I've hear some of his songs and heard snippets of some of his interviews whenever he was on 60 minutes or w/e. Forgive me for being ignorant but what's the appeal? poor voice, incoherent lyrics(he said he was just writing songs, and that people read into it), standard rock chords. can someone inform me?

Sandino said:

I think a lot of his appeal comes from beinging a critics darling but he definately has had his fair share of fans that have kept him popular for a long time. You almost can't deny the fact that he is at least very cleaver in his lyrics and writes about the world we live in with a unique perspective. It's understandable that he is very hated. His music can be very uncommercial and of course his voice is pretty strange. I'm a fan but not a crazed one. I own the 3 disc "Dylan" set released a few years back (bought it right before seeing him at Eastern Michigan live) and I do want to explore more but so far have only bought "Modern Times" (his latest studio album at the time).

the guy is 68 and still making great records (around 34 studio releases)

here you go http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Dylan

still touring too and he always has a great band with him

hope we can say the same thing about prince 15 years from now

I'm not familiar with Dylan outside of his bigger hits, and I don't own any of his material, but Stevie Wonder and Sam Cooke had a massive amount of respect for him, as do a lot of other artists, so that's good enough for me.

Maybe it's the fact that he isn't an overproduced, powerful-voiced belter that is his selling point.

His voice isn't wonderful, it's true. But that was never why people dug him. Dylan was and still is one of the best lyricists in modern music.

Personally, I never felt anything he said/sang was incomprehensible. Maybe the rest of y'all just need to turn your hearing aids up.

A whole lot of people dig his voice. even now there's much more depth and sophistication in his vocal style than whitney or Maria ever had

japanrocks said:

Don't see him live! Truly, truly horrible (incoherent; changed-to-the-point-of-being-unrecognizable arrangements of most songs; zero acknowledgement of the audience).

Has written some great songs. My current faves are "Highlands" and "Not Dark Yet", from Time Out of Mind.

Rightly said:

ROFL Stop smoking!

When was the last time you seen´ve him singing live?

I was at a concert with a friend in April this year. He gave a concert in Berlin. And it sucked big time.
His voice is a freaking joke I had a really hard time not to laugh during the whole concert-comedy at his best. His voice is horrible I mean really horrible!

PPKING said:

lol. you're an idiot!

Rightly said:

LOL It´s just if I want comedy I go to a professional trained comedian and not to an old man sucking big time while trying to sing.

PPKING said:[quote]

Rightly said:

A whole lot of people dig their on piss and drink it-so?
[Edited 9/2/09 6:36am]

PPKING said:[quote]

PPKING said:

Let's hear you sing. I bet you've got pipes of dulcet tones that would make angels weep.

meow85 said:

Welcome to kindergarten. Are you serious? Why should I sing ? For what?

It has nothing to do with Bob sounding like shit. Since when I´m responsible for Bob sounding horrible???? Did I miss something?? lol

PPKING said:

Thought so.

He sounds like a cow in pain!

...by the way this album is G R E A T

I've NEVER understood his appeal. Never will.

Sandino said:

Yes he was just writing songs, but how is a person not supposed to read into a line like "the answer, my friend, is blowin in the wind?"

It's one of the greatest lines of 20th century poetry.

But his stuff is an acquired taste. I certainly didn't like it right away. I remember hearing him first on We are the World, and just laughing. I couldn't believe anyone sang like that.

Meow said his voice is true, and she's right about that. For people who are looking for feeling & truth in their music, singers like Dylan or Tom Waits fit that bill, despite not having beautiful clean voices. Pretty singers like Celine Dion are so much frosting, but they don't have any substance or weight. But that is something you either hear or you don't. It can't really be explained.

NDRU said:

Interesting that U mention Tom. I dig his music and singing.

NDRU said:

exactly right.

Dylan changed the rules for rock music. He is peerless as a lyricist and his voice conveys incredible meaning through his inflections and phrasing. And at his peak, he was a remarkable vocalist.

Now, sadly, his voice is ruined. I can't even listen to his current shows, it's pretty bad.

here's an article i did on my favorite Dylan album, "Highway 61 Revisited"

http://www.nbcwashington....sited.html

I think his voice has aged well. I have about 15 Dylan CD's and he is my favorite lyricist of all time. As far as seeing him live, it is hit and miss. I am going to see him for the sixth time Oct. 10 at the Greek Theatre in Berkeley. I have seen him 3 times when he was great and twice when he was terrible. There is no in between, he is either incredible or he is horrible. I am hoping for a great show in October.

I am not a Bob Dylan-fan myself.

But as others said, i think his appeal lies first of all in his lyrics, and second, in his songwriting abilities.
His voice might be something to get used to / an acquired taste, but the hundreds (or probably thousands) of (often great) versions of his songs by others, show he is a very gifted songwriter.

Coming back to his voice: His voice is not my favourite voice either, but very often I see people on the org equal 'good or great vocals' to so-called technical abilities (reaching a certain number of octaves: Shitney Houston, Celine Dion, Mariah Carey) or the ability of singers to 'polish' their delivery (George Michael, Luther Vandross). Like singing is some kind of contest in techninal issues.
Isnt singing in the first place about expressing your soul and ideas? And about succeeding with delivering your message, how technically 'limited' your octave range might be?
Dylan might not be a technically impressive singer, but his delivery 'fits' his lyrics and music and I take him ANY day above the empty showing-off of someone like Mariah Carey.

Graycap23 said:

Me, too, but I remember a friend stating in no uncertain terms that he was NOT a good singer because he didn't meet the standard requirements of "voice, pitch, phrasing, rhythm..."

What can you say to that? "I guess you're right and now I hate his singing?"

The funny thing is, looking back the only thing Tom Waits is maybe lacking out of those things is voice, and his voice is interesting if not pure & pretty.
[Edited 9/2/09 12:27pm]

NDRU said:

I can "feel" Tom but Dylan is not doing a thing 4 me on any level.

Graycap23 said:

I love Dylan, but I don't knock anyone for not getting him. He's sort of like hard alcohol. If someone wants to say whiskey tastes bad, who am I to argue with them?

NDRU said:

Lol.....I don't drink either.

He is not a pop singer (you wont have a "correct" voice for pop, like McCartney´s or MJ´s)

He is not a rock singer either

He is closer to a mixture of blues and country singer imo
(he is closer to the rolling stones than to the beatles)

NDRU said:

Too many performers and music listeners think all it takes to be a good singer is to have a pitch-perfect voice and nothing else. Certain singers, like IMO Whitney, Beyonce, Christina, and others have GREAT voices by that definition, but they sing without conviction.

Many of the best singers I know of don't have textbook "good" voices, but they sing with truth and real emotion. They sing so you believe what they're saying. That's worth more as a vocalist than being able to hit every note.

So what if Bob Dylan moans through his nose? (and he does!) He wrote his own music and he believes in what he's saying, and it comes through in his voice. Even vocalists who may not have written the song but sing as if it were their own mean more than those who belt out a song without feeling it.