2. music
  3. 158924-136265

Jazz vocalists which may not be as real as we think/imagine

Sure we could include all genres of vocalists,  but lets focus on jazz performers,,for instance , take Diana Krall. 
I have a  pile of cds that i do not listen to, old rock,,, 2 are my wife's she picked up as gifts, and never listened.
So I figured maybe I can use DK's as a  test reference recording.
Her 1999 and 2001, both seem to my ears her voice is somehow ~~tweeked~~ laid out with modern aids such as EQ's and such.
My Q is , can we really consider DK's voice to be The Real Deal,,, or a  perhaps a toch of  ~ The Fake if not perhaps, bordering on, fraud. 
I really can not use her cds in my testing of new tweeks, mods, , Her voice comes across wayyyy too warm = Colored = a nono for my ears. 
I am after pure cold frigid, icy clean mountain spring water. 
Anyway, justa  random thought,, what say ye? Have you noticed this quirk among other jazz performers such as Sophie Milman, which btw , i do use in  my YT vid uploads of testing reference on tweeks/mods/upgrades. 
Her voice is at least somewhat more~~ a  natural~, Just barely,,had her engineers gonea  tad too far in tweeking, I may have to  also disreagrd her cds. 
Sure you might object and claim all recordings post 1985, have these intrusions of tweeking /EQing the voice, as a  makeover. 
I don't know, maybe in the past 20 yrs things have gotten out of hand. 
So cast your vote, is DK's voice real deal,, or a  tad fake?
Can she perform unpluged as she does on high tech studio records?
mozartfan
mozartfan OP
2,143 posts
 
I believe some opera halls use microphones for some of the artists. It's a contentious issue.

I would not be surprised some mod sopranos have tweaking going on in recordings,, vs the old legendary sopranos real talents
So yeah its possible going on in post 2000 opera recordings, productions. These mod recording engineers are slick,, they know how to pull it off w/o attracting much attention. 
Take Faith Hill, no denying she sings with passion, these rare gifts flow through her records,, but also you can hear some ~~amplification/extentions~~ which definetly transform her muisc into a  more magical experience. 
So again its a  2 sided blade,  True vocal fidelity vs a  more enjoyable WOW experience that overwhelms the senses?
I find faith Hill's records, acceptable, although if i heard her Unplugged at her peak,, what impressions  would we walk away with? 
See what i am saying here. 
mozartfan OP
2,143 posts
 
wow just cked Diana Krall is still performing,,, wow, Diana just barely pulled off vocals 20 yrs ago,, can she still do it now  with 20 years added to your voice?
Oh yeah, like New Orleans Jazz Fest here, where you get to hear old legends which croak their tunes like frogs,  which before sang like Nightingales
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,246 posts
 
Mozartfan, do you have a degree in ignorance?
cd318
2,636 posts
 
@mozartfan,

This is a fascinating subject. No matter how far you go back into the earliest days of recording you invariably find the engineers looking for some way to enhance their recordings.

Even those renowned Maria Callas recordings from the early 50s weren’t as honest as we’d like to think. Different venues, different microphones, different positions, different singing styles with miles and miles of tape used.

Eventually the best takes were very carefully selected to finally create an album such as highly regarded Tosca recorded in Milan back in 1953.

I’m getting the impression that vocal honesty and integrity were never the intention in recording. Only some kind of striving towards an imagined perfection as far as the vocalist’s talents and the technology of the time would allow.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tosca_(1953_EMI_recording)

More to discover