Thursday, February 11, 2010
National Skyline Are Taylor Swift and Carrie Underwood Crappy Singers?
Posted by Seth Graves on Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:54 AM
For starts, I know the Super Bowl was, in Internet years, several ice ages ago, and the Grammys pretty much before I was even born, but several lingering comments this week have started a rattling in my coffee-buggin' brain this morn, so I thought I'd type.
The concerns of which I speak regard Nashville's youngest, brightest, comeliest songbirds, Taylor Swift and Carrie Underwood, and their performances at the aforementioned televised events. Critics, bloggers, trolls, and the like from various Interweb outlets have registered complaints, commented snidely, and made more than a few mentions that Swifty was off-key during her performance with Stevie Nicks at the Grammys, and Carrie Underwood's pitch fell flat during the national anthem at the Super Bowl.
Maybe it's because I've grown old adoring snotty punk singers whose limitations have little need for pitch control, but frankly, if these ladies can't sing, then I'm not sure my ear is refined enough to tell who can. Obviously, if these two award-winning broads were incapable of holding a note, we'd have no idea who they are. Pro Tools can work wonders, but Grammy-winning miracles? Either I'm entirely too forgiving or audiences have grown impossibly particular.
To keep this from becoming a 10-page essay, I ask of you the following questions in hopes of sparking a discussion: Are T-Swift and C-Wood really bad singers? Have nine seasons of American Idol turned every Joe Six-Pack into an armchair Simon Cowell? Have studio tricks done to our performance expectations what magazine airbrushing has done to our body image? Would anyone have given Patsy Cline, Aretha Franklin, Karen Carpenter or Madonna this much shit 20-50 years ago or is it only this modern genre of pop vocal performers that's expected to be completely flawless? Do modern audiences prefer pristine pitch to an impassioned and soul-bearing performance, or is this genre so devoid of these things that technical accuracy is all that's left to appreciate? Aren't folks being a little unfair to expect both the virtuoso capacity of Susan Boyle and the effortlessly adorable mug of Taylor Swift?
Comments (85)
Showing 1-50 of 85
It's not so much an issue with Swift, but my problem with a lot of contemporary pop singers (especially those in R&B) is their overuse of melisma. Rather than just opening their mouths and singing the song, they try to shove as many notes into the damn thing as possible, which makes it easier to pick up on a sour note. Christina Aguilera is the best example. Great voice, but jeez lady, stop showing off and calm the fuck down.
like
dislike
How can you seriously even QUESTION Carrie Underwood's vocal ability after all these years? For 4 or 5 years now, and all through American Idol, Carrie has given one great performance after another, all live, never lip syncing.
For you to even COMPARE Taylor to Carrie is a joke and an insult to Carrie! Carrie has blown everyone away at the CMAS, Grammys ACMs, etc, with her outstanding live vocals, while Taylor has yet to hit a note on key in 4 years.
Carrie's Grammy performance last week was brilliant and received great crical reviews, while Taylor's grammy performance was universally panned. Taylor is bad at every live performance, while Carrie is always good.
Carrie's national anthem has received great critical reviews in all the major papers despite her one note that was wobbly at the end. For you to take away 5 years of outstanding vocals in Carrie, for one sharp note, and lump her in with Taylor is an outrage, and ridiculous.
Carrie is an incredible vocalist, and everyone knows that but you apparently. Taylor, on the other hand, has never been on key live. So please think before you lump a world class vocalist like Carrie in with a terrible overrated tonedeaf poser like Taylor.
Wow. What a joke! Carrie Underwood nailed that national anthem and is a world class vocalist. Did you not see her live performances the past 5 years? Did you not see her outshine Taylor at the Grammys last week with Carrie's amazing performance in the Michael Jackson tribute? Carrie is an outstanding singer, while Taylor is worse then most 12 year olds on youtube singing her songs better then she can.
I think you are unfair to even try to lump Carrie in with taylor in this article. Taylor has yet to hit the right note, and Carrie always gives a stunning performance.
Did you not see/hear all of carrie's incredible live performances on the CMAs, Grammys, ACMS, American Idol, etc, the last 5 years? unbelievable.
Carrie did a GREAT job at the National Anthem. I think Taylor Swift's team is doing damage control by trying to slam Carrie to take away the attention on her for her horrendous Grammy performance.
Carrie has a beautiful voice and was the first person to sing live at the Superbowl in over 15 years. Even Whitney lip synced her superbowl anthem and admitted this. Normally the Superbowl and NFL requires every singer to lip sync the performance of the anthem because it is so loud in the stadiium that the singers cannot hear.
Carrie gave a wonderful performance of the anthem at rehearsals the day before, without a single flaw. (watch below). So clearly, if she missed one note at the end, it is not because she is not a great singer, but because she couldn't hear herself in that loud stadium. Maybe she should have lip synced, but I applaud her courage in daring to sing live and true, then fake it by lip syncing like everyone else did. Shame on you for putting Carrie in the same league as Taylor, who should never even gotten a record deal.
Here is Carrie's soundcheck rehearsal of the anthem the day before the Superbowl. BIG DIFFERENCE!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U-YRHl2X8Q
Wow that's some outrage you got there Michael. I hope you're saving it for some of the more important wrongs of the world.
Not that I disagree all that much with his basic point - Underwood is really in a different class. She went out of tune on one (the last) note of the national anthem at the Super Bowl and it was an aberration for her. Underwood's predecessors singing the Super Bowl (the likes of Whitney Houston, Faith Hill, Beyonce, Jordin Sparks, and Jennifer Hudson) have lip synched it at the urging of the Super Bowl preshow producers because of all the technical difficulties involved. Underwood elected to sing it live and it was fairly obvious that on the last note, she couldn't hear herself over the roar of the crowd and made a wrong adjustment. Until then she was fine.
Swifty, on the other hand, has given one out of tune performance after another. Not just the Grammys. Her CMA performances for the last few years have been painfully out of tune, as have her Saturday Night Live performances, and just about every non-corrected performance she has given.
Underwood has gotten a pass because most agree that her missed note was anomalous and the by-product of her choosing to sing live where few have done so. She still should've gotten the last note to avoid any debate but one can at least understand why she missed it. The Swift backlash is because the industry has proclaimed her the standardbearer of music and people have suddenly woken up to the role Autotune has played in this.
^ Carrie is a Baptist and Christian, not a Scientologist. LMAO Where do you get these absurd theories? Carrie thanks God after every single award she wins, and sings songs about Jesus as well as songs of faith.
Some of these internet bloggers need to check their facts before they make up false rumors.
"^ Carrie is a Baptist and Christian, not a Scientologist. LMAO Where do you get these absurd theories? Carrie thanks God after every single award she wins, and sings songs about Jesus as well as songs of faith."
Oh Michael/Theresa. The joke went COMPLETELY over your head didn't it?
@Seth - really good post and valid question. I think "the listener" has steadily been molded to listen for and insist on perfection. This has been a gradual process though. Musicians and Engineers were probably asking the same question (albeit over a beer, not a blog) in the 1950s when multi-track recording and overdubbing began their climb from an esoteric recording technology to standard practice. Pitch correction is just the latest.
I sometimes wonder what's next in the quest for sonic "perfection" or will that evolution instead become so unbearable that it collapses in on itself?
@Ashley - I never knew what that style was called but have always hated it! Sadly some people confuse superfluous with soulful, when it's just the opposite. 'Melisma' has now replaced 'vocal wanking' in my lexicon. Thanks.
okay. i'm going to spell out my post, because I'm guessing it wasn't clear enough
1. certain interweb source have said both performances were flawed (not me. i didn't see either show. i have no opinion).
2. i grew up thinking joey ramone was the world's greatest singer, so wtf do i know?
3. i did ask you which, if either of these women are talented.
4. i then posed the question as to whether we're holding these performers to an impossible standard as opposed to artists in previous years due to changes in the way we produce and consume music among other things.
the only reason these two are "lumped" together is because they both performed in front of a televised audience of millions in the past few weeks and they were both criticized for it whether needlessly or not.
@Seth Carrie did not fall flat, she was actually only a quarter tone sharp. I think someone said this in an earlier response. Taylor just blows. Also, Pasty Cline had perfect pitch, just kind of a nerdy FYI.
@ Ashley I agree, restraint is something new soul singers are pushing away from and it's just fucking stupid.
i'm not a super big country fan, but i respect carrie underwood for having a great voice from what i've heard. i respect taylor swift for writing a bunch of songs that have resonated with consumers and touched the hearts of many a young girl (and many a young girl's dad's wallet). is there a little bit of a double standard going on, though (not with seth, but with people in general)? i mean, tim mcgraw and kenny chesney have been singing out of tune at awards shows for years, and nobody says much at all about those dudes. the girls are getting slammed.
btw, seth, thanks. methinks this little thread o'yours should blow up nicely by tomorrow. i'm going to leave it until then, like a flower, until its reached its full, grammarless, text-abbreviated, angry bloom.
um pretty sure carrie has five grammys and is the entertainer of the year, and is the only girl country artist that has 10 number one singles in her first two albums alone. she is the best singer in the world thats why they askedHER to sing at the superbowl.
Carrie is a great ever improving singer. No question she is a current and long lasting super star. Taylor is a weaker singer, but a great preformer. Taylor often does not sing, she speaks the lyrics and her pitch is not good at all. Taylor has a limited vocal range, while Carrie has a fantastic voice and vocal range. Taylor's strength is her material choice and her acting ability. Taylor's management has done a great job at establishing and pushing her career. Carrie material choices are not as good. I hope Carrie's next album has better material. One way out thought is that Scott from Taylor's record company is planting a seed to be the next American Idol judge.
i'd also like to point out, that our national anthem is a ridiculously challenging song to sing and sing well. it's ironic that it's something that we should all know, but only a few of us should sing.
People from Rosanne Arnold to Bob Forrest (Thelonious Monster/Bicycle Thief) have been booed out of the venue for doing it badly.
the way i see it, if you've got the balls to do it in front of that many people and pull it off without receiving a death threat, you did a good job.
it's like watching Evil Knievil jump a couple dozen school busses on a motorbike and then raking him over the coals for breaking a few bones.
CARRIE UNDERWOOD IS NOT A SCIENTOLOGIST AND DOES NOT HAVE BALLS!!! SHE THANKS GOD ALL THE TIME, AND....well...just OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T HAVE BALLS!!!
Looks like the Carrie street teamers are out in force today.
And as for: "Melisma' has now replaced 'vocal wanking' in my lexicon."
I always just called urban yodeling.
Swift is tuned to death on records, and tuned, in series, live. She's more of an entertainer than a singer. Good actor. Couldn't make a Middle School chorus. But more power to her! Smoke 'em if ya got 'em.
Seth, you absolutely nailed it -- we are becoming a nation of Simon Cowell-molded androids who are being spoon-fed our new annual pre-packaged American Idols and being led to think that only people who sing like Susan Boyle are worthy of being on a stage. The reason so many comments take exception to lumping Underwood with Swift is because Carrie is THE American Idol (even if she isn't immune to squawking on the ANTHEM'S final climactic note).
Taylor doesn't even try to compete with Carrie's vocal pyrotechnics -- she is basically a writer, a communicator and a live concert entertainer first. Her voice on record is conversational -- confidential whispers, near-strident exclamations, giggly asides. AI fans like to say Taylor wouldn't win on AI, and they become really resentful when Taylor's albums fly off shelves while the AI offerings have a short buzz and then a zzzzz. And they are totally baffled as to why their great singers are so boring in concert and held in 2nd-tier venues, while Taylor (who is a MUCH better live singer than thye AI crowd pretends) generates 1-minute sellouts in mega-stadiums and excites her fans into non-stop, scream-a-thon love-fests.
Some other people who wouldn't have won AI: Bob Dylan (Cowell went on record to say as much), Hank Williams, Johnny Cash, Loretta Lynn, Buddy Holly, John Hiatt, Lucinda Williams, John Fogerty, Levon Helm,Jack White, Kings of Leon, Tom Petty, Stevie Nicks, Tom Waits, Bruce Springsteen, Wilco, John Lennon, Neil young, Eddie Vedder, Connor Oberst, The Pixies, Tom Waits ....
How DARE YOU put Carrie Underwood in this category! That is like putting putting Evlis in a category of "one hit wonders". Are you even alive? Because obviously you have some dellusions.
Taylor Swift is another story and I agree with your assessment on her. Who doesn't? But it's a DISGRACE for you to even compare her with Carrie and have the nerve to say Carrie could be a crappy singer. She is actually one of the only GOOD singers out there! Look at her vocal performances and countless awards for *vocal ability*. Of course now Taylor seems to be changing the standards on that. Carrie won a damn singing competition to be honest... and is a member of the grand ole opry...
Look at her vocals in concerts, in songs, ANYWHERE!
Her national anthem performance was incrediable. Carrie herself did admit she was a little off.. but that can easily happen to anyone based on the conditions in the stadium and if you can hear yourself. Sometimes the ear piece screws you up. Just go watch all of her other national anthem performances and you will see why they chose Carrie to sing it.
"Some other people who wouldn't have won AI: Bob Dylan (Cowell went on record to say as much), Hank Williams, Johnny Cash, Loretta Lynn, Buddy Holly, John Hiatt, Lucinda Williams, John Fogerty, Levon Helm,Jack White, Kings of Leon, Tom Petty, Stevie Nicks, Tom Waits, Bruce Springsteen, Wilco, John Lennon, Neil young, Eddie Vedder, Connor Oberst, The Pixies, Tom Waits ...."
Some other people who Taylor Swift doesn't approach as a communicator and writer:
Bob Dylan, Hank Williams, Johnny Cash, Loretta Lynn, Buddy Holly, John Hiatt, Lucinda Williams, John Fogerty, Levon Helm,Jack White, Kings of Leon, Tom Petty, Stevie Nicks, Tom Waits, Bruce Springsteen, Wilco, John Lennon, Neil young, Eddie Vedder, Connor Oberst, The Pixies, Tom Waits ....
"btw, seth, thanks. methinks this little thread o'yours should blow up nicely by tomorrow. i'm going to leave it until then, like a flower, until its reached its full, grammarless, text-abbreviated, angry bloom. "
Why Larry Mell, I do believe you're right. I can't seem to stay away just yet because who knows what new entertainment awaits us.
@Seth I don't think it's the standard of perfection that's the reason Swift is getting so much grief. People will look past an occasional bungled note or two (which is why Underwood has escaped relatively unscathed). The power of Swift's Grammy performance was the pile of grievously out of tune notes mixed with Swift's blithe performance of them against the backdrop of Stevie Nicks' apparent displeasure. Swift was poised but I think her mistake was acting like she belonged on stage with Nicks. Compare that to Lady Gaga - no amount of costumed excess could hide her delight in being up there on stage with Elton John. Not to mention they delivered a strong performance with tuneful voices and high energy.
That being said the overuse of studio Autotune is a pox because of the unrealistic expectations it generates. Without it, Swift wouldn't be in this position because she wouldn't have recorded product that was so rocked up that she can't sing over it live. She would have stuck to sparer arrangements that her voice can handle better.
for the record, my carrie underwood/balls comment was just a joke...not as in, a joke that she doesn't have balls...literally...i'm sure she doesn't literally have balls...but i'm not in the carrie underwood street team. i was just jokin' around.
okay. just to make sure i'm clear on this...
carrie underwood - unlike taylor swift - does NOT belong in the category of grammy-winning pop country artists who performed on national television in the past couple weeks and received subsequent criticism for it?
apologies. i must have gotten my facts wrong.
But Larry Mell I thought you were criticizing Underwood for not hosting more events for debutantes. Is that not true?
@Seth In fairness, Swift got criticized everywhere, starting with the mainstream media (LA Times, Entertainment Weekly, NY Times, Washington Post, and on and on). So fierce was the criticism that it generated articles about the criticism.
The level of criticism Underwood received was rather muted - there was certainly some
but the mainstream media reviews of her anthem were largely positive even as they noted the flubbed last note, perhaps because most were surprised and impressed that Underwood broke with tradition and took the risk of singing live at the Super Bowl despite the special challenges that raises.
I would say the reaction to Underwood's rendition has been reasonable and within the range of what would be expected in light of her reliability as a live singer. The reaction to Swift's Grammy performance has been far more vehement and provides more discussion fodder. So I don't think the reactions to their performances are comparable and I can see why a non fan club member might question the premise of this blog.
Wow, this must have been posted on some Defend Carrie Underwood site with a link and a call to protect her reputation. Chill out, people.
That being what it is, I'll jump in:
I am certainly an armchair critic, always have been. Love music, play music, have been deciphering music and yet enjoying the hell out of it for decades. I can separate my technical understanding from my taste, and know the difference between virtuosity and emotion.
Carrie Underwood can sing as well as anyone. She's phenomenally gifted and has done well on the Nashville pop/country vehicle for which she seems tailor-made. Who knows why she missed a note. Give her a break.
Taylor Swift has sung off key, missed notes, and wobbled many times before-- I would venture more often than not in TV appearances. But whether aided or not, on her records she sounds appealing and gets her message across. I don't think people like her because she's a great singer, they like her for the whole package-- songwriting, delivery, arrangements, looks. I actually think it's to her credit that there hasn't been much effort to cover up her singing weaknesses in live TV appearances-- no one's trying to pull the wool. On records, I say just about anything goes except having someone else do the vocal. If you say singers shouldn't use correction in the studio, then guitar players shouldn't use effects and no one should gate a snare, compress a bass, etc.
At the CMA's she sang 'fifteen' from a precarious looking spot-- anyone could have/should have been scared about crowd control where they put her. And her adoring (bused in) 'fans' took the liberty of singing along-- and got the song wrong! They went to the chorus early. Taylor didn't miss a beat and listening live in the Sommet Center, I thought she'd nailed it. Watch it on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk4aQqaC-lo) and you can hear she's a little off many times during the song. But live, she had everyone with her. That's an entertainer.
Hopefully Taylor's singing will improve with age, and her songwriting will grow appropriately with her. But while there's nothing wrong with hitting all the right notes, it's not always about that.
I don't know... It kind of seems like the "normal" comment rage around here. Sometimes it's mega-stars. Sometimes it's the holy legends. Sometimes it's the cursed festival jam band. Sometimes it's that living god that is underground whatever.
Seems to me like you can insert whatever the hell kind of band and ask whatever the hell type question and get this sort of reaction. Makes for good reading though--usually.
(begins to eat popcorn)
*just wondering... Why the slavish devotion or frothing, spittle-spewing rants for any artist/band? I've always found it's the song or the album or the feeling brought about by the music itself to be far more worthy of those sorts of "heights"
Anyone can answer, just curious--no harm meant. Artists have highs and lows and can be great or shallow; but the songs are in another dimension, no? Is it not the message as opposed to the messenger, in other words?
I never weigh in on these; so sorry to interrupt. Carry on.
@bosnashgert
"I don't think people like her because she's a great singer, they like her for the whole package-- songwriting, delivery, arrangements, looks. I actually think it's to her credit that there hasn't been much effort to cover up her singing weaknesses in live TV appearances-- no one's trying to pull the wool. Hopefully Taylor's singing will improve with age, and her songwriting will grow appropriately with her. But while there's nothing wrong with hitting all the right notes, it's not always about that."
Thank you for saying that. Taylor Swift is arguably one of the best communicators of her generation - I'm 23 years old but her songs take me back like no other artist can. If you take the time to listen to her lyrics you'll realise how well she relates to her audience. It's like talking to your bestfriend who knows everything about you. It's refreshing not to have to listen to a song about grinding in the clubs for once.
@david
"Taylor doesn't even try to compete with Carrie's vocal pyrotechnics -- she is basically a writer, a communicator and a live concert entertainer first. Her voice on record is conversational -- confidential whispers, near-strident exclamations, giggly asides. AI fans like to say Taylor wouldn't win on AI, and they become really resentful when Taylor's albums fly off shelves while the AI offerings have a short buzz and then a zzzzz. And they are totally baffled as to why their great singers are so boring in concert and held in 2nd-tier venues, while Taylor (who is a MUCH better live singer than thye AI crowd pretends) generates 1-minute sellouts in mega-stadiums and excites her fans into non-stop, scream-a-thon love-fests"
I couldn't have put it better. Just went to one of her concerts here in Sydney and I had on of the best experiences of my life. The girl KNOWS how to put on a show and knowing she put it together just makes her more amazing.
please watch again the performance of Taylor at the grammy award and watch again carrie's performance at the super bowl.its pretty obvious who can REALLY SING AND WHO HAS A GREAT VOCAL... IT'S CARRIE UNDERWOOD
i like how australians and britons use 's' instead of 'z'. like 'realise'. can we go back to that? or can we put a 'z' in 'mayonnaize'?
one.
big.
vagina.
flap.
oh, and she is a scientoligist. my cousin freddy used to do her hair and told me and mamaw all about it. She lies about god, because god is a a big multi headed alien general(according to her).
hubbard man, he's got her.
This comparison is laughable. Taylor was awful at the Grammys... and usually is live. She is not a good singer at all.
Carrie Underwood is an INCREDIBLE singer. Her performance was amazing at the Super Bowl. On TV it sounded like the last note was off (really... one note, compared to all the notes Taylor didn't hit)... but if you watch the live videos on youtube that people took that were actually at the game, it sounded FLAWLESS.
And really... you can't compare just ONE single performance to decide if someone isn't a good singer or not... everyone has off days. But youtube Taylor Swift and Carrie Underwood and you'll see that Taylor seems to always give less than steller performances (that's me being nice) and Carrie always seems to give outstanding performances.
what is wrong with everyone? the point of this facetious (that means "amusing in tone") blog probably was to refocus the discussion away from brainless pro- and con- diatribes ("rants" for the bashers) and to a more interesting discussion of internet-age expectations of performers.
that being said (and since that point has been lost on the underwood defenders/haters), it is preposterous to declare that underwood "is the best singer ever." she's fine. that's it. just a reminder: pop music in all of its forms -- from folk to rock -- is NOT about vocal technique; it's about communication, emotion, and story-telling. want technique? go to the opera.
btw: the contradictions that abound about "swifty" are staggering: she uses digital correction for her live performances; she can't sing on key. she is corrected in the studio; her voice is thin and reedy. she has never sung on-key live; she always uses "auto-tune." so, what is it folks? if she does, then you wouldn't be ranting. if she doesn't then 9 million albums (30+ million downloads) and sold-out performances world-wide for the last 3 years are due to what? the obvious inferiority of everyone who disagrees with your opinions?
please go ahead and enjoy YOUR favourite performer. why must there also be a victim in order to provide validation?
No contradictions at all, 14695.
Your three points:
1. Yes, she uses digital correction for her live performances; no, she can't sing on key when she's doing an award show because she's not using her rack of autotuners..
2. Yes, she is corrected (meaning tuned) in the studio; and yes, her voice is thin and reedy. and charming as well.
3. She has never sung on-key live; she always uses "auto-tune." See #1.
She's also a hell of an entertainer, hard worker, and deserves her success. Nowadays there is really no need to be able to "sing".
I guess both of these girls can sing better than 95 percent of the rest of the population. That said, just because they "can" sing doesn't mean that what they "do" sing is any good. Once they lose their goldie locks and sweet innocence, some other teenie will take over for them and their "compositions". The fact that Swifty can win Grammys with songs about being fifteen is ridiculous on many levels. Sure they can sing. So can my 3 year old nephew, the girl at the stoplight next to me, 50 goofballs on American Idol, and Celine Dion. Who can't sing is Bob Dylan, Jack White, Janis Joplin, Tom Petty and Grace Slick, and theirs is the music that will be appreciated and compared for generations.
YOU'RE LUCKY THEY EVEN PERFORM FOR YOU BASTARDS! LEAVE TAYLOR AND WHATSHERNAME ALONE!!!!
i love when people get all bent out of shape about stuff like this. it is hilarious. who cares if they can sing or not. they are where they are b/c of their looks.
Carrie Underwood is obviously by far the better singer. She has the power of Kelly Clarkson, the likeable loveability of Justin Guarini, and the longevity of Chris Daughtry. Not since the unbridled crooning of Clay Aiken have we heard such tonal perfection. She sings those songs that others have written for her like a Ruben Studdard/Jennifer Hudson/God's own Angel 3 way love child. We should all be so lucky to hear her sing and I challenge anyone, including Fantasia, to do any better.
okay, then fine. i concede the following.
1. i totally compared Swift to Underwood. I said they were exactly the same and equals in every way. The fact that they are two popular singers who sang on national television and subsequently received some form of criticism for alleged imperfections has NOTHING to do with my argument. I only wrote this as a slander to Carrie Underwood with no other reason behind it, and thus, Carrie Underwood fans have every reason to be upset.
2. AutoTune is a miracle machine. Using equal parts science and magic, It's basically Creationism in the studio - an impossibly advanced vocoder that can turn any tone deaf hack into Pavarotti and millions of music fans will never know the difference.
4. The only way to know for sure if your favorite artist is using AutoTune or not is to send them through the ranks of American Idol.
3. Taylor Swift cannot sing. She's a random pretty girl who happens to (co)write decent songs, but the massive corporate money-go-round conspiracy to cover up the fact she cannot hold a note to save her life is crumbling.
@Seth Finally you get it!!!11!1!1!!eleventy
The crazies deserve the mocking. But you kind of brought it on yourself by not even bothering to watch both performances before using them as the basis for the blog. You can keep pointing out the similarity about them being popular singers who came in for a level of criticism that ranged between 1 and 100 recently after performing for large audiences. But it winds up a tenuous similarity after watching the 2 performances and comparing the reactions.
Aside from the fact that all these teamers are saying the exact same thing in post after f*cking post, I sincerely hope the Cream considers doing this kind of thing on the reg. It's always fascinating to see 30 or 40 people who can't possibly be regular readers of the blog descend upon it to tell you to leave their favorite artist alone.
Good times.
i don't think it matters if i watched the performances or not.i'm not the one criticizing them. i thought i made it clear that it's the interwebs making these claims, not me.
my point is not that i thought they weren't singing well. it's that so many people are saying so. in which case, it wouldn't matter if i watched it or not as the world (unfortunately) does not revolve around me and the same people would be saying such things regardless.
why do i have to keep explaining this?
i've since watched them both and they both sound fine to me.. as far as my ears are concerned, both of them sing better than Glenn Danzig and that's really all it takes to impress me.
Vote here for best Band of the Week
Slideshows
Top Commenters
