dseann said:

As I said on another thread, Luther Vandross technically had an incredible voice and showed ample and great usage of his gift. However, you have to judge the entire package (namely, his songs and the production and quality of said songs).

Where I find Vandross to be lacking compared to the great soul male romantic singers (see Al Green, Barry White, Teddy Pendergrass, Marvin Gaye) is that his musical style lacked emotion. I feel Vandross produced his vocal style and production to where it was too polished, too much technique and had hardly any feeling.

Don't get me wrong -- Vandross' songs were performed expertly and he sang them wonderfully. However, they are the type of songs that I would play in the background of a party of mixed company of upwardly mobile people. But IMO his songs lacked the passion and emotion and essentially stopped before they got to where love songs by Marvin, T.P., The Isley Brothers and Barry started. IMO, his contemporary and one-time rival Freddie Jackson's music was much more romantic than Vandross'.

I found myself spending more time listening to Vandross' vocal technique than being swept up in the emotion of the song. Even his signature song -- his remake of "Superstar" -- is a testament of how it seemed that people are more caught up in his vocal performance than any inherent sensuality. And what good is a lover-man soul singer who won't move past his overly rehearsed phrasings and go all the way?
[Edited 7/25/07 17:51pm]

SoulAlive said:

I have to disagree with some of this. It's a stretch to call any of Luther Vandross' albums signature albums for the 1980s -- the quality of the albums were consistently good, but if anything Vandross does not have one definitive album that can be considered a landmark effort. Signature 1980s albums would be something like Janet Jackson's "Control," Anita Baker's "Rapture," Prince's "1999" and "Purple Rain," Rick James' "Street Songs," etc.

As for Freddie Jackson, where Vandross has him beat is in longetivity; Jackson's albums "Rock Me Tonight," "Just Like the First Time," "Don't Let Love Slip Way" and "Do Me Again" were as equally successful as anything Vandross put out in the 1980s. In fact, 1986's "Just Like the First Time" spent something like an amazing 27 weeks as the No. 1 album on the Billboard R&B Albums chart. Jackson was so hot in that period that he became the first artist in more than 40 years to supplant himself with on the Billboard R&B Singles chart with back-to-back No. 1 singles.
[Edited 7/25/07 20:11pm]

Najee said:

Sorry,have to disagree with you several of Luther's 80s albums were definitely R&B classics.I forgot to mention his 1985 album 'The Night I Fell In Love'.That's a classic too.These songs were all over the radio back then,even the non-singles.His masterpiece is 1986's 'Give Me The Reason',an album where nearly every song got alot of attention and airplay.I once read that Prince was heavily into this album and Patti LaBelle's 'The Winner In You' album.....both of these albums inspired him to come up with "Adore".

Najee said:

No doubt,Freddie was hot in the 80s but come on...Luther was basically the King of R&B back then.His popularity was amazing and not just in the U.S.,either.In the late 80s (or early 90s....can't remember) he soldout a string of dates at Wembley.I remember this being a big deal back then.Luther correctly pointed out that "I'm selling out more dates than artists who are supposedly bigger crossover acts".

As for Freddie's albums.....not one of those albums could be considered a "classic",imo.His albums each had a few singles,but none of the other songs (the non-singles) got alot of attention and airplay.R&B and Quiet Storm radio bassically devoured Luther's albums.That's the difference between him and Freddie: Luther was an album artist,which Freddie wasn't.

SoulAlive said:

I believe you have a different definition for a "classic album" than I do. Albums that enjoy huge commercial success and incredible critical praise -- and even define the music genre for a certain period -- fall in that category. Michael Jackson's "Thriller," Prince's "Purple Rain," Anita Baker's "Rapture," Janet Jackson's "Control," Bobby Brown's "Don't Be Cruel" and Rick James' "Street Songs" fall in that category.

Luther Vandross had a string of successful albums in the 1980s, but I have never heard any critic or anyone outside of his most zealous fans call any one of his albums a "must-have" for the decade -- instead, his 1980s reputation is based on the totality of his output. I would agree that all his albums were good and enjoyed a consistent level of success, but in order to define Vandross' place in 1980s soul you need to list all his albums because he didn't have one that was genre-defining. If anything, Vandross' 1980s impact is more defined by singles than one album.

SoulAlive said:

Actually, that would apply more to Freddie Jackson. Jackson had a No. 1 single with Melba Moore ("Just a Little Bit More,") and became the first artist in more than 40 years to replace himself with a No. 1 single ("Tasty Love"). This continued a string of hit songs from his debut album that received continuous airplay in Summer 1985 through Spring 1986 -- "Rock Me Tonight (for Old Times Sake)," "You Are My Lady," "Love Is Just a Touch Away," "He Will Never Love You (Like I Do)" -- and continued on with his second album, "Just Like the First Time" with songs like "Have You Ever Loved Somebody," "Jam Tonight" and "I Don't Want to Lose You Love."

I feel you're overstating the success of "Give Me the Reason" a little bit here. Songs like the title track (which was made earlier for the "Ruthless People" soundtrack), "Stop to Love," and the duet with Gregory Hines "There's Nothing Better than Love" were certainly successful singles and "So Amazing" is one of his evergreens. But it's interesting you're calling "Give Me the Reason" this "classic" album when it spent the majority of the time on the charts looking up to Freddie's "Just Like the First Time."
[Edited 7/26/07 5:39am]

SoulAlive said:

It seems like every discussion about Luther Vandross seems to fall back more on his reputation/general standing in soul music than his actual music. Of course, Vandross is going to be remembered more because of his longevity and/or technique was better than his other peers (see Peabo Bryson, Jeffrey Osborne). But IMO, I found Freddie Jackson's music overall more romantic than Vandross', which mostly came off as high-glossed with little emotion or feeling.

Also, I don't feel people need to trash Jackson's career in order to elevate Vandross'. Moreover, I always find it interesting that in soul music circles that Vandross is one of those artists where people feel you should be obligated to like, that if you judge him with the same critical eye you're doing something sacriligious.

SoulAlive said:

We must have different Quiet Storm formats, because Jackson's music was a staple on those stations. Practically his entire "Just Like the First Time" album was a fixture for three years on the stations I heard, from his singles ("Tasty Love," "Have You Ever Loved Somebody," "Jam Tonight," "I Don't Want to Lose Your Love' and his duet with Melba Moore "Just a Little Bit More") to his non-singles ("Janay," "Look Around," the title track).
[Edited 7/26/07 5:38am]

Oh,I wasn't trashing Freddie's career I like him.I got his first album 'Rock Me Tonight' on CD.He's had some decent hits and his talent is obvious.I just feel that Luther was a better artist with better albums.Luther was the king of R&B throughout the 80s and 90s,imo.

listening to "Make Me A Believer" right now
[Edited 7/26/07 4:16am]

SoulAlive said:

It depends on how you're defining "king of R&B." Rick James, Prince, Michael Jackson and later Bobby Brown set the trend for soul music in terms of musical influence and personal style. I imagine you can consider Luther Vandross if you're defining it based on having a consistent presence and being a soul music audience-only artist; he certainly set the table for conservative R&B audiences.

Of course, Vandross had longer and more enduring success than Freddie Jackson. Vandross had four successful albums by the time Jackson made his debut in 1985 and when the soul music scene changed in the 1990s Vandross smartly changed his sound and appeal to pop audiences to extend his career another decade. But that doesn't I have to like Vandross' more than Jackson's, either.

If you're just getting into Jackson, I definitely would recommend buying "Just Like the First Time," which IMO was the height of his career.
[Edited 7/26/07 5:34am]

Najee said:

Is that the album with "Look Around"? Love that song

SoulAlive said:

That's right. It also features "Tasty Love," "Have You Ever Loved Somebody," "Just a Little Bit More" (a duet with Melba Moore), "Jam Tonight" -- all of which were Billboard No. 1 R&B singles -- and "I Don't Want to Lose Your Love," which reached No. 2 on the Billobard R&B Singles chart. Other memorable tracks were the title track and "Janay," which apparently inspired some women to give their daughters that name.

It's interesting that whenever Jackson's name comes up, I don't hear that many people discussing "Just Like the First Time." Like I said, this was an album that spent more than six months as the No. 1 album on the Billboard R&B Albums chart when the charts were considered much more relevant in gauging people's reaction to music.

I believe the thing people keep overlooking is that by the time Jackson released his debut album "Rock Me Tonight" in 1985, Vandross already had four successful albums and a very entrenched reputation/standing in the soul music scene. All Vandross had to do was hold serve for the latter part of the 1980s and not only would he be considered better than Jackson but have a legacy as one of the greatest male soul singers ever.

The reality is that from 1985 to mid-1991 Jackson more than matched Vandross' output and success; I would dare say Jackson was arguably more successful than Vandross during that period. However, at the end of the period Vandross had eight similar successful albums (including the just-released "Power of Love" and the 1989 greatest hits package that featured "Here and Now") to Jackson's four. There was no way Jackson was going to catch up -- especially with the soul music scene changing to the hyper-sexually aggressive, younger, hip-hop-influenced style that was emerging and eventually swallowed up singers like Jackson.
[Edited 7/26/07 6:08am]

Najee said:

From your description I would think you were talking about Barbara Streisand than Luther. Marvin, T.P. Ron Isley and Barry White couldn't sing like Luther so they had to place more emphasis on the emotional part of their song deliverance. How can songs like "Nothing Better than Love", "Here and Now(not much music at all)", "So Amazing" be considered too polished and, I get the feeling you're trying to say, soulless?

dseann said:

Not that I think Luther Vandross is a better singer necessarily than those guys -- he may have been a more technically polished one, because after all he was a background singer and ad pitchman for years before becoming a front-line singer -- but the one thing where he fails and people like Teddy Pendergrass, Marvin Gaye, The O'Jays, Al Green, The Isley Brothers and Barry White start is I do feel his songs and music lacked a lot of emotion, and I feel that may been a byproduct of being a background singer and ad pitchman.

Very rarely have I listened to a Vandross song and found his work to have much spontaneity, warmth, passion and sensuality -- it's like you can anticipate what he's going to do before he does it. In fact, there is a lot of sameness to the basic sound and production style practically throughout his 20-plus-year career -- songs like his collaboration with Beyonce on the remake of "The Closer I Get to You" have the same structure and sound as stuff like 1985's "Wait for Love."

Vandross' music, his voice and persona were too rehearsed, too choreographed, virtually too safe -- which is why I feel it was so successful but partly where Vandross is a step behind those guys I named in the pantheon. It's a similar feeling I got with Patti Austin, another person who for years was a classic background singer/ad pitchwoman who became a front-line singer. If that's what you like, fine, but let's not confuse technical production with innovative music and spirited performances.

Surely, you're not going to put songs like "So Amazing" and "There's Nothing Better than Love" -- songs that can be played in an office setting, a cocktail party or a setting of mixed company -- against something like Gaye's, Pendergrass', The O'Jays', Green's, The Isleys' or White's music when it comes to romance. If anything, it's the rather soulless and fairly non-threatening, asexual manner in which Vandross' love songs come across that validated in some people's minds the gay rumors over the years.
[Edited 7/26/07 15:10pm]

In some ways I can see how Freddie outdid Luther. Vocally he was/is a beast, as is Luther. Though I can see how Luther would be more polished, Freddie let you know he came from the church (so did Luther, but he would do it on a more smoother tone). But I don't think he was any less romantic than Marvin or Barry or Ron. There are times he used that vibrato that still sends chills up and down your bones. Luther had more success because he was a gifted artist. He could write and produce as well and he was the director of his ship. People often said his live shows were AWESOME! I think if Freddie had been giving more push for mainstream success like Luther, we'd be saying the same thing about Freddie than we are about Luther. It was just by '94, the scene had changed so dramatically with R. Kelly and Jodeci coming in that Freddie felt out of place while Luther was basically a POP SUPERSTAR at this point so it didn't affect his popularity as much as it did Freddie. Both these guys were students from Sam Cooke and Marvin Gaye School and they excelled brilliantly, only Luther though graduated from college with flying colors.

jaimestarr79 said:

I agree.. But I think it is easier to make love songs about women, when you actually like pussy and be inside it.

dseann said:

Luther is definitely a legend but to say ron isley,marvin,and t.p weren't in their class. That is scary. Marvin and Ron were definitely the soul balladeers of the 70's and ron with his brothers even extended their dominance throughout the early part of the 80's. I would take luther over the mr. biggs isley but i would take the early ron isley from 3+3 through between the sheets over luther anyday.

phunkdaddy said:

Thank ya...

phunkdaddy said:

I agree. Once again, notice how dseann tried to make it a discussion over technical vocals -- a common trait among Luther Vandross fans/defenders. The argument is more about the quality of their songs overall and the romantic bent of their selected ballads.

To say Vandross' songs fall short of what Marvin Gaye, Al Green, The Isely Brothers, Barry White and Teddy Pendergrass produced in their heydays is not a slight to Vandross at all. Those guys essentially are the pinnacle of the male lover-men group. A five-pack of Vandross' best romantic ballads (when the objective is to be with a woman), IMO, is going to fall short of a five-pack of what those guys could produce.

Says who? You? Stop sniffing what you're sniffing because that theory is wack! Much love to the true prince of soul Luther.

ElectricBlue said:

i seriously consider luther right up there with celine deon and mariah carey in that they are all technically competent singers but i feel/hear no emotion when they sing...it doesn't move me at all...and while i am not a follower of freddie jackson's music at all i am just glad to see objective discussion on him for a change.

LoDog said:

(Noting image of another black person flipping off his or her shoes, grabbing a jar of Vaseline and ready to fight because someone made a "sacriligious" remark against Luther Vandross).

I have to agree with Electric Blue on this one.
[Edited 7/29/07 1:54am]

sosgemini said:

I agree. In a way, Luther Vandross is an anomaly in soul music; as steeped as he was in the nomenclature of its vocal expressionism, IMO he sounded more self-involved than romantically devoted. His references have always seemed not so much real emotions as other love songs, which made him a formalist in a field at least nominally defined by excess of feeling.
[Edited 7/29/07 2:53am]

Najee said:

I really didn't care if he was gay or not(none of my business), but to call his songs "soulless" is a slap in his face(as well as mine). Play these songs at any (black) function and note the positive response to "soullessness". A song never had to be "threatening" to be enjoyable to me and never will have to be. By the way, threatening to what or whom?

Luther sings without emotion??? I hear nothing but soul and real emotions when I hear him sing. He's one of a kind! Have you heard A House Is Not A Home, to name an example??

VenusBlingBling said:

yes...yes...i've heard his music a multitude of times...i wanted to shoot all the dj's in the world for playing "here and now" ten times an hour...

sosgemini said:

dseann said:

1.) I didn't say anything personally about Luther Vandross' sexuality.

2.) I'm well aware that Vandross is considered by some black people to be abovereproach, to the point some people feel you should be obligated to like him.

3.) Maybe the more appropriate comment is "I don't find Vandross' songs sexy or sensual, that there isn't a lot of strong emotive feeling in his style."

4.) Thanks for proving my point -- Vandross' songs are fairly middle of the road that they can be played at some family reunion or get-together, which is not bad for that moment. After all, it's high-glossed "conservative R&B." However, it generally seemed like Vandross' music came off as too restrained.

sosgemini said:

This may be a difference of appreciation based on race. To the typical non-black person, Vandross is associated mostly with songs like "Here and Now," "Power of Love," his version of "Endless Love" with Mariah Carey and "Dance with My Father." To his diehard, mostly black fan base Vandross is associated with songs like "Never Too Much," his version of "Superstar," "Any Love" and "So Amazing."
[Edited 7/30/07 9:32am]

Najee said:

I do agree with the Here and Now comment though.

Najee said:

based on race? im black foo.

and i know of the bulk of his hits (pop and r&b)...and i stand by all my comments.

sosgemini said:

We're all entitled to our opinions. I'm defending him(Luther) in this thread but, I feel the same way as you do about some of his songs(or covers). That "Evergreen" was horrid to me just as the original. Made me feel like I was sitting in the audience at some Broadway show or something.

sosgemini said:

The majority of non-black people commonly associate songs like "Here and Now" to Luther Vandross, because that was the non-soul music audience's first major exposure to his music. If the comment doesn't apply to you, then fine.