One thing we know for sure is that Kraal's husband (Elvis Costello) doesn't rely on recording gimmicks to improve his voice
I had no idea they were married.
Yes Elvis Costello vocals on his master hit record Burt Bacharach compliation back in early 2000ish, seems not to have much tweaking. and the live , seems even less so. |
Rick Rubin and Mark Ronson
Great , please Name NAMES,, lets black tar these producers of fake vocals, Both big cheats, big scam artists, ,
Old Ricky and Mark, putting marekting sales profits over real art, art for art's sake.
|
Cinema trailers often tend to overdose on it.
Oh yeah no doubt, Disney Studios lods their movies with sound effects,, sucking kids in with unrealistic, fakeness, falseness, lie-ness, where kids can't tell whats reality and what is fantasy any longer.
I hate Disney, its a destoryer of kids minds. Fake movies, fake sound effects. That fakeness rubs off on gentle minds |
concert. Great music, great musicians. I don’t get your beef against her. And she has been a top seller, while her concerts still sellout. What could be the problem with that?
Diana ’s voice has been ~~commercialIZED~~, transformed by modern gadgets to get stardom/sales/contracts/profirts,, The Money Factor has become more impoartnt than the artist actual level of skills.
Its what i have been saying in all my posts. Not sure why/how you missed my points so frequently stated so claerly, not hyped like some modern vocal artists. |
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 |
I never said Diana can't sing,, sure she has a great voice,, its just I perfer not so modulated,,I'd perfer less modifications , and more natural = more for real.
Diana was young at the time and the record engineers took advantage of her unsuspecting youth. |
Carmen McRae
Yeah now thats more how i perfer female performers to come across on records. Whereas Nina Simone was a bit too raw. talented, just not my taste. I just don't heard much tweeking in this recording. This is my point, Taht some modern records have taken mod gadgets a bit too far from Au Natural Here would make a great reference cd
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qnyaZQELxk
|
Are we talking about autotune?
Yeah something like that,, but obviously her record studio has alot more high tech gadgets tahn just the old autotune.
Alot of audiopphiles lovea warm sound,, Sahdes I've never liked since the mid 70's.
So in this style of songs, I can see how some warmth is a good thing,, just saying with my new tweeks, one can clearly hear whats actaully going on in the studio.
I can actually detect they added tones that are not natural to Diana ;'s , naturally wonderful voice,, Let be clear about that, had they not tweek the recording, the cd would have wonderful. |
Keep Sophie Millman out of it. She has a wonderful sultry voice and delivery and the recordings are quite good.
Well I only brought in Sophie Milman as a reference to Diana's records, Sophie has superior sonics in the recording,, Agree, lets not bring in Sophie Milman's superior vocals.
Diana sure palys fine piano though. No doubt about that |
MOZARTFAN this has been going on for 70 years just think elvis presley manufactured by RCA so if diana kralls voice is a tad fake all pop singer are they have all had eq in there records thats the real world hollywood and the music buz is fake
eah well what i was getting at , what might back in Elvis day , been touch ups, now how computer TECHNOLOGY involved, = game changer. Touch ups are one thing , but outright modulations , is going too far from ~~natural~~
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVdaFQhS86E
|
The good thing is she bring in a whole new audience who wouldn't think of listening to Jazz or the American Songbook.
Ok now things are making more sense
So the record folks are trying to bring out charms in Diana's voice that matches the feelings, shades of the songs melodies.
With me there is a certain limit on tech mods that i can accept in a record.
Sophie Milman's voice just sounds less tweeked, with Diana my attention is on the studios tech mods to her voice,, I just can't help thinking...
Thats all this topic is suppose to be about,,Not ad hominem attack on Diana's wonderful charming gifted voice.
Apologies that the OP was awkward and so goofy. |
|
It was all about how polished, ~~marketable~~ can we make over her voice = more notable, = more pop-ularity = more shows/contracts = $$$$.
Thus Diana was ~~commercialized...Diana realizes this now. Which is why I only listen to certain 20TH C composers and a very few 19th C composers.
Rock/jazz not at all interested. |
This is just microphones we're talking here.
Well lets hope fine Neumann tube mics are involved, , its what the **recording emgineers* manipulate after wards lies the problem.
Diana should have told studio, no thats too warmish,,I do not sound like that in reality. Lets keep it more real..
Agree all recordings post 1985 are manipulated to a degree that is far off whats real.
|
Just reading the heading, I knew Diana Krall would be the subject
WEll I knew I am not the only one who could hear a added sonics to the recording.
The engineers just over fubbed the warmness thing. Thats all, Which disqualifies it as a reference cd in mods/upgrades |
As for Diana Krall, she isn’t competing with them. She only has to be good enough for today, and that she obviously is
Well tahts helps explain why older Capitol records have such natural flare, And that Diana Krall can easily get away with her high tech modulated record. We live in high tech times and so its quite perfectly acceptable to have this technology employed in records quality. What happened was i was searching for a finely recorded jazz or country female voice as reference in mods/tweeks. I came across Sohie Milman on YT and added 2 of her cds as reference records. I thought they were acceptable as her voice does come across as natural, even though some tweeks may have been added, one can hardly tell, Then i dug out 2 Diana Krall cds,, and noted how different the 2 singers voice came across. That is what prompted this post. I also have jacnitha on order, I came across Jacnitha's voice from a YT vid showing off the Seas Bifrost, I felt this also might makea good reference, as i am interested in adding that speakera s a 2nd speaker. Now how modded is her record, I cam't tell via YT. But sure seems more natural, less modded. We'll see this week
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgaUQO4lvII
|
I doubt we listen to ANY vocalist without some enhancement.
OK now thats understood. Here may be something that was at the back of my mind as i heard Diana Krall, again, a very talented artist, both keys and vocals. That gal can sing, poetry. But at the back of my mind, may have been a long ago fond memory of songs on the AM radio wayyy back when,, taht recollection of sound, amy have triggered my (over) reaction to listening to Diana Kralls studio engineered record... It is such as this one.. Ck out what back then they considered a microphone. I just can not imagine there were many gadgets to mod the voice. I'd just like to believe we are hearing pure talent, with no mods.On songs such as this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbnrdCS57d0
|
I mean she sings OK, I feel this song is a bit of a bore,, drags a bit, and we can hear her voice free of studio gadgets. I think had the studio not modded her voice on records,,, may not have been as convincing, I know some jazz buffs noticed the studio mods which i hear. Can be a bit annoying. I find this song a bit dull.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZZYDd4SsEk
|
Looks like you have a hidden agenda to smear the reputation of a very accomplished artist.
~~The Hidden Agenda~ is obvious, not at all obscure,. Others here and on my other topic also hestitate to over-applaud Diana's singing skills.
**she is good, but I am looking for more than just gooD* quoted from a post on the other topic.
Thats what i am trying to sy,,look how Grammy's awards sell out show s she had in her heyday.. , Yes we all agree, the lady has many fine talents,,But lets not get carried away. Of course I have to put some of the blame of modern voice wteeking gadgets and record engineers who may have gone a bit far in her voice mods.
This is my point,, in no way am I knocking her talents. She is a fine artist,, just not how far the positive reviews go.
Lets be realistic. here.
Folk singers around the world never had modern electronic voice mods,, , This idea of tweeking vocals has gone too far to claim *great* next to a recorded artists name. Consider mariah Carey,, queen of voice mods, If we heard her sing without electric mods,, we might all throw tomotoes, rotten ones at that, and demand a refund.
Mariah can hit few notes, but she can't sing. Its all computerized fake notes. |
I think you misunderstand whazt i said in the OP, The whole isssues here is ~~modern studio engineers, did they get carried away with their gadgets,,a bit too far from the original voice~~. I spoke with my tech guy,on this Q, he says, alot of the voice mods really began in the early 80's. IOW all others before , voices were tweaked, slightly extended. DK's voice, though talented, can not hold up under *Unplugged sessions*. Here,you hear what i mean, Sure Patsy's voice has a amplification, which only lends more vol, thrust to her voice range,, But does not mask any weaknesses. = More organic, vs the modern engineered variety, = not all fake, but lets say, Not as real as we might think. Lets not get carried away in modern times, by modern gadgets. There was once a Golden Age of Singing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuZTk1hdpMs
|
As several have pointed out, microphones, venue, electronics, the sound engineer influence what we hear. If you dont like diana krall, just say so
Yeah I admit, some of my words might have been cheap shots at Diana Krall's talents , which is not right. Diana has beena super talent for many jazz/music fans world over.
AS I got to thinking , my gripe has more to do with studio tech geeks taking liberties with new high tech gadgets.
I mean , no doubt starting in the early 80's (according to my tech guy who says thats really when these mods/tweaks really began) , the tweaking on voice has gonea bit too far.
Many of you here know what I am talking about.
So aside from Diana Krall (Completely, taking Diana off the discussion)
are the studio tech geeks guilty of something here..
Thats my Q.
Should all voice manipulation gadets be banned, outlawed from any/every record, no matter what genre, Well rap is not music anyway, so that group is allowed freely to make whatever noise they wish.
We are only concerned with real muisc, pop, jazz, folk.
It is my belief we need to get back to pre electronic tweaks, and start all over.
Unplugged.
Yeah I know , how dull, boring.
And btw the RS had onlya few good songs, all written by the creative and talented Brian Jones, , then again , drugs didn't hurt that process.
To me drug induced music should be canceled. I never listen to rock any longer.
So yeah, thats my beef, studio tech geeks gone wild with modern gadgets, giving us what is not really The Real Deal.
I feel this is fair and balanced, and hard to argue against.
I have no hidden agenda, the tech geeks are exposed. The studios have The Agenda, what sells, financial gains over art for art's sake.
We need to get back to pure folk music, unfiltered,/ unplugged. |
pure natural. Personally I like the Girl next door but it is to bassy in some parts. I use it for reference just because of that. You should not only use perfect recordings for reference. Close-miked recordings are often unlistenable on good systems, they’re done for radio. Have a listen to Bo Kasper "10 songs live".
Yes some tracks on Sophie Milman have a certain level of bass db, that seem to hard driving on the small 6 inch midwoofers in the Thors, , the Defy7 has too much slam watts even at low vol, Might be the new Mundorf Supreme Silvergold caps adding that bass slam.
One of the best reference cds for velvety bass riffs is Burt Bacharach/Elvis Costello's cd
On picking through Diana Krall tracks, to have her best, , its not really something i like to do, Sophie Milman and Jacintha, both offer wonderful music , on all tracks.
Same with Bacharach/Costello,
That brings up our old rock days, we used to listen to lp's, and skip a bunch of songs as *duds*,,
I think Diana Krall was a *1 hit wonder*, although she has more than 1 hit, its the *duds* you have to get through with.
|
Bo Kasper
Yes Indeed, Bo casper, Sound via my $10 comp speakers has this super high fidelity, = incredible reference cd and the music is very good. Nice recommend, make any system sound Class AAA And thats how dealers would sell us grade C speakers, with high quality reference cds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1Z9e6U5V4E
|
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. |
