Lou Reed “Hold on” live & stéréo.wmv

From “The New-York album” VHS.

Digital sheet music source: Hold On – Lou Reed

Lou Reed Hold On (HQ)

From his 1989 album New York.

How important is vocal ability in your liking of a band or artist? Think about it for a minute before you answer. Take for example Lou Reed – The Velvet Underground and his solo work – I personally love both, but, he isn’t a good singer! He’s basically talking a lot of the time. Kurt Cobain wasn’t the world’s best singer, but it worked. Iggy Pop hasn’t got much vocal ability – I’m not insulting, he can hold a note in some songs, but generally speaking. There are more. So, for you, how important is it actually?Please explain your answer. 🙂

Digital sheet music source: Hold On – Lou Reed

I like the Violent Femmes. That should answer your question.So long as they aren’t screaming their lungs out and the music sounds good, I’m aboard :)EDIT- Pennywise is right. Whiny vocals kill it for me too.

Pretty important, but honestly, it dependsSay you hear a killer riff and some awesome drums, but the vocals sound like Nick Jonas. The song is ruined. 2 options. Listen to the muzak version or listen to the instrumental versionOn the contrary, the vocals could be perfect, but the guitars are out of tune and the drumming is plain awful. The thing to do is to listen to other songs by the same vocalist and the band where you may find some good instumental workOf course, over the time of a band career, the vocalist could change his/her style and become better or worse. Better yet, they replace the vocalist. That last thing will bring debate to the fans of the band. Who is better?So, basically, I love good vocals, but it can be taken anyway

It’s not very important in my opinion I mean I love Bob Dylan and think he has a good voice but many people don’t like him because of it. I agree with the singers you mentioned as well.

It’s important, I don’t deny that. I mean, who would Freddie Mercury be without his amazing voice?Though not every singer needs a good voice. For example, Jack White isn’t the best singer ever, but he certainly can sing a little bit.The voice isn’t important. What’s important is how much passion they add to their work.

Personally, its generally the lyrics of the songs that attract me to an artist/band. not their vocal ability.They have to have some degree of “talent” to record a “known” song.. so its generally the words they sing and how they sing them that’s important to me.For example.. Eric Clapton was never going to be the best vocalist, but Tears in Heaven is one of the greatest songs ever written and recorded.

It depends, I don’t mind average vocals if there’s great instrumentals or interesting arrangements to back it up. I can always ignore boring vocals if there’s an awesome guitar riff somewhere.

It’s almost essential, some bands can have brilliant instrumentalists, but lack decent vocals. Some singers voices get annoying and that can really put people off the band.

honestly Lady it’s really not that important to me. if I REALLY enjoy the vocals which is rare in the music I listen to it’s definitely a bonus. but in the genre of music I listen to its pretty much an acquired taste for most people. I am a musician so I guess my main focus is always on the music anyway not really the vocals, but I guess to another vocalist or a non-musician/music fan the vocals might be more important

Its very important to me. If someone is going to sing, they need to know how to sing. Same with black,death, doom, etc they got to do it right. Its funny to think that someone doing death vocals can do it wrong, but oh yes they can lolbad vocals ruin the song for me

The vocals can play a very big part in the liking of a band. For example, the band Trivium, Matt changed his singing and it changed the band from Heavy Metal to Thrash Metal, to very different genres.

Extremely important – in fact, it’s the first thing I look for. If a band has amazing music, but I just despise the vocals (as such is growling or screaming – sorry guys, I just can’t get into it) then it totally distracts me and I can’t even appreciate the music.On the flip side, if I love the vocals enough it doesn’t matter that the music is average.Examples:A lot of people in here like Wintersun. I think the music is great, but I can’t listen to it because of the vocals.I adore Tarja Turunen’s voice, and it doesn’t disappoint me on her newest album. The music is meh, but I love the album because of her voice.

This is a trick question!!HahaWell, it does depend.I can’t really say what it depends on, but it just does.I think the music has to be at least good enough so that the vocals won’t matter as much. But if the music is just.”decent” then the vocals better be workin’.On a scale of 1 to 10, and 10 being very important, I’d say a 5 or a 6.But sometimes, I don’t listen to music with singing/lyrics, lol. That just makes it easier, hah.

Not at all. To go along with your examples: J Mascis can’t sing worth a crap but he’s an amazing guitarist and I love the sound Dinosaur Jr puts out. Same goes with both Thurston Moore and Kim Gordon of Sonic Youth, both mediocre singers at best. Paul Westerburg really couldn’t sing a lick but I’m a huge Replacements fan. I could go on for a long time but I’ll leave it at this. I prefer my artists vocals to flow along with the music being played. That’s why I can’t stand a lot of the singers. Their voice stands apart from the band, not joining it as just another instrument in the cohesive mix.

Hi Orla! lolI’m with countess on this one. I listen to alot of Melodic Death Metal and when I hear a scream, I expect it to be good. I don’t want it to be weak, and raspy.or a growl, if it’s weak.it can pretty much kill the music for me, BUT sometimes I can still listen to a band it depends if the REST of the singing is good. so yeah, vocals are pretty important to me, but they aren’t the ONLY thing.if the screaming or growling is dead but the clean singing is amazing, it makes up for it. if all the vocals are dead, then yeah the song has been shot. =/

i think it’s mildly important, but it does have some effect on my interest.for example, i am a led zeppelin fan and i enjoy their work, but because i have never really been a robert plant fan it probably limits the amount that i can really enjoy their work.also, i think eddie vedder probably has one of the worst voices in the world, but i still like pearl jam’s early work as well.and as you say, there are other greats who aren’t really great singers, but who complement the sound of their band well, which is exactly what kurt cobain did

Good Question.With me it Varies, depending on the JON-RAH.A lot of the experimental bands or Prog that I listen too, have very Unusual vocalists – They will intentionally sing in dissonance and that may sound bad, but it’s not in THAT context of Music.I think most Rock vocalists are quite able to Sing Loud & In Tune, but very few of them have perfect pitch.I’m not sure what I’m talking about.Okay – Here it is — As long as the Vocals are NOT annoying, (like some of Billy Corgan’s) – Then vocals are not that important.UNLESS – ( loop back to the beginning — )EDIT –Okay, Okay – I think I have it.The “SOUND” of the Vocalist is more important to me, than the “TALENT” or “SKILL” of the vocalist..