purchase it there to try this again with a better bed track.

Try it again Joe and don't color out side of the lines so much... watch your cues and for sure... pay attention to the notes, its pitchy.

I know you are working with the new "The Four Pillars of Singing" system and I know this song like the back of my hand Joe... I have sang it a thousand times and have coached it a hundred times. Why don't you do a skype lesson with me. We can review the Pillars training method and content...and work on this song. I have the lyrics and the vowel modifications already marked out.

Coach

Hi Robert, and thanks for the review!

Couple of things,— No need to apologize for honesty, that's what I'm here for. I just bought the karaoke track you mentioned. Also, as you know, I can't do skype lessons as I don't have internet access at home where I can sing. I hope to see you for some work when I'm home next in May/June of next year.

To clarify something, I'm not at all attempting to sound or sing like Geoff Tate, though I do understand what you mean when you refer to the expectations of others at Youtube and elsewhere. I wanted to use the song to showcase the sound of my own voice and the way I like to sing.

So, yes, if there's pitch and timing errors, or issues with tonal quality, those are important. Not sounding like Tate, or singing his exact melodies, is less important (at least for the purpose of reviews at this forum).

If you don't mind, I'll work on it all week with the new backing track, I'll listen to the original version, and I'll record it over the weekend trying for more of a "tribute" attempt, and I'll post it in this thread on Monday. Thanks again!

 

[Robert Lunte]

Joe, we look forward to your next attempt... just to be clear. My review did not say anything about sounding like Geoff Tate or singing it like Geoff Tate. I wouldn't want you to do that. People that sing covers and contentiously try to sound like the original artist, I think are missing a more fulfilling opportunity and challenge. Do justice, ... don't hack it up,... but try to make covers a little bit of your own as well. Otherwise, your just a well practiced, trained monkey. Fortunately, thats not your problem. 

I am talking about musicianship Joe... pitch and rhythm... tighten it up... it needs a lot of work on the fundamentals. 

[Joe Naab]

It depends on the audience. As Robert notes, your timing in the song is markedly different from the original, which most people are going to expect. And your melody line is different than the original, which would also be expected by most. As a work of art, I liked it. As far as world-class, is the original singer world class? Would someone consider Geoff Tate world class? I ask, even though I am big fan of him, prefer his voice over Todd's, even give him quarter in the debacle with Queensryche, like his wine, Insania, like his Roadking (HD Bagger that he rides to Sturgis.) And I have covered two songs by QR, including this one, which was the hardest, because of the low notes.

 

Thanks so much for the follow-up. To be clear, I wasn't at all trying to mimic the melodies or timing of Geoff Tate. I haven't heard the original version for years, intentionally, because I want to resist the temptation to imitate while I'm working to develop my own sound.

So, to seek some clarification, are my melodies and timing bad, per se, or simply different from the original? Or, maybe put another way, if you'd never heard the original before, would you have thought the song well-sung? Along those lines. I think you may have answered this when you said you liked it as a work of art.

Yeah, "world-class" is tough to define, and such a personal thing, anyway. When I say "world class", I'm first referring to rock singers as opposed to all singers, which would include opera and theater. So, the 9's and 10's might be guys like Tate, Steve Perry, Freddie Mercury, Chris Cornell, Robert Plant, Bono, Bruce Dickinson, Dio, Miljenko Matijevic,— understanding that they might not be technically perfect, and there will still be people who don't like their voices.

I guess what I was after with the "scale of 1 to 10" thing, is an approximation. Maybe "10" could be "huge wow factor", "head turning", "awesome original sound", with the rest of the numbers falling off in quality.

 

[KillerKu]

I actually think this is going in a good direction. The emotions are very different than the original. I get like a cross betweeen Roger Waters ( Pink Floyd) and Lou Reed.

When I hear it, I feel tension, anxiety, and despair, but also a sense of repressed or depressed affection. It sounds like a love letter from someone who can't express love for some reason (horrible life circumstance, or something else), and has a lot of charm.

I do think if you pulled the pitch a little closer to equal temperament and the rhythm a bit closer to the beat, you could express these emotions while getting more approachable and accessible.

I don't however believe these are emotions that can be expressed precisely. Very few people are 'desperately precise, mechanically anxious' and so forth. These emotions tend to affect motor control and I don't think those emotions would connect with me if it didn't have some of the characteristics of being a bit stilted, trembling, and out of control.

I don't know if those are the emotions you're trying to express, but it works as a piece of art. It gets a response from me emotionally. The trick for a commercial performer would be to find the balance that works for their art between making that connection and also being approachable as a piece of music, which usually involves some degree of a formula.

For me emotions are not formulaic, controlled, meticulous experiences at all. The sound of my voice when emotional is not that either. But music which is closer to the formula has more appeal to the average person aesthetically (harmony vs dissonance, meter, etc). So a lot of what makes me connect with music is the struggle between the emotional 'loss of control' and music having some kind of formula which is emotionless, static, without that struggle.

[Joe Naab]

Joe, we look forward to your next attempt... just to be clear. My review did not say anything about sounding like Geoff Tate or singing it like Geoff Tate. I wouldn't want you to do that. People that sing covers and contentiously try to sound like the original artist, I think are missing a more fulfilling opportunity and challenge. Do justice, ... don't hack it up,... but try to make covers a little bit of your own as well. Otherwise, your just a well practiced, trained monkey. Fortunately, thats not your problem. 

I am talking about musicianship Joe... pitch and rhythm... tighten it up... it needs a lot of work on the fundamentals. 

Perfect. Got it. In my younger days I used to try to imitate. Now, I'm focused on developing my own sound so I can start working on originals soon. These submissions will be using covers, but to showcase my sound. If pitch and rhythm are sloppy, that's huge to know. I'm going to tighten it up right away and I'll still try to bring in more of the "spirit" of the original. Thanks.

 

[KillerKu]

Thanks so much for the follow-up. To be clear, I wasn't at all trying to mimic the melodies or timing of Geoff Tate. I haven't heard the original version for years, intentionally, because I want to resist the temptation to imitate while I'm working to develop my own sound.

So, to seek some clarification, are my melodies and timing bad, per se, or simply different from the original? Or, maybe put another way, if you'd never heard the original before, would you have thought the song well-sung? Along those lines. I think you may have answered this when you said you liked it as a work of art.

Yeah, "world-class" is tough to define, and such a personal thing, anyway. When I say "world class", I'm first referring to rock singers as opposed to all singers, which would include opera and theater. So, the 9's and 10's might be guys like Tate, Steve Perry, Freddie Mercury, Chris Cornell, Robert Plant, Bono, Bruce Dickinson, Dio, Miljenko Matijevic,— understanding that they might not be technically perfect, and there will still be people who don't like their voices.

I guess what I was after with the "scale of 1 to 10" thing, is an approximation. Maybe "10" could be "huge wow factor", "head turning", "awesome original sound", with the rest of the numbers falling off in quality.

 

If I had never heard this song I would probably hear a slight clash with backing track. Your voice sounds restless emotionally. The backing track sounds a bit tighter, polished, more controlled and subdued (which is a style Tate sung with).

The melody structure, timing eccentricities, might work if the arrangement also had restless qualities that complemented it, or on contrast maybe even something even more mechanical, so the voice sounded strangled by the track and like it needed to break free.

As is, it connected with me emotionally, but aesthetically I think either you or the track (even original) would need to give or take a bit either direction (tempo, pitch, etc).

[Joe Naab]

I actually think this is going in a good direction. The emotions are very different than the original. I get like a cross betweeen Roger Waters ( Pink Floyd) and Lou Reed.

When I hear it, I feel tension, anxiety, and despair, but also a sense of repressed or depressed affection. It sounds like a love letter from someone who can't express love for some reason (horrible life circumstance, or something else), and has a lot of charm.

I do think if you pulled the pitch a little closer to equal temperament and the rhythm a bit closer to the beat, you could express these emotions while getting more approachable and accessible.

I don't however believe these are emotions that can be expressed precisely. Very few people are 'desperately precise, mechanically anxious' and so forth. These emotions tend to affect motor control and I don't think those emotions would connect with me if it didn't have some of the characteristics of being a bit stilted, trembling, and out of control.

I don't know if those are the emotions you're trying to express, but it works as a piece of art. It gets a response from me emotionally. The trick for a commercial performer would be to find the balance that works for their art between making that connection and also being approachable as a piece of music, which usually involves some degree of a formula.

For me emotions are not formulaic, controlled, meticulous experiences at all. The sound of my voice when emotional is not that either. But music which is closer to the formula has more appeal to the average person aesthetically (harmony vs dissonance, meter, etc). So a lot of what makes me connect with music is the struggle between the emotional 'loss of control' and music having some kind of formula which is emotionless, static, without that struggle.

Wow, thank you so much. Yes, you actually heard what I was going for (which happens to also have an autobiographical element). I remember Tate's original being more gentle, subdued, melodic, and I'm attempting to add more tension and passion, of sorts, to it.

I'm getting the message about the technical matters here in the thread, so I will get to work on improved precision. I can sing it 100 different ways. Just working on finding a way that has some "wow factor". Thanks again.

[Joe Naab]

If I had never heard this song I would probably hear a slight clash with backing track. Your voice sounds restless emotionally. The backing track sounds a bit tighter, polished, more controlled and subdued (which is a style Tate sung with).

The melody structure, timing eccentricities, might work if the arrangement also had restless qualities that complemented it, or on contrast maybe even something even more mechanical, so the voice sounded strangled by the track and like it needed to break free.

As is, it connected with me emotionally, but aesthetically I think either you or the track (even original) would need to give or take a bit either direction (tempo, pitch, etc).

You are so spot on. I think about this a lot as I sing/train to several dozen covers on karaoke tracks, and always find myself wishing that the track could conform to the way I'm wanting to sing the song in my style. I have to work with the tracks I have, so there will always be some mismatch between how I'm singing and the track that was intended for the original singer.

Maybe the overarching question I'm asking is, does my voice sound like I could perform in public at a sound level of competence? And, I'm referring to my voice and the way I sing as opposed to the quality at which I'm covering the song as it was originally sung, if that makes sense.

[KillerKu]

Maybe the overarching question I'm asking is, does my voice sound like I could perform in public at a sound level of competence? And, I'm referring to my voice and the way I sing as opposed to the quality at which I'm covering the song as it was originally sung, if that makes sense.

It's going to depend tremendously on the audience. An artier crowd looking to connect emotionally with an original performer, there is a chance in my opinion, if your songs are composed to suit your performance style. American Idol signing contests, definitely no.

In a bar cover band, it might be iffy. It might depend on how much you were willing to sacrifice to sound 'more like the original.' In some ways, by singing covers we are amplifying the 'power of the formula' vs the power of 'individual expression,' as the musical formula has already previously worked in the past and many listeners find deviations from that formula frustrating, where as with an unfamiliar song listeners are forced to explore something as more of its own entity.

As a singer songwriter, it would be a gamble (and honestly it is for anyone, but. Broadway and opera no way unless you cleaned up a whole lot and matched their stylistic requirements in addition to technical requirements.

A great example is this, Queensryche, is known for being technically proficient and appreciated predominately for a certain sound. Even when Geoff Tate deviated from the sound he got a lot of flak from his own fans, so if this cover was to go out to Queensryche devout fans Rob is probably right.

I guess the question is how well can you replicate a pitch and keep locked into a mechanical tempo if done intentionally? That's typically the safest route, but for people like me we can find it a bit sterile and are attracted to more 'wild and untamed' human expression. 

Maybe try an open mic first. Try playing at a local park. If you have an art scene in your community check that out and see what they are up to. Maybe make some connections. Bar bands without formulaic sounds can scare of customers, so bars don't like that. Coffee shops are sometimes known for songwriter types, but if it's too edgy and loud they might spit out their coffee.

Lou Reed hung out with Andy Warhol. In general I've found strange/outsider people like unusual music more on average than the average person. The more you deviate from the norm, the more you have to rely on abnormal listeners.

[Joe Naab]

It's going to depend tremendously on the audience. An artier crowd looking to connect emotionally with an original performer, there is a chance in my opinion, if your songs are composed to suit your performance style. American Idol signing contests, definitely no.

In a bar cover band, it might be iffy. It might depend on how much you were willing to sacrifice to sound 'more like the original.' In some ways, by singing covers we are amplifying the 'power of the formula' vs the power of 'individual expression,' as the musical formula has already previously worked in the past and many listeners find deviations from that formula frustrating, where as with an unfamiliar song listeners are forced to explore something as more of its own entity.

As a singer songwriter, it would be a gamble (and honestly it is for anyone, but. Broadway and opera no way unless you cleaned up a whole lot and matched their stylistic requirements in addition to technical requirements.

A great example is this, Queensryche, is known for being technically proficient and appreciated predominately for a certain sound. Even when Geoff Tate deviated from the sound he got a lot of flak from his own fans, so if this cover was to go out to Queensryche devout fans Rob is probably right.

I guess the question is how well can you replicate a pitch and keep locked into a mechanical tempo if done intentionally? That's typically the safest route, but for people like me we can find it a bit sterile and are attracted to more 'wild and untamed' human expression. 

Maybe try an open mic first. Try playing at a local park. If you have an art scene in your community check that out and see what they are up to. Maybe make some connections. Bar bands without formulaic sounds can scare of customers, so bars don't like that. Coffee shops are sometimes known for songwriter types, but if it's too edgy and loud they might spit out their coffee.

Lou Reed hung out with Andy Warhol. In general I've found strange/outsider people like unusual music more on average than the average person. The more you deviate from the norm, the more you have to rely on abnormal listeners.

Thanks again, I appreciate your feedback. Know that if I ever sang for a cover band, I would go out of my way to reproduce the songs as close to the original as possible. I know how that works with cover band audiences. I'm not getting my question across well so I'll let go of it for now. I'll submit another song or two in the weeks to come.

[Robert Lunte]

does my voice sound like I could perform in public at a sound level of competence? And, I'm referring to my voice and the way I sing as opposed to the quality at which I'm covering the song as it was originally sung, if that makes sense.

Joe, I appreciate your willingness to be critiqued and open minded. It takes a lot of courage and says a lot about your character. It also is the shortest path to getting better, when you can set the ego aside. Since you are my customer out at the 4Pillars system, I'm going to give you a straight up answer.

1). We all only heard 1 song, 1 take. It is difficult to make a sweeping judgement call and be completely fair to you, when all we have is 1 moment / sample, first try out of the gates... so I have to give you that caveat. However...

2). The tone of your voice is complete adequate, if not more the adequate to sing in a way that an audience would love. So the basic physiology and formant colors your voice produces are ever bit just fine, however, you are not maximizing your potential in this regard because of a lack of training, strength, coordination and experience. The apparatus is there Joe, but the athletic ability to make it really come to life is not yet there.

3). "The way you sing"... relevant to #1 above... Not only us... but you too... you can't judge the "way you sing" on one song, one take, one review, etc... that would be totally unfair to yourself and unrealistic. Apart from the fact that certain songs "sit" in peoples' voices better then others. We can't even determine if this is a good song for you or not because is so early and raw in your development. Frankly Joe, you don't know "the way you sing"... is this the way you sing? I hope not, because it sounds like you need a lot of work... but after you get that work done, "the way you sing"... will be a totally different thing Joe!  So... "the way you sing" today... or the "the way you sang" this song today?  NO, an audience will not jell with it Joe, to be honest.

But, after you train, build strength, coordination, and do this damn tune over and over about 50 times, the probably will!  That is what the singing experience is for ALL OF US Joe... people that are really committed to making this a lifestyle. Even the best of on here, are still striving to get better and certain songs or movements of the voice. Maestro Kyle used to say, ".. the day you think your done, your done".  The process of getting stronger, gaining more experience and getting better never ends as a singer... Just keep going Joe... in your copy of 4Pillars...

 

- Are you training The Foundation Building Routine in the program?

- master the onsets!

- Master the acoustic modes , the way TVS organizes the vowels and resonance.

- Be sure to do a set of onsets + sirens with coordination & tuning onsets for 30 minutes. (T&R, Q&R, P&R, W&R, M&R)

then...

- Start training with the resistance training onsets with sirens to build the belt musculature. (D&R, A&R, C&R, Q&R).

 

Joe, just so you know... we have all been here before, including me... Case in point... click on my Reverberation banner below in my signature... play the song, "Souls of Silence"... Joe, it took me about 3 years, before I could sing this song. And I wrote it!!!???  For three F****** years, I couldn't sing my own F****** song!? (... it could still probably be better... ), but it took me 3 years to work up to the ability to pull this off... I had to strengthen my belts (TA muscle) and get my coordination down for narrowing and learn to Edge better to get it to work... and just flat out... good old fashioned... train, train, train, train... I worked on this F***** every night and recorded it about 6 times... at some point, I didn't even like the F***** anymore , I grew sick of it... BUT... I refused to let it beat me Joe... No song, especially a song I wrote, was going to defeat me Joe... then about the beginning of this year, I finally got it to a point where it sounded decent... Like preparing for a marathon... I had to "train up" to it Joe as an athlete... Honestly, same goes for "Behind Diverted Eyes" & "Timeless Chains"...  Everyone here can tell you a similar story.

That is the lifestyle of being a serious singer... 

Hope this helps and inspires... 

[Joe Naab]

Joe, I appreciate your willingness to be critiqued and open minded. It takes a lot of courage and says a lot about your character. It also is the shortest path to getting better, when you can set the ego aside. Since you are my customer out at the 4Pillars system, I'm going to give you a straight up answer.

1). We all only heard 1 song, 1 take. It is difficult to make a sweeping judgement call and be completely fair to you, when all we have is 1 moment / sample, first try out of the gates... so I have to give you that caveat. However...

2). The tone of your voice is complete adequate, if not more the adequate to sing in a way that an audience would love. So the basic physiology and formant colors your voice produces are ever bit just fine, however, you are not maximizing your potential in this regard because of a lack of training, strength, coordination and experience. The apparatus is there Joe, but the athletic ability to make it really come to life is not yet there.

3). "The way you sing"... relevant to #1 above... Not only us... but you too... you can't judge the "way you sing" on one song, one take, one review, etc... that would be totally unfair to yourself and unrealistic. Apart from the fact that certain songs "sit" in peoples' voices better then others. We can't even determine if this is a good song for you or not because is so early and raw in your development. Frankly Joe, you don't know "the way you sing"... is this the way you sing? I hope not, because it sounds like you need a lot of work... but after you get that work done, "the way you sing"... will be a totally different thing Joe!  So... "the way you sing" today... or the "the way you sang" this song today?  NO, an audience will not jell with it Joe, to be honest.

But, after you train, build strength, coordination, and do this damn tune over and over about 50 times, the probably will!  That is what the singing experience is for ALL OF US Joe... people that are really committed to making this a lifestyle. Even the best of on here, are still striving to get better and certain songs or movements of the voice. Maestro Kyle used to say, ".. the day you think your done, your done".  The process of getting stronger, gaining more experience and getting better never ends as a singer... Just keep going Joe... in your copy of 4Pillars...

 

- Are you training The Foundation Building Routine in the program?

- master the onsets!

- Master the acoustic modes , the way TVS organizes the vowels and resonance.

- Be sure to do a set of onsets + sirens with coordination & tuning onsets for 30 minutes. (T&R, Q&R, P&R, W&R, M&R)

then...

- Start training with the resistance training onsets with sirens to build the belt musculature. (D&R, A&R, C&R, Q&R).

 

Joe, just so you know... we have all been here before, including me... Case in point... click on my Reverberation banner below in my signature... play the song, "Souls of Silence"... Joe, it took me about 3 years, before I could sing this song. And I wrote it!!!???  For three F****** years, I couldn't sing my own F****** song!? (... it could still probably be better... ), but it took me 3 years to work up to the ability to pull this off... I had to strengthen my belts (TA muscle) and get my coordination down for narrowing and learn to Edge better to get it to work... and just flat out... good old fashioned... train, train, train, train... I worked on this F***** every night and recorded it about 6 times... at some point, I didn't even like the F***** anymore , I grew sick of it... BUT... I refused to let it beat me Joe... No song, especially a song I wrote, was going to defeat me Joe... then about the beginning of this year, I finally got it to a point where it sounded decent... Like preparing for a marathon... I had to "train up" to it Joe as an athlete... Honestly, same goes for "Behind Diverted Eyes" & "Timeless Chains"...  Everyone here can tell you a similar story.

That is the lifestyle of being a serious singer... 

Hope this helps and inspires... 

Thanks Robert! I love it all and understand. I appreciate the candor and that you guys are holding me to a high standard. It makes me want to work even harder.

[Kevin Richards]

I was just sent the link to this thread and have given said track a listen.

This is not about interpretation - this is flat out amateur in too manyways. I'm sorry if you expected me to coddle Joe; the truth has to be said here. The song performance of this is below average. If a singing student sent this to me for review I would say the same thing.

Your idea of pitch, melody, rhythm, emotional conveyance need  A LOT OF WORK. Its not interpretive, its being somewhat clueless in how to sing a song properly given its subject matter and emotional intent.

Needs more work Joe...

[Joe Naab]

Last night I listened to the original version and things make more sense now. I wasn't attempting at all to sing this like the original version, though I can see how listeners would expect that I was, and would be put off when it sounded different.

This is the way I've come to love to sing this song over the years. I didn't realize how far I had drifted from the original version. The differences in melody and rhythm were conscious choices, for better or worse.

I alter the melody, rhythm and mood of every cover that I sing, to varying degrees. I'm the only audience that I ever have, so if affords me the opportunity to sing the way I enjoy singing, a type of "creative karaoke", using my voice and the way I express myself.

Or course now I realize that to share what I do requires that I consider the mindset of a different audience. I hadn't considered this.

None of this is to say that I don't have work to do on my voice or the way I sing/interpret songs, and I hope no one thinks that's where I'm coming from. To the contrary, I train my voice every day and plan to do so for years to come. It's what I love most in life.

[Joe Naab]

I was just sent the link to this thread and have given said track a listen.

This is not about interpretation - this is flat out amateur in too manyways. I'm sorry if you expected me to coddle Joe; the truth has to be said here. The song performance of this is below average. If a singing student sent this to me for review I would say the same thing.

Your idea of pitch, melody, rhythm, emotional conveyance need  A LOT OF WORK. Its not interpretive, its being somewhat clueless in how to sing a song properly given its subject matter and emotional intent.

Needs more work Joe...

Hi Kevin. Thank you for the feedback. I don't at all expect to be coddled. Treated with courtesy, yes. Coddled, no. And I absolutely appreciate what you wrote. As I wrote above, I can sing this song 100 different ways. This is the way I chose and it didn't settle well with you and others. That's okay. It's useful to know.

I know Robert deleted a portion of your post, but I'd like to comment on that anyway, since you took a swipe at me and others saw it. I hope Robert allows me to reply.

I am not a performance coach nor have I ever claimed to be. I don't conduct private lessons of any kind and have never claimed as much. I've only just recently begun to create and offer an inexpensive, in-home vocal training course for people who can't afford private lessons with someone like yourself. I don't promote or link to my course in my signature line here, as others do. I may one day.

I've lived in South America for 15 years. I'm surrounded by all kinds of young people who love to sing and want to sing better and can't afford private lessons. I realize that this is a problem for many singers all over the world, even in developed countries like the U.S. They are who I want to help most. And it's a great course. The feedback from my first few students has been excellent. I'm adding new material all the time.

Also know that my voice connects over four octaves, from C2 to C6, though it's still rough at the edges. My intent is to fully develop the three octaves from G2 to G5 and this is becoming an easy siren for me to do, getting better by the day. I can do it across different vowels, with varied larynx positions, varied amounts of resonation, volume, and so forth.

I'm first and foremost a a student of the voice. I openly demonstrate my voice to students and prospective students, explain my approach to teaching the voice, and encourage them to learn from other coaches and courses. I make it clear to them that I'm also one of the students at my school. There is full disclosure and I'm not the slightest bit ashamed of providing vocal training workouts for people to use at home and I stand by the quality of the course.

[KillerKu]

On the subject of interpretation, have you read the lyrics and tried to figure out what you were attempting to convey with each line? This is inherently a subjective process so I'd be hesitant to say anyone can is incorrect about the meaning of a song.

But rather than worry about sounding like the original artist or not, sometimes I find it very helpful to look at the lines of a song as a story. Even then, it is possible to sing a song sarcastically, in third person, and so forth. But the further away you get from the 'generic meaning' of a song the more people won't get it, and dire hard fans might be miffed at your sacrilegious treatment. 

This is a pretty famous example of a song being treated sacrilegiously, and probably equally appreciated and hated by various camps:

Whatever audience finds value in it doesn't have to be Sinatra (singer) or Paul Anka (lyrical composer) or fans of the melody from which it was derived (Comme d'habitude).

As for the vocal training thing, I would probably just leave that alone for now. I personally have a fair amount of accumulated singing knowledge at this point from experience and the company I've kept (it's hard not to learn a bit about singing with so many singers and singing teachers here). I help a bit here and there when I can, but I wouldn't want to appear in a professional capacity or as someone with expertise. I have going on five octaves of vocal range, but for me it is not at all a measurement of my qualifications, because I consider many people more qualified. It's up to you to make the final decision what you believe on that matter.

Anyway, I probably agree with Rob most that I can't tell where your vocal abilities are at, right now from one song. What is choice, what is not choice. But amateur art is art as well. There 'are' art scenes that aren't predominately learning reproduce and demonstrate traditional techniques in each field.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_it_yourself

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsider_art

There are comparably smaller, but not non existent audiences for this kind of art. So whatever direction you choose to go, its up to you. 

[ronws]

Again, I liked it as an artistic endeavor. Is it a world class rendition on this song? Maybe not. You have a good voice and could conceivably shine well on other songs. I don't think my voice is good on every song, even ones I enjoy singing. I was working on a cover of "Jaded" by Aerosmith. I really like that song but I just don't sound like Steven and so I may never share that one.

But I could imagine you singing in public, yes, to applause, even.

 

[Musikman7002]

Hi Joe, I have listened to your track and read the comments by our forum members. Lots of great advice here and I can tell you from my band experience etc when you are doing any cover material from ICONIC singers lol people always expect it to sound just like the original artist. In some cases that may be kind of possible. There are certain singers with timbers and basic range similarities that make it easier to sing very close to the original artist. I agree with Roberts posts about striving and improving. There are songs I spent many years building the basic instrument up to a point where the execution was finally right. If you look through past pages I have many songs on here from very iconic singers and you can see on some I succeed more than others but I am always trying to improve as a vocalist and that shows in my own Original material maybe better than singing covers although even there I can see improvement on songs I tried to sing as a newbie etc. Never be discouraged, there was very little in my early singing that would have made other people think I should stick with it haha.

[Joe Naab]

On the subject of interpretation, have you read the lyrics and tried to figure out what you were attempting to convey with each line? This is inherently a subjective process so I'd be hesitant to say anyone can is incorrect about the meaning of a song.

But rather than worry about sounding like the original artist or not, sometimes I find it very helpful to look at the lines of a song as a story. Even then, it is possible to sing a song sarcastically, in third person, and so forth. But the further away you get from the 'generic meaning' of a song the more people won't get it, and dire hard fans might be miffed at your sacrilegious treatment. 

This is a pretty famous example of a song being treated sacrilegiously, and probably equally appreciated and hated by various camps:

 

As for the vocal training thing, I would probably just leave that alone for now. I personally have a fair amount of accumulated singing knowledge at this point from experience and the company I've kept (it's hard not to learn a bit about singing with so many singers and singing teachers here). I help a bit here and there when I can, but I wouldn't want to appear in a professional capacity or as someone with expertise. I have going on five octaves of vocal range, but for me it is not at all a measurement of my qualifications, because I consider many people more qualified. It's up to you to make the final decision what you believe on that matter.

Anyway, I probably agree with Rob most that I can't tell where your vocal abilities are at, right now from one song. What is choice, what is not choice. But amateur art is art as well. There 'are' art scenes that aren't predominately learning reproduce and demonstrate traditional techniques in each field.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_it_yourself

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsider_art

There are comparably smaller, but not non existent audiences for this kind of art. So whatever direction you choose to go, its up to you. 

Thank you, again. My biggest takeaway from this first submission has been that I need to pay much closer attention to communicating the intent of the lyrics. I think I'm pre-occupied with "sounding right", or "cool", or "powerful", as the expense of conveying the lyric appropriately. I didn't do that well at all here.