louis armstrong and rod stewart ?

[S t e v e]

how the **** did two people with such bad voices become so successful?...discuss

[craigh]

Louis Armstrong was one of the great early trumpet players in Jazz. Rod Stewart was a great singer when he was with Jeff Beck. He was a good singer in The Faces & solo up to & including "A Night On The Town". Since then, he's been an embarrassment.

 

Craig

[Versatile]

Armstrong was one of the first black superstars...great jazz player who probably started singing for comedic effect and because he was such a lovely personality people forgave him and joined in with the fun. Rod on the other hand seems to have benefitted from having great musicians like Jeff Beck, The Faces etc. so the boogie was hot and when everybody is drunk the voice doesn't matter. Faces concerts often involved kicking footballs around and wearing tartan scarves and silly haircuts...yet more evidence that the knees-up factor transcended any concerns about vocal limitations.

[chezqui]

Surely it's the emotion with which the song is delivered that makes both of these guys fantastic. People can play exactly the same notes but it is the way it is delivered that makes a guitarist great, not just getting notes in the right order. It is the ability to feel the music. For me Rod was at his best with Ronnie Wood with whom he wrote a lot of his greatest stuff, Mandolin Wind, Every Picture tells a story, Stay with me, . Have a listen to early Steve Marriot stuff for the same soul, tin soldier, all or nothin.

[BigKahune]

Stevejoshlay1 -

 

You say they have bad voices. I say they have interesting voices.

 

Yes, some will slap these guys around pretty good for their "perceived" bad voices, but some thing has to be good when you can bank as much money as they did.

[S t e v e]

Stevejoshlay1 -

 

You say they have bad voices. I say they have interesting voices.

 

Yes, some will slap these guys around pretty good for their "perceived" bad voices, but some thing has to be good when you can bank as much money as they did.

 

yeah, i worded it wrong and didn't mean "bad" voices...and after reading your reply and thinking about it i agree with ya B)

[Versatile]

Stevejoshlay1 -

 

You say they have bad voices. I say they have interesting voices.

 

Yes, some will slap these guys around pretty good for their "perceived" bad voices, but some thing has to be good when you can bank as much money as they did.

Bad is the new Good....and it does no harm to have a Swedish Blonde on your arm.....

[S t e v e]

Bad is the new Good....and it does no harm to have a Swedish Blonde on your arm.....

who has the swedish blonde?

[Rocky4]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhVdLd43bDI

 

Define bad. I hear good pitch, interesting timing, and great presentation. I wonder why you picked out these two vocalists. Armstrong was an innovator with his trumpet as well as his voice. As far as Stewart, I can't see anything bad about Becks and his own early work. I can't imagine Every Picture Tells a Story without Stewarts unique voice.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0agVtbLcq-I

 

[S t e v e]

after second thoughts rocky i agree B)

[Versatile]

who has the swedish blonde?

In the 70's...Britt Ekland.

[milod]

Satch had a voice that was used as a musical instrument.

 

Whether you like his and Stewart's stuff or not, that's kinda the deal - a musical instrument with words added.

 

m

[Daryl M]

In Nashville, I hear people called 'stylists'. Some singers have an interesting texture, or tone to their voice and it just works. I remember crystal clear voiced Vince Gill in the days before he had country hits. I heard someone say that his voice was beautiful, but not 'memorable' and that he'd need a great song and big hit or his solo career may never take off. One thing about Rod Stewart and Armstrong, their voices are memorable.