I like George's singing but....

glass onion · Feb 15, 2011, 01:50 PM

Quote from: nimrod on Feb 14, 2011, 07:47 PM
yes, I agree and as I said in the thread title I do like the way he sings, my point was that he didnt have a raunchy side to his voice in the way that J & P did, you'd never hear George attempt Why Dont We Do It In The Road or Im Down for example, or the way Paul sings on I Got A Feeling.........Its a good job J & P could belt out these rockers as without them doing it the Beatles would have been more limited as a band.
I like singers who could do lovely ballads AND raunchy rock, a lot of bands simply cant do really raunchy stuff as they simply have no one who can sing it

well,i agree nimrod.i wasn't disagreeing with your point at all,i was just giving my own humble opinion on georges' singing.he couldn't sing rock stuff as well as paul and john,no way.he sort of had a way of getting around the real uptempo stuff without belting stuff out.think of 'wah wah'.uptempo and rocky?i think so....but i wouldn't say georges' voice is a real stomper in it,although he sings it real well.strange!

7 of 13 · Feb 15, 2011, 02:03 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cvUsvp9oB8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KynpC1e9I9E

tkitna · Feb 15, 2011, 07:25 PM

Thanks for those two examples to prove that he couldnt belt it out.

7 of 13 · Feb 15, 2011, 08:13 PM

george had a good singing voice and a fantastic range, not sure what you mean otherwise.

I'm Happy Just To Dance With You (Rare BBC)

nimrod · Feb 15, 2011, 09:36 PM

Quotegeorge had a good singing voice and a fantastic range, not sure what you mean otherwise.

2ch

tkitna · Feb 16, 2011, 01:54 AM

Quote from: 7 of 13 on Feb 15, 2011, 08:13 PM
george had a good singing voice and a fantastic range, not sure what you mean otherwise.

Why is it so hard for you?

glass onion · Feb 16, 2011, 03:14 AM

Quote from: 7 of 13 on Feb 15, 2011, 08:13 PM
george had a good singing voice and a fantastic range, not sure what you mean otherwise.

I'm Happy Just To Dance With You (Rare BBC)

mmmmmm,i agree(in a way)with the good voice part-as i have already said i think george had a nice voice,not great,nice.but i'm not too sure on the 'fantastic range' part of your quote.georges' range was a limited one.when you talk about range within a singing voice this does not mean your normal voice and a falsetto.now paul had a good range in his pomp,freddie mercury had a good range.not sure about george harrison.

nimrod · Feb 16, 2011, 05:45 AM

Quote from: glass onion on Feb 16, 2011, 03:14 AM
mmmmmm,i agree(in a way)with the good voice part-as i have already said i think george had a nice voice,not great,nice.but i'm not too sure on the 'fantastic range' part of your quote.georges' range was a limited one.when you talk about range within a singing voice this does not mean your normal voice and a falsetto.now paul had a good range in his pomp,freddie mercury had a good range.not sure about george harrison.

isnt the range the number of octaves you can cover ?, I think George had about 1.5

Joost · Feb 16, 2011, 07:02 AM

I think there are two ways to be a good singer. Either you're very talented and you can do whatever you want with your voice, or you're less talented and you learn to recognize your limitations and make the best of what you've got. Apparently George with either not very good at "belting" or he wasn't comfortable doing it, so he chose not to do it. Good for him. It's fine if people stick to what they're good at, or what they're comfortable doing. Nobody blames the guy from AC/DC for never trying to sing something like 'Blackbird'.

7 of 13 · Feb 16, 2011, 11:07 AM

Quote from: glass onion on Feb 16, 2011, 03:14 AM
mmmmmm,i agree(in a way)with the good voice part-as i have already said i think george had a nice voice,not great,nice.but i'm not too sure on the 'fantastic range' part of your quote. georges' range was a limited one. when you talk about range within a singing voice this does not mean your normal voice and a falsetto.now paul had a good range in his pomp,freddie mercury had a good range. not sure about george harrison.

actually that came from this thread
Wreck of the Hesperus
but even so george sang back up and harmony on many beatles rockers, including Help and Twist and Shout.
when i said george had a fantastic range, perhaps that was a misinterpretation or miscalculation on my part. ;sorry
what i meant is that george could imbue alot of emotion and color into songs and lyrics. anybody who has heard guitar gently weeps, want to know a secret, wanna be your man or happy just to dance with you knows this is true.

Top 5 George Harrison vocals

7 of 13 · Feb 16, 2011, 11:12 AM

Quote from: nimrod on Feb 15, 2011, 09:36 PM
2ch

still waiting for that yardstick.

anyway...

..i'll give you the point nimrod..

anybody can tell you that John Lennon had the more hardcore rock and roll voice. 4ac

George Harrison Is singing

I Need You, by the Beatles (with lyrics)

glass onion · Feb 16, 2011, 12:30 PM

Quote from: nimrod on Feb 16, 2011, 05:45 AM
isnt the range the number of octaves you can cover ?, I think George had about 1.5

erm,yes you could be right.....i also meant in terms of 'range' that paul,could sing in a lot more styles too,a broader 'range'.but yes,it probably does mean the octave range of a vocalist.

Quote from: 7 of 13 on Feb 16, 2011, 11:07 AM
actually that came from this thread
Wreck of the Hesperus
but even so george sang back up and harmony on many beatles rockers, including Help and Twist and Shout.
when i said george had a fantastic range, perhaps that was a misinterpretation or miscalculation on my part. ;sorry
what i meant is that george could imbue alot of emotion and color into songs and lyrics. anybody who has heard guitar gently weeps, want to know a secret, wanna be your man or happy just to dance with you knows this is true.

Top 5 George Harrison vocals

yes,colour and emotion were very evident in georges' stuff,particularly emotion,that was the point i was making earlier in the thread.one of the main plusses for me in georges' voice was the emotive quality.which in part,i.m.o,stemmed from his voice actually being quite weak.but still nice!!

larainefan · Feb 16, 2011, 02:54 PM

What about the early days, when George got a chance to sing more? I thought I read somewhere he was considered the strongest singer at the Decca auditions, that John was kind of reticent and Paul oversang his parts.

7 of 13 · Feb 16, 2011, 03:01 PM

Quote from: larainefan on Feb 16, 2011, 02:54 PM
What about the early days, when George got a chance to sing more? I thought I read somewhere he was considered the strongest singer at the Decca auditions, that John was kind of reticent and Paul oversang his parts.

yes, excellent point. it appears that a couple of songs recorded with john singing lead vocals were actually sang by george when performed live. and yes i think george has a very good hard rock voice, but it's a bit rockabilly flavored, he could also sing the sensitive ballad.

nimrod · Feb 16, 2011, 07:53 PM

Quote from: Joost on Feb 16, 2011, 07:02 AM
I think there are two ways to be a good singer. Either you're very talented and you can do whatever you want with your voice, or you're less talented and you learn to recognize your limitations and make the best of what you've got. Apparently George with either not very good at "belting" or he wasn't comfortable doing it, so he chose not to do it. Good for him. It's fine if people stick to what they're good at, or what they're comfortable doing. Nobody blames the guy from AC/DC for never trying to sing something like 'Blackbird'.

yes, but my point was the Beatles would have been a much lesser group if none of them could sing Im dOwn or Oh Darling or Money