On the Voice tonight. AWFUL.

How exactly is this supposed to be a butchering? By all standards it's performed very well.

Usher sounds okay but yes this was a butcher. Why were they singing it?

mjscarousal said:

Usher sounds okay but yes this was a butcher. Why were they singing it?

How? Please explain. I don't hear it.

Adam Levine butchers ANYTHING! his voice is utter shit. Usher can sing... but his voice is not what it used to be. They were playing that Voice crap at the gym. And his cover of Every Breath You Take is

novabrkr said:

How exactly is this supposed to be a butchering? By all standards it's performed very well.

Where is the tempering agency in this forum to squash the over-reacting that goes on? Justin

Timberlake thinks he's Michael Jackson! Usher and Adam Levine butchered "Untitled"!

"Untitled" is a difficult song to pull off perfectly because of D'Angelo's idiosyncratic phrasing and

his unique gifts for background layering and vocal production. Adam Levine's voice is not suited

for pure R&B and his timing in certain spots was off (like at 0:46-0:48) but this was hardly a

butchering - I agree with you Nova. This rendition only makes you appreciate the original that much

more, but hardly cause for the exaggeration that it's a debacle.

Y'all need to chill the fuck out. Not everything that you dislike is cause for a nuclear meltdown.

novabrkr said:

mjscarousal said:

Usher sounds okay but yes this was a butcher. Why were they singing it?

How? Please explain. I don't hear it.

This. I think it was a pretty good attempt at the song. Didn't sound terrible but wasn't D'Angelo to a tee either, but I don't think it was supposed to be. I liked their cover.

duccichucka said:

novabrkr said:

How exactly is this supposed to be a butchering? By all standards it's performed very well.

Where is the tempering agency in this forum to squash the over-reacting that goes on? Justin

Timberlake thinks he's Michael Jackson! Usher and Adam Levine butchered "Untitled"!

"Untitled" is a difficult song to pull off perfectly because of D'Angelo's idiosyncratic phrasing and

his unique gifts for background layering and vocal production. Adam Levine's voice is not suited

for pure R&B and his timing in certain spots was off (like at 0:46-0:48) but this was hardly a

butchering - I agree with you Nova. This rendition only makes you appreciate the original that much

more, but hardly cause for the exaggeration that it's a debacle.

Y'all need to chill the fuck out. Not everything that you dislike is cause for a nuclear meltdown.

The org is full of haters. Not 1% of the haters would say what they're saying here to their faces. Especially if they were enjoying a cup of coffee together. You explained that stuff really well. D'Angelo is one of the best when it comes to a super laid back, syncopated and mumbling singing style that doesn't sound forced. It floats so naturally, and together with that swamp funk, they more or less created something new out of something pretty traditional. The trio d'angelo, questlove and pino is the core to that music. Alot of amazing musicians adding to that sound though. But there's not many other vocalists that can pull off that stuff he's doing. Prince could maybe do something like that if he practiced it. The One is a song that shows some of his similar abilities. His ability to go up and down octaves fast and playful, yet also rhytmically challenging here and there.

Ducci, what do you mean by "idiosyncratic phrasing" and "unique gifts for background layering and vocal production"? What is so hard about background layering? I don't know the technical stufff, I just know it sounds good to my ear.

I agree that Adam's voice isn't suited for RnB and neither is Usher's. His ass would kicked out of an old school church choir in a minute.

And yes, if you were trying to sing Untitled and you fucked it up and we were having coffee, I would tell you.

[Edited 5/20/14 7:57am]

scriptgirl said:

Ducci, what do you mean by "idiosyncratic phrasing" and "unique gifts for background layering and vocal production"? What is so hard about background layering? I don't know the technical stufff, I just know it sounds good to my ear.

I agree that Adam's voice isn't suited for RnB and neither is Usher's. His ass would kicked out of an old school church choir in a minute.

And yes, if you were trying to sing Untitled and you fucked it up and we were having coffee, I would tell you.

[Edited 5/20/14 7:57am]

If you just happen to always know how to lay background vocals in a way that suits the song perfectly, adding something interesting to the whole sound other than just sounding like a random choir. Sometimes a choir sound perfect if every voice sounds almost the same singing in unison. Other times it's more suitable to blend different voices almost like soccer fans yelling the man united song... Like the hook on America could sound just about as funky if it was Parliament singing it. Just enough grit mixed with pure soul and gospelish vocals. Blending different techniques, intensity,

I don't know the english word for all the theory, but you can probably dumb it down this way:

Unison: everyone singing the same key at the excact same time.
Chords: people singing different keys... and not just octaves
Church choir inspired by western europe: no heavy bending of key, "clean and pure" vocals, little to no vibratio

Church inspired by western africa: "soul", vibrating, ,
Hooligans: shouting, talk singing, "incorrect" off key...

There's so many nuances to the use of our voice. D'angelo is creative, subtle, soulful, gentle, sophisticated, yet down to earth with it in a way that is hard to explain. It just sounds like magic. He learned from the best. Prince, Parliament, Michael Jackson etc... Prince learned alot from Parliament when it comes to blending different textures. He just added erotica and a sensual touch to it that D'angelo would take in new directions. D'angelo doesnt have the capability to go as high or as low as Prnce to my knowledge. But his sweet Gaye, Green and Mayfield like elegance is really making it work pretty damn well anyways.

[Edited 5/20/14 8:42am]

Total layman here, but I liked it! At the same time, scriptgirl is more than entitled to her opinion. Assuming that Untitled is one of her all-time favourites, I can totally understand if she feels that this rendition does the original an injustice.

.

Me, I think Usher was in good shape, vocally, and Adam -whose recent output I don't have the greatest love for- handled himself alright, especially toward the end when they were one-upping each other with the 'yeah yeah yeah's. That was cool.

.

Replica and Gin, thanks!

scriptgirl said:

Ducci, what do you mean by "idiosyncratic phrasing" and "unique gifts for background layering and vocal production"? What is so hard about background layering? I don't know the technical stufff, I just know it sounds good to my ear.

I agree that Adam's voice isn't suited for RnB and neither is Usher's. His ass would kicked out of an old school church choir in a minute.

And yes, if you were trying to sing Untitled and you fucked it up and we were having coffee, I would tell you.

[Edited 5/20/14 7:57am]

The perfect example of D'Angelo's idiosyncratic phrasing and gift for background layering (in the

guise of vocal production) is in the middle section of "Untitled." He uses his background vocals

as if it's another instrument.

In many ways, vocal phrasing is how a singer layers his/her background harmonies. D'Angelo's

approach to this type of vocal production is unique in R&B because he does his own background

harmonies (where he adds, usually the 3rd, 5th, and 7th of the particular melody he's singing).

But he does this in a way that it is polyphonistic - he's got more than one vocal melody at once

and they are all executed in the way that the voice should be considered: as another instrument.

He learned this, I'm willing to bet, by listening to how Prince did his backgrounds. But D'Angelo's

approach to how he executes and produces his background vocals is taken to the 9th power

because he is not simply embellishing the main vocal melody/chorus, as Prince would. Instead,

as I just mentioned, he's essentially introducing another instrument to the mix by stacking and

layering his backgrounds. In this particular song, it sounds like he added a phaser or some other

effect to his vocals to give it spaced-out feeling to it. The only other singer who layered his back-

ground vocals in this manner, similar to Prince and D'Angelo, was Elliott Smith (as far as I know).

It's a unique gift: you gotta have the ability to pick out harmonies (i.e., have a pretty good ear

or good ear training) and you have to be melodically inventive. Again, if you listen to the middle

section of "Untitled" where D'Angelo has all of those vocal melodies and background melodies

twisting and turning into each other (start at 3:35 and ends at 4:19), you'll hear what I'm talking

about. It sounds good because he's not simply singing background; he's producing them. My

musician friends and I always marvel at D'Angelo's background vocals and how well he executes

them.

Ducci, thank you. Do you think D is a musical genius

scriptgirl said:

Ducci, thank you. Do you think D is a musical genius

You're welcome.

No.

Ducci, but even with all those skills, D isn't a musical genius? How come? Not dissing you, just would love to hear why not.

On one hand, I love everything D'Angelo has ever done so I could call him a genius. But he hasn't done enough material to determine whether he's a genius or not. I love the live CD they finally released in its entirety....Angie kills it on the background vocals.

I'm not feelin this live performance though. I hate Adam's voice anyway but this is too much. That timbre with this song...

scriptgirl said:

Ducci, but even with all those skills, D isn't a musical genius? How come? Not dissing you, just would love to hear why not.

Having skills and talent alone does not a genius make. There is some indication that even Mozart

wasn't a genius, but merely a supremely talented individual who worked very hard at his craft. History

is now revealing that Mozart was going to concerts every night, working hard, and that his first real

triumph as a musician was when he was 21, but this is after eighteen years of musical training.

History is also revealing that the word "genius" doesn't mean dick. The way we use words change

over time. "Genius" is a prime example. Today, it just means "really talented" or "brilliant."

So no, I do not think that D'Angelo is a genius. And for whatever reason, he certainly does not have

the work ethic of Mozart, irrespective of Mozart's otherwordly talent.

No shit. Those dipshits butcher their own music, too. They both suck so fucking hard it's pretty unimaginable.

yeah, d's work ethic is an issue

scriptgirl said:

Ducci, but even with all those skills, D isn't a musical genius? How come? Not dissing you, just would love to hear why not.

140?

That's gone down fast.

It's long been at about 160.

The word itself doesn't really mean anything in today's context. It refers to someone being "helped from above" as an explanation to his extraordinary skills. That's in the same sense as a guardian angel helping you out. Another use has been to consider someone's abilities to have such a "natural flowing quality" to them that they examplify "the spirit" (the "spirit" attributed to God, nature's purposefulness, the progress of civilization, whatever you want to attribute to it in your wildest fantasies). Hardly a matter of a serious debate if someone is or isn't a "genius".

novabrkr said:

140?

That's gone down fast.

It's long been at about 160.

The word itself doesn't really mean anything in today's context. It refers to someone being "helped from above" as an explanation to his extraordinary skills. That's in the same sense as a guardian angel helping you out. Another use has been to consider someone's abilities to have such a "natural flowing quality" to them that they examplify "the spirit" (the "spirit" attributed to God, nature's purposefulness, the progress of civilization, whatever you want to attribute to it in your wildest fantasies). Hardly a matter of a serious debate if someone is or isn't a "genius".

You're probabaly right, hehe. But different sources say it differently. And anyways, if you're born a genius, you'd still have to prove it somehow. And how do you really analyze it? Do you have to be a genius to recognize a genius? What level of intelligence is needed to recognize what a genius work of art is? In art it must be more difficult to define genius than in figure based logics where you are solving visual problems, or even logical mathmatics. Knowledge will still be an important tool to solve these problems. So this questions is impossible to give a 100% correct answer to. Atleast I personally see Prince as a genius. I'd also put producers like Flying Lotus in the genius box. But I can't prove it. I'm just as a musician amazed at his abilities, and I think they're far more than just work ethic. And what kind of work ethic does really D'Angelo have compared to Prince? If D'Angelo was the hardest working man in business, extremly curious, and always felt the need to prove something. Then I think he'd be able to pull off something that many would say was genius. It's all opinion though. And very difficult topic to discuss since we all have different background and perspectives.