Poor opinion of singers who don't play...

http://acapella.harmony-central.com/showthread.php?2938066-Female-Singers-and-their-bad-attitudes-pls-comment

This thread is... Interesting.

HMMM, yes. Very interesting.

Having never done any live work just yet, I don't know how I'd be, as a female singer myself. I would be the ONLY singer though, in my duo as my partner does not sing and would be playing guitar only.

I think my ego WOULD grow to quite inflated proportions if the feedback I got from my audience was good...as positive as that I receive around here, for instance! lol

But yeah...I find that if an attractive woman is in a band otherwise made up of guys, they can tend to get all the attention. The real Grace Slick once said, if there are 5 cows and 1 pig, who're people gonna notice? The pig, you know? Heh.

I'm more interested in where the thread is heading, with the idea that singers are second-class citizens not deserving of equal pay. What's up with that?

Ugh. I think that's just a backlash as a result of the singers tending to get all the attention for seemingly little effort. *groan*

That really burns my ...

Practice? Difficulty? A little research and knowledge could help this person. Speaking through ignorance is...well....ignorant!!

Yesterday I practiced and worked on a song that I just could not work out, so many damn times (practice) that I was exhausted. I could have went right to sleep. And it still ain't right. And to boot my voice was shot. "All the singers have to do is sing." Yea...just like that.

What's so hard about singing, those instrumentalists ask? Well...if it's so easy, why don't they do it and get paid the same for doing "nothing"? Eh? Because they can't. Boo hoo.

I posted there...it won't go anywhere and just end up running in circles...musicians all hate each other, at least that's what it seems to me!

The one situation that me (as a singer) agree that the pay scale is unfair, is in wedding/party bands that are run by companies. When I did a stint as a wedding singer, I got paid more than all the other musicians in the band and all I did was show up 30 minutes before the gig and sing, no set-up, no gear, nothing, just sing and collect a check. In the minds of the agents, not me, the singers where/are the most important part of the band, the voice is what made it and it was much more difficult to replace.

I sang for an agency with 4/5 different band ensembles with all different members, but there were always the same 3/4 singers in all groups so I guess the agents are right.

Sure in the duo situation, it would be preferable if I played guitar or keys but I don't so I need to make it work with the one guitar player and we get along great, no stress. The other part of the relationship is that I own the PA, run the website, handle the bookings, etc so I more than carry my share of the work. In my situation I couls claim the opposite, why should the guitar player get paid the same if he doesn't contribute with anything more than his guitar? See how things can be turned around?

Rod

Vocalists are from Mars. Instrumentalists are from Venus.

Gender has nothing to do with the matter, nor does the ability to play an instrument. The notion that a dedicated singer should get LESS than everyone else is laughable. Pay cut for Jagger? Bono? Plant?

But consider this: NFL running backs always make more than their offensive lineman, but (with very few douchebaggy exceptions) they always gesture extravagantly toward the superior value of the linemen, who open the holes in the defense that make it possible for these well-paid stars to run through.

The fact (or perception) underlying this fuzzy debate about vocalists is that the vocalist does not always show the same amount of respect to others as the running back. The real reason that instrumentalists might prefer a singer who can also play an instrument is that that person is much more likely to recognize and appreciate the work and the dedication that they put into the sound. A singer/musician is far less likely to become a toxic ego-balloon than a singer who hasn't (in many cases) worked at craft or taken lessons but rather views him/herself as a natural talent. At another level, someone who has moved equipment is less likely to leave everyone else to do the grunt work and then dismiss this work as inferior to his/her own contribution.

Sharing the experience of being a musician puts everyone on more equal terms, it seems to me. But to my mind there is nothing wrong with a singer who only sings--as long as he/she remains mindful of the burden carried by others.

Jack, based on Terry's post, I would summize he is the one difficult to deal with, the one being judgemental and egotistical placing terms in who he works with thus preventing himself from working with potentially great singers! The ego in his post seems worst than of any singer I worked with.

Rod

From where I'm standing, this deal boils down to if your band consists of decent folk, or not.

When people treat each other with respect and kindness, all problems are easily fixed by communcating like civilized creatures.

It just takes a little bit of empathy and humility.

/thread

I WANT YOUR JOB! lol

The voice is no less a musical instrument. I play guitar and sing. They are mutually inseparable to me and I work to sing in complement to the guitar and visa versa. That kind of coordination is what soloists try to realize in everything they do. When that clicks I think it redefines wholesome.

I wouldn't take to heart any opinion placing voice second; especially from someone who does not sing. I know many guitarist - instrumentalists - who talk down singing and make an argument for expressing themselves through their instruments alone. Baloney. These are the guys who can't sing or truly do feel the instrument itself should be taken as the sole vehicle of expression. I have many instrumental pieces that were developed as such due simply to a structure and style that, by the pure happenstance we all know is the better part of writing, did not lend themselves to lyrical complement.

Song is the highest order of musical expression. The singer's expressiveness and vocal quality are the key elements. Musical instruments are beneath them, structurally and soulfully, but they are otherwise inseparable.

If you don't have good vocals, you don't have a band. Period.

Well, I think you CAN have a good band without a vocalist at all, but most people out there want to see / listen to someone sing the songs being played by the instrumentalists. It ties everything all together I think. Also people focus not only on the lead person but the one who sings, even if they are separate things. If the lead guitarist is out the front of the stage playing but not singing, and the singer is standing further back, people will often still look at the singer. It's something about the fact they sound is actually being emitted from their own selves and not an external instrument. It's more personal, vulnerable and thus impressive and powerful.

You can have a band without any vocals at all.

One of my favorite bands is a Japanese band called "Mouse on the Keys".

They play something called math rock.

The beats sound like random programmed beats coming out of a computer, but it isn't.

Here's one of the their songs ("Saigo no bansan"). The song title translates to "The Last Supper" (yes, that last supper).

[video=youtube;UjpOhR_Q9xw]

There are many great instrumental songs even by bands that have singers. But, at least for me, most of that is head music. Music for department stores or elevators or hanging out and getting mellow, sex and so forth. There are some really great songs too; the only problem is the listener can't sing along! People like to sing. Even if they can't they like to think they can and secretly sing in the car or shower. Like me

Songs with vocals are poetry. Songs can be emotional and good vocals complete that emotion because they make that final relatable connection to the listener. People sing birthday songs, love songs; they sing their wedding song to there spouse in private moments. It's the singing that says something.

It can either be done bad or good, sometimes half assed. But when it's good (which isn't easy) it is timeless. A good guitar solo can make your hair stand. A great vocalist can make you cry. It's acting with your voice through your soul and into someone else's. That ain't easy and to me a band without a singer isn't completing the connection. Great music yes. But for me, best for Dancing, background or mood music or for playing air guitar or getting your teeth drilled.

Of course opinions vary

Extending the troll logic happening in that thread, instrumentalists who do not sing should also not get a full cut...

This is awesome! Thanks for this!

Rod

Extending the troll logic happening in that thread, instrumentalists who do not sing should also not get a full cut...

Well the thread started with one girl criticizing another girl, that happens to be a singer...jealous much? But Terry made it bigger with his claim that he would not work with a non-instrument playing singer...now it's a gender/musician/ignorance mess IMO...just another useless thread amongst thousands...

Rod

You can have a band without any vocals at all.

One of my favorite bands is a Japanese band called "Mouse on the Keys".

 

They play something called math rock.

The beats sound like random programmed beats coming out of a computer, but it isn't.

 

I agree, I was being way to generic in my initial response. I took it more from the original post rant about singers not being musicians. So I'll clarify, if you have vocals they better be good, if they aren't good they better fit the music style (which again makes them good) otherwise you got crap.

 

Of course there is immense amounts of fantastic music that is instrumental. But in todays music scene a bunch of guys/girls standing around playing great isn't going to get noticed much. I notice "Mouse on Keys" are wearing costumes, if your going to be boring to watch you better find some entertainment somewhere!

Well the thread started with one girl criticizing another girl, that happens to be a singer...jealous much? But Terry made it bigger with his claim that he would not work with a non-instrument playing singer...now it's a gender/musician/ignorance mess IMO...just another useless thread amongst thousands... Rod

Oh I don't know about "useless". I'm starting to get some chuckles.

Also, given "stunningbabe's" ongoing history of deliberately provocative and exaggeratedly "female" posts, I smell a troll. "her" online persona is like a caricature of what "she" supposedly hates.

Oh I don't know about "useless". I'm starting to get some chuckles. Also, given "stunningbabe's" ongoing history of deliberately provocative and exaggeratedly "female" posts, I smell a troll. "her" online persona is like a caricature of what "she" supposedly hates.

Good point! It is amazing how things evolve in the world of on-line forums! It never ceases to amaze me!

Rod

Somebody chill that guy about the freaking mice on the keys. That kind of stuff makes my undies bunch up.

I found this thread interesting on a couple levels. I play some, but I don't consider myself a musician. I sing some, but I don't consider myself a singer. I'm primarily a lyricist. It just hits me as funny how singers and musicianas seem to pick at each other. Why? Ego of course. No one wants to feel less important.

For the record, I'm more in the singers corner (and yes, I consider real singers as musicians).

I've seen hundreds of decent bands with crap singers = going nowhere. I've see hundreds of crap bands with decent singers = the crowd generally digs them. It all has to do with what fantasy a lay person (non-musician/audience) can project themselves into as they listen or observe. Most people can see themselves as singers much easier than they can see themselves as instrumentalists, so they take the easy fantasy.

My only issue with singers is that (not unlike a lot of instrumentalists) the bad ones still think they're good. My favorite saying is this: On a scale from 1 to 100, everyone can sing. But there ARE some 1's out there. Just watch the first couple weeks of American Idol.

I both sing and play guitar. Over the span of my playing years I've done solo, duet, and the band thing pretty much on an equal basis. It's not that players automatically have no respect for singers. In fact their can be just as much tension between instrumentalists and player/singers. The times that I've played in bands as an instrumentalist (side man) I have to admit that there have been times that I began to get mental images of reaching out and strangling the singer right in the middle of a high note. Why? Not because they were bad singers but, because they were bad (male or female) "front men". If you're getting flack from your group maybe it's time to ask yourself some questions. 1. Do you show up for and participate fully in each and every practice session or, do you tell the instrumentalists, "Why don't you guys work this one up and call me when you're ready"? 2. When you're introducing a new song to the band do you offer each member an opportunity to shine at what they do best or, do you insist that they play solely to compliment your vocals. 3. Do you always expect the band to play what you sing or, are you open minded enough to take the time and effort to also sing what they play. 4. Do you demand more pay and consideration because you believe yourself to be the star of the band who can't be replaced without it all falling apart or, do you understand that you need the band as much as they need you? I don't often get involved with groups who have a designated lead singer other than myself any longer (not because I'm the best singer in town) but because although I've played behind some very good front men to often the ego thing is just to much hassle. But, on the occasions that I do I make it very clear to the person who's going to be standing in front of me that none of the above will be tolerated. The minute I see it I'm unplugged, packed up, and out the door without even an adios.

Being a singer/front man is the best spot you can hold in a band. In fact you do have the opportunity to become the one member who is difficult if not impossible to replace. But, if you let it go to your head and abuse the position you may as well start looking for a new band the moment you cop that attitude.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with the idea that "attitude problem = bad". Who would?

But there is a big difference between low/no tolerance for primadonna behavior and just outright saying/implying that a singer isn't worth as much pay as an instrumentalist.

That and some of the more blatant mysogeny in that thread, even from the "female" OP, is full of fail.