Dylan's Voice/ Better Now?


I have been listening to Modern Times for the past couple of months in my car. I am sort of responding to another person comment in another thread, that to him Dylan sounds like a dead frog. He said he could not listen to any Dylan recordings after a certain year, in the late 60's or 70's.
I think Dylan's voice is like a fine wine, it just keeps getting better as it ages. I love his voice on his last few albums. I like the grumble, croakiness, of his "frog" voice.
To me, there is way more interest, depth, and soul to his voice in his latter recordings.
Where do you stand regarding Bob Dylan's voice. Is it shot? Tolerable? or fantastic?
Todd
toddnkaya

Showing 3 responses by mapman

I'm with you. I enjoy his vocals on the more recent recordings. Like many a blues-man, it fits Dylan and the music like a shoe. Wouldn't have it any other way. THis ain't AMerican Idol!
When I saw Dylan live last a few years back, his voice was a non-issue. His band was smokin and delivered most all of the goods on that particular night in Philly. Not always the case though based on accounts.

Its inevitable that age will affect the voices of the aging classic rockers these days. Some are starting to wilt to the detriment of their act (McCartney). Some manage to push on, at least for now (Moody Blues). Some seemingly go with the flow and make their technical deficiencies actually work for them stylistically in new ways (Dylan). I admire Dylan more than ever for that!

GOod comment above about the difference between technical proficiency and expressiveness in vocals!
"Bob's singing works for his stuff"

TO me that's all that matters. I like the rough edges it adds to the otherwise smooth grooves found in many of his more recent recordings. It has a worn quality that reflects the years of use on it and adds credibility to the message of the song. It's never been pretty or technically refined. That's always been a big part of the Dylan package, like it or leave it. Still the case only more so.