Female Singers R Us

Monday, 7 January 2013

[Listen] Sugababes Version 1.0 Debut First New Song,"Boys"


One of this year's most exciting comebacks has to be that of the original members of the Sugababes, Siobhán Donaghy,Mutya Buena and Keisha Buchanan- now going by the catchy name, Mutya Keisha Siobhan.

One of the biggest strengths of version 1.0 was their ability to create fresh and unique harmonies. To show that time hasn't diminished this uncanny ability to sing as a unit, the trio have just released an a capella teaser of unreleased song/possible-first-single, Boys.

Though the harmonies in this video are unquestionably amazing- I'd forgotten just how good they sounded together- what really stood out, was how much their individual voices have improved since their 2000 début, One Touch. Let's just hope they've found the right producers to complement and highlight the stunning vocals that Mutya Keisha Siobhan can undoubtedly bring.



And a studio snippet of the song:

47 comments:

  1. I am insanely glad they are back together, Siobhans solo works were perfection too btw!

    At least they have the raw talent both vocally and with the writing, I just hope they get marketed properly. Its been a long time since there was a credible girl group in the game.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I love this group they are each good vocalist especially Keisha and are even better live. Which is rare. Im glad the original lineup has reunited. I wish US artist would take note.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, I do dare to question the ''amazing''' level of the harmonizing. ;-)
    It's good but I would not call it amazing.

    Might well be just me but, though very different kind of voices and music, when it comes to harrmonizing I think this is more impressive .

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E_tho7E0WQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    ReplyDelete
  4. @ScottishStuey:disqus not really sure what you mean by 'credible', if you're reffering to song writting and undoubtably great vocals, then surely little mix too fit 'credible' who are well and truley 'in the game'

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for sharing your thoughts about donnegan.
    Regards
    http://www.inthesameboat.net/node/172711
    Feel free to surf my web page - battersea

    ReplyDelete
  6. The songwritingcredits for both ''bands'' are about as credible as a snake oil salesman.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I am pretty sure little mix have no hand in writing. Its a matter of taste however and being honest I find LM extremely mundane, MKS have edge and work outside the box with their sound. One touch was an exceptional album for artists as young as they were at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Lol but with the Suga's the original line up were far more interesting lyrically speaking, as members absconded so did the standard

    ReplyDelete
  9. Were they really? More interesting than the lyrics to twelve men penned ''Wings''????? /s
    You know....somehow I am inclined to take your word for that Stuey. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  10. LOL! I have to say I found Wings more cliche than their awful image in the follow up single (I forget the name of it).


    Mutya Keisha Siobhan 1 - Lil' Mix 0


    ;)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wow, they sound fantastic! Where do you find all these treasures lol

    ReplyDelete
  12. i agree with you 100% DD they sound fab and i hope they keep there music current enough to give them success , the new sugababes tho....i look at them and im like "please forget to breath in your sleep".very happy for the return and the first song i owned was by them ! round round on tape haha

    ReplyDelete
  13. Keisha has a really unique voice, its got a sharp quality to it that is distinct from the other singers that she's performed with in the Sugababes line ups over the years, but she's can still take part in some great harmonies.

    ReplyDelete
  14. In the bluegrass/americana circles .:-)

    ReplyDelete
  15. LOL I have to admit, never heard of little mix and my research went no furter than reading the wiki entries on them and their first album plus checking out the vids to DNA and Wings.
    Sugababes I know little more of.
    But from what I read about the inter group relationships....don't expect them to be together very long.

    ReplyDelete
  16. She does have a distinguished sharp rich tone, I dont know what to catogorize. She says she is a Soprano.

    ReplyDelete
  17. lol. Oh Opie, please, pinches of salt must be taken with all my sweeping statements (you must know this by now)! And you're right, it's totally a genre thing. But yes, that was gorgeous. The closest thing I have to that in my own personal music collection would be from Jenny Lewis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0GWs4oaoRY. Though nowhere near as intricate as your video, there are similarities in the sound of the harmonies.

    I love her and all her work with Rilo Kiley...perhaps I'll profile her...not sure if anyone has ever suggested her,

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hahaha I know! Same goes for mine as you surely also know. I just needed a ''hook'' to start of my comment and excuse my link.

    I read up just now on Jenny and I would say she sounds Americana alright. Considering you like her and she is bit off the beaten track, I would say a profile is an excellent idea. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Having wikipedia'd Little Mix I stand corrected, they did write their own material....that being said I still think its sh.....

    ReplyDelete
  20. LOL If I thought for a moment you believe those 14 year olds with, judging by their ''bios'' on wiki no discearnable music education or experience, deserve any actual writing credits Stuey....I'd tell you about this cute bridge I have for sale. Or perhaps you'd be interested in some desert property with view of the ocean? ;-D

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hahahaha my thoughts exactly! Lol that property sure sounds good right about now :D

    ReplyDelete
  22. Stuey and Opie Ever you guys are so right little mix are so untalented

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNXKE3win5Y

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

    ;) ;) xoxo

    ReplyDelete
  23. Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said they are ''untalented''.
    I questioned the writing credits asigned to them. And I still do.

    ReplyDelete
  24. haha it doesn't take a genius to figure that that's what you were alluding to by calling them inexperienced 14 year olds but whatever lol. And actually there is enough 'info', they regularly upload candid videos, many of which involve spontaneous harmonizing :)

    ReplyDelete
  25. Loll indeed it takes little genius to misread.
    I think great songwriting (and btw that is not even the category of writing being under discussion here) requires a certain intellectual maturity. A maturity extremely rare in 14 year old's. Certainly more rare than singing abllity.
    Much like every other word in my comments in this thread, that remark you misinterpreted in fact still went to songwriting credits.

    Not enough info was refering to me not having that. And that would not be remedied by supposedly candid videos they deemed worthy of uploading.
    I am way too cynical to believe there not having been work at their harmonizing prior to the shooting of such ''candid'' videos.

    And when I say ''not enough info'' I mean I reserve any judgment either way. So relax! :-)

    ReplyDelete
  26. ahah ok, so firstly they are actually all over the age of 19, so obviously you are correct about your lack of information :). And while I understand what you mean about song writing, I still believe that it was rather ignorant of you to judge the group so harshly especially seeing as you made a point that you knew nothing about them. But hey, who cares, I'm relaxed so feel free to 'judge either way' away :).

    ReplyDelete
  27. Again you are putting words in my mouth. How much clearer can I be than I have been? I question the writingcredits acredited to them. That's ALL!!!

    Hardly a harsh judgment if one looks at the official songcredits on their album combined with the songs that sizeable group actually came up with.

    I stand corrected on the age thing. I was researching both them and Suababes at the same tiime and mixed up their ages at the time of their fiirst album respectively.

    As for my general ignorance on both groups...I made no claims otherwise. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  28. Oops Sorry!
    I accidentally posted my reply in the wrong place . See above.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I really have no desire to put anything within the vicinity of your mouth, so not really sure what your banging on about there. Listen you unfairly judged them and whether or not you were aware of the way in which your words were interpreted it seems as if you are trying to pass of as the 'indy' 'hipster' mainstream cynic, which I'm all for, when sufficient evidence can be produced to back up your cynicism, but as you have so eloquently stated, you can not. :)

    ReplyDelete
  30. And yet you insist on continuing to put words in my mouth.
    Anybody reading my words can see the subject was writing credits. And I choose my words quite carefully btw.
    You decided to read something else in them and in spite of my asserting several times I did NOT mean anything other than what I posted, you continue to believe I mean something other than I say I mean.
    Why would I?

    And please don't insult me like that....''indy hipster'' Ha!
    I have hated indy hipsters since decades before the word hipster was invented.
    Sufficient evidence as to the validity of pop writing credits for the 'artist' whose name is on the front has long been established. My cynicism towards said credits is but the realism of the non stan.
    It's the cynicism of one who has lived long enough to have witnessed how big fakery has become in popmusic. THE most lucrative genre in the music Business.

    And yet more words you are putting in my mouth as AGAIN...my statement regarding lack of info went to the source of their harmonizing

    ReplyDelete
  31. Personally I believe this incredible, deep and touching music is far superior...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGwB-f1xfxM

    ReplyDelete
  32. LOL So true! And I bet it was written by those girls, 4 ''producers'' and half a dozen or so Muppets.;-)

    ReplyDelete
  33. Hehehe yep, I get the feeling however the muppets were the ones bursting at the seams with the "talent"

    ReplyDelete
  34. They sure were entertaining me a hell of a lot more than these girl groups

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yvHWyvexZA&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    ReplyDelete
  35. Holey moley you can spew a cascade of pretentious gibberish! To be perfectly honest I lost interest in this about 4 posts ago and have been cracking up at your over reactions. Great attempt of swaying my view though. Sorry *cute* attempt. xo

    ReplyDelete
  36. LOL a real good effort at saving face. Might have worked even.... had this exchange been a verbal one. But alas...the whole thing is written down and vou did lose face here. Compounding the loss by declaring I failed to sway your blatant misinterpretations of my posts.
    But that is quite alright. Never expected to actually get through the dense haze surrounding a stan. I just enjoy giving them plenty of opportunity to lose face. And you guys, unlike your idols, rarely fail to deliver. :-)

    I'm not surprised btw that to anybody impressed by the kind of lyrics originally under discussion, my post seem ''pretentious gibberish''.
    But really a rather redundant remark seeing as the whole discussion was about your inability to understand the meaning and intent of a,basically, one line comment.

    ReplyDelete
  37. my face is securely on my head but thanks for the concern :) (and no offence but I don't think I'll be taking tips from a synonym abusing delinquent who can't even understand the connotations of their misinformed, repetitive and pretentious rants, which when actually read make little sense and contradict) I think the true misinterpretation is that you think you are always correct when, so very sadly it appears your not, boo :(. Little Mix's song DNA (which they wrote 'btw') has been voted by numerous critic sites wit in the top 5 best songs of 2012, and while that may not say that much considering the crappy year of pop music we have just endured, surely the talent, both musically and lyrically can not be denied. Although I forget I am dealing with an individual who is so 'hipster' they have descended into self-parody and hate themselves :S awks. xo

    ReplyDelete
  38. LOL The word you were looking for regarding what clearly irritates you about my writing is ''verbose''.
    Now your latest effort...that IS a fine example of pretentious.
    ''Synonym abusing'' ''delinquent'' , '' connotations''...all fine words when used correctly and if they come naturally to you. Neither is clearly the case in your attempt to match my natural style.

    As for that 8 men penned ditty and my having to take some pop critics opinion on it's merits over my own ears and opinion ....well, that's a suggestion not worthy of anything more than a derisive giggle.
    ''Talent musically and lyrically'' hihihi

    I won't bother with the insult attempts other than uttering a hearty laugh at you pretending to even be able to ''actually read'' while continuing to post the proof of your utter inability to do so.

    I mean...seems you're even struggling with the expression ''losing face'' when the available evidence points at a likely extensive experience with it.

    ReplyDelete
  39. naw using my argument right back at me. if I wanted my comeback I would have wiped it off your mums chin. And you realise according to your definition you just lost face by "uttering a hearty laugh." Sad times for you
    :(. As you have proven once again you clearly don't know what your words mean, or mine for that matter, which is rather cute considering its now become the basis of your entire argument. Better luck with future endeavours xoxo ;)

    ReplyDelete
  40. Again, so unfortunate for you how it's all here in black and white. :-)
    For instance that crude ''come'' line. You seem to be getting more desperate and consequently sinking to a lower level with each post.
    You have now been reduced to trying your hand at insulting my mother ( btw necrophilia is against the law in most countries. Might be wise not to advertise your interest in such practices ) and claiming to know my words, intent and meaning better than I do.
    And yet again you lose face by demonstrating how deeply unaware you are of your failings dear. I don't lose face by uttering a hearty laugh at your suggestion. That's because,unlike you claiming an emotion clearly by your ever sinking level not truly there, I am not lying.

    I did utter that hearty laugh as any regular reader here could have predicted. Even the other stans who came before you would tell you that would very much my response.
    Dude leave yourself at least a shred of dignity and move on. Go focus on being a stan for yet another faker.
    I mean... really, I can't imagine how much lower you can go in yet another demonstration on ''how to lose face and compound it''.
    Of course...I wouldn't have imagined your present depth. It's beyond where I would go so, ya know...you can probably surprise me easily.
    Go for it if you want though. ''Move on'' is but helpful friendly advise out of concern for a fellow human being's continued loss of dignity. .:-)

    ReplyDelete
  41. Just keep demonstrating my argument for me :) Observing your many other posts seeking confrontation its quite obvious that you merely use "sophisticated" , verbose language to attempt to intimidate and hide the fact that your argument is plainly just stupid. The only dignity I would be worried about is yours, which through out this post has failed to not be dragged through the mud with each of your increasingly dull retorts.
    I love how you consider me losing when you're the one who has so obviously given up as you have met your match, and to be honest it wasn't even a strain to thwart you. I always have a nice day thanks, but I'm sure you don't. How sad, and pathetic mwah xoxo

    ReplyDelete
  42. Lol ''sophisticated'' Thanks for the compliment. Real sorry you feel so very intimidated though. Hang in there ''arthur'' :-)

    ReplyDelete
  43. Clearly doesn't understand sarcasm. You don't contribute anything to anyone's days, you're like a fly, a slight annoyance that's easily destroyed :) and hope you'll leave the void opinions for the scum-sucking idiots, oh wait, never mind xoxo ;)

    ReplyDelete
  44. You must be very fond of flies in that case. :-)
    And seeing as you are the one who besides reading and responding to my every reply are also ''observing'' my other comments...did you just call yourself a ''scum-sucking idiot''?
    Or was that refering to the other posters here?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Thought you said you were done? lol. They're hard to miss when your picking "fights" (over the internet, really tough by the way) all over this amazing website. Well the little dictionary you keep venturing into has once again made you look like the pathetic fool you are regarding your thwarting remark. Its obvious you're at a loss, you keep repeating yourself and your trying to insult my grammar ?? ugh lame, I actually thought you were going to be interesting, but instead here I am ashamed that you exist and that I have been forced to interact with such a sickening being :). Also please stop trying to back tack. You're wrong. period :). Thanks for the compliment! At least you know that you're defeated ;) xoxo

    ReplyDelete
  46. LOL done for the day dear. Hence the ''have a nice day'' . Were I done with you permanently, I'd have made it ''have a nice life''.
    I am afraid once again you run into the main problem you show in every reply. Your inability to take in and comprehend the written word correctly.

    Obviously that makes grammar a real issue. :-)
    And it was you who brought it up sweetie. By first off misinterpreting two pretty clear comments of mine, secondly informing me you didn't misinterpret...I just didn't understand my OWN writing and thirdly complaining about my verbosity.
    You then, in a vain attempt to make believe the language comprehension problem lies with me, made it the subject of every one of your misguided comments.
    At the same time btw proving also in every comment, it really is your own issue. And subconsciously you are aware of it.This is why my verbosity intimidates you into such anger, you allow it to drag you into endless self humiliation. :-(

    One of the ways you keep losing face is resorting to childish insult attemts, another is blatant lying. Because ..nope, you are not laughing...you are pissed off. And no you didn't think I'd be interesting. You claimed two days ago that my posts are ''repetitive, misinformed and pretentious'' and four days ago that they were ''pretentious gibberish'' and how you had ''lost interest 4 posts ago''.

    I keep telling you, but of course here also your language comprehension ( and anger) stands in your way, this is all in black on white. You lie and it is there for all to see. And again...you lose face. Aaawwww.

    ReplyDelete
  47. And ps...by whom exacty have you been ''forced to interact'' with me?

    LOL you seem to not only be unable to own up to misunderstanding a comment, you also like to put the responsibilty for your choices and actions well away from yourself.

    ReplyDelete