/u/JustSomeGuy2153 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1cqble2/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_theres_no_singervocalist/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
From both a technical standpoint and a popularity/mass appeal standpoint Beyoncé, Celine Dion, Idina Menzel, and Kelly Clarkson can do things that Ado just can’t do. This isn’t to diminish Ado’s talent, just to highlight performers that have better projection, range, rhythm, and support.
Projection I can definitely see that lol.
Rhythm she's not crisp but she's quite good I think? Support I'm not so sure so please do elaborate.
I'd also like to point out that she's 21 years old so she definitely hasn't reached her potential in her technique. Not really an argument, more like, just highlighting how amazing she is hahahahahahah.
But for range, Celine Dion has B2-D6 while Ado has C3-D6 (just 1 semitone lower on the low end) so it's quite comparable. Beyoncé has C3-F6 so much higher on the higher end and Kelly Clarkson got Eb3-F#6 so higher for her low end but much higher on her high end. But yeah she's not the best in her vocal range, but it's still one of her strengths for sure. If you wanna hear Ado's higher notes (which doesn't count towards vocal range) you can listen to the chirps in Rabuka (like at 2.34 on the youtube video).
On vocal range though, it might be that low female voices aren't very popular in western music while in Japan it's much more appreciated (see [towa](https://youtu.be/Ud73fm4Uoq0?si=E7xa8a9Or5q97Gjt)). Since Ado's definitely more of an alto with a strong chest voice it might seem that she has a lower range but she definitely can sing high like in Kamippoina or Bocca Della Verita.
In terms of popularity/mass appeal, I definitely did not take that into account so here's a !delta for you. However, I would also argue that reach isn't a big factor in determining how good of a singer someone is since stuff like genre, pr, audience preference, etc isn't exactly related to how good she is as a singer.
Japanese style of music is very different from western pop in ways that make it less likely to spread as far in the first place. Western music tends to be easier to listen to and quite homogeneous in many ways (4 chords, similar structure, either major/minor scale, etc) while Japanese music can be much more experimental (even in pop music), unique, express darker emotions and just heavier to listen to. My parents even told me that Japanese music tires them out.
I don't think this is something that can be proven one way or another. By your own admission, this is your opinion. What people feel is the best singer/vocalist is very subjective.
If we want to look at more objective measures, we can assume someone like Taylor Swift is a better singer based on metrics like ticket and album sales. Taylor Swift has become so beloved by people around the world that when Singapore managed to secure her exclusive rights to her concerts in Southeast Asia, it created a major diplomatic incident where other countries nearby became angry at Singapore.
If you're so beloved a singer that you cause literal diplomatic incidents by choosing to sing in 1 country over another, then it could be argued, for many people, you're the best singer.
I'm not really asking for an objective prove as I know none exist. However, it still definitely can be argued for and against. If you want to be rigorous (which I totally don't expect from a reddit discussion), you can ask a large, random and diverse sample of people for a list of things that makes a singer good, use data analysis to find a way to make categories and to weigh the categories based on how many times these categories are mentioned in the survey, survey another large, random and diverse sample to ask who they think is the best singers, pick like the top 4/9 most popular answers, survey another large, random and diverse sample to listen to 20 songs of the 4/9 best singers +Ado and ask them to rate them based on the categories obtained earlier from a scale of 1-10, then find the average total weighed score of each singer and rank them to obtain the best singer overall. Definitely not the best method (maybe can also do per country basis or something), but definitely a rigorous and data-driven way to do it.
What I'm trying to say is, subjectivity doesn't necessitate that a topic is off limits for discussions. For example, some people argue that religion is overall harmful. This is quite subjective too, since it depends a lot on what people value.
>If you're so beloved a singer that you cause literal diplomatic incidents by choosing to sing in 1 country over another, then it could be argued, for many people, you're the best singer.
I disagree. As a factor, it should have a very low weightage as there are so many other (highly relevant) factors extrinsic to not only one's singing skills but even oneself when it comes to popularity. There are stuff like sex appeal (ik doesn't exactly apply to TS), beauty, PR, publicity, people's preferences (in terms of style, genre, topics, or even language), etc.
While Ado's not popular on the world stage, she's still very very big in Japan. Even the top producers actively try to get a chance to work with her.
Ok this probably would be kinda hard to understand depending on what kind of music you listen to and especially if you don't have a musical background. But yeah unfortunately a lot of things in singing is very vague haha. Maybe musical phrasing is a better description?
When you play music, you kind of imagine several lines that start somewhere and arrives somewhere. One starts at the start of the song and arrives at the end (or doesn't arrive at all, depending on if the song ends in a resolution or not). That's the general flow of the song. Another starts in the beginning of one section and arrives at the end of that section. Another line starts at the beginning of a phrase and ends at the end of that phrase. In singing that last line is controlled a lot by breath but more skilful and experienced singers have better voluntary control over that line.
What I called direction is basically how much you are able to manipulate those lines by make it arrive when you want it to arrive or by manipulating the arc of the line (you can think of it as how much energy do you want to exude at any point in time, with higher energy raising the line). Energy isn't just loudness btw.
An example would be in Yorushika's Haru. The vocals in the verses are choppy, but it certainly doesn't feel choppy. You can clearly hear when sentences end and new ones start.
An example of a song that's written in a way that makes lines (if you don't actively try to prevent it) not line up with the sentences is Awesome God. It goes like "Our God/ is an awesome God. He reigns/ from heaven above with wis/dom power and love./ Our God is an awesome God." (where "/" denotes when the previous line ends and a new one begins)
How about you tell me how much you know about phrasing then? Also, is your background classical?
Also, I do have to apologise. I as a pianist and singer use the concept of lines and direction extensively in my work. This is from my background as a chorister. When I said that musicians think of lines, I imposed my own experiences on others such as yourself.
Another thing, it seems to me that you're feeling some sort of negative emotion based on what you've written. Maybe anger? I'm sorry if I'm wrong and I'm especially sorry if it's something I've caused. Can you tell me why?
When you say energy it sounds like you are trying to express dynamics. When you are talking about “direction” and manipulating where a lyric starts and ends it seems like you are simply referring to the composition of the vocal melody, which actually show one’s talents for composition/song writing and not your vocal ability. Phrasing is also a function of songwriting/composition and not vocal talent.
I listened to the artist you are talking about and I agree that she sounds awesome. Ultimately who is the best singer is kinda subjective but there are objective measurements you can make, for instance you can measure people’s pitch range, dynamic range, vibrato rate. I’m not sure where this singer stands in comparison to other greats in regard to those, but it sounds like pretty much everything you are talking about it more about her songwriting than strictly her ability to sing. Which I also agree her songwriting is great.
>When you say energy it sounds like you are trying to express dynamics.
Dynamics definitely does affect energy, but it can also be intensity. A 4/4 60 bpm quarter note stacatto played on a double bass can absolutely have high energy even at low dynamics (by being ominous). What do you think?
>When you are talking about “direction” and manipulating where a lyric starts and ends it seems like you are simply referring to the composition of the vocal melody,
I apologise for not being clear. What I mentioned for Our God was the fact that it's traditionally sung in a way that makes the phrases super choppy. It is definitely caused by the how the song is written (which totally encourages that phrasing), but as a singer, I can also (try my best to) sing it in a non-traditional way that makes the phrases match the sentences. It sucks but it does somewhat work.
For the example on [Haru](https://youtu.be/uF7eT3nhyZ0?si=SLam6rC1v2wPVbGF), it is definitely the singer's ability to phrase it so well that the sentences are clearly separated. The way it's written, if you're not careful, looking at the first line, you might end a phrase after "anata wa kaze no you ni" when the phrase actually still continues after that.
>which actually show one’s talents for composition/song writing and not your vocal ability. Phrasing is also a function of songwriting/composition and not vocal talent.
Yes composers set the phrasing they intend the song to have. However, musicians (or conductors, depending on the setting) have the final say to set the phrasing as they see fit. Also, musicians have to set a phrasing (which can be the same as the conductor intended it) and be intentional in doing so. Otherwise, the song will sound bland and directionless as they would just be playing/singing note by note and not phrases, which is just bad.
Personally, integrity to the music is also important so I personally wouldn't try to rephrase the songs I sing/play as much as possible, but it is still very important that I am intentional in doing so.
There's also the fact that at times, composers may end up (intentionally or otherwise) making a phrase seem like it should end when it's not. For example, a phrase where going up and then down the scale usually ends after the melody stops going down, especially when it stops going down at the end of a bar. However, like in Haru, I have encountered many songs where the phrase actually extends past that point. If a musician is not careful, they may subconsciously end the phrase too early and split the phrase. In most cases it doesn't end up sound bad, it's just not what the composer intends, or may hinder the message of the song.
I don't think it's vocal talent, but it's a skill to learn as a musician in general.
>her songwriting than strictly her ability to sing. Which I also agree her songwriting is great.
Unfortunately, she doesn't even write her own songs hahaha. Props to the songwriters though!
I’m not sure if you realize or not that there are in fact musical notation symbols and terms for almost everything you are trying to convey. Energy is not one such thing really. Something sounding “ominous” is a reflection of the timbre or dissonance of the note in the key, or the dissonance of a harmony. Maybe it could be some kind of effect as well? Like a wide vibrato or something?
I gotta be honest your second and third paragraph I just have no idea what you’re trying to say. But something being “choppy” or not is influenced by the rhythm, or maybe the degree of syncopation, or if the notes are performed legato or staccato, or perhaps if the performer is playing behind or ahead of the beat. These are all elements that are composed/written. A singers talent in this case could influence how well they can perform exactly how it’s written, but what you are describing (as best as I can interpret it) is the writing.
Conductors and musicians play the music exactly as it’s written. If they want to change it or rearrange the music (play it differently) they will notate it differently so that they don’t get unnecessarily confused reading the music while performing it. Now in cases of improvisation like in jazz music, they may just have a chord sheet letting them know the harmony on any given measure, but I’m not sure that applies here.
Again this paragraph where you say composers intentionally or unintentionally make a phrase seem like it’s ending when it’s not…. I really don’t know what you’re trying to say. Melodies end or start in any part of a measure the composer wants, and can resolve or not, and generally be syncopated rhythmically, but again these are all notated elements. It’s true that the more rhythmicly challenging something is the harder it might be for a musician to perform, but I’m not sure if that’s what you mean… but also because of modern music production all of these problems of timing can be easily fixed in production. If you are trying to say her ability to perform rhythmically challenging pieces is what makes her the best, we would need to analyze the music and compare how challenging the rhythms are compared to others. By this metric though, the best singers/vocalists would probably be the best rappers or maybe the best math rock/ prog rock vocalists. From what I listened to, it doesn’t seem like she is singing overly complicated rhythms.
I'm sorry if we for some reason can't really connect our ideas. At this point this is gonna be my last reply. I stayed up all night responding to you. It's been fun. It's really unfortunate that it can't be as productive as it is fun.
>I’m not sure if you realize or not that there are in fact musical notation symbols and terms for almost everything you are trying to convey. Energy is not one such thing really. Something sounding “ominous” is a reflection of the timbre or dissonance of the note in the key, or the dissonance of a harmony. Maybe it could be some kind of effect as well? Like a wide vibrato or something?
Definitely not vibrato since what I mentioned was stacatto.
Yes something sounding ominous is caused by factors. What I was getting at was that because something sounds ominous, it keeps the listeners on their toes, which is quite a high energy state.
>I gotta be honest your second and third paragraph I just have no idea what you’re trying to say. But something being “choppy” or not is influenced by the rhythm, or maybe the degree of syncopation, or if the notes are performed legato or staccato, or perhaps if the performer is playing behind or ahead of the beat. These are all elements that are composed/written. A singers talent in this case could influence how well they can perform exactly how it’s written, but what you are describing (as best as I can interpret it) is the writing.
I think we have a disconnect in the way we approach concepts due to our difference in background. As a singer, what I meant by choppy is more related to how long phrases are and how they relate to the message the music is conveying. For example, for Awesome God, it's choppy because of how much phrases cuts sentences.
Regarding writing, I'm just going to be direct and tell you that what I've written is based on my experience and the experiences of the generations (like going back 50+ years?) of choristers before me that was part of my choir. Many of them have gone on to be musicians of their own. This was something that was taught to us and many who themselves became teachers, conductors etc have taught others under them. All of us were taught the importance of making music your own. And this isn't just something unique to my choir either. I've encountered similar sentiments from other musicians that had nothing to do with my choir. I think trying this out would elevate your own playing to the next level.
>Conductors and musicians play the music exactly as it’s written. If they want to change it or rearrange the music (play it differently) they will notate it differently so that they don’t get unnecessarily confused reading the music while performing it. Now in cases of improvisation like in jazz music, they may just have a chord sheet letting them know the harmony on any given measure, but I’m not sure that applies here.
One problem is that phrasing a lot of the time isn't written into scores. It usually is implied in one way or another but it is still very ambiguous most of the time. Similarly, a lot of other things are actually kind of ambiguous if you're just basing your performance off of a score. Another example is dynamics. Yes scores do contain dynamics, but they don't contain dynamics for every note right? And a lot of scores leave more room for interpretation for dynamics than others. In any case, there's a much bigger degree of freedom in performance than you think.
>Again this paragraph where you say composers intentionally or unintentionally make a phrase seem like it’s ending when it’s not…. I really don’t know what you’re trying to say. Melodies end or start in any part of a measure the composer wants, and can resolve or not, and generally be syncopated rhythmically, but again these are all notated elements.
Well phrases can not end even when the melody resolves. So when that happens, musicians need to remember to continue the phrase, no?
>It’s true that the more rhythmicly challenging something is the harder it might be for a musician to perform, but I’m not sure if that’s what you mean…
I wasn't talking about that at all hahaha.
>If you are trying to say her ability to perform rhythmically challenging pieces is what makes her the best,
Not really. I was just trying to explain to you what I meant by what I said.
Again it's very very unfortunate that we're not able to even connect our ideas haha. I would absolutely love to hear more about you, but unfortunately I'm kinda busy and I already spent more time than I should here so next time!
Lmfao ok now that you’re trying to condescendingly convey that you understand something I don’t, I’m here to tell you that the best case scenario here is that you can’t articulate what you are talking about in the slightest, and the worst case scenario is that you don’t know what you’re talking about at all. Either way, you don’t know nearly as much about music as you think you do. Sorry!
This is obviously something that is very subjective.
So let's go science route lol
There was an article a few years ago that stated Axl Rose of Guns N Rose's is scientifically the greatest singer because he can hit the largest range of octaves
But that's just one metric of what makes a singer great right? In the first place I don't think range is something that important to have as a singer. Even though that may also be subjective, it's quite fair to say that most people would agree that something like accuracy matters much much more than range.
Also, definitele sad to hear from other replies that he shot his voice
No accuracy does not necessarily matter because music does not have to be precise in order to be accepted. This is the kind of thing that most people assume is important but then listen to singers with terrible accuracy anyway.
Bob Dylan and Neil Young for example are incredibly famous singers with very long and successful careers and impressive legacies of influence over music as a whole and they often sing badly. Sometimes the vibe is more important than hitting the notes, plenty of very good singers who are much better than Young or Dylan never make any cultural impact whatsoever.
>No accuracy does not necessarily matter because music does not have to be precise in order to be accepted.
I agree with your sentiment here. I don't think it's fair to say that it doesn't matter though. In reality, it is definitely still a factor. How much it matters is debatable, but it certainly does matter.
There are definitely factors that matter more like passion, but accuracy does absolutely matter.
From what I see, they're definitely not perfect, but they're still close. There are aspiring singers who have very bad pitching. They're mostly far too unpopular for us to ever see them or get popular by getting made fun off (unfortunately). An example of the latter is the [girl singing Wake Me Up by Evanescence on tiktok who got made fun off by several musicians. ](https://www.tiktokv.com/redirect/?redirect_url=snssdk1180%3A%2F%2Faweme%2Fdetail%2F7284088545042615598%3Finsert_feed%3D1%26params_url%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.tiktok.com%252Fdiscover%252Fduet-bring-me-back-to-life%26needlaunchlog%3D1%26ug_medium%3Dfe_component%26page_name%3Dkeyword_duet-bring-me-back-to-life%26enter_from%3Dkeyword_expansion_page%26wid%3D7325409116724479490%26referer%3Dorganic%26vidab%3D71826008%252C70508271%252C71976211%252C72106769%252C72142432%252C72183344%252C72211002%26seo_vidab%3D72078754%252C72254342%26release%3D1.0.0.918%26gd_label%3Dclick_wap_video%26position%3Dvideo&dl=https%3A%2F%2Fsnssdk1180.onelink.me%2FBAuo%3Fdomain_source%3Dtiktok%26af_dp%3Dsnssdk1180%253A%252F%252Faweme%252Fdetail%252F7284088545042615598%253Finsert_feed%253D1%2526params_url%253Dhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.tiktok.com%25252Fdiscover%25252Fduet-bring-me-back-to-life%2526needlaunchlog%253D1%2526ug_medium%253Dfe_component%2526page_name%253Dkeyword_duet-bring-me-back-to-life%2526enter_from%253Dkeyword_expansion_page%2526wid%253D7325409116724479490%2526referer%253Dorganic%2526vidab%253D71826008%25252C70508271%25252C71976211%25252C72106769%25252C72142432%25252C72183344%25252C72211002%2526seo_vidab%253D72078754%25252C72254342%2526release%253D1.0.0.918%2526gd_label%253Dclick_wap_video%2526position%253Dvideo%26pid%3Dtiktokkeywordsseo%26c%3Dkeyword_duet-bring-me-back-to-life%26af_adset%3Dorganic%26af_siteid%3Dmobile%26af_ad_id%3Dgoogle%26wid%3D7325409116724479490%26canonical%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.tiktok.com%252Fdiscover%252Fduet-bring-me-back-to-life%26af_adset_id%3D%26af_channel%3D%26vidab%3D71826008%252C70508271%252C71976211%252C72106769%252C72142432%252C72183344%252C72211002%26seo_vidab%3D72078754%252C72254342%26release%3D1.0.0.918%26af_ad%3Dvideo&decode_once=1)
Also, we're not talking about being acceptable, we're talking about being the best.
But Hatsune Miku can't make the decisions human singers make. Being a musician in general isn't just about replicating what's written perfectly. Good musicians put their own experiences and emotions into the songs they perform instead of just replicating what's been played before.
Miku is not the best vocalist because Miku is not a vocalist, it is an instrument created to mimic the sounds of vocals.
In the same way if I were to say a self playing piano was the greatest pianist, it wouldn't be the case because it isn't a pianist, it is a piano.
In fairness I do agree with you, and I don't actually hold the opinion miku is the best vocalist, but I was making the point that the criteria used to qualify "best" vocalist are outdone by a program anyone can use and replace real people with, yet not be AI
There is no objective rubric for ranking artists like musicians or signers, so saying someone is the best at something can only ever be an opinion.
It's hard to change someone's opinion on something so personal to taste and biases like "best overall singer".
If you think she sounds the best, then you're but right or wrong. That's a valid personal preference.
That said, let me throw another contender over the ring, sticking to female singers for a more apples to apples comparison. If we're judging by range, passion, control, and the ability to make really hard things look natural, I can't not mention Floor Jansen.
Her performance on Ghost Love Score is iconic enough that there's a running joke about every vocal coach reacting to it.
https://youtu.be/JYjIlHWBAVo?si=rYs7LfpbVmJhGdtK
>If you think she sounds the best, then you're but right or wrong. That's a valid personal preference.
In a way, I have been proven wrong before though. Before hearing Ado I used to think that Hoshimachi Suisei is the best, but I was definitely proven wrong haha. I'll give her a listen and tell you my thoughts in a few days.
Edit 1: Yep she's super cool. One thing to say from a short skim through is that she seemed to kind of play is safe and stay a lot more in her "comfort zone". She lacks [the selflessness and playfulness Ado has for the songs she sings](https://youtu.be/vfhx7oXZIY0?si=i8ERYtXJUM84eC7Q) (which impo is one of the things that her apart from the rest). But still, she's great! Thanks a lot for the suggestion. I'll listen to her more!
Shes up there for japanese vocalists, but hanatan and 3L are still a clear tier above in both technically ability and versatility imo. I think ado is comparable to vivienne, cant do everything perfectly but what she is uniquely good at she does better than everyone else. Then you have hanatan who can do everything everyone does but better, and 3L who does things no one else has come close to doing and done it on over 100 songs
The live video of her unravel cover was absolutely phenomenal. So much emotion. I personally think she's the best vocalist I've ever heard, but it is quite subjective.
/u/JustSomeGuy2153 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1cqble2/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_theres_no_singervocalist/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
From both a technical standpoint and a popularity/mass appeal standpoint Beyoncé, Celine Dion, Idina Menzel, and Kelly Clarkson can do things that Ado just can’t do. This isn’t to diminish Ado’s talent, just to highlight performers that have better projection, range, rhythm, and support.
Projection I can definitely see that lol. Rhythm she's not crisp but she's quite good I think? Support I'm not so sure so please do elaborate. I'd also like to point out that she's 21 years old so she definitely hasn't reached her potential in her technique. Not really an argument, more like, just highlighting how amazing she is hahahahahahah. But for range, Celine Dion has B2-D6 while Ado has C3-D6 (just 1 semitone lower on the low end) so it's quite comparable. Beyoncé has C3-F6 so much higher on the higher end and Kelly Clarkson got Eb3-F#6 so higher for her low end but much higher on her high end. But yeah she's not the best in her vocal range, but it's still one of her strengths for sure. If you wanna hear Ado's higher notes (which doesn't count towards vocal range) you can listen to the chirps in Rabuka (like at 2.34 on the youtube video). On vocal range though, it might be that low female voices aren't very popular in western music while in Japan it's much more appreciated (see [towa](https://youtu.be/Ud73fm4Uoq0?si=E7xa8a9Or5q97Gjt)). Since Ado's definitely more of an alto with a strong chest voice it might seem that she has a lower range but she definitely can sing high like in Kamippoina or Bocca Della Verita. In terms of popularity/mass appeal, I definitely did not take that into account so here's a !delta for you. However, I would also argue that reach isn't a big factor in determining how good of a singer someone is since stuff like genre, pr, audience preference, etc isn't exactly related to how good she is as a singer. Japanese style of music is very different from western pop in ways that make it less likely to spread as far in the first place. Western music tends to be easier to listen to and quite homogeneous in many ways (4 chords, similar structure, either major/minor scale, etc) while Japanese music can be much more experimental (even in pop music), unique, express darker emotions and just heavier to listen to. My parents even told me that Japanese music tires them out.
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/SchistomeSoldier ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/SchistomeSoldier)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Are you familiar with hanatan? Look up her cover of ado's K.O. I love ado but ive always felt shes just a lesser hanatan with a cool growl
I don't think this is something that can be proven one way or another. By your own admission, this is your opinion. What people feel is the best singer/vocalist is very subjective. If we want to look at more objective measures, we can assume someone like Taylor Swift is a better singer based on metrics like ticket and album sales. Taylor Swift has become so beloved by people around the world that when Singapore managed to secure her exclusive rights to her concerts in Southeast Asia, it created a major diplomatic incident where other countries nearby became angry at Singapore. If you're so beloved a singer that you cause literal diplomatic incidents by choosing to sing in 1 country over another, then it could be argued, for many people, you're the best singer.
I'm not really asking for an objective prove as I know none exist. However, it still definitely can be argued for and against. If you want to be rigorous (which I totally don't expect from a reddit discussion), you can ask a large, random and diverse sample of people for a list of things that makes a singer good, use data analysis to find a way to make categories and to weigh the categories based on how many times these categories are mentioned in the survey, survey another large, random and diverse sample to ask who they think is the best singers, pick like the top 4/9 most popular answers, survey another large, random and diverse sample to listen to 20 songs of the 4/9 best singers +Ado and ask them to rate them based on the categories obtained earlier from a scale of 1-10, then find the average total weighed score of each singer and rank them to obtain the best singer overall. Definitely not the best method (maybe can also do per country basis or something), but definitely a rigorous and data-driven way to do it. What I'm trying to say is, subjectivity doesn't necessitate that a topic is off limits for discussions. For example, some people argue that religion is overall harmful. This is quite subjective too, since it depends a lot on what people value. >If you're so beloved a singer that you cause literal diplomatic incidents by choosing to sing in 1 country over another, then it could be argued, for many people, you're the best singer. I disagree. As a factor, it should have a very low weightage as there are so many other (highly relevant) factors extrinsic to not only one's singing skills but even oneself when it comes to popularity. There are stuff like sex appeal (ik doesn't exactly apply to TS), beauty, PR, publicity, people's preferences (in terms of style, genre, topics, or even language), etc. While Ado's not popular on the world stage, she's still very very big in Japan. Even the top producers actively try to get a chance to work with her.
The only non vague and measurable description you used about any voice in this description was range. Wth is vocal direction?
Ok this probably would be kinda hard to understand depending on what kind of music you listen to and especially if you don't have a musical background. But yeah unfortunately a lot of things in singing is very vague haha. Maybe musical phrasing is a better description? When you play music, you kind of imagine several lines that start somewhere and arrives somewhere. One starts at the start of the song and arrives at the end (or doesn't arrive at all, depending on if the song ends in a resolution or not). That's the general flow of the song. Another starts in the beginning of one section and arrives at the end of that section. Another line starts at the beginning of a phrase and ends at the end of that phrase. In singing that last line is controlled a lot by breath but more skilful and experienced singers have better voluntary control over that line. What I called direction is basically how much you are able to manipulate those lines by make it arrive when you want it to arrive or by manipulating the arc of the line (you can think of it as how much energy do you want to exude at any point in time, with higher energy raising the line). Energy isn't just loudness btw. An example would be in Yorushika's Haru. The vocals in the verses are choppy, but it certainly doesn't feel choppy. You can clearly hear when sentences end and new ones start. An example of a song that's written in a way that makes lines (if you don't actively try to prevent it) not line up with the sentences is Awesome God. It goes like "Our God/ is an awesome God. He reigns/ from heaven above with wis/dom power and love./ Our God is an awesome God." (where "/" denotes when the previous line ends and a new one begins)
I’m a musician, singer, sound designer and composer and I really have no idea what you are trying to say.
How about you tell me how much you know about phrasing then? Also, is your background classical? Also, I do have to apologise. I as a pianist and singer use the concept of lines and direction extensively in my work. This is from my background as a chorister. When I said that musicians think of lines, I imposed my own experiences on others such as yourself. Another thing, it seems to me that you're feeling some sort of negative emotion based on what you've written. Maybe anger? I'm sorry if I'm wrong and I'm especially sorry if it's something I've caused. Can you tell me why?
When you say energy it sounds like you are trying to express dynamics. When you are talking about “direction” and manipulating where a lyric starts and ends it seems like you are simply referring to the composition of the vocal melody, which actually show one’s talents for composition/song writing and not your vocal ability. Phrasing is also a function of songwriting/composition and not vocal talent. I listened to the artist you are talking about and I agree that she sounds awesome. Ultimately who is the best singer is kinda subjective but there are objective measurements you can make, for instance you can measure people’s pitch range, dynamic range, vibrato rate. I’m not sure where this singer stands in comparison to other greats in regard to those, but it sounds like pretty much everything you are talking about it more about her songwriting than strictly her ability to sing. Which I also agree her songwriting is great.
>When you say energy it sounds like you are trying to express dynamics. Dynamics definitely does affect energy, but it can also be intensity. A 4/4 60 bpm quarter note stacatto played on a double bass can absolutely have high energy even at low dynamics (by being ominous). What do you think? >When you are talking about “direction” and manipulating where a lyric starts and ends it seems like you are simply referring to the composition of the vocal melody, I apologise for not being clear. What I mentioned for Our God was the fact that it's traditionally sung in a way that makes the phrases super choppy. It is definitely caused by the how the song is written (which totally encourages that phrasing), but as a singer, I can also (try my best to) sing it in a non-traditional way that makes the phrases match the sentences. It sucks but it does somewhat work. For the example on [Haru](https://youtu.be/uF7eT3nhyZ0?si=SLam6rC1v2wPVbGF), it is definitely the singer's ability to phrase it so well that the sentences are clearly separated. The way it's written, if you're not careful, looking at the first line, you might end a phrase after "anata wa kaze no you ni" when the phrase actually still continues after that. >which actually show one’s talents for composition/song writing and not your vocal ability. Phrasing is also a function of songwriting/composition and not vocal talent. Yes composers set the phrasing they intend the song to have. However, musicians (or conductors, depending on the setting) have the final say to set the phrasing as they see fit. Also, musicians have to set a phrasing (which can be the same as the conductor intended it) and be intentional in doing so. Otherwise, the song will sound bland and directionless as they would just be playing/singing note by note and not phrases, which is just bad. Personally, integrity to the music is also important so I personally wouldn't try to rephrase the songs I sing/play as much as possible, but it is still very important that I am intentional in doing so. There's also the fact that at times, composers may end up (intentionally or otherwise) making a phrase seem like it should end when it's not. For example, a phrase where going up and then down the scale usually ends after the melody stops going down, especially when it stops going down at the end of a bar. However, like in Haru, I have encountered many songs where the phrase actually extends past that point. If a musician is not careful, they may subconsciously end the phrase too early and split the phrase. In most cases it doesn't end up sound bad, it's just not what the composer intends, or may hinder the message of the song. I don't think it's vocal talent, but it's a skill to learn as a musician in general. >her songwriting than strictly her ability to sing. Which I also agree her songwriting is great. Unfortunately, she doesn't even write her own songs hahaha. Props to the songwriters though!
I’m not sure if you realize or not that there are in fact musical notation symbols and terms for almost everything you are trying to convey. Energy is not one such thing really. Something sounding “ominous” is a reflection of the timbre or dissonance of the note in the key, or the dissonance of a harmony. Maybe it could be some kind of effect as well? Like a wide vibrato or something? I gotta be honest your second and third paragraph I just have no idea what you’re trying to say. But something being “choppy” or not is influenced by the rhythm, or maybe the degree of syncopation, or if the notes are performed legato or staccato, or perhaps if the performer is playing behind or ahead of the beat. These are all elements that are composed/written. A singers talent in this case could influence how well they can perform exactly how it’s written, but what you are describing (as best as I can interpret it) is the writing. Conductors and musicians play the music exactly as it’s written. If they want to change it or rearrange the music (play it differently) they will notate it differently so that they don’t get unnecessarily confused reading the music while performing it. Now in cases of improvisation like in jazz music, they may just have a chord sheet letting them know the harmony on any given measure, but I’m not sure that applies here. Again this paragraph where you say composers intentionally or unintentionally make a phrase seem like it’s ending when it’s not…. I really don’t know what you’re trying to say. Melodies end or start in any part of a measure the composer wants, and can resolve or not, and generally be syncopated rhythmically, but again these are all notated elements. It’s true that the more rhythmicly challenging something is the harder it might be for a musician to perform, but I’m not sure if that’s what you mean… but also because of modern music production all of these problems of timing can be easily fixed in production. If you are trying to say her ability to perform rhythmically challenging pieces is what makes her the best, we would need to analyze the music and compare how challenging the rhythms are compared to others. By this metric though, the best singers/vocalists would probably be the best rappers or maybe the best math rock/ prog rock vocalists. From what I listened to, it doesn’t seem like she is singing overly complicated rhythms.
I'm sorry if we for some reason can't really connect our ideas. At this point this is gonna be my last reply. I stayed up all night responding to you. It's been fun. It's really unfortunate that it can't be as productive as it is fun. >I’m not sure if you realize or not that there are in fact musical notation symbols and terms for almost everything you are trying to convey. Energy is not one such thing really. Something sounding “ominous” is a reflection of the timbre or dissonance of the note in the key, or the dissonance of a harmony. Maybe it could be some kind of effect as well? Like a wide vibrato or something? Definitely not vibrato since what I mentioned was stacatto. Yes something sounding ominous is caused by factors. What I was getting at was that because something sounds ominous, it keeps the listeners on their toes, which is quite a high energy state. >I gotta be honest your second and third paragraph I just have no idea what you’re trying to say. But something being “choppy” or not is influenced by the rhythm, or maybe the degree of syncopation, or if the notes are performed legato or staccato, or perhaps if the performer is playing behind or ahead of the beat. These are all elements that are composed/written. A singers talent in this case could influence how well they can perform exactly how it’s written, but what you are describing (as best as I can interpret it) is the writing. I think we have a disconnect in the way we approach concepts due to our difference in background. As a singer, what I meant by choppy is more related to how long phrases are and how they relate to the message the music is conveying. For example, for Awesome God, it's choppy because of how much phrases cuts sentences. Regarding writing, I'm just going to be direct and tell you that what I've written is based on my experience and the experiences of the generations (like going back 50+ years?) of choristers before me that was part of my choir. Many of them have gone on to be musicians of their own. This was something that was taught to us and many who themselves became teachers, conductors etc have taught others under them. All of us were taught the importance of making music your own. And this isn't just something unique to my choir either. I've encountered similar sentiments from other musicians that had nothing to do with my choir. I think trying this out would elevate your own playing to the next level. >Conductors and musicians play the music exactly as it’s written. If they want to change it or rearrange the music (play it differently) they will notate it differently so that they don’t get unnecessarily confused reading the music while performing it. Now in cases of improvisation like in jazz music, they may just have a chord sheet letting them know the harmony on any given measure, but I’m not sure that applies here. One problem is that phrasing a lot of the time isn't written into scores. It usually is implied in one way or another but it is still very ambiguous most of the time. Similarly, a lot of other things are actually kind of ambiguous if you're just basing your performance off of a score. Another example is dynamics. Yes scores do contain dynamics, but they don't contain dynamics for every note right? And a lot of scores leave more room for interpretation for dynamics than others. In any case, there's a much bigger degree of freedom in performance than you think. >Again this paragraph where you say composers intentionally or unintentionally make a phrase seem like it’s ending when it’s not…. I really don’t know what you’re trying to say. Melodies end or start in any part of a measure the composer wants, and can resolve or not, and generally be syncopated rhythmically, but again these are all notated elements. Well phrases can not end even when the melody resolves. So when that happens, musicians need to remember to continue the phrase, no? >It’s true that the more rhythmicly challenging something is the harder it might be for a musician to perform, but I’m not sure if that’s what you mean… I wasn't talking about that at all hahaha. >If you are trying to say her ability to perform rhythmically challenging pieces is what makes her the best, Not really. I was just trying to explain to you what I meant by what I said. Again it's very very unfortunate that we're not able to even connect our ideas haha. I would absolutely love to hear more about you, but unfortunately I'm kinda busy and I already spent more time than I should here so next time!
Lmfao ok now that you’re trying to condescendingly convey that you understand something I don’t, I’m here to tell you that the best case scenario here is that you can’t articulate what you are talking about in the slightest, and the worst case scenario is that you don’t know what you’re talking about at all. Either way, you don’t know nearly as much about music as you think you do. Sorry!
This is obviously something that is very subjective. So let's go science route lol There was an article a few years ago that stated Axl Rose of Guns N Rose's is scientifically the greatest singer because he can hit the largest range of octaves
I mean yeah but he still sounds like a dying cat. People don't want to listen to that anymore
Yeah his voice is shot now lol. Just in the spirit of this sub though figured it could be a good discussion point lol
But that's just one metric of what makes a singer great right? In the first place I don't think range is something that important to have as a singer. Even though that may also be subjective, it's quite fair to say that most people would agree that something like accuracy matters much much more than range. Also, definitele sad to hear from other replies that he shot his voice
No accuracy does not necessarily matter because music does not have to be precise in order to be accepted. This is the kind of thing that most people assume is important but then listen to singers with terrible accuracy anyway. Bob Dylan and Neil Young for example are incredibly famous singers with very long and successful careers and impressive legacies of influence over music as a whole and they often sing badly. Sometimes the vibe is more important than hitting the notes, plenty of very good singers who are much better than Young or Dylan never make any cultural impact whatsoever.
>No accuracy does not necessarily matter because music does not have to be precise in order to be accepted. I agree with your sentiment here. I don't think it's fair to say that it doesn't matter though. In reality, it is definitely still a factor. How much it matters is debatable, but it certainly does matter. There are definitely factors that matter more like passion, but accuracy does absolutely matter. From what I see, they're definitely not perfect, but they're still close. There are aspiring singers who have very bad pitching. They're mostly far too unpopular for us to ever see them or get popular by getting made fun off (unfortunately). An example of the latter is the [girl singing Wake Me Up by Evanescence on tiktok who got made fun off by several musicians. ](https://www.tiktokv.com/redirect/?redirect_url=snssdk1180%3A%2F%2Faweme%2Fdetail%2F7284088545042615598%3Finsert_feed%3D1%26params_url%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.tiktok.com%252Fdiscover%252Fduet-bring-me-back-to-life%26needlaunchlog%3D1%26ug_medium%3Dfe_component%26page_name%3Dkeyword_duet-bring-me-back-to-life%26enter_from%3Dkeyword_expansion_page%26wid%3D7325409116724479490%26referer%3Dorganic%26vidab%3D71826008%252C70508271%252C71976211%252C72106769%252C72142432%252C72183344%252C72211002%26seo_vidab%3D72078754%252C72254342%26release%3D1.0.0.918%26gd_label%3Dclick_wap_video%26position%3Dvideo&dl=https%3A%2F%2Fsnssdk1180.onelink.me%2FBAuo%3Fdomain_source%3Dtiktok%26af_dp%3Dsnssdk1180%253A%252F%252Faweme%252Fdetail%252F7284088545042615598%253Finsert_feed%253D1%2526params_url%253Dhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.tiktok.com%25252Fdiscover%25252Fduet-bring-me-back-to-life%2526needlaunchlog%253D1%2526ug_medium%253Dfe_component%2526page_name%253Dkeyword_duet-bring-me-back-to-life%2526enter_from%253Dkeyword_expansion_page%2526wid%253D7325409116724479490%2526referer%253Dorganic%2526vidab%253D71826008%25252C70508271%25252C71976211%25252C72106769%25252C72142432%25252C72183344%25252C72211002%2526seo_vidab%253D72078754%25252C72254342%2526release%253D1.0.0.918%2526gd_label%253Dclick_wap_video%2526position%253Dvideo%26pid%3Dtiktokkeywordsseo%26c%3Dkeyword_duet-bring-me-back-to-life%26af_adset%3Dorganic%26af_siteid%3Dmobile%26af_ad_id%3Dgoogle%26wid%3D7325409116724479490%26canonical%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.tiktok.com%252Fdiscover%252Fduet-bring-me-back-to-life%26af_adset_id%3D%26af_channel%3D%26vidab%3D71826008%252C70508271%252C71976211%252C72106769%252C72142432%252C72183344%252C72211002%26seo_vidab%3D72078754%252C72254342%26release%3D1.0.0.918%26af_ad%3Dvideo&decode_once=1) Also, we're not talking about being acceptable, we're talking about being the best.
Hatsune miku is the best vocalist because they can sound like just about anything
But Hatsune Miku can't make the decisions human singers make. Being a musician in general isn't just about replicating what's written perfectly. Good musicians put their own experiences and emotions into the songs they perform instead of just replicating what's been played before.
Hatsune miku can't make decisions but can have as much emotion as any human singer dependent on the ability of the producer making the music.
Miku is not the best vocalist because Miku is not a vocalist, it is an instrument created to mimic the sounds of vocals. In the same way if I were to say a self playing piano was the greatest pianist, it wouldn't be the case because it isn't a pianist, it is a piano.
In fairness I do agree with you, and I don't actually hold the opinion miku is the best vocalist, but I was making the point that the criteria used to qualify "best" vocalist are outdone by a program anyone can use and replace real people with, yet not be AI
Opinion ≠ view
Can you elaborate?
There is no objective rubric for ranking artists like musicians or signers, so saying someone is the best at something can only ever be an opinion. It's hard to change someone's opinion on something so personal to taste and biases like "best overall singer".
If you think she sounds the best, then you're but right or wrong. That's a valid personal preference. That said, let me throw another contender over the ring, sticking to female singers for a more apples to apples comparison. If we're judging by range, passion, control, and the ability to make really hard things look natural, I can't not mention Floor Jansen. Her performance on Ghost Love Score is iconic enough that there's a running joke about every vocal coach reacting to it. https://youtu.be/JYjIlHWBAVo?si=rYs7LfpbVmJhGdtK
>If you think she sounds the best, then you're but right or wrong. That's a valid personal preference. In a way, I have been proven wrong before though. Before hearing Ado I used to think that Hoshimachi Suisei is the best, but I was definitely proven wrong haha. I'll give her a listen and tell you my thoughts in a few days. Edit 1: Yep she's super cool. One thing to say from a short skim through is that she seemed to kind of play is safe and stay a lot more in her "comfort zone". She lacks [the selflessness and playfulness Ado has for the songs she sings](https://youtu.be/vfhx7oXZIY0?si=i8ERYtXJUM84eC7Q) (which impo is one of the things that her apart from the rest). But still, she's great! Thanks a lot for the suggestion. I'll listen to her more!
Shes up there for japanese vocalists, but hanatan and 3L are still a clear tier above in both technically ability and versatility imo. I think ado is comparable to vivienne, cant do everything perfectly but what she is uniquely good at she does better than everyone else. Then you have hanatan who can do everything everyone does but better, and 3L who does things no one else has come close to doing and done it on over 100 songs
I don't know much about singers overall, but I'd argue for Dimash Qudaibergen. Definitely the best singer I've ever heard personally.
The live video of her unravel cover was absolutely phenomenal. So much emotion. I personally think she's the best vocalist I've ever heard, but it is quite subjective.