[besson3c]

This guy nails it:

John Eskow: Christina Aguilera and the Hideous Cult of Oversouling

The obsession over the melisma makes it so hard for me to get into most pop music because it is just so damn overdone and overused. Just because an effective musical device exists doesn't mean it should be used each and every fathomable opportunity. Same goes with many other pop twangy musical devices.

The article references Aretha Franklin and Ray Charles who helped make the melisma popular, but I can listen to these guys all day because they don't drive the damn thing into the ground just because they can.

Why does this pass for what is good singing? It is not only Aguilera who is guilty of this in her Superbowl performance (and presumably in general, for her), if you turn on American Idol or whatever it is hard to find singers that don't annoy the shit out of me somehow. Why aren't people starting to grow a little sick of singers like this?

Rant rant rant...

[The Final Dakar]

I think it's more to show off ability. A sort of "glamour shot" in the song.

[turtle777]

I agree, melisma is way overdone.

This can only be fixed by additionally using excessive vocoders, talk boxes and pitch corretion.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I think it's more to show off ability. A sort of "glamour shot" in the song.

Agreed, but too much of it is like putting on too much makeup - it becomes ridiculous and you look like a whore.

I mean this in a general sense, I'm sure you don't look like a whore.

[The Final Dakar]

You're right, I look nothing like your mother.

[-Q-]

I learned a new word today.

Ultimately, I think it's as Dakar says: they're showing off. And not in a good way.

[Doofy]

All part of the Amerikan "all singing, all dancing" experience. It's the 'candy apple red flake' paint job of the vocal world.

Same thing with guitar. Just because you can shred, it doesn't mean you have to - which is why I like guitarists like the chap from Nightwish. Doesn't even bother playing solos most of the time, but every so often pulls out a little run which says "yes, I can if I want to".

[SpaceMonkey]

Does this make besson the melisma of the MacNN Lounge?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

All part of the Amerikan "all singing, all dancing" experience. It's the 'candy apple red flake' paint job of the vocal world.

Same thing with guitar. Just because you can shred, it doesn't mean you have to - which is why I like guitarists like the chap from Nightwish. Doesn't even bother playing solos most of the time, but every so often pulls out a little run which says "yes, I can if I want to".

It's not just showing off though, it's also a matter of taste, originality, confidence, courage, and in some cases respect that these musicians lack to me. At this point it would honestly impress me more if these singers did *not* do this, because it is so incredibly cliché and trite now, to me.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Does this make besson the melisma of the MacNN Lounge?

I'd be the melisma of the lounge if it were 1960

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

It's not just showing off though, it's also a matter of taste

Like I said, it's all part of the Amerikan "all singing, all dancing" experience.
Like the Superbowl half-time or a VS undies show - everything must glitter.

Now, that may seem like I'm on an anti-Amerikan rant again, but I assure you I'm not. It's definitely an American culture thing, arising out of the meeting of "all singing, all dancing" and urban pop styles such as R&B. Also possibly a function of minimal instrumentation, as may be found in certain styles where the "musician" has done nothing more than order a few Apple Loops.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Like I said, it's all part of the Amerikan "all singing, all dancing" experience.
Like the Superbowl half-time or a VS undies show - everything must glitter.

Now, that may seem like I'm on an anti-Amerikan rant again, but I assure you I'm not. It's definitely an American culture thing, arising out of the meeting of "all singing, all dancing" and urban pop styles such as R&B. Also possibly a function of minimal instrumentation, as may be found in certain styles where the "musician" has done nothing more than order a few Apple Loops.

I agree, but I wasn't coming at this as a sort of bitter musician rant, but a bewilderment that this trend is still so prevalent and people haven't gotten a little bored with this style of singing. The pop music business may not be terribly innovative, but it is fast paced in terms of the faces and names that are pushed. Surely people have noticed that the singer du jour sort of sounded like yesterday's singer du jour?

Okay, maybe this is just a musician rant

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c

a bewilderment that this trend is still so prevalent and people haven't gotten a little bored with this style of singing. The pop music business may not be terribly innovative, but it is fast paced in terms of the faces and names that are pushed. Surely people have noticed that the singer du jour sort of sounded like yesterday's singer du jour?

Don't be silly. Most people don't notice "wet floor" signs in front of them - they're hardly going to notice that tomorrow's new big thing is exactly the same as yesterday's new big thing.

(And by "most people", I don't mean anyone here. We're all on a Mac forum, so we obviously all notice things and make better, more informed choices than the rest of the herd)

[Big Mac]

Well, I learned a new word today! I didn't know there was a term for those obnoxious, purposeful changes in pitch. I would have called it Aguilerism.

I didn't notice when she flubbed the line, but my family all commented that they didn't like her rendition - that it sucked. I heard that she got her start in performing by singing the SSB.

The girl from Glee was much more impressive.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Well, I learned a new word today! I didn't know there was a term for those obnoxious, purposeful changes in pitch. I would have called it Aguilerism.

I didn't notice when she flubbed the line, but my family all commented that they didn't like her rendition - that it sucked. I heard that she got her start in performing by singing the SSB.

The girl from Glee was much more impressive.

For those that care, a melisma is not just changing the pitch. A scoop into a note or a drop off in pitch at the end of the note release is not a melisma. A melisma is, AFAIK, where you sort of doodle around in a single syllable of a word in or out of time. Think of gospel singers.

However, in the context of gospel singing the melisma often takes place on a cadence - a dominant chord that wants to resolve to something else such as the "a-men" at the end of many gospel tunes. It makes sense in this context because of what is going on harmonically. Pop singers just use it to decorate stuff randomly and needlessly though.

It takes far more bravery to make a musical statement plainly and simply without needless decoration. I say bravery because it is generally harder. To me the melisma sounds more like a musical crutch in the context of most pop music. I have absolutely no problems with Ray Charles using melismas, because he was actually good and stuff.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Don't be silly. Most people don't notice "wet floor" signs in front of them - they're hardly going to notice that tomorrow's new big thing is exactly the same as yesterday's new big thing.

And it is naive of me to think that they care. I think Justin Beiber is more about his look and hair and some weird sexual teenage fantasies than he is about the music itself, and the same is probably true for Miley Cyrus, except maybe with less sex.

(And by "most people", I don't mean anyone here. We're all on a Mac forum, so we obviously all notice things and make better, more informed choices than the rest of the herd)

Probably not anybody in here, but around here the herd is slowly becoming more and more about the Mac (the iPhone in particular), so I wouldn't take for granted that platform preference equates to being outside of the herd

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

And it is naive of me to think that they care. I think Justin Beiber is more about his look and hair and some weird sexual teenage fantasies than he is about the music itself, and the same is probably true for Miley Cyrus, except maybe with less sex.

Yep. But then, it's mostly *all* about that.
When making product, I'm not really selling song - I'm selling lifestyle.

Quote from bloke in Big Audio Dynamite (Don Letts or Dan Donovan, can't remember which), back in the '80s: "It's better to look good and play shit than it is to look shit and play well".

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Probably not anybody in here, but around here the herd is slowly becoming more and more about the Mac (the iPhone in particular), so I wouldn't take for granted that platform preference equates to being outside of the herd

Mac does not equal iPhone.

[andi*pandi]

Also learned a new word. This must be the reason I never liked Mariah Carey or Whitney Houston.

[Spheric Harlot]

^ I detest both of them - with all due respect, though.

But I love Aretha.

Originally Posted by Doofy 

All part of the Amerikan "all singing, all dancing" experience. It's the 'candy apple red flake' paint job of the vocal world.

Well, since besson has also mentioned the cadence but failed to explain the context, I figure it might be worth mentioning that a similar (but not identical) tradition has existed in European music from a couple hundred years back:

Coloratura - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cadenza - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's all about showing off.

I love the term "Oversouling", though.

[besson3c]

Here's another thing...

There was a local story here of a high school girl being asked to stop singing the anthem her way and to instead sing it in the more traditional way in respect of the country/military/whatever. This has gotten some people angry and has created some polarization.

What do you think? Do you think that there is a certain line that should be drawn as far as embellishing the anthem, or should it be wide open for creative interpretation? If so, could this include modifying lyrics? Is the anthem a sort of evolving entity, or should it be "archived"?

The musician in me says that retarded embellishments like adding little yodels and 209384092438 melismas should be banned from the universe, but obviously good taste is subjective and undefinable. I don't necessarily think that there is one way the anthem should be performed for eternity either, though. Just don't make it suck

[imitchellg5]

I think we need a new national anthem. Probably some Bruce Springsteen.

[lpkmckenna]

I can't say I've heard much melisma used with O Canada. It just doesn't match the song.

[Big Mac]

If you had a Christina Agu. you'd very likely get such a version. Strangely, though, her break-out hit (Genie in the Bottle) had none of that stuff.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The girl from Glee was much more impressive.

...what?

The girl from Glee was completely, 100% mediocre.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

...what?

The girl from Glee was completely, 100% mediocre.

...which could actually be his point.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I don't necessarily think that there is one way the anthem should be performed for eternity either, though. Just don't make it suck

Agreed. Rock it, you turkey!

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Agreed. Rock it, you turkey!

Hehe, that's awesome!

I wonder if my censor covers farts?