NOTE: I am sure I may be getting some skewed comments thinking that this is going to be biased AGAIN since one of the involved vocalists is the Journey front man Arnel Pineda (because he is one of my idols). AND, this is a very long read again. I don't expect much people to take time in reading this one.
And please, these are my own opinions. Very arugable opinions. It's ok to argue with these but please pay respect to my opinions as I would pay respect to yours.
---
It is always a controversial whenever a fellow countryman/countrywoman is chosen to sing the Philippine National Anthem before an international boxing match which includes a Filipino boxer in the competition. Why? Because there is this existing government agency that is actually monitoring the usages of our national symbols (do not get me wrong - I believe they are there for a reason, and the reason is legitimate).
It all adheres to the Republic Act 8491 (under Section 37) or the Flag and Heraldic Code (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lupang_Hinirang#Usage_and_legal_regulation or http://www.chanrobles.com/republicactno8491.htm for more detail), which states:
"The national anthem must be sung in accordance with the original musical arrangement of composer Julian Felipe, who gave it a marching tempo. Violators may be fined P5,000 to P20,000 or jailed for a year."
From the latter link: Sec. 37. "The rendition of the National Anthem, whether played or sung, shall be in accordance with the musical arrangement and composition of Julian Felipe."
Get the whole Republic Act 8491 here - http://www.glin.gov/view.action?glinID=74097
This law was written in 1998, on the 100th year of its composition, 100th year after the Philippine independence from Spain, and 54 years after its composer passed away. Again, don't get me wrong - this is the law, and it was written in the very straightforward manner. I would put respect to any kind of law that is enforced by the government. But I would like to put an effort to question how was this law written this way, and how it is actually enforced nowadays.
If this is not a law, it would just boil down to preference (but even it IS the law now, I have read and heard different people's preferences). Some say why should these singers stick to the traditional composition when they can deviate a little; some say it's not that hard to follow the original composition.
Personally, I haven't decided yet what would be my personal preference to this. I am a musician, so I may tend to be yelling out the artistic sense of it, but law itself carries a good reason behind why it is there.
The chosen singers that were to sing the national anthem during international events should feel honored, having the opportunity to represent our country in the international stage in the means of delivering what would be one of the most important national symbols. But I am sure this has not been the case, as I am sure the most recent chosen ones are aware that a group of people are watching them not to feel so proud being represented by an amazing singer, but to dissect every note the singer sings and look for faults or errors that they can pinpoint. But from the singers' points of view and awareness, had they really been bothered by that thought at the actual moment they are singing the beloved anthem? Or the more general question would me, how did they exactly feel at the moment of singing with the fact that some people are watching and listening to them in a "lawful" way?
Do you think the law was well thought and well written? I understand the manifested objective of this law - to respect and to instill usage with respect of our National Anthem at all times. But do you think this written law is too stiff? Was it intentional to seem that way? Or does it lack something?
In my opinion, yes it does lack something. It honestly is lacking more than just one factor. Actually what is lacking are really big factors if you are going to write a law. So let me reiterate - "The national anthem must be sung in accordance with the original musical arrangement of composer Julian Felipe...". So where here in this law is the ORIGINAL MUSICAL ARRANGEMENT? Where do we look for a reference? If we are bound to this law, why are we also bound to look up for the original composition which is not really attached to the law itself. I think that is absurd.
By common sense, one way or another, we would know know the tune for the lead vocalist of our national anthem, whatever the key maybe (but BY LAW, it should be sang in the musical composition by Felipe, including the key signature). BY HEART, if I may add. But that is not enough not to include the composition (or at least an official reference) to the actual law. You know why? Today, I tried looking for a score sheet of Lupang Hinirang, but all I got is a two page sheet in the following link (http://www.free-scores.com/download-sheet-music.php?pdf=16729) which is an four-piece acapella arrangement of the song (with the credit goes to a NON-Julian Felipe).
My next concern would be very much related to the above fact. Is there or is not there an existing earlier composition for the voicing parts (e.g. SATB)? Take note that Felipe's original composition is an incidental music (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incidental_music) and had no lyrics to go with it (until the next year). So BY COMMON SENSE, how do singers should cope up with the law? Sing however the trumpets or any other melodic instruments were played? So yeah, it's easy to say there are musical arrangements made for the lyrics, but I haven't found anything about Felipe's rearrangement for this (as it says ORIGINAL and JULIAN FELIPE = music with no voice).
And touching more on the SATB voicing (take a peek on the La Diva's video below - I know it's not a SATB setup), ASSUMING that the first instance the original music was meshed with voice OR ASSUMING that the first instance the original music was played by a number of melodic instruments on a SATB setup (or any voicing setup), is it enough for us to revisit the written law again and say that it's clear how to simply follow it? Again, no is my answer. A solo singer does not have a reference voice to follow with the assumptions I have made above, and even if the assumptions were not placed, that would lead the solo singer AGAIN to a blind spot still, citing again the "original composition" which is an incidental music. It's actually hard to miss this point out as there are a lot of public establishments out there which have been making use of the national anthem with a choir (or at least a SATB quartet) with different voicing parts (especially radio stations signing on/off) which are in the same lawful umbrella too.
La Diva:
So comparing those radio station quartets to the solo singers (who are obviously getting more attention with a percentage of detractors compared to the former), I believe you can sing along with any of the two entities without any problems (I can go musically technical on this part why, but it is not necessary for now), let alone the tempo as I will touch on that part just a little later on this entry. Take a peek on the videos below on Arnel Pineda, Charice Pempengco, and Regine Velasquez. They have delivered pretty much the same notes (the key signature may differ a bit), and basically any one can just sing along with their renditions with minimal problems(even if it's not needed). But the debate comes in the last part comes in. The line "Ang mamatay ng dahil sa'yo". Firstly, I surely remember from school that the syllables "-tay ng da-hil sa-" is just made within one measure for a 4/4 time measure, or two 2/4 time measure for the standard marching tempo (series of quarter notes), but at times those syllables are sung in two measures for a 4/4 time measure, and let alone the 2/4 time measure because a series of half notes for this part of the song isn't so "marching" sounding. So again, which is the correct composition? There is no reference. But concentrating on the notes themselves, by COMMON MUSICAL SENSE, the unison should sing the last line on notes (of the key signature) MI-DO-RE-(lower)TI-TI-DO. But I believe, in choirs the notes are more than that. In the SATB voicing, I am guessing that would be the tenor part, and the soprano part would be MI-DO-RE-SOL-SOL-SOL. That's exactly how the above mentioned vocalists did in the videos below (except for Regine who sang it MI-DO-RE-SOL-SOL-DO), and for me that's not exactly a way of showing some artistic expression as an erroneous connotation of "doing it your own way" but simply taking on a different set of notes that has been pre-arranged, simply to make the song exclamatory and more dramatic. It may prove to be a simple technique, but it is an effective one. And musicality-wise, I have to say the way those artists have sang it, they did it WITHIN the original composition because even if I didn't live in 1898 to hear the original version, I am sure those notes I have mentioned above were hit by any melodic instrument too.
Arnel Pineda:
Charice Pempengco:
Regine Velasquez:
Martin Nievera and Lani Misalucha's version in the ending were really their "artistic expressions" in a sense that the notes they sang were really off the original composition.
Martin Nievera:
Lani Misalucha:
How about the tempo? The law says that it should be played/sung on a marching tempo. Again, where is the reference to this marching tempo? Does the law have to rely on human common sense again on defining our own idea of a marching tempo? Or is there a separate law wherein a "march" tempo is definitive? But alright, for curiosity's sake, a marching tempo ranges from 120 up to 200 BPM. The law writer on this one must have felt lazy searching for at least the definite tempo rate, or he/she didn't feel the need to make the indication.
But now going back to the original written law, yes, I am very sure in some way, composer Julian Felipe would have appreciated this law as a nationalistic sign to respect his work for the country. But did anyone from the National Historic Institute foresee the string of incidents happening? If he were still alive, would you think he would appreciate the NHI's efforts in keeping the national anthem respected by IMPOSING FINES and JAILTIME?
Nobody can blame the NHI for doing what they are supposed to do. And at the same time, it's plain easy to call the attention of these chosen singers (notably the singers in the videos below) because if you slap the law to them, they'd all be technically defenseless. But the bad thing really is NHI is enforcing the law that they obviously did not write BY COMMON SENSE because there are a lot of loopholes in that section itself and the rest of the chapter. The closest ones that I consider to be "safe" are Sarah, Kyla and Karylle, but no still because the way they sang it wasn't really in the marching tempo (normally a 2/4 measure) even though they sang it as how Felipe composed it in terms of the notes. But when at times (or even if not at all) they say they sang it with nationalistic pride and honor and with all their hearts no matter how they sang the national anthem, I do believe them.
Sarah Geronimo:
Kyla:
Karylle:
As how the law was written and as how the NHI is enforcing the law, I don't think there is a single musician involved in the formation of that law and enforcing of the law, except for Julian Felipe himself. If there is at least a single musician other than Felipe involved, please let me know.
The law as it is now would either be very stiff or very vague. If I have the necessary power, I would have that law rewritten or at least put the necessary reference to it. The reason why - I have already enumerated them above. If the law is going to be too stiff to be revised, why not have a chosen singer sing the national anthem in front of the NHI people privately, agree on how the singer should deliver the anthem in the big stage even on the little deviations, then persecute the singer if he or she does not do it according to the agreement. If that still does not work, why not do what some other people I hear suggesting - play a pre-recorded mp3 file of the anthem. You can actually have different versions of it. In that way, no one has to worry who's doing a bad job.
So, here are my opinions to this. I do not mean to detract any person or group of people in this entry. I do not intend to degrade that law which has been present for 12 years already. I do not intend to push some movement to revise the said law, or something really stupid like that. These are just my opinions and nothing more than that.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Monday, March 15, 2010
Head2Head: Steve Perry vs. Arnel Pineda Part 4 - The Other Guys
Between the times after Steve Perry's departure and Arnel Pineda's arrival, there were two vocalists that sang for the band Journey. As much as Pineda's popularity with his voice being widely known resembling Perry's voice (but I did disagree to this in some level in the previous entry), the other two singers may not have been as close as Pineda in terms of resemblance, but they do pack punches of their own.
Firstly, Steve Augeri.
He came in the band in 1998. He basically looks like Kenny G, with that long blond curly hair with tight leather pants and long sleeves. You may be quite mislead by his sort of "gayish" demeanors, especially in the 2001 Las Vegas concert, but he certainly can sing. For my opinion, his voice suits the ballad songs of Journey. In fact, I think his rendition of Open Arms tops all present and past Journey singers.
His voice presents a strong but still conservative attitude. It's like you know he's delivering some power in some lines, and at the same time he seems not putting much effort to it, which is really good. The end result is a soft rocker/balladeer.
He has this certain level of creativity too (but not too exploratory as Perry). In his 2001 concert, you'd hear his style in different ways. Check out the video below of his rendition of Faithfully (that could have honestly be the best Faithfully rendition among the Journey singers). If you can notice how he sang the line "Sleep alone tonight..." in 0:54-0:55, he sang the syllable "to..." in the word "tonight" in a quick melisma style (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melisma), singing three quick sixteenth notes of D#4, C#4 and B3 in succession. No other (at least in my knowledge) has done this aside from the sixteen year old kid from Batangas, Philippines named Jovit Baldivino in the TV show contest Pilipinas Got Talent. Also, listen to 2:18-2:19 of the same video, where he sang an additional syllable, completing his own lyrics "THERE'S always another show" and it turned out nice.
What really good in Augeri's singing is he would always take his time in every syllable he would sing, and that results to him that the lyrics that come out of his mouth would tend to be understandable (compared to Perry's somewhat "garbled" singing in some songs). But yeah, I mentioned above that his rendition of Faithfully could have been the best one among the Journey singers but not, because his vocal range may not be as wide as Perry nor Pineda. If you listen at the ending of the same video (3:52 onwards), when he hits C#5, he's already faltering and may sound he's already employing falsetto, but still alright. But when he hits D#5, that's already a subpar compared to Perry, Pineda and surprisingly to Deen Castronovo too. Try to listen to other Journey songs reaching those high notes, and you'll know what I mean.
In my opinion, if this guy didn't hurt his throat, he'd still be singing for Journey.
Next up is Jeff Scott Soto.
There are not much decent Soto videos with Journey out there, so I just settled for a few non-Journey songs that he sang. So this part may be not so definitive as compared to the other parts of this blog.
Soto has a bad ass voice definitely, and quite the opposite of Augeri. If Augeri has a conservative voice, Soto wouldn't conserve his voice and he doesn't sound doing it too. I can't really say if he has the range compared to Perry or Pineda, but in the video of Til The End of Time above, he hit B4 and C#5 in succession beautifully.
Not really much about to say about him, but in my opinion it's a good thing that he left Journey. I am not saying the guy treated the band badly or the other way around, but on the musical side, his voice would be more suitable for alternative rock (like those two videos above) rather than Journey's power ballad / glam rock genre.
So those are the two vocalists that came after Perry and before Pineda. But how about this guy...
Deen Castronovo.
Deen is Journey's drummer since 1998, along with Augeri's entry in the band. If you would see him play the drums, you'll see how much of a bad ass this guy is. The song, Still They Ride, in the video above is, in my opinion, the most soulful song that he sang while hitting the drums. That was in their concert here in Manila in 2009.
He doesn't only hit the drums. He can sing too, and his voice pretty much resembles Perry's. He never was listed as Journey's official lead vocalist, but he does sing a few Journey songs in their concerts, being really popular in singing the song Mother, Father. You hear him hitting those high notes with his modal voice while his concentration isn't really paid attention on singing only. That makes him a really talented musician. What more if he's just standing, focusing only on the singing part. That makes me really wonder what kind of wonders he can do.
I think if he really wanted to sing, he'd beat the sh*t out of Perry and Pineda. But who needs competition when they can sing and play together?
Still not convinced on Deen?
Eat your heart out!
Firstly, Steve Augeri.
He came in the band in 1998. He basically looks like Kenny G, with that long blond curly hair with tight leather pants and long sleeves. You may be quite mislead by his sort of "gayish" demeanors, especially in the 2001 Las Vegas concert, but he certainly can sing. For my opinion, his voice suits the ballad songs of Journey. In fact, I think his rendition of Open Arms tops all present and past Journey singers.
His voice presents a strong but still conservative attitude. It's like you know he's delivering some power in some lines, and at the same time he seems not putting much effort to it, which is really good. The end result is a soft rocker/balladeer.
He has this certain level of creativity too (but not too exploratory as Perry). In his 2001 concert, you'd hear his style in different ways. Check out the video below of his rendition of Faithfully (that could have honestly be the best Faithfully rendition among the Journey singers). If you can notice how he sang the line "Sleep alone tonight..." in 0:54-0:55, he sang the syllable "to..." in the word "tonight" in a quick melisma style (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melisma), singing three quick sixteenth notes of D#4, C#4 and B3 in succession. No other (at least in my knowledge) has done this aside from the sixteen year old kid from Batangas, Philippines named Jovit Baldivino in the TV show contest Pilipinas Got Talent. Also, listen to 2:18-2:19 of the same video, where he sang an additional syllable, completing his own lyrics "THERE'S always another show" and it turned out nice.
What really good in Augeri's singing is he would always take his time in every syllable he would sing, and that results to him that the lyrics that come out of his mouth would tend to be understandable (compared to Perry's somewhat "garbled" singing in some songs). But yeah, I mentioned above that his rendition of Faithfully could have been the best one among the Journey singers but not, because his vocal range may not be as wide as Perry nor Pineda. If you listen at the ending of the same video (3:52 onwards), when he hits C#5, he's already faltering and may sound he's already employing falsetto, but still alright. But when he hits D#5, that's already a subpar compared to Perry, Pineda and surprisingly to Deen Castronovo too. Try to listen to other Journey songs reaching those high notes, and you'll know what I mean.
In my opinion, if this guy didn't hurt his throat, he'd still be singing for Journey.
Next up is Jeff Scott Soto.
There are not much decent Soto videos with Journey out there, so I just settled for a few non-Journey songs that he sang. So this part may be not so definitive as compared to the other parts of this blog.
Soto has a bad ass voice definitely, and quite the opposite of Augeri. If Augeri has a conservative voice, Soto wouldn't conserve his voice and he doesn't sound doing it too. I can't really say if he has the range compared to Perry or Pineda, but in the video of Til The End of Time above, he hit B4 and C#5 in succession beautifully.
Not really much about to say about him, but in my opinion it's a good thing that he left Journey. I am not saying the guy treated the band badly or the other way around, but on the musical side, his voice would be more suitable for alternative rock (like those two videos above) rather than Journey's power ballad / glam rock genre.
So those are the two vocalists that came after Perry and before Pineda. But how about this guy...
Deen Castronovo.
Deen is Journey's drummer since 1998, along with Augeri's entry in the band. If you would see him play the drums, you'll see how much of a bad ass this guy is. The song, Still They Ride, in the video above is, in my opinion, the most soulful song that he sang while hitting the drums. That was in their concert here in Manila in 2009.
He doesn't only hit the drums. He can sing too, and his voice pretty much resembles Perry's. He never was listed as Journey's official lead vocalist, but he does sing a few Journey songs in their concerts, being really popular in singing the song Mother, Father. You hear him hitting those high notes with his modal voice while his concentration isn't really paid attention on singing only. That makes him a really talented musician. What more if he's just standing, focusing only on the singing part. That makes me really wonder what kind of wonders he can do.
I think if he really wanted to sing, he'd beat the sh*t out of Perry and Pineda. But who needs competition when they can sing and play together?
Still not convinced on Deen?
Eat your heart out!
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Head2Head: Steve Perry vs. Arnel Pineda Part 3 - Live Performances
This entry had been a long wait due to an audition for a lead vocalist spot that I was getting ready for (which I am still waiting for the decision of the band whether they will take me or not). Nonetheless, I am back here to do some blog work.
----
This part of the head2head feature comes actually with a surprise for me. More revelations that I had never realized before. So let's get on with it.
NOTE: I have viewed quite a number of videos of both performers, but I will just be posted just a few notables.
Some say the band's (not only the singer's) live performances really tell their real talent (apart the talent in songwriting and composing of course). For me it's not entirely true but a big part of it is true. But let's speak of the lead vocalist alone. Live performances give vocalists the chance to show their ability to replicate IN REAL TIME (or even tweak a bit crediting their creativity) the songs they have recorded on studio where they could have done it NOT in real time. They also give the vocalists to show longevity, stamina and endurance mainly of their singing voices (and Journey songs are songs to be reckoned with). Also, live performances can reveal a vocalist's level of showmanship - one's ability to connect with the audience.
Perry and Pineda definitely got what it takes to deliver long live performances without even breaking a sweat off their asses, but if you try to closely watch their performances, there are a number of things that can be significantly noticeable, and maybe splits the two singers in some fashion more effective than the comparison of their studio performances.
As contrary to popular belief that they have very similar voices, I disagree again. Yes they do have similar vocal range (in the countertenor range), but they have different and distinct timbres. Perry has this trademark rasp, and Pineda has what I would say a clean voice. Making an analogy to a guitar, Perry is to distorted (but of course not too distorted), as Pineda is to clean. Both of them delivered effectively in their live performances with their own styles.
I have noticed that Perry's voice is somewhat different in live compared to the studio versions, where Pineda would maintain his studio voice in live performances. This is very noticeable in the song Separate Ways. I have mentioned in the previous entry that Perry and Pineda had similar delivery in the studio versions of this song, but in Perry's live performance of this song, his voice was thinner. Well, he had a better delivery in his NY 1994 performance than the video below, but he sang it two semitones lower. The video below features Perry singing Separate Ways (the longer version already) in Houston 1981.
Perry's trademark rasp is still true in his live performances. His voice quality in his live performance of Faithfully (find clip here - http://theamateurmusicanalyst.blogspot.com/2010/02/head2head-steve-perry-vs-arnel-pineda.html) would more or less be the same, which is good.
Perry appeared to be the more creative live performer than Pineda, in a sense that he would play with vocal notes (maybe instantaneously on set). He would bend and get out of the usual ways he sings the songs, and make it sound beautiful. Check his 1994 in NY video -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W9SatPrhmU&feature=related (I am sorry about this, embedding is disabled in this video by request). Anyway in Perry's performance there (I'm guessing not with Journey), his creativity in this song was really at the highest level. The only bad thing about that is he sang it two semitones lower than the original. See video below for his less creative (but still highly creative) live performance of the same song in Houston 1981:
Like what I have mentioned above, Pineda would sound pretty much the same in his studio and live performances. His clean and very whole modal voice is very true in all of his performances. And again, as he would do in his studio versions, he does emphasize long notes very effectively. Check his live performance of Faithfully in Chile 2008 concert (find clip here - http://theamateurmusicanalyst.blogspot.com/2010/02/head2head-steve-perry-vs-arnel-pineda.html). The whole song had him display his ability to sing long notes but check his rendition in 2:28-2:30. I never heard Perry do that as how Pineda has been doing it.
Pineda has been proven very gutsy already in his studio versions, but he would just go further in his live performances, hitting those high notes with longer measures, yielding an even more whole voice compared to his studio voice. His vibrato is just top notch, most especially when hitting those tied whole B4 notes in the line "somewhere in the night" in Don't Stop Believin, where in Perry's version, he just hit that note right on with no vibrato.
In the showmanship sense, Pineda just beaten the shit out of Perry. Yea, Perry would do some gestures, and would walk around the stage, interacting a bit with bandmates and speaking with the audience. But Pineda would do a lot better. And I have seen his ultimate performance in the band's and Pineda's homecoming concert here in Manila in 2009, singing Separate Ways. All those moving and running around and jumping around. And any vocalist would know (including I myself) how hard it is to hit those B4 and C#5 notes properly while trying to get down and shake the fans' hands. Well, it may be kinda biased, but that's his first homecoming concert with Journey. He must have been really happy doing those on stage. And mind you, Separate Ways was at least the tenth song already they performed that night, with all that energy Pineda spent before singing Separate Ways (which in my opinion is a very "tiring" song to sing), and he still had that energy to finish the whole concert. Talk about stamina.
And take note: Pineda is already in his 40s, while Perry was in his 30s when he was doing most of these stuff. But it seems Pineda appears to have the more youthful energy than the other vocalist, which is more appropriate for the songs Separate Ways, Don't Stop Believin', Anyway You Want It, and those other songs on that tempo.
As that energy Pineda would show us, that actually takes him down on the mellow songs, particularly on Faithfully, Open Arms and Lights. Pineda would sound overly intense singing those songs (with the exception of his performance guesting in Ellen's show singing Faithfully, which in my opinion his most soulful and relaxed performance of that song), while Perry would maintain his "seemingly hypnotic tone" which is more appropriate in those songs. This difference itself wouldn't be that hurtful on the studio versions, because you would not see the facial expressions of the vocalists, but on live performances, some of Pineda's mannerisms while singing those mellow songs would seem inappropriate, and in a way, it has an effect on the listeners/viewers on how they think Pineda would sound like. The video below is their performance here in Manila singing Open Arms, which had him moving like he wasn't supposed to, at least in my honest opinion. I wish Pineda would just do Open Arms or any other mellow song they got as how he did move in their concert in Chile, AND minus his overly intense delivery in the stanzas.
Or just try to do what Perry did in their Oakland 1982 concert (at least the movement and stanza parts):
I have read a few comments that came to my attention - in live performances, Perry had this tendency to sing that would be hard to understand. So I did try to listen to the videos closely, as if I do not know the lyrics. I found that even though Perry and have these little pronunciation issues, Pineda appears to sing clearly than Perry. I can be a bit technical about it, but I wouldn't bother.
So that's it for now. Definitely two both great vocalists, each with their own strengths and weaknesses (at least for my own pair of eyes and ears). It's really a matter of preference.
Now the last installment of this entry coming up!
----
This part of the head2head feature comes actually with a surprise for me. More revelations that I had never realized before. So let's get on with it.
NOTE: I have viewed quite a number of videos of both performers, but I will just be posted just a few notables.
Some say the band's (not only the singer's) live performances really tell their real talent (apart the talent in songwriting and composing of course). For me it's not entirely true but a big part of it is true. But let's speak of the lead vocalist alone. Live performances give vocalists the chance to show their ability to replicate IN REAL TIME (or even tweak a bit crediting their creativity) the songs they have recorded on studio where they could have done it NOT in real time. They also give the vocalists to show longevity, stamina and endurance mainly of their singing voices (and Journey songs are songs to be reckoned with). Also, live performances can reveal a vocalist's level of showmanship - one's ability to connect with the audience.
Perry and Pineda definitely got what it takes to deliver long live performances without even breaking a sweat off their asses, but if you try to closely watch their performances, there are a number of things that can be significantly noticeable, and maybe splits the two singers in some fashion more effective than the comparison of their studio performances.
As contrary to popular belief that they have very similar voices, I disagree again. Yes they do have similar vocal range (in the countertenor range), but they have different and distinct timbres. Perry has this trademark rasp, and Pineda has what I would say a clean voice. Making an analogy to a guitar, Perry is to distorted (but of course not too distorted), as Pineda is to clean. Both of them delivered effectively in their live performances with their own styles.
I have noticed that Perry's voice is somewhat different in live compared to the studio versions, where Pineda would maintain his studio voice in live performances. This is very noticeable in the song Separate Ways. I have mentioned in the previous entry that Perry and Pineda had similar delivery in the studio versions of this song, but in Perry's live performance of this song, his voice was thinner. Well, he had a better delivery in his NY 1994 performance than the video below, but he sang it two semitones lower. The video below features Perry singing Separate Ways (the longer version already) in Houston 1981.
Perry's trademark rasp is still true in his live performances. His voice quality in his live performance of Faithfully (find clip here - http://theamateurmusicanalyst.blogspot.com/2010/02/head2head-steve-perry-vs-arnel-pineda.html) would more or less be the same, which is good.
Perry appeared to be the more creative live performer than Pineda, in a sense that he would play with vocal notes (maybe instantaneously on set). He would bend and get out of the usual ways he sings the songs, and make it sound beautiful. Check his 1994 in NY video -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W9SatPrhmU&feature=related (I am sorry about this, embedding is disabled in this video by request). Anyway in Perry's performance there (I'm guessing not with Journey), his creativity in this song was really at the highest level. The only bad thing about that is he sang it two semitones lower than the original. See video below for his less creative (but still highly creative) live performance of the same song in Houston 1981:
Like what I have mentioned above, Pineda would sound pretty much the same in his studio and live performances. His clean and very whole modal voice is very true in all of his performances. And again, as he would do in his studio versions, he does emphasize long notes very effectively. Check his live performance of Faithfully in Chile 2008 concert (find clip here - http://theamateurmusicanalyst.blogspot.com/2010/02/head2head-steve-perry-vs-arnel-pineda.html). The whole song had him display his ability to sing long notes but check his rendition in 2:28-2:30. I never heard Perry do that as how Pineda has been doing it.
Pineda has been proven very gutsy already in his studio versions, but he would just go further in his live performances, hitting those high notes with longer measures, yielding an even more whole voice compared to his studio voice. His vibrato is just top notch, most especially when hitting those tied whole B4 notes in the line "somewhere in the night" in Don't Stop Believin, where in Perry's version, he just hit that note right on with no vibrato.
In the showmanship sense, Pineda just beaten the shit out of Perry. Yea, Perry would do some gestures, and would walk around the stage, interacting a bit with bandmates and speaking with the audience. But Pineda would do a lot better. And I have seen his ultimate performance in the band's and Pineda's homecoming concert here in Manila in 2009, singing Separate Ways. All those moving and running around and jumping around. And any vocalist would know (including I myself) how hard it is to hit those B4 and C#5 notes properly while trying to get down and shake the fans' hands. Well, it may be kinda biased, but that's his first homecoming concert with Journey. He must have been really happy doing those on stage. And mind you, Separate Ways was at least the tenth song already they performed that night, with all that energy Pineda spent before singing Separate Ways (which in my opinion is a very "tiring" song to sing), and he still had that energy to finish the whole concert. Talk about stamina.
And take note: Pineda is already in his 40s, while Perry was in his 30s when he was doing most of these stuff. But it seems Pineda appears to have the more youthful energy than the other vocalist, which is more appropriate for the songs Separate Ways, Don't Stop Believin', Anyway You Want It, and those other songs on that tempo.
As that energy Pineda would show us, that actually takes him down on the mellow songs, particularly on Faithfully, Open Arms and Lights. Pineda would sound overly intense singing those songs (with the exception of his performance guesting in Ellen's show singing Faithfully, which in my opinion his most soulful and relaxed performance of that song), while Perry would maintain his "seemingly hypnotic tone" which is more appropriate in those songs. This difference itself wouldn't be that hurtful on the studio versions, because you would not see the facial expressions of the vocalists, but on live performances, some of Pineda's mannerisms while singing those mellow songs would seem inappropriate, and in a way, it has an effect on the listeners/viewers on how they think Pineda would sound like. The video below is their performance here in Manila singing Open Arms, which had him moving like he wasn't supposed to, at least in my honest opinion. I wish Pineda would just do Open Arms or any other mellow song they got as how he did move in their concert in Chile, AND minus his overly intense delivery in the stanzas.
Or just try to do what Perry did in their Oakland 1982 concert (at least the movement and stanza parts):
I have read a few comments that came to my attention - in live performances, Perry had this tendency to sing that would be hard to understand. So I did try to listen to the videos closely, as if I do not know the lyrics. I found that even though Perry and have these little pronunciation issues, Pineda appears to sing clearly than Perry. I can be a bit technical about it, but I wouldn't bother.
So that's it for now. Definitely two both great vocalists, each with their own strengths and weaknesses (at least for my own pair of eyes and ears). It's really a matter of preference.
Now the last installment of this entry coming up!
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Head2Head: Steve Perry vs. Arnel Pineda Part 2 - Studio Versions
So now we're going to focus on the studio versions of the same songs they have recorded. I have chosen the following songs for comparison (from the slow ballad songs to the power rock songs):
1. Faithfully
2. Open Arms
3. Don't Stop Believin'
4. Separate Ways
By the way, I am hoping I will not rouse fans around (more or Arnel's fans as I am a Filipino too), and I'd like to keep everything as unbiased as possible.
1. Faithfully
Steve - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vUriVEn7FU
Arnel - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNBSo44t5a8
The first difference that I have spotted, On delivering the very first line, it's almost a definite given that Steve's voice can tend to be more "soothing" to listeners compared to Arnel's.
I have also noticed that Arnel seems to be more able to sustain long notes longer than Steve, and at times that can tell that he is able to put more emphasis on some words better than the other vocalist. One of the notables too is when they deliver the line "Two strangers learn to fall in love again..." - Arnel made a good emphasis and power on the line, and Steve just delivered a dotted quarter note and just did a rest the measure. In my opinion, the emphasis as Arnel had done it would be more suitable as in those parts Neal (lead guitars) was already delivering his power lines. There are also other parts of the song that manifest this.
As reference in the first statement for this song, Steve having the "more soothing" voice, it may seem that Steve may appear on the speakers as the more relaxed singer as Arnel.
2. Open Arms
Steve - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHHHmi_8Bhs (note: this isn't the official Open Arms video, but a very hilarious video. thought of sharing it)
Arnel - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OqLI1X72RE
This is going to be actually a difference in preference in the part of the listeners. Both are equally musically effective in delivering the song. If you prefer the rock star leaning to a thin voice compared to Axl Rose, listen to Steve's version, but if you prefer a whole voice all throughout the song, go for Arnel. Steve delivered such power in this song that I thought it was missing in Faithfully, while Arnel was getting the rasp on high notes especially in the chorus parts. Too bad this is is just three and a half minutes long, that they could have showcased more of their vocal skills in this very nice song.
There is, by the way, a surprise about this song in the last part of this head to head.
3. Don't Stop Believin'
Steve - http://www.trilulilu.ro/magic_dream/3f00a3d4117350
Arnel - http://www.livevideo.com/video/C7A2769589614AF2852B9694639AD855/journey-don-t-stop-believin.aspx
This song, let alone which singer would do better, deserves a powerful rocker. The way Steve sang this song, in my opinion, is a bit soft. Arnel gave justice more to this song than the original counterpart, maybe because of Steve's more relaxed demeanor on the microphone. His voice was a bit reasonable wholler than Steve's. The range in the whole in both versions aren't really different, but noticably, Steve's famous rasp becomes less evident when he tries to hit the high notes (unlike Michael Bolton's seemingly infinite supply of rasp even on high notes). But undoubtedly, both singers can deliver the eight count (2 whole notes) on the chorus line "...hiding somewhere in the night." So that actually slices the gap of the two singers in terms of vocal timbre. I honestly like Arnel's version of this compared to Steve's, and even to the other past Journey vocalists.
On a side note, Steve surprisingly sang this way better in live.
4. Separate Ways (Worlds Apart)
Steve - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQbZRMLKozk
Arnel - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2UxLRG2kNE
Here's actually a surprise for me. They sounded almost exactly the same in this song except for a slight mispronunciation on Steve's version in the second stanza, which isn't really bad (overstating the word "forgivable"), and a little creative differences. Arnel beautifully nailed the last note (a whole B4 note using modal register) of the refrains as Steve did in his version. For the untrained ear, you can almost never distinguish the difference between the two singers for this song. No vocal notes were delivered longer by one singer compared to the other.
But perhaps the biggest differences lie on two things: firstly, because the Revelation release (Arnel's) is an extended version of the Escape release (Steve's), extended by an extra 1:03 with a couple of additional riffs in-fixed in the ending of the song, and secondly, Arnel just raised the bar of his vocal range in the modal register.
The first difference: Check out 4:42 up to 5:11 of the Revelation release. Those riffs are additional ones. The lines "I still love you girl, I really love you girl" and "If he ever hurts you, true love won't desert you" sang by Arnel are nasty lines. The first line was sang with starting note at B4, then just hits C5 and D5 with one note each. That's not easy. And the next line was sung with starting note at B4 then peaks at E5 for two notes.
And if you think that's really hard (well it is really hard), wait til you get to the ending which brings us to the second difference. Steve in the Escape release hit the whole B4 notes twice. That's actually already an exclamation point for an ending of a song. But Arnel did it differently and a lot harder, hitting a whole B4 note in the first then doing a nasty portamento from B4 to E5, and he did not have to employ falsetto in the whole process.
My friend researched about this and Arnel was the first Journey vocalist who did this. I do not want to think that Arnel's predecessors (including Perry) were not capable of doing it, and just thought that they just did not think of doing it. So that's +1 in creativity and guts for Pineda.
So wait for the next installment of this head to head :)
1. Faithfully
2. Open Arms
3. Don't Stop Believin'
4. Separate Ways
By the way, I am hoping I will not rouse fans around (more or Arnel's fans as I am a Filipino too), and I'd like to keep everything as unbiased as possible.
1. Faithfully
Steve - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vUriVEn7FU
Arnel - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNBSo44t5a8
The first difference that I have spotted, On delivering the very first line, it's almost a definite given that Steve's voice can tend to be more "soothing" to listeners compared to Arnel's.
I have also noticed that Arnel seems to be more able to sustain long notes longer than Steve, and at times that can tell that he is able to put more emphasis on some words better than the other vocalist. One of the notables too is when they deliver the line "Two strangers learn to fall in love again..." - Arnel made a good emphasis and power on the line, and Steve just delivered a dotted quarter note and just did a rest the measure. In my opinion, the emphasis as Arnel had done it would be more suitable as in those parts Neal (lead guitars) was already delivering his power lines. There are also other parts of the song that manifest this.
As reference in the first statement for this song, Steve having the "more soothing" voice, it may seem that Steve may appear on the speakers as the more relaxed singer as Arnel.
2. Open Arms
Steve - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHHHmi_8Bhs (note: this isn't the official Open Arms video, but a very hilarious video. thought of sharing it)
Arnel - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OqLI1X72RE
This is going to be actually a difference in preference in the part of the listeners. Both are equally musically effective in delivering the song. If you prefer the rock star leaning to a thin voice compared to Axl Rose, listen to Steve's version, but if you prefer a whole voice all throughout the song, go for Arnel. Steve delivered such power in this song that I thought it was missing in Faithfully, while Arnel was getting the rasp on high notes especially in the chorus parts. Too bad this is is just three and a half minutes long, that they could have showcased more of their vocal skills in this very nice song.
There is, by the way, a surprise about this song in the last part of this head to head.
3. Don't Stop Believin'
Steve - http://www.trilulilu.ro/magic_dream/3f00a3d4117350
Arnel - http://www.livevideo.com/video/C7A2769589614AF2852B9694639AD855/journey-don-t-stop-believin.aspx
This song, let alone which singer would do better, deserves a powerful rocker. The way Steve sang this song, in my opinion, is a bit soft. Arnel gave justice more to this song than the original counterpart, maybe because of Steve's more relaxed demeanor on the microphone. His voice was a bit reasonable wholler than Steve's. The range in the whole in both versions aren't really different, but noticably, Steve's famous rasp becomes less evident when he tries to hit the high notes (unlike Michael Bolton's seemingly infinite supply of rasp even on high notes). But undoubtedly, both singers can deliver the eight count (2 whole notes) on the chorus line "...hiding somewhere in the night." So that actually slices the gap of the two singers in terms of vocal timbre. I honestly like Arnel's version of this compared to Steve's, and even to the other past Journey vocalists.
On a side note, Steve surprisingly sang this way better in live.
4. Separate Ways (Worlds Apart)
Steve - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQbZRMLKozk
Arnel - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2UxLRG2kNE
Here's actually a surprise for me. They sounded almost exactly the same in this song except for a slight mispronunciation on Steve's version in the second stanza, which isn't really bad (overstating the word "forgivable"), and a little creative differences. Arnel beautifully nailed the last note (a whole B4 note using modal register) of the refrains as Steve did in his version. For the untrained ear, you can almost never distinguish the difference between the two singers for this song. No vocal notes were delivered longer by one singer compared to the other.
But perhaps the biggest differences lie on two things: firstly, because the Revelation release (Arnel's) is an extended version of the Escape release (Steve's), extended by an extra 1:03 with a couple of additional riffs in-fixed in the ending of the song, and secondly, Arnel just raised the bar of his vocal range in the modal register.
The first difference: Check out 4:42 up to 5:11 of the Revelation release. Those riffs are additional ones. The lines "I still love you girl, I really love you girl" and "If he ever hurts you, true love won't desert you" sang by Arnel are nasty lines. The first line was sang with starting note at B4, then just hits C5 and D5 with one note each. That's not easy. And the next line was sung with starting note at B4 then peaks at E5 for two notes.
And if you think that's really hard (well it is really hard), wait til you get to the ending which brings us to the second difference. Steve in the Escape release hit the whole B4 notes twice. That's actually already an exclamation point for an ending of a song. But Arnel did it differently and a lot harder, hitting a whole B4 note in the first then doing a nasty portamento from B4 to E5, and he did not have to employ falsetto in the whole process.
My friend researched about this and Arnel was the first Journey vocalist who did this. I do not want to think that Arnel's predecessors (including Perry) were not capable of doing it, and just thought that they just did not think of doing it. So that's +1 in creativity and guts for Pineda.
So wait for the next installment of this head to head :)
Friday, February 19, 2010
Head2Head: Steve Perry vs. Arnel Pineda Part 1 - Introduction
I already have four remakes of Journey songs (with Arnel Pineda) here in my phone, namely Faithfully, Open Arms, Separate Ways and Don't Stop Believin'. Before I have thought of making this entry about these two great Journey singers, and have actually tried listening to the above mentioned songs sung by Steve Perry, I was already hoping by my simple methods that I was to do for this entry will reveal, at least for my own opinion, who would turn out to be the overall better singer in their prime. But honestly, I was wrong and when the other reviews said Steve and Arnel have very similar voices, they were right. My opinion is they have very distinctive voices, but very very similar. So what separates the two of them?
I will try to compare these two singers the best way that I can. I have already assumed that they are of more or less the same vocal range (countertenor range with maybe around 3 octaves using the normal voice, let alone the range for falsetto as they do not use it in the Journey hit songs), but I'm just hoping I would stumble upon articles which really discusses their vocal range as I can't seem to find any. All I have read from random people here in the internet is that they are saying Arnel's range is higher than Steve's (maybe just by a few semitones). As they have sung some of the hits in the studio quite differently, I have already assumed one can sing how the other has sung it, and vice versa (except for Arnel's portamento in the ending of Separate Ways - which is a real tenor tester). So I am guessing this may be a battle of creativity, guts and showmanship.
Well, to introduce the two vocalists:
Steve Perry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Perry_(musician))
Steve came in the band Journey in 1977, replacing the band's former singer. He basically set the musical direction with his soaring tenor voice and his songwriting skills, making hit after hit after hit, especially on the albums Escape (1981) and Frontiers (1983), which included four songs I have enlisted above (except for Faithfully, which was written only by Journey keyboardist Jon Cain).
Aside from his success as a band member of Journey, he also pushed out efforts as a solo artist, released two solo albums entitled Street Talk (1984) and For The Love of Strange Medicine (1994). Street Talk includes the hit songs Oh Sherrie (which topped the charts, but I honestly don't know this song) and Foolish Heart. I don't know much about the latter album, but this was released just before the band's reunion in 1995.
Steve suffered a hip injury that caused him unable to perform, and needed corrective surgery. He was hesitant of having the surgery done, and the rest of the band had to wait since the tour had to be delayed (and it got so delayed). Steve parted ways from the band, after Neal Schon and Jon Cain set an ultimatum for Steve to have the surgery done. The tour was so delayed, that the band had to look for a replacement vocalist. That was 1998.
Around that time, Arnel Pineda and his band (band name at that time is New Age) was asked by an owner of a restaurant/nightclub in Hong Kong to perform there. Dressed in skeleton outfits, they called themselves "The Rolling Bones".
So let's move on to the other guy...
Arnel Pineda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnel_Pineda)
I'd like to skip most of Arnel's very dark past and keep it private for him (and I know the story is already widespread in the internet).
Arnel started to be a band's lead vocalist when he was 15 years old, with the band named Ijos. Armed with passion and encouragement to sing by his mother, he was pretty much ready to rock at a young age.
Basically his band made a few changes in members and name along the way, joining a few contests and remained active doing their gigs mostly in Luzon. At the Yamaha World Band Explosion in 1990, Arnel won the best vocalist award while his band won as first runner up. A talent agent spotted Arnel and the band and was asked to perform in Hong Kong. In 1991, Arnel with his band moved to Hong Kong and performed six nights a week.
The year 1994 could have been the end of Arnel's singing career. His health was comprised after his long-term romantic relationship failed that year, almost losing his voice. He was advised by the doctor that his singing was over and he had to stop. But after several months of recuperation here in his homeland, he was able to sing again. By 1998, he and his band went back to Hong Kong to perform again, but flew back again here in Manila to record his solo self-titled album, with some of the songs he wrote and arranged himself. Added note: in the album, he cut his hair short and dyed it blonde.
From 2002 to 2005, Arnel and his band went back to Hong Kong to perform again, now sharing the lead vocals seat with a female singer. By 2006, Arnel flew back here with Monet Cajipe, the guitarist who had been in all bands were Arnel was in. They formed the band called The Zoo, and released the album Zoology in September 2007.
And who would have known just three months after that release, he would officially become the lead singer of Journey. Somehow, one of Arnel's fans and a good friend of his managed to record and upload most of The Zoo's performances with his VC. And somehow, from halfway around the globe, from the places where the timezones are maybe fifteen or sixteen hours in difference of Arnel's (and mine too) local timezone, Neal Schon made his way to these videos and had him convinced that Arnel could be the perfect frontman for their band.
And he was right. The whole band was right. Now they have released their first album with Arnel entitled "Revelation" which debuted at #5 in the US charts, and they have been touring around the world with their new music and the invigorated old ones.
Around this time, Steve is enjoying his retirement but some news spreading out rumors that he's making a new album. Dunno.
So watch out for my analysis on the head to head battle of these two undeniably great vocalists (at least when Steve was still in his prime). :) Three more parts to go.
I will try to compare these two singers the best way that I can. I have already assumed that they are of more or less the same vocal range (countertenor range with maybe around 3 octaves using the normal voice, let alone the range for falsetto as they do not use it in the Journey hit songs), but I'm just hoping I would stumble upon articles which really discusses their vocal range as I can't seem to find any. All I have read from random people here in the internet is that they are saying Arnel's range is higher than Steve's (maybe just by a few semitones). As they have sung some of the hits in the studio quite differently, I have already assumed one can sing how the other has sung it, and vice versa (except for Arnel's portamento in the ending of Separate Ways - which is a real tenor tester). So I am guessing this may be a battle of creativity, guts and showmanship.
Well, to introduce the two vocalists:
Steve Perry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Perry_(musician))
Steve came in the band Journey in 1977, replacing the band's former singer. He basically set the musical direction with his soaring tenor voice and his songwriting skills, making hit after hit after hit, especially on the albums Escape (1981) and Frontiers (1983), which included four songs I have enlisted above (except for Faithfully, which was written only by Journey keyboardist Jon Cain).
Aside from his success as a band member of Journey, he also pushed out efforts as a solo artist, released two solo albums entitled Street Talk (1984) and For The Love of Strange Medicine (1994). Street Talk includes the hit songs Oh Sherrie (which topped the charts, but I honestly don't know this song) and Foolish Heart. I don't know much about the latter album, but this was released just before the band's reunion in 1995.
Steve suffered a hip injury that caused him unable to perform, and needed corrective surgery. He was hesitant of having the surgery done, and the rest of the band had to wait since the tour had to be delayed (and it got so delayed). Steve parted ways from the band, after Neal Schon and Jon Cain set an ultimatum for Steve to have the surgery done. The tour was so delayed, that the band had to look for a replacement vocalist. That was 1998.
Around that time, Arnel Pineda and his band (band name at that time is New Age) was asked by an owner of a restaurant/nightclub in Hong Kong to perform there. Dressed in skeleton outfits, they called themselves "The Rolling Bones".
So let's move on to the other guy...
Arnel Pineda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnel_Pineda)
I'd like to skip most of Arnel's very dark past and keep it private for him (and I know the story is already widespread in the internet).
Arnel started to be a band's lead vocalist when he was 15 years old, with the band named Ijos. Armed with passion and encouragement to sing by his mother, he was pretty much ready to rock at a young age.
Basically his band made a few changes in members and name along the way, joining a few contests and remained active doing their gigs mostly in Luzon. At the Yamaha World Band Explosion in 1990, Arnel won the best vocalist award while his band won as first runner up. A talent agent spotted Arnel and the band and was asked to perform in Hong Kong. In 1991, Arnel with his band moved to Hong Kong and performed six nights a week.
The year 1994 could have been the end of Arnel's singing career. His health was comprised after his long-term romantic relationship failed that year, almost losing his voice. He was advised by the doctor that his singing was over and he had to stop. But after several months of recuperation here in his homeland, he was able to sing again. By 1998, he and his band went back to Hong Kong to perform again, but flew back again here in Manila to record his solo self-titled album, with some of the songs he wrote and arranged himself. Added note: in the album, he cut his hair short and dyed it blonde.
From 2002 to 2005, Arnel and his band went back to Hong Kong to perform again, now sharing the lead vocals seat with a female singer. By 2006, Arnel flew back here with Monet Cajipe, the guitarist who had been in all bands were Arnel was in. They formed the band called The Zoo, and released the album Zoology in September 2007.
And who would have known just three months after that release, he would officially become the lead singer of Journey. Somehow, one of Arnel's fans and a good friend of his managed to record and upload most of The Zoo's performances with his VC. And somehow, from halfway around the globe, from the places where the timezones are maybe fifteen or sixteen hours in difference of Arnel's (and mine too) local timezone, Neal Schon made his way to these videos and had him convinced that Arnel could be the perfect frontman for their band.
And he was right. The whole band was right. Now they have released their first album with Arnel entitled "Revelation" which debuted at #5 in the US charts, and they have been touring around the world with their new music and the invigorated old ones.
Around this time, Steve is enjoying his retirement but some news spreading out rumors that he's making a new album. Dunno.
So watch out for my analysis on the head to head battle of these two undeniably great vocalists (at least when Steve was still in his prime). :) Three more parts to go.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Power's Out by Nicole Scherzinger ft. Sting
Title: Power's Out
Artist: Nicole Scherzinger ft. Sting
Album: Her Name is Nicole
Released: 2008
Genre: Ballad
Length: 4:09 (full version - will verify)
Lyrics: http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/nicolescherzinger/powersout.html
Note: I am having limited resources now, with only limited time. So I am guessing will turn out to be quite limited compared to my previous reviews.
I have only heard of this song around mid or late last year on Magic 89.9 Boys Night Out. This would always be played every night on BNO. The first time I heard this song, I immediately found it very touching. Without even looking for the lyrics of this song, I didn't have the hard time to understand the story of the song.
The lyrics can basically hold two meanings - the direct one and the metaphorical one. So let's deal with the direct one first.
A guy and a girl, in the process of offering their places to each other in the event of a power outage, whatever the cause is. To add a bit of a spice to the story, try to imagine, it's night time and it's raining hard outside. It's not really clear who among the two is offering the place to who at the instance of the song when it was written, or maybe it was intended to be written that way to show that the story is ultimately interchangeable.
Trying to go deeper to its meaning abit, I am guessing the two people involved in the song are somewhat "more than friends, but less than lovers." You know, the kind of best friends thing that they know they're special to each other but somehow they just couldn't say that they want to get hitched. This potentially momentous event for them could be actually one of the few chances they got to try to open their hearts up to each other, in a way that suggests that they can be submissive to the other.
Now let's go to the music. I am not sure how many people in the world who can recognize Nicole and Sting as world class modern singers would have thought they would do a duet, and they would sound really great together. But I sure didn't think it would happen. And here, they made a song together and they sound really great with Nicole's powerful but very sincere voice and Sting's "specially stinging" voice.
The rhythm and the melody, if you try to listen to them individually, are something that I would consider a bit opposites in the musical way. The rhythm is quite minimalistic, messing only with a few chords in the key of C (Am, Em, F, C, /Bb), with Bb the only note off the scale, and making the variation of Dm, C, G, while the melody is very dynamic, using eight notes and half notes in one series, and even more dynamic making use of series of staccato notes (not sure if this can also be used in vocals) then connecting to quarter notes in legato (in the line "The world is just a super sized merry go round..."). But listening to the rhythm and the melody as a whole is just a creative way of composing music.
Vocal ranges demonstrated for both singers in this song are quite high, with Sting peaking at A4 and Nicole at D5 using only their normal voices. The peak notes may not be as highlighting as other songs (e.g. Arnel Pineda's long portamento from B4 up to E5 using his normal voice in the ending of Separate Ways - not sure if Steve Perry was able to do this before, but I'm sure he was very well able to do it in his prime), but the highlight to this song is the mesh of Sting and Nicole's voice. And moreover, the message along with the rhythm of the song would not need such power delivered from high notes. Also, what Nicole did in the song, was pretty much what Sting did too. If my ears (and now with limited resources to verify) serves me right, they are both messing with more or less the same octave (fourth octave), with Nicole just needing to go a few semitones up for the duet parts.
Replicating the song wouldn't be much of a problem for the instrumentalists. I wouldn't go much further on that. The vocalists may have a bit of an obstacle here, but I am guessing this will still be not much of a problem. Mental note of the peak notes I have mentioned above: A4 for the male, D5 for the female. That is honestly relatively easy to do, even for singers with only two octave range. But remember that A4 is just a few semitones down from the highest note a tenor singer can normally sing without utilizing falsetto, while D5 is just a few semitones higher from the middle part of the vocal range of a soprano or even a mezzo-soprano. Meaning, at the peak notes, a tenor with only a two-octave range (say C3 to C5) may already be exerting much effort than the soprano with a two-octave range (say C4 to C6).
Of all the years in my life listening to a lot of music, I have decided that this song is definitely one of the best duets for all time. And to think this is a collaboration of two singers a few musical generations away (Sting is 58 years old; Nicole is 31 years old), they sure made a hell of a song. This would have been very fit in the Manila scene way back in 1993-1994 when typhoons were really coming here in a regular basis temporarily losing electricity, and just experiencing power outage, eventhough there were no typhoons. Nonetheless, I consider this song one of my top favorites.
Artist: Nicole Scherzinger ft. Sting
Album: Her Name is Nicole
Released: 2008
Genre: Ballad
Length: 4:09 (full version - will verify)
Lyrics: http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/nicolescherzinger/powersout.html
Note: I am having limited resources now, with only limited time. So I am guessing will turn out to be quite limited compared to my previous reviews.
I have only heard of this song around mid or late last year on Magic 89.9 Boys Night Out. This would always be played every night on BNO. The first time I heard this song, I immediately found it very touching. Without even looking for the lyrics of this song, I didn't have the hard time to understand the story of the song.
The lyrics can basically hold two meanings - the direct one and the metaphorical one. So let's deal with the direct one first.
A guy and a girl, in the process of offering their places to each other in the event of a power outage, whatever the cause is. To add a bit of a spice to the story, try to imagine, it's night time and it's raining hard outside. It's not really clear who among the two is offering the place to who at the instance of the song when it was written, or maybe it was intended to be written that way to show that the story is ultimately interchangeable.
Trying to go deeper to its meaning abit, I am guessing the two people involved in the song are somewhat "more than friends, but less than lovers." You know, the kind of best friends thing that they know they're special to each other but somehow they just couldn't say that they want to get hitched. This potentially momentous event for them could be actually one of the few chances they got to try to open their hearts up to each other, in a way that suggests that they can be submissive to the other.
Now let's go to the music. I am not sure how many people in the world who can recognize Nicole and Sting as world class modern singers would have thought they would do a duet, and they would sound really great together. But I sure didn't think it would happen. And here, they made a song together and they sound really great with Nicole's powerful but very sincere voice and Sting's "specially stinging" voice.
The rhythm and the melody, if you try to listen to them individually, are something that I would consider a bit opposites in the musical way. The rhythm is quite minimalistic, messing only with a few chords in the key of C (Am, Em, F, C, /Bb), with Bb the only note off the scale, and making the variation of Dm, C, G, while the melody is very dynamic, using eight notes and half notes in one series, and even more dynamic making use of series of staccato notes (not sure if this can also be used in vocals) then connecting to quarter notes in legato (in the line "The world is just a super sized merry go round..."). But listening to the rhythm and the melody as a whole is just a creative way of composing music.
Vocal ranges demonstrated for both singers in this song are quite high, with Sting peaking at A4 and Nicole at D5 using only their normal voices. The peak notes may not be as highlighting as other songs (e.g. Arnel Pineda's long portamento from B4 up to E5 using his normal voice in the ending of Separate Ways - not sure if Steve Perry was able to do this before, but I'm sure he was very well able to do it in his prime), but the highlight to this song is the mesh of Sting and Nicole's voice. And moreover, the message along with the rhythm of the song would not need such power delivered from high notes. Also, what Nicole did in the song, was pretty much what Sting did too. If my ears (and now with limited resources to verify) serves me right, they are both messing with more or less the same octave (fourth octave), with Nicole just needing to go a few semitones up for the duet parts.
Replicating the song wouldn't be much of a problem for the instrumentalists. I wouldn't go much further on that. The vocalists may have a bit of an obstacle here, but I am guessing this will still be not much of a problem. Mental note of the peak notes I have mentioned above: A4 for the male, D5 for the female. That is honestly relatively easy to do, even for singers with only two octave range. But remember that A4 is just a few semitones down from the highest note a tenor singer can normally sing without utilizing falsetto, while D5 is just a few semitones higher from the middle part of the vocal range of a soprano or even a mezzo-soprano. Meaning, at the peak notes, a tenor with only a two-octave range (say C3 to C5) may already be exerting much effort than the soprano with a two-octave range (say C4 to C6).
Of all the years in my life listening to a lot of music, I have decided that this song is definitely one of the best duets for all time. And to think this is a collaboration of two singers a few musical generations away (Sting is 58 years old; Nicole is 31 years old), they sure made a hell of a song. This would have been very fit in the Manila scene way back in 1993-1994 when typhoons were really coming here in a regular basis temporarily losing electricity, and just experiencing power outage, eventhough there were no typhoons. Nonetheless, I consider this song one of my top favorites.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
One Hundred Ways by James Ingram and Quincy Jones
Song Title: One Hundred Ways
Artist: James Ingram, Quincy Jones on sax
Album: The Dude (Quincy Jones)
Released: 1981
Genre: Jazz
Length: 4:19
Lyrics: http://www.lyricsdownload.com/james-ingram-one-hundred-ways-lyrics.html
I am pretty sure that at the time that I was really young, James Ingram had already reached the "household name" status, and this song was one of the reasons why. I was already pretty much familiar with this song back then.
As I read the lyrics looking for its story, I honestly stumbled upon this simple crossroad. What's the song all about? Is it the vocalist giving advice to a guy how to court or woo a girl, or how to maintain a running romantic relationship with a girl? Then finally I have decided to myself that this should be a combination of both - how to continually court the girl to maintain the running romantic relationship between the guy and the girl. Well, this should be a lesson for the guys - you shouldn't stop courting your lady even if you already started dating. Be as much or even more of the same sweet guy the time you fall in love with your girl.
From its lyrics, the song demonstrates some of the different ways how a guy should treat his girl. But since in actuality there are way more alot of ways to do that than how it is demonstrated in the song (because that's going to be virtually impossible for the song to tell everything), hence the lines "Find one hundred ways." That's telling there are many ways to make your girl feel all well, and find those ways to keep things that way. Well, honestly, it's more like of "Do this" and "Do that," and that takes away the sense of "being yourself" - which is entirely not good, but not bad either in my opinion.
James Ingram is definitely one of those sick ass tenor singers out there. Just by the way he delivers this song is simply phenomenal. Just right at the start of the song (0:09-0:21 in the video), he had already showcased his vocal range (with falsetto) in the higher end, from Bb4 up to F5. Already lingering up to the middle part of the fifth octave just in the intro - that should mean something sweet but powerful.
The vocal range in this song not only demonstrated the higher end. The stanzas were beautifully sung around the third octave. Basically, the whole song showcased the voice quality of James (or of course any vocalist who would cover this) with his quite a wide range of his voice while maintaining his superb quality of voice. I wouldn't say that his voice reveals versatility in his part, unlike some other bad ass tenor singers like Steve Perry, Arnel Pineda, Gary Valenciano, Adam Levine and Brandon Boyd who I would consider carrying more versatility in singing than James Ingram (I know Gary V is not a rock vocalist but I know he can deviate his singing from how we usually hear him sing). James' voice is very distinct and special, that in a way you just can't take him away from jazz music (and I know this is going to be a singer analysis rather than being a song analysis if I just go on, so I must stop right here).
If my ears weren't missing anything, I'd say the song was musically played in sort of a minimalist way in terms of the instruments used (for a song composed and released in the 80s) - keyboards/synth, bass, background guitars and percussions. But mind you, the mesh of the bassist and the synth guy was just simply effective. It's very soothing in the ears (well, that's what jazz music is all about), that you want to hear this song either when you feel a lot in love and / or you just want to fall asleep (and I don't mean that in a bad way).
The composition of the music itself relating it to lyrics is just simply beautiful. There's just something enchanting with songs made in the keys of Eb and Bb. As for this song, it's in the key of Eb. I like the series of chords and notes used in the song, e.g. for intro/stanza: /Eb, /A, /Ab, /G, /C, /F, /Bb. Put those and the treble notes across a music score, you'd be seeing quite a number of notes outside the Eb major. If you're an average composer, you'd put yourself at risk trying to put in notes from outside the scale. This was done very beautifully, and the effect on the other end - you'd realize you're not listening to just a bland and plain song.
Listening from the absolute scale, the music is quite simple, meaning you can put up an average band who can play this for you. Even if you omit the background guitars it would still be workable. I won't go to detail with that. But the thing is, a bad ass tenor is very much needed. Range is a must in this song for the vocalist. Even if you turn the key a couple of semitones down, you may take away the worry from the higher notes, but mental note here: I have mentioned that this is a wide ranged song in terms of vocal range, so you'd be adding a bit of worries on the lower notes.
To summarize the nasty vocal range of this song: without falsetto - F3 up to Ab4, and an isolated Bb4 in 3:49 in the video; with falsetto - Eb4 up to C5 (take note of the long whole Bb4 note in the end of the bridge). This is some sick ass range I tell you (but I am feeling a bit relieved that I have nailed every vocal note of this song).
I think a lot of people will agree if I see this song is a perfect recipe for seduction. James Ingram and Quincy Jones have definitely set the benchmark for jazz music with this song. Maybe an oldie, but definitely one of the best goodies out there.
Artist: James Ingram, Quincy Jones on sax
Album: The Dude (Quincy Jones)
Released: 1981
Genre: Jazz
Length: 4:19
Lyrics: http://www.lyricsdownload.com/james-ingram-one-hundred-ways-lyrics.html
I am pretty sure that at the time that I was really young, James Ingram had already reached the "household name" status, and this song was one of the reasons why. I was already pretty much familiar with this song back then.
As I read the lyrics looking for its story, I honestly stumbled upon this simple crossroad. What's the song all about? Is it the vocalist giving advice to a guy how to court or woo a girl, or how to maintain a running romantic relationship with a girl? Then finally I have decided to myself that this should be a combination of both - how to continually court the girl to maintain the running romantic relationship between the guy and the girl. Well, this should be a lesson for the guys - you shouldn't stop courting your lady even if you already started dating. Be as much or even more of the same sweet guy the time you fall in love with your girl.
From its lyrics, the song demonstrates some of the different ways how a guy should treat his girl. But since in actuality there are way more alot of ways to do that than how it is demonstrated in the song (because that's going to be virtually impossible for the song to tell everything), hence the lines "Find one hundred ways." That's telling there are many ways to make your girl feel all well, and find those ways to keep things that way. Well, honestly, it's more like of "Do this" and "Do that," and that takes away the sense of "being yourself" - which is entirely not good, but not bad either in my opinion.
James Ingram is definitely one of those sick ass tenor singers out there. Just by the way he delivers this song is simply phenomenal. Just right at the start of the song (0:09-0:21 in the video), he had already showcased his vocal range (with falsetto) in the higher end, from Bb4 up to F5. Already lingering up to the middle part of the fifth octave just in the intro - that should mean something sweet but powerful.
The vocal range in this song not only demonstrated the higher end. The stanzas were beautifully sung around the third octave. Basically, the whole song showcased the voice quality of James (or of course any vocalist who would cover this) with his quite a wide range of his voice while maintaining his superb quality of voice. I wouldn't say that his voice reveals versatility in his part, unlike some other bad ass tenor singers like Steve Perry, Arnel Pineda, Gary Valenciano, Adam Levine and Brandon Boyd who I would consider carrying more versatility in singing than James Ingram (I know Gary V is not a rock vocalist but I know he can deviate his singing from how we usually hear him sing). James' voice is very distinct and special, that in a way you just can't take him away from jazz music (and I know this is going to be a singer analysis rather than being a song analysis if I just go on, so I must stop right here).
If my ears weren't missing anything, I'd say the song was musically played in sort of a minimalist way in terms of the instruments used (for a song composed and released in the 80s) - keyboards/synth, bass, background guitars and percussions. But mind you, the mesh of the bassist and the synth guy was just simply effective. It's very soothing in the ears (well, that's what jazz music is all about), that you want to hear this song either when you feel a lot in love and / or you just want to fall asleep (and I don't mean that in a bad way).
The composition of the music itself relating it to lyrics is just simply beautiful. There's just something enchanting with songs made in the keys of Eb and Bb. As for this song, it's in the key of Eb. I like the series of chords and notes used in the song, e.g. for intro/stanza: /Eb, /A, /Ab, /G, /C, /F, /Bb. Put those and the treble notes across a music score, you'd be seeing quite a number of notes outside the Eb major. If you're an average composer, you'd put yourself at risk trying to put in notes from outside the scale. This was done very beautifully, and the effect on the other end - you'd realize you're not listening to just a bland and plain song.
Listening from the absolute scale, the music is quite simple, meaning you can put up an average band who can play this for you. Even if you omit the background guitars it would still be workable. I won't go to detail with that. But the thing is, a bad ass tenor is very much needed. Range is a must in this song for the vocalist. Even if you turn the key a couple of semitones down, you may take away the worry from the higher notes, but mental note here: I have mentioned that this is a wide ranged song in terms of vocal range, so you'd be adding a bit of worries on the lower notes.
To summarize the nasty vocal range of this song: without falsetto - F3 up to Ab4, and an isolated Bb4 in 3:49 in the video; with falsetto - Eb4 up to C5 (take note of the long whole Bb4 note in the end of the bridge). This is some sick ass range I tell you (but I am feeling a bit relieved that I have nailed every vocal note of this song).
I think a lot of people will agree if I see this song is a perfect recipe for seduction. James Ingram and Quincy Jones have definitely set the benchmark for jazz music with this song. Maybe an oldie, but definitely one of the best goodies out there.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Increased Vocal Range?
Well, for today I am going to share to everyone my quick venture of being a self-proclaimed vocalist after being strictly placed as an instrumentalist for rougly twenty years already. I'm going to try to share some tips on what I have "unconsciously" done before, but still until now I am a newbie in solo singing.
I was pretty much a real newbie just a few years back. I was only interested in the quality of my voice, not by range because I knew how to use falsetto pretty much. I can say my voice quality was intermediate, and no problem for me at all at getting the right pitches because of my perfect listening pitch skill. This was already several years after my high school friends somewhat made me sing a pop song on my own for the first time in my life.
Then recently, this friend of mine who is a really really good singer, sang alot of high pitched songs which I'd always thought I'd never nail. But somehow, using just the very limited voice lessons I had when I was really younger (I never had a true vocal coach), I just tried and tried singing and singing those high pitched songs (with the guidance and support of my girlfriend). Soon enough I've been nailing them, almost no use of falsetto, in a quite surprisingly fast pace. I self tested my vocal range - I can go from A2 to B4, and can linger abit in C5 or C#5 (but that's really hard for me to nail) without the use of falsetto, and can go further almost one more octave with falsetto. Just a bit over three octaves. I couldn't believe it myself at first.
Vocal range is one's range of MUSICALLY USABLE NOTES, meaning sounding musically nice. That's a lot different from shouting.
So, as of myself who is a self taught tenor, maybe I can share some tips which worked for me:
Before singing, firstly choose and learn a few high pitched tenor songs with varying speed and rhythm. This way your voice box will be used to varying changing speeds of pitches.
When singing, try to feel the song as if you're singing for someone. Do not be conscious about your body movements. Just be natural, especially when you're trying to nail the B4's and C5's without falsetto, and more especially if these are whole notes (maybe just half notes for 6/8, 8/8 or 12/8 songs). In my own normal singing voice when I try to hit those notes, I just let it all out. I just close my eyes, concentrate ONLY on that part of the song, maybe arc my back a bit as if I am trying to get power from my backside of my diaphragm, and being intimate with the microphone. This actually will depend on the singer. We all have our own natural and maybe unconscious movements.
Of course the delivery of your voice is the really important thing. Remember to STICK WITH YOUR OWN VOICE no matter what. Do not try emulating other people's voice because that's going to be another thing you're going to mind of. Using your own natural voice will take away the worry of how are you EXACTLY sounding like. Make your voice as whole as you can get, even on high pitches. It's easier said than done actually. But just try to breathe deeply between measures before delivering a note, quick breathing if there's no rest, normal deep breathing when there is a rest. At all costs, don't pull your voice from your throat. Breathe deeply, and feel your voice from your chest. And maybe the clincher to this - OPEN YOUR MOUTH VERY WELL to deliver a nice resonating sound. Mind the syllables with A, E, I, O and U. They have different and distinct positions on how the mouth is opened.
One thing also you have to mind of is the volume of the voice. Normally a tenor singer is a powerful singer and should be very able to hold relatively high notes (well, the word tenor is from the latin word 'tenere' which means TO HOLD). Lower pitch, not much volume needed, but to deliver a high pitched note without the use of falsetto, there's when you let it all out, but you still have to mind and control the airflow - if you're going to deliver a note with at least four counts, better spread the airflow to that whole length. You don't want to run out of air in the middle of a long note. also, If you try to deliver a high note with a softer volume, that's going to sound like you're using falsetto, and at times, it may sound ineffective.
An added note: Don't expect your singing voice to be equally the same in terms of quality and power when just singing compared to singing while playing a musical instrument. Your body movements can really affect your singing voice. If you are one of those people who can do it without worrying about voice quality, you're sure hell of a talented person.
Maybe an equally important factor: QUIT DRINKING ICED BEVERAGES. I myself have put down the frequency of drinking iced or cold drinks compared to before. But yeah, I know sometimes it's hard to resist :)
With all these exercises, I've repeated and practiced all of them alot of times, and it's really nice hearing myself along the way that I have increased my vocal range. It sounded too impossible for me before, and I honestly was surprised by the changes of my voice so far. One thing you also will need to take note is, after singing maybe a couple of those kind of songs, you may feel abit tired and thirsty. I still consider myself a noob and still wanting to learn more.
I hope this helps the readers! :)
I was pretty much a real newbie just a few years back. I was only interested in the quality of my voice, not by range because I knew how to use falsetto pretty much. I can say my voice quality was intermediate, and no problem for me at all at getting the right pitches because of my perfect listening pitch skill. This was already several years after my high school friends somewhat made me sing a pop song on my own for the first time in my life.
Then recently, this friend of mine who is a really really good singer, sang alot of high pitched songs which I'd always thought I'd never nail. But somehow, using just the very limited voice lessons I had when I was really younger (I never had a true vocal coach), I just tried and tried singing and singing those high pitched songs (with the guidance and support of my girlfriend). Soon enough I've been nailing them, almost no use of falsetto, in a quite surprisingly fast pace. I self tested my vocal range - I can go from A2 to B4, and can linger abit in C5 or C#5 (but that's really hard for me to nail) without the use of falsetto, and can go further almost one more octave with falsetto. Just a bit over three octaves. I couldn't believe it myself at first.
Vocal range is one's range of MUSICALLY USABLE NOTES, meaning sounding musically nice. That's a lot different from shouting.
So, as of myself who is a self taught tenor, maybe I can share some tips which worked for me:
Before singing, firstly choose and learn a few high pitched tenor songs with varying speed and rhythm. This way your voice box will be used to varying changing speeds of pitches.
When singing, try to feel the song as if you're singing for someone. Do not be conscious about your body movements. Just be natural, especially when you're trying to nail the B4's and C5's without falsetto, and more especially if these are whole notes (maybe just half notes for 6/8, 8/8 or 12/8 songs). In my own normal singing voice when I try to hit those notes, I just let it all out. I just close my eyes, concentrate ONLY on that part of the song, maybe arc my back a bit as if I am trying to get power from my backside of my diaphragm, and being intimate with the microphone. This actually will depend on the singer. We all have our own natural and maybe unconscious movements.
Of course the delivery of your voice is the really important thing. Remember to STICK WITH YOUR OWN VOICE no matter what. Do not try emulating other people's voice because that's going to be another thing you're going to mind of. Using your own natural voice will take away the worry of how are you EXACTLY sounding like. Make your voice as whole as you can get, even on high pitches. It's easier said than done actually. But just try to breathe deeply between measures before delivering a note, quick breathing if there's no rest, normal deep breathing when there is a rest. At all costs, don't pull your voice from your throat. Breathe deeply, and feel your voice from your chest. And maybe the clincher to this - OPEN YOUR MOUTH VERY WELL to deliver a nice resonating sound. Mind the syllables with A, E, I, O and U. They have different and distinct positions on how the mouth is opened.
One thing also you have to mind of is the volume of the voice. Normally a tenor singer is a powerful singer and should be very able to hold relatively high notes (well, the word tenor is from the latin word 'tenere' which means TO HOLD). Lower pitch, not much volume needed, but to deliver a high pitched note without the use of falsetto, there's when you let it all out, but you still have to mind and control the airflow - if you're going to deliver a note with at least four counts, better spread the airflow to that whole length. You don't want to run out of air in the middle of a long note. also, If you try to deliver a high note with a softer volume, that's going to sound like you're using falsetto, and at times, it may sound ineffective.
An added note: Don't expect your singing voice to be equally the same in terms of quality and power when just singing compared to singing while playing a musical instrument. Your body movements can really affect your singing voice. If you are one of those people who can do it without worrying about voice quality, you're sure hell of a talented person.
Maybe an equally important factor: QUIT DRINKING ICED BEVERAGES. I myself have put down the frequency of drinking iced or cold drinks compared to before. But yeah, I know sometimes it's hard to resist :)
With all these exercises, I've repeated and practiced all of them alot of times, and it's really nice hearing myself along the way that I have increased my vocal range. It sounded too impossible for me before, and I honestly was surprised by the changes of my voice so far. One thing you also will need to take note is, after singing maybe a couple of those kind of songs, you may feel abit tired and thirsty. I still consider myself a noob and still wanting to learn more.
I hope this helps the readers! :)
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Dancing Into The Moonlight by D'Sound
Song Title: Dancing Into The Moonlight
Artist: D'Sound
Album: Doublehearted
Released: 2003
Genre: Pop/Jazz
Length: 4:18
Lyrics: http://artists.letssingit.com/d-sound-lyrics-dancing-in-to-the-moonlight-42q1cj9
A few years back, my brother bought a D'Sound album entitled Smooth Escapes: The Very Best Of D' Sound. I cannot remember very well but if I'm not mistaken, it is a 20-song album (will verify this), obviously taking their best songs from the band's albums. And guess what, this is the song that I liked the most in that compilation - better than their hits Tattoed On My Mind, People Are People, Talkin' Talk and Do I Need A Reason.
The story this song is sharing to the listeners is pretty simple and straightforward - basically the vocalist shares her experiences, feelings and thoughts of being in love and being with her lover. And it is also evident that whatever she feels about and for her lover, she is generally receiving the quality of love complimenting what she is sharing. In other words, the feeling is mutual, "Knowing that you are just mine."
It's easy to understand how she expresses her feelings for her lover, as the lyrics, for the most part, only uses either the simple form or just a shallow usage of a few figures of speech. Nothing really fancy on the wordings, except for two lines in the bridge:
"The fireflies starting a flame
The waves are all saying your name"
When I first heard these lines after listening to two and a half minutes of purely good music, my eyebrows just crossed for curiosity. Honestly, I really don't like how this part was written. I am not entirely saying that this was poorly written, but try to relate it to the rest of the song. Somehow, the entire song was simply written, then the songwriter suddenly thought of putting two personification lines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personification). The song was pushed down momentarily for maybe an unnecessary depth. And trying to realize what those two lines would mean, it's like suggesting that the girl is getting overly obsessed for her lover. And to add to that, after the bridge, the song goes back to chorus, going back to its original depth, without any continuity from the bridge.
The music itself is very captivating. Even if you make this as an instrumental without changing anything, this would still do very well. Just hearing the intro part, which already has meaningful notes and great delay/reverb effects, you'd almost instantly think "Oh I feel this is going to be a very happy love song." I'm not sure if a lot of people can appreciate this, but the percussions in the intro part was just very simple BUT very nice. The clapper and the bass were the only ones being used on that part. I do not know if they have a musical term for it. At 0:11, in the transition between two intro riffs, the clapper was hit on an off beat manner, that it quite emphasized the transition part.
The entire song showcased the guitars (with the guitarist with a very good limb to brain coordination, switching the effects so frequently in the whole length) with a very significant amount of delay, echo and reverb, except for the ending part using overdrive (3:37 to end). You'd only be noticing there are not much notes used in the whole stretch, and maybe only four eighth notes used in a series in one measure. The sounds of the notes were just carried by the effects, and that helps the notes to be kept in legato. The bass basically served as a backbone, especially on the stanzas and the instrumental part - maybe more needed as a backbone compared to most of the other songs).
Hearing this song for the first time and not relating to other D'Sound songs, I wouldn't be surprised if some people would say Simone Larsen's (lead vocalist) voice is not out of the ordinary. A reasonable percentage of female singers can definitely emulate Simone in this song. But mind you, it's not all about sounding unique, but it's more of how the vocalist can relate and mesh his/her voice to the music and the lyrics combined. Simone's voice in this song reveals a female's personality of being a fierce lover. Sweet sounding, but fierce lover.
It's going to be tricky if you decide that this song deserves more attention and come up to cover this, not actually heavy on the fingering skill part. Take note, the only chords used in the whole song are Em7, DM7, Am, Em7/F#, GM7. Nothing really special in those chords, not even a single accidental (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidental_(music)) used in the whole song (if I haven't missed out a thing). But the tricks will fall on having to utilize two lead guitarists (I think this is necessary to play this song closest to the original) exchanging notes alternatively (that would seem to look like a dialogue of two instrumentalists). It is imperative that the two guitarists don't play with exactly the same effect at the same time, because that will almost just momentarily defeat the purpose of having two separate guitarists. And yea, a backup female singer for the second voice would be a plus.
Vocal range for the whole song is not really wide, but in the higher part of the normal soprano range. Floor is A4 and peaks at A5 (the bridge only peaks at G5). No fancy combination of notes. That's not so hard for the vocalist.
I've always imagined this song to be played on acoustics, but never knew how this would sound. But for me, the best acoustic setup for this song would be two acoustic guitars, the bass guitar and the percussions. I think it would work better if the acoustic guitars would still stick with the delay effects, so that would be two guitars on clean + delay (two same effects throughout the song - as opposed to what I have mentioned above playing with the exact same effect at the same time). Maybe to at least to deviate and compromise abit from having two guitars with the same effect, one of the guitarist can play one octave lower, so as to put emphasis on it. But having them play as it is would still be workable.
This is a must-have for people who loves pop love songs. If it weren't for the two personification lines that I have mentioned above, I would have rated this song a perfect 10 out of 10. But anyway, the simplistic nature of the lyrics and how it was sung meshed with a very enchantic music make me listen to this song everytime I can. I have always believed that this song deserves more recognition that it has been currently receiving.
Artist: D'Sound
Album: Doublehearted
Released: 2003
Genre: Pop/Jazz
Length: 4:18
Lyrics: http://artists.letssingit.com/d-sound-lyrics-dancing-in-to-the-moonlight-42q1cj9
A few years back, my brother bought a D'Sound album entitled Smooth Escapes: The Very Best Of D' Sound. I cannot remember very well but if I'm not mistaken, it is a 20-song album (will verify this), obviously taking their best songs from the band's albums. And guess what, this is the song that I liked the most in that compilation - better than their hits Tattoed On My Mind, People Are People, Talkin' Talk and Do I Need A Reason.
The story this song is sharing to the listeners is pretty simple and straightforward - basically the vocalist shares her experiences, feelings and thoughts of being in love and being with her lover. And it is also evident that whatever she feels about and for her lover, she is generally receiving the quality of love complimenting what she is sharing. In other words, the feeling is mutual, "Knowing that you are just mine."
It's easy to understand how she expresses her feelings for her lover, as the lyrics, for the most part, only uses either the simple form or just a shallow usage of a few figures of speech. Nothing really fancy on the wordings, except for two lines in the bridge:
"The fireflies starting a flame
The waves are all saying your name"
When I first heard these lines after listening to two and a half minutes of purely good music, my eyebrows just crossed for curiosity. Honestly, I really don't like how this part was written. I am not entirely saying that this was poorly written, but try to relate it to the rest of the song. Somehow, the entire song was simply written, then the songwriter suddenly thought of putting two personification lines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personification). The song was pushed down momentarily for maybe an unnecessary depth. And trying to realize what those two lines would mean, it's like suggesting that the girl is getting overly obsessed for her lover. And to add to that, after the bridge, the song goes back to chorus, going back to its original depth, without any continuity from the bridge.
The music itself is very captivating. Even if you make this as an instrumental without changing anything, this would still do very well. Just hearing the intro part, which already has meaningful notes and great delay/reverb effects, you'd almost instantly think "Oh I feel this is going to be a very happy love song." I'm not sure if a lot of people can appreciate this, but the percussions in the intro part was just very simple BUT very nice. The clapper and the bass were the only ones being used on that part. I do not know if they have a musical term for it. At 0:11, in the transition between two intro riffs, the clapper was hit on an off beat manner, that it quite emphasized the transition part.
The entire song showcased the guitars (with the guitarist with a very good limb to brain coordination, switching the effects so frequently in the whole length) with a very significant amount of delay, echo and reverb, except for the ending part using overdrive (3:37 to end). You'd only be noticing there are not much notes used in the whole stretch, and maybe only four eighth notes used in a series in one measure. The sounds of the notes were just carried by the effects, and that helps the notes to be kept in legato. The bass basically served as a backbone, especially on the stanzas and the instrumental part - maybe more needed as a backbone compared to most of the other songs).
Hearing this song for the first time and not relating to other D'Sound songs, I wouldn't be surprised if some people would say Simone Larsen's (lead vocalist) voice is not out of the ordinary. A reasonable percentage of female singers can definitely emulate Simone in this song. But mind you, it's not all about sounding unique, but it's more of how the vocalist can relate and mesh his/her voice to the music and the lyrics combined. Simone's voice in this song reveals a female's personality of being a fierce lover. Sweet sounding, but fierce lover.
It's going to be tricky if you decide that this song deserves more attention and come up to cover this, not actually heavy on the fingering skill part. Take note, the only chords used in the whole song are Em7, DM7, Am, Em7/F#, GM7. Nothing really special in those chords, not even a single accidental (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidental_(music)) used in the whole song (if I haven't missed out a thing). But the tricks will fall on having to utilize two lead guitarists (I think this is necessary to play this song closest to the original) exchanging notes alternatively (that would seem to look like a dialogue of two instrumentalists). It is imperative that the two guitarists don't play with exactly the same effect at the same time, because that will almost just momentarily defeat the purpose of having two separate guitarists. And yea, a backup female singer for the second voice would be a plus.
Vocal range for the whole song is not really wide, but in the higher part of the normal soprano range. Floor is A4 and peaks at A5 (the bridge only peaks at G5). No fancy combination of notes. That's not so hard for the vocalist.
I've always imagined this song to be played on acoustics, but never knew how this would sound. But for me, the best acoustic setup for this song would be two acoustic guitars, the bass guitar and the percussions. I think it would work better if the acoustic guitars would still stick with the delay effects, so that would be two guitars on clean + delay (two same effects throughout the song - as opposed to what I have mentioned above playing with the exact same effect at the same time). Maybe to at least to deviate and compromise abit from having two guitars with the same effect, one of the guitarist can play one octave lower, so as to put emphasis on it. But having them play as it is would still be workable.
This is a must-have for people who loves pop love songs. If it weren't for the two personification lines that I have mentioned above, I would have rated this song a perfect 10 out of 10. But anyway, the simplistic nature of the lyrics and how it was sung meshed with a very enchantic music make me listen to this song everytime I can. I have always believed that this song deserves more recognition that it has been currently receiving.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Soon by Moonpools and Caterpillars
Song Title: Soon
Artist: Moonpools and Caterpillars
Album: Lucky Dumpling
Released: 1995
Genre: Alternative
Length: 4:29
Lyrics: http://www.lyricsdownload.com/moonpools-and-caterpillars-soon-lyrics.html
So, this is going to be the first song that I will share my analysis on. :) Be noted that these are going to be all my own opinions.
"Soon" is the first and only song that I know that was composed by Moonpools and Caterpillars. It is quite a conservative but catchy song for its own right. It sounds really simple and friendly to my ears, but of course, there's more than just the music.
What does this song trying to tell us? Well, when I listened to the lyrics, it took me maybe three or four times of playing this song before I tried check the lyrics out in the internet basically because Kimi Ward-Encarnacion (lead singer) has this distinct accent that prevented me (and probably the other listeners) to entirely get the lyrics by just listening to the song.
Reading on the lyrics, there seemed to be no direct person the song was intended for - whether if this is for a lover or another friend or whatnot. But definitely, there was a struggle between two person with the vocalist one of the two. It is quite confusing when you try to picture the situation of the vocalist at that point of singing, as the two stanzas aren't really that relative to each other.
In the manner of sending a message across, it could have been done by adding a bridge aside from the existing instrumental. But musicwise, adding a bridge can make it sound overly dragging already. A four and a half minute song for a conservative alternative song with a monotonous melody is just enough - adding some thirty seconds may overdo it.
So taking its music as it is, as I have already mentioned twice, the melody is quite monotonous - key is C major, and used only one note off the scale (F#). But despite that, it is very effective. That would be a kind of song that you would listen to anytime of the day, whichever mood you'd be, whatever lyrics would be written with that music.
The melody may be monotonous, but this is very much compromised by the simple level of variety how the song was sung - quite a variety of notes how the choruses were sung differently. I am actually a fan of it - showing progression. Obviously, the first chorus uses an initial set of notes with a smaller span (rough guess: C4 up to A4), then the succeeding choruses stretch up to D5 then if up to F#5. That easily shows progression and more power as the song progresses. I can actually dissect this even further, but it's going to be unnecessarily long.
The first part of the intro (0:00-0:10) may prove to be the signature of the song. It is just a four-measure simple BUT distinct drum riff. Something like that if you hear that riff somewhere from the background, you would almost bet you're hearing this song (I honestly cannot dissect the drumbeat to an intermediate level, because I did not learn to play the instrument).
I honestly felt that the first part of the instrumental (2:57-3:07) was a bit bland. It was almost given that there is nothing much special from the bass in the entire song, so for that four measures of the same drum riff and plain bass riff, it really sounded bland and plain. I understand that that part is a build up for its latter part with the harmonica, but I believe that they could have done a bit of a better build up - maybe put a simple and short lead guitar part or something (harmonics would do like in 3:15-3:17).
Covering this song as it is would not be really hard to do. The bass and the rhythm guitar parts are pretty simple and playable by virtually anyone who plays the guitars. Rhythm guitars will only need to switch from clean to distorted, and so on. I know harmonica players are not that easy to find, but it can be easily replaced by a keyboardist (for 3:07-3:37).
If you really want to sound like how Kimi sang this song, you will really need a very special voice. Her voice is not really ordinary, as she brings sincerity and power at the same time along with her very distinct accent. Vocal range is C4 up to D5, but drops at G3 and peaks at F#5 (not 100% sure - will verify again on a better time). That range is not going to be that hard for a natural soprano, if she wouldn't mind not sounding like Kimi. But a female with a rocker attitude voice would definitely be a plus.
Overall, the song is very effective. Simplistic sounds and notes, but very well carried by the vocalist. This may be very well loved by music lovers ranging from slow ballad lovers up to the rock lovers, as this song shows a pretty good balance of the both as an alternative song, and I won't be too surprised on people having this on their playlist. :)
Additional notes: Several years back I was asked by a friend to temporarily replace one of their band members for this certain gig. To cut the story really short, at practice time, we ended up playing an acoustic version of this song - piano and singer only. We played it at the same tempo as the original, and it sounded very great. It was very effective. The notes for the piano need not to be that complicated, as long as I was able to follow the rhtyhm of the song, and translated it to notes. It was pretty good, worthy of some recording time.
Artist: Moonpools and Caterpillars
Album: Lucky Dumpling
Released: 1995
Genre: Alternative
Length: 4:29
Lyrics: http://www.lyricsdownload.com/moonpools-and-caterpillars-soon-lyrics.html
So, this is going to be the first song that I will share my analysis on. :) Be noted that these are going to be all my own opinions.
"Soon" is the first and only song that I know that was composed by Moonpools and Caterpillars. It is quite a conservative but catchy song for its own right. It sounds really simple and friendly to my ears, but of course, there's more than just the music.
What does this song trying to tell us? Well, when I listened to the lyrics, it took me maybe three or four times of playing this song before I tried check the lyrics out in the internet basically because Kimi Ward-Encarnacion (lead singer) has this distinct accent that prevented me (and probably the other listeners) to entirely get the lyrics by just listening to the song.
Reading on the lyrics, there seemed to be no direct person the song was intended for - whether if this is for a lover or another friend or whatnot. But definitely, there was a struggle between two person with the vocalist one of the two. It is quite confusing when you try to picture the situation of the vocalist at that point of singing, as the two stanzas aren't really that relative to each other.
In the manner of sending a message across, it could have been done by adding a bridge aside from the existing instrumental. But musicwise, adding a bridge can make it sound overly dragging already. A four and a half minute song for a conservative alternative song with a monotonous melody is just enough - adding some thirty seconds may overdo it.
So taking its music as it is, as I have already mentioned twice, the melody is quite monotonous - key is C major, and used only one note off the scale (F#). But despite that, it is very effective. That would be a kind of song that you would listen to anytime of the day, whichever mood you'd be, whatever lyrics would be written with that music.
The melody may be monotonous, but this is very much compromised by the simple level of variety how the song was sung - quite a variety of notes how the choruses were sung differently. I am actually a fan of it - showing progression. Obviously, the first chorus uses an initial set of notes with a smaller span (rough guess: C4 up to A4), then the succeeding choruses stretch up to D5 then if up to F#5. That easily shows progression and more power as the song progresses. I can actually dissect this even further, but it's going to be unnecessarily long.
The first part of the intro (0:00-0:10) may prove to be the signature of the song. It is just a four-measure simple BUT distinct drum riff. Something like that if you hear that riff somewhere from the background, you would almost bet you're hearing this song (I honestly cannot dissect the drumbeat to an intermediate level, because I did not learn to play the instrument).
I honestly felt that the first part of the instrumental (2:57-3:07) was a bit bland. It was almost given that there is nothing much special from the bass in the entire song, so for that four measures of the same drum riff and plain bass riff, it really sounded bland and plain. I understand that that part is a build up for its latter part with the harmonica, but I believe that they could have done a bit of a better build up - maybe put a simple and short lead guitar part or something (harmonics would do like in 3:15-3:17).
Covering this song as it is would not be really hard to do. The bass and the rhythm guitar parts are pretty simple and playable by virtually anyone who plays the guitars. Rhythm guitars will only need to switch from clean to distorted, and so on. I know harmonica players are not that easy to find, but it can be easily replaced by a keyboardist (for 3:07-3:37).
If you really want to sound like how Kimi sang this song, you will really need a very special voice. Her voice is not really ordinary, as she brings sincerity and power at the same time along with her very distinct accent. Vocal range is C4 up to D5, but drops at G3 and peaks at F#5 (not 100% sure - will verify again on a better time). That range is not going to be that hard for a natural soprano, if she wouldn't mind not sounding like Kimi. But a female with a rocker attitude voice would definitely be a plus.
Overall, the song is very effective. Simplistic sounds and notes, but very well carried by the vocalist. This may be very well loved by music lovers ranging from slow ballad lovers up to the rock lovers, as this song shows a pretty good balance of the both as an alternative song, and I won't be too surprised on people having this on their playlist. :)
Additional notes: Several years back I was asked by a friend to temporarily replace one of their band members for this certain gig. To cut the story really short, at practice time, we ended up playing an acoustic version of this song - piano and singer only. We played it at the same tempo as the original, and it sounded very great. It was very effective. The notes for the piano need not to be that complicated, as long as I was able to follow the rhtyhm of the song, and translated it to notes. It was pretty good, worthy of some recording time.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
The Amateur Musician Himself
Hi there! Firstly, I'd like to introduce myself as an amateur musician who loves music alot. In those two decades of being a musician, I still consider myself as amateur (because that's what I really am). My initial motive for this blog was just to make analysis of some popular modern songs that I'd be picking, but then I have thought of sharing some music stuff that I have gathered for quite some time now and organize them here. So basically, I have put this one up for my fellow musicians of varying skill (and maybe passion too) levels and music lovers alike.
As for the song analysis entries, I am not very sure that this is a right thing to do that I'd be giving out most of my most neutral comments on some of the most renowned music (maybe mostly on original songs of different genres, but I may also tackle on renditions, revivals, rearranged and artists too). I'm sure in the process, I'd be hearing from various fans (depending on how widespread this blog will be).
As much as I want to make in depth analysis of the songs I'll be picking, I'd rather not go too deep nor too technical as it may appear unnecessarily long.
Also, for limitations, I will only dwell on the songs themselves - I will not go through their music videos, and I will not relate a certain song to another song by the same or another artist. I may seem appear not too keen on the percussion and in the guitar effects as I don't have much experience on them (I was more of a "raw musician").
But bear in mind, I am just an amateur - pretty much bound to miss a lot of things so bear with me in that. Everyone is free to make any kind of comment :)
I have been listening and actually making silent critics and praises to a number of songs already for some two or three years already, but I never wrote them down and organize them into one big pile of junk. Now, I have thought of actually compiling these down into this blog, with honestly no motive nor objective behind.
Aside from those, I will try to share as much music stuff that I got here. :)
So, in a nutshell, what kind of a musician I am?
I have been learning how to play music since I was six years old. So that's almost twenty years ago. Since then, I have learned how to play the piano (since I was six), the guitar (since I was nine) and the violin (just occasionally since 2001). Almost all of these learnings are self learned. But since I have been the type of musician (at least on the latter days), that doesn't really play hard to practice alot everyday, my skills are still intermediate.
Aside from that, I have been singing maybe since I was ten years old, but never sang solo until I was eighteen when I was almost forced to sing by my high school friends (thank you guys - I owe you alot!). And just recently, I have unconsciously trained myself to reach two octaves (around A2 or A#2 upto B4, but may can still linger around C4 or C#4 - normal range for tenor) without the use of falsetto, and can extend to another octave with falsetto. Three octaves - not bad for an amateur vocalist who doesn't have solo singing exposure at all. I won't go further share the quality of my voice here - let's just go do a videoke session if you want to know :)
So maybe this is the real deal. I'd rate my perfect listening pitch skill (a skill that mainly uses your pair of ears - to determine the notes you hear almost instantly) around 8.5 out of 10. This is the skill that I trained myself so hard to have since I was still in high school, when I really didn't have songhits or piano pieces or even tablatures with me, and just relied entirely on my own ears to decipher and arrange songs in my head. This is maybe the critical skill why right now I'm doing this thing.
I can definitely play live music, but I am thinking I am the kind of a musician who likes and who would be better behind the scenes, half of it enjoying the music as being played, and half of it trying to dissect and forming comments on the different parts and components of the music themselves (there was actually a time I was just watching a live band trying to analyze every note and beat they play, and not enjoying the music - it tends to be a curse at times). I am someone who can dissect and pull notes out of a song and make either a piano piece or a tablature out of it. But at times, I cannot play some of the stuff I write with the speed it was intended to have.
And yeah, I may have touched on writing my own songs a bit, but I just sucked at writing the lyrics.
So there, I'm not sure how's going to work, we'll see what happens. Maybe soon I can somehow get some musicians to write for this blog. Happy reading! :) KEEP THE MUSIC ROLLING!
As for the song analysis entries, I am not very sure that this is a right thing to do that I'd be giving out most of my most neutral comments on some of the most renowned music (maybe mostly on original songs of different genres, but I may also tackle on renditions, revivals, rearranged and artists too). I'm sure in the process, I'd be hearing from various fans (depending on how widespread this blog will be).
As much as I want to make in depth analysis of the songs I'll be picking, I'd rather not go too deep nor too technical as it may appear unnecessarily long.
Also, for limitations, I will only dwell on the songs themselves - I will not go through their music videos, and I will not relate a certain song to another song by the same or another artist. I may seem appear not too keen on the percussion and in the guitar effects as I don't have much experience on them (I was more of a "raw musician").
But bear in mind, I am just an amateur - pretty much bound to miss a lot of things so bear with me in that. Everyone is free to make any kind of comment :)
I have been listening and actually making silent critics and praises to a number of songs already for some two or three years already, but I never wrote them down and organize them into one big pile of junk. Now, I have thought of actually compiling these down into this blog, with honestly no motive nor objective behind.
Aside from those, I will try to share as much music stuff that I got here. :)
So, in a nutshell, what kind of a musician I am?
I have been learning how to play music since I was six years old. So that's almost twenty years ago. Since then, I have learned how to play the piano (since I was six), the guitar (since I was nine) and the violin (just occasionally since 2001). Almost all of these learnings are self learned. But since I have been the type of musician (at least on the latter days), that doesn't really play hard to practice alot everyday, my skills are still intermediate.
Aside from that, I have been singing maybe since I was ten years old, but never sang solo until I was eighteen when I was almost forced to sing by my high school friends (thank you guys - I owe you alot!). And just recently, I have unconsciously trained myself to reach two octaves (around A2 or A#2 upto B4, but may can still linger around C4 or C#4 - normal range for tenor) without the use of falsetto, and can extend to another octave with falsetto. Three octaves - not bad for an amateur vocalist who doesn't have solo singing exposure at all. I won't go further share the quality of my voice here - let's just go do a videoke session if you want to know :)
So maybe this is the real deal. I'd rate my perfect listening pitch skill (a skill that mainly uses your pair of ears - to determine the notes you hear almost instantly) around 8.5 out of 10. This is the skill that I trained myself so hard to have since I was still in high school, when I really didn't have songhits or piano pieces or even tablatures with me, and just relied entirely on my own ears to decipher and arrange songs in my head. This is maybe the critical skill why right now I'm doing this thing.
I can definitely play live music, but I am thinking I am the kind of a musician who likes and who would be better behind the scenes, half of it enjoying the music as being played, and half of it trying to dissect and forming comments on the different parts and components of the music themselves (there was actually a time I was just watching a live band trying to analyze every note and beat they play, and not enjoying the music - it tends to be a curse at times). I am someone who can dissect and pull notes out of a song and make either a piano piece or a tablature out of it. But at times, I cannot play some of the stuff I write with the speed it was intended to have.
And yeah, I may have touched on writing my own songs a bit, but I just sucked at writing the lyrics.
So there, I'm not sure how's going to work, we'll see what happens. Maybe soon I can somehow get some musicians to write for this blog. Happy reading! :) KEEP THE MUSIC ROLLING!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
