Monday, 21 October 2013

[Watch] Katy Perry Performs "Roar" @ X-Factor (UK) And Continues To Bore



I can't seem to click with Katy Perry and her live performances. Sure, I like a lot of her singles- present one not included- but her live showings always leave me feeling cold and disinterested. Never more so was this the case than watching her showing at the X-Factor (UK), where she performed aforementioned single Roar.

I mean, she was dressed up as a tiger (and you guys know how much I love cats) and even that didn't hold my interest. (Poor) joke aside, the performance itself was okay- though the vocal was shaky-but the real problem I had, and usually have, was the absence of any stage presence from Katy herself.

She seems like a lovely lady, and makes catchy music, but it just never seems to translate when she puts her product on show. Maybe you guys can link me some videos in the comments that might allow me to see the light of Perry.

Whatever the case, I'm sure I'll be picking up a copy of Prism- which is getting strong reviews-at some point! Hopefully it'll be darker in sound, like she promised pre-release, and less like the lead single lifted from it.





Thoughts?

174 comments:

  1. tbh im not clicking with gaga or katy these days, do what you want with my prism and all that jazz seems rather bleak so far.

    much prefer lorde atm and her amazingly produced EP. although i find it iffy that she's 16.....i had zero life experience at 16 and certainly not enough to write an EP but hey.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGtF3I2EX4M

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great - more "Bore"..but with pitchier vocals. Which I COULD somewhat forgive id she did anything other than just stand there. There are literally NO notes in this song that she shouldn't be able to hit with ease. Why can't this woman sing a song live that was written for her voice? Such a terrible performer - wooden as can be.

    ReplyDelete
  3. There are a few gems on Prism, and some good ballads too. The album as whole didn't really fit well as a good experience for me, but all the songs were great. If that makes sense here. (The whole album leaked like last week haha). I can't comment on the video as I'm still in school right now and I can't watch it haha.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "...There are a few gems on Prism, and some good ballads too..."


    Most likely. I expect them all to fall apart vocally when she tries to recreate them live, however.

    ReplyDelete
  5. LOL That's pretty bad alright, how she can't sing a song written especially for her. Though of course that is still trumped by singers who can't sing songs they wrote themselves..*cough* Taylor.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes! She left the United States.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Touche! LOL...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Prism has leaked, you knew that?
    http://kickass.to/katy-perry-prism-album-2013-deluxe-version-cbr-320kbps-mp3-blackhunter-grg-t8025168.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. I could not take the opening seriously at all. Boring performance and lazy vocals.


    Also wth was up with the weird slendermen-esque people?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I smell a Gaga fan.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Same case as Rihanna, more of a studio vocalist/artist. Not surprised.

    ReplyDelete
  12. come on, people. The chorus was so lip synced,

    ReplyDelete
  13. *singers, and poor ones at that.

    Vocalist is not a term that should be thrown around so lightly.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Heard the performance. It worries me because she sounds like she has a strong solid voice in the studio all throughout her chest range. But this is so weak and shaky and rigid. But she's actually had good performances (maybe not, say Beyonce-level, but decent-good) of her songs that are harder to sing than this, ones where she's actually dancing too. So it frustrates me why she can't nail one of her easiest to sing songs where she's standing in one place, looking like she's being puppeted. #ineptitude.

    ReplyDelete
  15. It wasn't that bad, she was on key most of the time. Her breath control and resonance was somewhat pitiful though. Katy isn't a bad live singer by any means, note that she's no Mariah Carey or Beyonce when performing, but she does have a nice tone...she's just really inconsistent. She'll have an awesome performance, a horrible one, an ok one, another okay one, a boring, then an amazing one.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Vocally, it was not that bad. Yes, she is not Beyoncé or Kelly Clarkson, but at least she sang within her comfortable range and thus she sounded acceptable. But I agree, she is just soooo boring. She doesn't have the vocal ability to make up for her lack of stage presence and performing skills. The music is also very generic and boring. Nothing she hasn't done before.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Better than I expected! But, hey, at least she can sing it better than this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSwlCaf2FM The high notes at the end are cringeworthy. Then again, Selena didn't have a loud backtrack to hide her voice

    ReplyDelete
  18. I thought you didn't like me and thought I was boring? Why the change?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ricky Yong Chin Yuan22 October 2013 at 06:39

    I did absolutely adore Birthday.

    ReplyDelete
  20. in do what you want it is E3-F#5 :) her full voice range is Bb2-F#5 (PROBS CAN GO LOWER TOUGH )

    ReplyDelete
  21. Oh please, for someone who it seems only listens to Gaga to hear individual notes achieved..and then admits he can't even but needs the aid of a machine to do so, it is utterly laughable to address other people's taste in music.
    It is another opinion of mine that you should just go get yourself a xylophone and marvel at the notes you will be able to produce.

    ReplyDelete
  22. When am I ever nice?

    ReplyDelete
  23. this is 'good' by her standards, isnt it?


    she always sounds like someone 'learning' to sing. her live performances are always hurtful to the ears.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Royals is relatable though. At least to me.

    ReplyDelete
  25. it was a moment! Just because u said the truth about this lazy performance.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Wow, absolutely horrendous. Someone please burn her recording contract. That was a disgrace to all the talented singers barely getting by trying to make it in the industry. What a travesty.

    ReplyDelete
  27. It's not dark in sound at all DD, so don't get your hopes up. It features some of the most basic, cliched and weakly-written lyrics I've ever seen.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I see.


    "it was a moment" LOL you really do love Mariah don't you?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Ricky Yong Chin Yuan23 October 2013 at 02:00

    Amen!

    ReplyDelete
  30. I hope that those people are screaming because their ears hurt like hell and not because they think she's great. BTW, you realise that you've failed at creating an album with a "darker" sound when Selena covers one of your songs and doesn't change the instrumental at all...

    ReplyDelete
  31. you are so fucking rude and delusional


    i have never seen anyone on this blog who is more disrespectful than you
    i remember visiting this blog before almost two years ago seeing a big group of people here just commenting on divas and what we liked and what things these divas could improve on


    but then OPIE comes along and basically unleashes a hurricane on everyone calling people dimwits because we disagree with you; telling me i have minimum brain cells and that just because i am a lady gaga fan i am some sort of inferior person


    its also hilarious how you try to say that gaga DOES NOT care about music and yet you somehow in some weird distorted way say that miley does??? have you not heard 23 by miley with juicy j and wiz khalifa??? its so obvious she is a sell out


    JUST BECAUSE SHE DID A FEW GOOD COVERS OF SOME OLD CLASSICS DOES NOT MEAN SHE HAVE A DEEP UNDERSTANDING AND CARE FOR MUSIC


    and her words, actions, and delivery do??? what ???
    shes most known for humping a foam finger and grinding on robin thicke more than any of her songs or musical contributions --- shes gained infamy this year people pay more attention to her twerking more than anything else shes done


    and i didnt say she was performing rejected songs... i said some were switched out or remasters - some were edited and half of the songs on the album have not been leaked or released yet so we dont know what those songs sound like


    and LOL gaga is not a real musician or vocalist??? wtf and miley cyrus is???
    gaga has had classical training and has worked with famous vocal coaches for the latter half of her life even way before she became famous
    and because her parents encouraged her to play piano automatically renders her piano skills useless??? what the hell???


    lets put gaga and cyrus on a stage with no skimpy or outrageous outfits and no crazy hair or antics just a microphone and gaga would blow miley away so DON'T EVEN GO THERE


    also thanks for personally attacking me multiple times it just goes to show how negative this blog has become because of you - every time i see something negative or see a long string of argumentative comments it usually involves you and its not only in gaga posts its in other posts


    and miley can use PR but gaga can't? and musically miley delivered? thats debatabl, you tlk Bangerz like its some revolutionary album thats better than anything that has come out this year


    OH and just so you know calling me a dimwit and telling me how little brain cells i have does not increase your credibility


    quit acting like you're better than everyone else and talking to everyone who disagrees with what you have to say

    ReplyDelete
  32. I'm not so sure of which one is worse, I mean, Taylor at least has the merit of writing her own songs. What does this lady have?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Carrie and taylor in the same range. this is stupid

    ReplyDelete
  34. She is in a same range as taylor swift. laughing stock.

    ReplyDelete
  35. You have been exposed score for jessica.

    ReplyDelete
  36. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aztpwdfBf8s

    ReplyDelete
  37. What's exactly your definition for "vocalist"? because "singer" seems to me like a heavier word than "vocalis" (and by heavier I mean that to be good singer is more diffcult than to be a good vocalist)

    ReplyDelete
  38. Having the same range doesn't mean having the same singing quality. I've heard very little from both butCarrie is definetly a much better singer.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I don't know. Maybe she is a great cook? ;-)
    I am sure each lady has skills in somethings the other doesn't have but the subject I was commenting on was the actual act of singing.
    In that, I find as flabbergasting as it is if someone is unable to sing live what is written specifically for them, I find it even more baffling if someone can't sing live what they wrote themselves. You'd think, while in the process of writing they be vocalizing the song and would adjust it if they find they can't sing it BEFORE they bung it on an album.

    ReplyDelete
  40. LMFAO. Stop over intellectualising shit. She put her arse on the cover. Anything meaning she claims the song to have is a bullshit excuse to use her body to sell her music.

    ReplyDelete
  41. It's a single now...the success it's had on iTunes and Youtube must've convinced the label to make it a single...Venus got bumped off in the meantime...

    ReplyDelete
  42. Yeah, maybe just listening to the full album instead of dismembered singles/snippets will add to the experience...

    ReplyDelete
  43. I'd just like to remind you all that R. Kelly has interfered with multiple under-age girls. Meanwhile, Gaga runs some kind of youth charity and is a self-proclaimed "youth activist".


    ---------


    In answer to the question, no. I don't think it will totally flop to hell and back, but it won't be a big success. Maybe it will go top 10 and be a Judas-sized minor hit.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Mmmm...gonna have to disagree with the obsession for attention and then being a victim equates to her not in it for the music. Michael Jackson has had NUMEROUS of songs dealing with the media's obsession surrounding his life, but that doesn't mean he wasn't in it for the music. That said though, I agree Miley is bringing something different to the top 40 table as she's melding pop, country and hip hop, which differs from the myriad of electropop songs we've been getting (which I'm not blasting, I love my fair share of electropop/dancepop)

    ReplyDelete
  45. Her dad is a civil engineer, her mum's a famous poet, she was signed to a major label at age 14 and she sings Royals like she's one of the peasants...

    ReplyDelete
  46. You are confusing my opinion for (one) of my arguments for that opinion I think. :-)


    Michael Jackson definitely was into music. He showed a real interest in music outside of pr purpose interviews
    He talked about a media's obsession which wasn't in the first place all designed by him. Also he had plenty of other stuff to say and plenty of other interests besides fame.
    In fact, poor dude clearly did not have such an abiding interest in "being famous" as Gaga has. There is absolutely no comparison between Gaga and Michael Jackson other than them each being hugely successful.


    Also I didn't say she is a victim, I said she likes to paint herself a victim.

    ReplyDelete
  47. A vocalist is someone who utilizes their voice to the degree and skill a musician does to an instrument. A vocalist is more involved in the technical aspects of music.



    A good example of a vocalist vs a singer would be Callas vs Tebaldi... though I'd attach a few negative adjectives to the word singer when describing Tebaldi...

    ReplyDelete
  48. Okay, I get you now, I mean it's still my personal thought process that only people who legitimately love music garner solid success in music (whereas those who just try to buy their way into musical success, errm not so much), but I can see where you get the vibes from GaGa that she's in love with fame... it's not like her first album wasn't called that or anything...

    ReplyDelete
  49. Because if a woman uses her body we should completely disregard what she may or may not be saying, because a woman can't show her body and be taken seriously..? OK then.

    ReplyDelete
  50. LOL yes, she never tried to hide that interest. There is that to say for Gaga.

    That album title being one clue, the present album and song themes being another, her standing on stage holding little speeches to her fans suggesting achieving fame is a way to overcome your bullies is yet another.
    Her being more surface than substance..also a clue.

    I am afraid I am indeed a lot more cynical. Not sure in fact on what you base such a belief when there is such overwhelming evidence to the contrary around but maybe it has to do with what one understands under "loving music". (Not exactly the term I used btw. Loving music and music being your prime motivation for what you are doing are not exactly the same thing. ;-D )

    ReplyDelete
  51. "(Not exactly the term I used btw. Loving music and music being your prime motivation for what you are doing are not exactly the same thing. ;-D )"

    Ahhh, got me beat with the wording there. I'm probably a bit too idealistic, as I, at the very least think that music would be one of the major motivations for being in the business. You still got me beat with prime motivation as I can't speak for anyone as much as I love GaGa and Miley (or just about any other pop artist who throws me something shiny that lasts for about 3-5 minutes ;D ).

    ReplyDelete
  52. So event if taylor hit a bad note, it still count? It doesn't make any sense.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Yes, I think that would definitely be an idealistic view. And tbh..considering the utter crap produced by many in the music business...I truly hope you are being unrealistically idealistic. ;-)

    Anyway, it is of course just an opinion I formed from my observations. I cannot look into the minds of these artists. Only people I know for sure who are in it for the music as prime motivation are those who get into genres nobody achieves world fame or world riches through when they clearly have the skills to pick any genre..

    ReplyDelete
  54. I think you should educate yourself a bit before you go proclaiming what makes sense or not or what is "stupid".
    Wikipedia is your friend buddy!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocal_range

    ReplyDelete
  55. I just called it like it is ad your link doesn't give an answer to it.

    ReplyDelete
  56. If she hits it with at least a bit of quality, then it does count.

    ReplyDelete
  57. LOL, she'd better be http://www.heart.co.uk/showbiz/artists/katy-perry/news/spends-50k-cooking-lessons/


    But yeah, you're right, if we're judging the act of singing itself, then it's true that Taylor's case is even worse. But if we were judging the whole artistry, then I'd give more credit to Taylor than to Katy (which it's not too much anyway xD)


    BTW, what happened to your other account? I liked that dragon :3

    ReplyDelete
  58. OK so we don't have exactly the same definition. For me, a vocalist is a person that works professionally using his voice like an instrument, no matter how good or bad it does (Then we should be talking about good and bad vocalists) and a singer is the one who, alongside with vocals, can transmit emotion, so to be a good singer implies also to be a good vocalist. Anyway, we have the same opinion about them so let's not get into terms discussions :P

    ReplyDelete
  59. That's the magic words "a bit of quality", there should be a side note to the measurement Ex. Vocal Range : 2 octaves with a bit of quality. LOL

    ReplyDelete
  60. No hon, you call it like you see it. Which is the view of somebody completely ignorant who refuses to educate himself.
    That link completely explains what vocal range is and why it goes to notes hit by a singer and why an really good singer and a really crappy singer can have the same range.
    Because range goes to the vocal chords where as being a good singer goes to what the owner of said vocal chords does with them.

    ReplyDelete
  61. The Aussie is another ignoramus determined to remain in that state. Get out while you can Leith! LOL

    ReplyDelete
  62. Closed it in order to make it harder to get into endless fights with idiots. So far, not really working optimal.
    (the dragon remains though. Youtube and facebook. Feel free to get in touch with me anytime there :-) )

    ReplyDelete
  63. I reread this several timed but it doesn't quite make sense to me. Lol...

    ReplyDelete
  64. That's why, below the range, you have a full anylisis of the quality of that range :)

    ReplyDelete
  65. It looks like I still have trouble in expressing myself in english ^^U Let's just say that I also think that Katy and Rihanna are pretty much in the same level and that that level is quite low. Period xD

    ReplyDelete
  66. No!, I still hope I can take one of those out of that horrible state! I can't be too late for him! :'(

    ReplyDelete
  67. Here's one where one says to oneself.."singers"? "vocalists?"..Let's just go with "fucking awesome!" ;-)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM6VTYH8zoI

    ReplyDelete
  68. Well, calling the scond account Opie Ever2 doesn't make it too difficult to notice it's you xD Unfortunately I have no facebook (Well, I actually have it, but the last time I checked it I hadn't even found this site lol) and the same with my youtube account. By the way, where did that dragon came out from? Did you draw it yourself?

    ReplyDelete
  69. Oh I didn't mean to hide Leith. I have and will always post under the same tagname.
    The dragon picture I just found on the net when looking for a picture which would go with my youtube tagname.
    Shame about the accounts but you know..another youtube account is easily made. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  70. By the looks of some of his comment, we are talking Tea party here...I am afraid I don't share such hope. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  71. I think that Alison Krauss is starting to get jealous :P

    ReplyDelete
  72. LOL No need. There's plenty of room in my musical heart for more than one awesome singer. Especially if they are completely different kind of singers.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP0L0d-JCug

    ReplyDelete
  73. True, I probably have a solid dose of unrealistic idealism, but it works for me for now, to each his own. :)

    As for this: " Only people I know for sure who are in it for the music as prime motivation are those who get into genres nobody achieves world fame or world riches through when they clearly have the skills to pick any genre.."
    Definitely agreed.

    ReplyDelete
  74. If it works for you...always hang on to it. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  75. OK, I get ya. I still stuggle explaining myself and guess what. English is supposed to be my first language. Lol...

    ReplyDelete
  76. the belts in Gypsy are wow
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBjKTMgiSI0

    ReplyDelete
  77. OMG you check me out. Good on you. BTW love the tea party.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Yes I did. Unlike some, I do my research. And yeah, that's what I figured. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  79. Such a phenomenal voice. My goodness. My jaw drops each time. That voice is insane. Very few people today have great voices, she's one of them. Carrie, Kelly Clarkson, and Jennifer Hudson. These 3 females probably have the most potential to go on through history as Greats. Carrie more so than the other 2 is highly underrated. Hope she cleans the flaws up in order to perpetuate the magnitude of her instrument. The Industry is in dire need of that at the moment.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Guess you have time for that. Spend more research on tea party people before judging them.

    ReplyDelete
  81. That's what i am talking about. Taylor can't event hold a candle.

    ReplyDelete
  82. First of all, it didn't take much time to look at your profile. I can read pretty good so that didn't take a lot of time either.
    And what exactly makes you think if I bother doing research on something as insignificant as you, I haven't done research on the Tea party and the kind of members it attracts?


    I certainly did enough research to recognize both their tendency to ignore factual information they get given, like you did in this thread, AND their fondness of the line " I call it like it is" whenever they say something ignorant, like you did in this thread.
    As well as their tendency to be disparaging of people who do put in the time to research something.

    ReplyDelete
  83. You'll be hard pressed to find more than one, or at most two, here who would ever claim Taylor is as good a singer as Carrie. Or a good singer period.

    ReplyDelete
  84. I'm more interested in that low note at the end. Sounds like a C3 to me.

    ReplyDelete
  85. her range in this song is C3-E5 absolutely fantastic <3

    ReplyDelete
  86. Hey chill out. this is just a satire website, nobody cares.

    ReplyDelete
  87. It's a C♯3

    Loved the raspy E5, and the E♭5 at end.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Also a short acapella version of Do What U Want.
    http://youtu.be/gH01Gupub_Y

    ReplyDelete
  89. I could have sworn you cared, seeing as you are the one leaving comments all in a huff because you think fact that Taylor has a similar range to Carrie means that anybody here ranks Taylor as being as good a singer as Carrie.
    But when I point out to you that nobody here is suffering from any such confusing ...you don't care?

    And ps no, this is not a satire site. You are either as confused about what satire is as you are on vocal range or you are trying to be snide. The latter failing obviously.

    ReplyDelete
  90. it's C3 , this song doesn't have any C# in it :)

    ReplyDelete
  91. It start as C♯3 when the vibrato stops it go down to C.
    I'm sure, it even sounds exactly like the Midi Waveform.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Also I'm almost sure that the note only sounds like C at end cause it mixes with the piano note in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  93. I guess by Satire Aussie was implying that it's a joke with no validity therefore there's no reason to be "hard pressed".

    ReplyDelete
  94. Why is Taylor even mentioned? Of course not. Taylor doesn't even have a voice let alone the skill to butt heads with a Heavy-tier voice like Carrie's lol It's merely a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Yes,that's the snide which is failing due to the fact that if you are simply being ignorant, you calling something you failed to understand .... something of "no validity" =FAIL
    It's the equivalent of saying something is "stupid" because you don't understand it.


    Since the comment seems to have confused both of you..I was simply agreeing Taylor couldn't possibly be put in the same category as a singer as Carrie.
    And pointing out that nobody here would.
    Except the person who doesn't understand what vocal range means and therefor thought saying Taylor and Carrie have a similar range equals saying they are equally good singers.
    Now who was the one person here who was that confused and got all upset about that mistaken claim again??? Oh yeah, that poster called "Aussie".

    ReplyDelete
  96. ...it didn't confuse me, at all. What he said was snide but in the least somewhat true. What merited that comment wasn't a lack of understanding but a general realization of the site's "validity" which stands no higher than that of an entirely opinionated blog. No disrespect to this site, though. However, Anyone who's even moderately intelligible in the field of Vocals would agree with that statement seeing as the accuracy of these analysis's are terribly off the market.


    I'm well aware of what you were saying; I'm not blind. I was just noting that what he said wasn't completely out of malice because in a way it's true.

    ReplyDelete
  97. I guess you didn't read the about regarding this blog? It plainly states that is just what it is..a highly opinionated blog by one individual who is entirely aware his knowledge is far from perfect and who therefor welcomes any informed correction.
    Anybody who thinks this is or claims to be the end all answering beacon is operating under false expectations.

    Therefor..No, calling this a satire blog just because you lack understanding of either the subject or the fact that you are indeed reading just an opinionated blog and not any "voice of authority" does not make it a "true" statement.
    (Satire: Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts,
    in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to
    ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations,
    and society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon and as a tool to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society.)

    And also no, I don't believe Aussie made his snide remark out of the realisation you came to.
    You came to that conclusion out of a state of knowledge.
    He was being snide out of ignorance.
    I am convinced ,judging by the extend of his ignorance on the subject of vocal range, that he is not capable of drawing such a conclusion. His was very likely only informed by malice.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Ricky Yong Chin Yuan26 October 2013 at 06:46

    I thought I was a bad singer... But seriously, people like her make me feel better.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Precisely, so under the assumption that Aussie's likely to have read that since he/she seems to have been on here for a while, what was said isn't necessarily condemn-worthy as it's concurring with the creator's OP.


    & I didn't say that, what it was gearing toward was SOMEWHAT truthful. Also, satire isn't limited to only literature. You're defining the concept in that of Black & White terms. Aussie didn't use it out of context 'cause it was applicably sound.


    Again, that's personally how I see it. Perceptively no one's inept to the obvious, despite their odd position to it. This blog is so ridiculously (even stated in the ABOUT section) warranted off of a very green basis. Knowing that, I genuinely believe Aussie took expeditious notice of that thus pushing her/him to say that. That's not really malice or ignorance, I don't think. Maybe I'm awarding Aussie too much credit but I highly doubt that's the case.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Literature is "the art of the written work". Blogs are written work. Also the definition says satire is a genre of written work. And it has an intent.
    This blog is simply one dude sharing his opinions on musical divas and their work. And he invites other people to respond to his opinion and/or share their opinions.
    Sometimes his opinions may be written intentionally funny but that does not constitute "satire".
    So still .... no! Calling this blog "satire' remains incorrect.



    Also where do you get the information you base the assumption on that this Aussie has been here for a while? His account shows him to have shown up here three days ago. ( making it indeed a very "expeditious notice". Especially so for one unhampered by any knowledge. A factor which always greatly aids the taking of expeditious notice )
    And what makes you assume it is "likely" he read that "About"?

    You are making assumptions based on nothing at all.
    The available facts..that is that his account started posting generally one month ago and on this blog 3 days ago, as well as the content of his comments, do not warrant any of the assumptions you are making.

    And the claim that "perceptively nobody is inept to the obvious" equally is a rather wild assumption seemingly dis-proven by....most every human at some point in his/her life. Many more than once.

    And yes, that's what I stated already, the fact that you think this blog, which you nevertheless seem to like to hang on, is ridiculous if one comes here with a misguided expectation, leads you to assume that when someone seems to superficially agree with you, you think they followed the same path of thinking. You made that assumption regarding Aussie in spite of all evidence to the contrary.

    See! Everybody at some point is inept to the obvious. ;-)


    Anyway, you can just go ahead and ignore the evidence to the contrary and stick to the notion Aussie was neither ignorant nor malicious.
    I, in the meantime, will stick to the logical conclusion one can draw from his actual comments.


    As for the "ridiculously green based" nature of this blog. My suggestion would be to either accept that is the case or seek out blogs written by vocal pedagogues and such. People officially certified in the subject.
    Because frankly, I don't think DD is likely to become a certified expert anytime soon so ranting against the nature of this blog isn't of much use.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Of course there's room for plenty of singers in one's heart, but there's always a little special place for one of them. Boyce Avenue, Christina Aguilera, Evanescence, Bon Jovi, Queen... They all have a room in, but will never compare to them http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SywgDfYoROE

    ReplyDelete
  102. Well, it looks like we're facing a new stan in the site (hopefully, not in Luiz's level, two of them would be too much...)

    ReplyDelete
  103. i just find it hilarious how you could say DWUW is generic yet you stan for miley cyrus???


    and although she's a capable vocalist
    what exactly is special about miley's voice???
    the insanely nasal quality to it??? its not even a pleasant nasal quality ....

    ReplyDelete
  104. NO. i checked it like 10 times it's clear C and it doesnt start as C# , if she would hit C# it would be clearly out of tune,there isnt any interval in that note, it's just C3 with vibrato on B2.I am studying music, i know note when i hear it :) it is C3, and common' we all know she CAN go lower than that...

    ReplyDelete
  105. HauntinglyHollow26 October 2013 at 12:49

    If the vibrato is on B2, does it count to her vocal range ?

    ReplyDelete
  106. No offense, but I can't take what you said seriously as you had the nerve to copy & paste from WIKIPEDIA, a very subjective "Intel" site. It's not always valid. Satire is used in everyday life, be it in conversation, shows, literature, whatever. Stop constricting it only to literature, it's insulting and of all INCORRECT. Don't tell me what satire is 'cause clearly that's something you're oblivious to. Contextually to what was being targeted, it was used correctly. OBJECTIVELY. Learn to read between the lines.


    & wow, what a rhetorical question. You're basically saying it's silly to have assumed Aussie read that section (with "what evidence") yet in previous comments alluded that it was practical for one to do so. Getting a little incoherent there, huh?


    & actually, scientifically you're incorrect. The subconscious picks up every meticulous detail & is often divergent from one's inability to gauge their instincts accordingly. That's a common psychological trait. However, it is picked up thus the reason I said "despite their odd position to it." So no, it hasn't been dis-proven, actually. First off, it's a blog with users who are apt to their own ideology. You're simply deeming Aussie an idiot, out of malice & it's immature.


    Please, drop it. There's nothing further to discuss. You'll think otherwise, I won't. Whatever?

    ReplyDelete
  107. she can sing a B5 in head voice so it is Bb2-B5

    ReplyDelete
  108. What's exactly the difference between Dramatic Soprano and dramatic coloratura soprano ?

    ReplyDelete
  109. Geez, we aren't going nowhere with this.

    ReplyDelete
  110. she hitted that not before she played any note on piano and if it would be C# it wouldn't mix with piano like ever, you can't mix two absolutely disharmonic notes to one....

    ReplyDelete
  111. no, simply vibrato doesn't. But Bb2 she hitted in sexxx dreams DOES count, i seriously don't even know why it isn't updated. She hitted it 2 times in sang part and 2 times in spoken...

    ReplyDelete
  112. i count only full voice notes. If we would count all notes including head voice and falsetto her vocal range would be like 4 octaves.

    ReplyDelete
  113. HauntinglyHollow27 October 2013 at 08:48

    It is better to wait until ARTPOP and then update it, hope DivaDevotee plans to :) And what is the lowest note in ARTPOP (song) harmonies ?

    ReplyDelete
  114. So does a mezzo soprano go higher than a lyric soprano, and lower? Sorry I really do not know.

    ReplyDelete
  115. You seem to know what you are talking about. So what would you say her biggest flaw is? Vocally/.

    ReplyDelete
  116. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba0bc5xSaZQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player Venus live at G-A-Y Heaven in London. What is the note at 3:30

    ReplyDelete
  117. ok then it would be Bb2 - F#5/G5 - B5 cause she belted a G5 once an it's only one semitone above so i think it's possible for her to do it again

    ReplyDelete
  118. you forget anastasia j
    essie j christina aguilera

    ReplyDelete
  119. A coloratura-whatever is a singer that has the agility to execute incredibly difficult ornamentation. Vocal runs, staccatto, switch to and from all the parts of the range... So a coloratura dramatic soprano is just a dramatic soprano with a lot of agility. (Note that being able to do some runs doesn't equal to being a coloratura, you need really serious agility to be considered one)

    ReplyDelete
  120. That person isn't overintellectualising anything. He or she just notices that the lyrics bear two meanings. It's a shame that so many people are too lazy to look past the obvious...

    ReplyDelete
  121. Damn, I did forget Anastasia. That woman can sing her ASS off AND she has the technique. She's so underrated. And the health issues would normally be thought of as a hindrance in utilizing her vocal ability at high capacity but it doesn't. That's a testament to how truly great her instrument is. Definitely. Jessie J? She's an awesome singer but I wouldn't put her in the Category as Ana, Kelly, Carrie, or Jennifer. She's got a stellar instrument on her, but I personally think it's ordinary in comparison to theirs. Christina, great voice but man. That tech. I think regardless of that most people view her as an extraordinary singers, despite being ignorant to her obvious flaws. I think she's already paved her way (by the literate public/society) into the ranks as being one of the greats. Carrie, Kelly & Jennifer I think have yet to really do that.

    ReplyDelete
  122. Jesus, where do I begin? haha. Her placement for one. But a bigger Issue is the position of her larynx & colouring her voice to sound like something she isn't, a Mezzo. For a LONG time she had me fooled. I wasn't aware until someone pointed out, which made sense. She's a Soprano but lowers her larynx. That isn't good. But not only that, her sound is placed in the throat, & that's damaging her voice. Because of this, she's unable to sing into the Soprano Tessitura. She can't belt past F#5, as a true Soprano. That's an issue attributed to her placement & attempt to carry much more weight than her voice quite naturally allows. She sounds GREAT (some times) but it's not healthy.


    But I tend to ignore her flaws in admiration for how truly great her voice is. I've got sympathy.

    ReplyDelete
  123. A Mezzo sings lower than a Lyric Soprano. Soprano and Mezzo Soprano are two different voice types, Mezzo (meaning Middle) being lower than that of Soprano. There are many different TYPES of Mezzos and Sopranos. Lyrics are the higher Sopranos, so yes they naturally sing a LOT higher than Mezzos. Mezzos generally tend to have the better lower registers. So Lyric Soprano=Higher whereas Mezzo=Lower. Those are the primary attributes, in comparison. But, there are MANY exceptions where Mezos surpass Sopranos in the upper register & where some Sopranos (primarily Mariah) surpass Mezzos in the lower region. Some, both. But primarily Mezzos go lower & Lyric Sopranos go much higher. Carrie, she's a Full Lyric. One could even argue Spinto, but I believe she's a Full Lyric Soprano.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Remember what you asked Mikeypop earlier?
    Well, you are being obnoxious.

    First off all wikipedia isn't always incorrect. In this case it happens to be correct. Which is why I used it as it is a handier quote than linking you to the dictionary and several other sites in an effort to explain what Wiki already put so succinctly.
    No, this blog is not a satire blog.It is neither subjectively nor objectively correct to call it thus.
    Aussie tried to be sarcastic (and you might want to look up the difference between satire and sarcasm btw) about this blog because that is what stupid people do, they make themselves look stupid by calling something essentially "stupid" after first demonstrating they simply failed to understand.

    Your logic completely fails. The fact that I have the sense to be as practical as to read the about before I start complaining has no bearing on whether Aussie did. Your assumption remains based on nothing as his words never indicated he did.

    Nothing incoherent in my writing but a lot in your thinking.

    If you are going to claim I am "scientifically incorrect", you will need to back that up with the scientific studies claiming people always pick up the obvious. And I will retort with what scientific studies have for instance shown on witness statements.

    Talk about not being able to read in between the lines! It doesn't matter whether one picks up something subconsciously. If one isn't conscious of it, one isn't aware of it and therefor is oblivious to the obvious. That goes with the word ..."obvious".
    If something is only perceived subconsciously it is clearly not "obvious" .

    And the fact that you are "not phased" also goes to show people can be oblivious to the obvious.

    I btw am not oblivious to the obvious fact you prefer to call my question "rhetorical" over admitting you have no facts to base your assumptions on and I actually proved the one fact you claimed (the length of his stay on this blog) to be incorrect.

    I am deeming Aussie an idiot because he calls what he doesn't understand "stupid" , uses such retort as "I call it like it is" and tries to be flippant about researching something..
    Such behavior is the very definition of "being stupid" .

    And seriously? I will decide for myself how concise or not I will be thanks. How's about you don't try to sound smarter than you are? If we are giving advice on writing styles here. Because tbh half the time you are floundering in your style.

    "meticulous detail"
    " and of all INCORRECT."
    " subliminal insult"
    " is often divergent from one's inability to gauge their instincts accordingly"
    " thus the reason I said"
    " ultimately saying nothing new progressively"
    " out of malice & it's immature"
    "recycled the same things"
    And the use of such language combined with "&" rather than "and"
    A lot of it at worst incorrect/making no sense. At best incredibly clunky language.

    And more being oblivious to the obvious by you there. If you want to no longer continue a conversation, the logical course is to stop answering.

    Not to spout a lot of nonsense and insults, in words and phrases too big for your britches, and then demand or request for the other to not respond.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Not even gonna lie, I'm not even gonna give that comment a passing glance. For what anyway? Seemingly lackadaisically bland use of diction? I'll pass lol BUT, I will say that we'll agree to disagree. The whole thing was unnecessary. Besides, your comment is "awaiting moderation" hinting someone was a wee bit overboard laddy lol

    ReplyDelete
  126. Well, just to inform you ...one of the things it pointed out was your often incorrect at worst but clunky at best language. Like the above. "lackadaisically bland use of diction".

    That is just so blatantly incorrect that it is clear you DID do more than glance at my comment dear and are now trying to get your own back.. :-)
    And what's more, that accusation came at the end of a comment long enough that one has to click on "see more" to have seen that end.
    Making you look like one taking a lackadaisical attitude towards truth. As well as generally pompous. :-)

    And nope, I was not "overboard" . It's likely that one of my haters here has finally discovered that "flag" function.
    Likely they read me mentioning it regarding the luis.
    Being a dimwitted assortment of kids, it took them a while but now they look to be making enthusiastic use of it.
    You might want to join that fanclub. Several of them, like you, tried to also hopelessly match my style and failed equally miserably.
    Plus they also tend to be liars and wimps who will run and distract rather than admit when they are wrong.
    I'd say you'd fit right in there kiddo.

    ReplyDelete
  127. i don't get about jessie j why she is ordinary ? this girl has big potential , monstre voice , amazing riffs , runs and melismas , whistle register ( may be exclamations but are good whistle tones. )

    ReplyDelete
  128. " in the studio..."


    DING! DING! DING!


    Almost all of her live performances are lacking... and I think that's for a reason.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Really? Incorrect how? Please, enlighten me with your wannabe intelligence. Exactly what grammatical clause would that violate? 'cause by no means is it "incorrect" for an adverb to be used in conjunction with an Adjective...at least not to anyone knowledgeable on grammatical structure. Clearly that isn't you. In fact, it's very ironic, right? You're ruling something that you EVIDENTLY don't understand as incorrect & stupid, if you will. If I'm correct, that's the same thing you accused Aussie of lol This not only makes you a hypocrite but an ignoramus as well. Honestly, do you realize how transparent you're becoming? You make snide comments (FAIL by the way. Nostalgic? It should be) although expressed dismay of that when someone else did it. THEN, not knowing what Satire meant (OBVIOUSLY) you COPIED and PASTED from a website, one that isn't even valid. Then & there you coruscated your ignorance. What's even worse? You attempt (FAIL) to pass for a covert intellectual but give yourself away by calling others idiots with the MISCONCEPTION that your "intelligence" is exceptionally better. A bit of a try-hard there, huh? lol & then you fail to elucidate what should be a very simple point, yet remain as stagnant as a ROCK. You became overly repetitive as you progressed. You couldn't at least be concise? LOL

    So, you've proven yourself to be not only an IDIOT, but a hypocrite, grammatical ignoramus, a try-hard, and something you SWEAR you aren't: perceptively inept.


    Who'd you think I was? Aussie? That faux intelligence may work on those whose are akin to yours, but don't fool yourself into believing that it transcends the consciousness of a truly intelligent person. You must've lost your damn mind lol

    ReplyDelete
  130. Riffs/Runs are Melisma lol But, I feel that her excellent use of Melisma is her greatest attribute. Belting? She tends to become very shrill as she approaches the upper register. There are some exceptions. As for Whistle Register? She doesn't have a whistle register. Exclamations aren't accounted for in range. She's a decent vocalist though. This is my personal opinion, for the most part.

    ReplyDelete
  131. Yes indeed, even wannabe intelligence would be able to enlighten you. Were you not so convinced you know all already. A "rock" if you will. :-)

    Here's some enlightenment for you...these comments are here and stand by themselves. Your accusations are therefor laughable to anybody who understands English.
    You, my dear, sound like someone who swallowed a dictionary and a book on English grammar but never quite got the gist of it. You are all theory but no talent.
    You are like a Taylor Swift if you will. You know technically how it should be done but can't actually sing in key for the life of you.

    btw "lackadaisically bland use of diction" was incorrect in it's content hon, not it's grammar.

    The fact that this possible meaning never even entered your head pretty much caused you to "coruscate your ignorance" by "ruling something stupid you EVIDENTLY didn't understand" and demonstrates you are not even a "covert intellectual". But you are being repetitive and far from concise. Making you..yes indeed, a hypocrite.


    Your phrasing is also clunky but to understand that, one would need to actually get that gist. And to be repetitive...you don't.

    Which is why you would write a sentence in which you'd combine "overly", "repetitive" and "progressively". Total overkill which indeed makes it look like you "try too hard".

    All in all it is very entertaining to read your comments filled with accusations you then proceed to abundantly demonstrate to be more guilty of yourself than anyone else here is.

    The fact that you are completely unaware of that "transcends the consciousness of a truly intelligent person".

    Oh hang on, " perceptively nobody is inept to the obvious"

    I stand corrected dude, you must be aware of what you are doing. Guess you simply don't mind demonstrating how yours is a "faux intelligence".

    ps I am also not inept to the obvious fact that you are still trying to deflect from the fact that you lied, came with assumptions that were based on thin air and are simply wrong in it being correct that this is a "satire blog". Had the statement been "blog is a satire", THAT you could have defended as a possibly valid statement. But "satire blog"..nope.
    Alas, a distinction lost to the "perceptively inept".

    pps I don't recall "swearing" anything. Throwing in a bit more inspired lying are you?

    ReplyDelete
  132. And btw assuming anything that comes from Wikipedia is by definition "not valid" most definitely sparkles your ignorance (see yet why your phrasing is clunky?).

    ReplyDelete
  133. ...remedial at best lol Defaulting to mirroring what's being said about you, huh? Guess that's your way of being effective. Do yourself a favour & stop 'cause you lost your credibility when you copied info from an invalid website, contradicted yourself, & then mirrored what was said against you in attempt to do something you've failed at many times: prove a point. You're the typical "norm" who puts up the facade that they're a lot smarter than already AREN'T. Then, the nerve to don someone as "stupid" when in fact are as proportionally stupid. You're one dimensional & more than anything, transparent. Laughable at best lol

    ReplyDelete
  134. Keep it up Taylor The Pompous.
    It remains very amusing how you keep regurgitating that dictionary without any real understanding. Not of your own writing nor of what you are reading it seems.
    Especially when you feel such a need to put down my intelligence and have to resort to lying and false claims.
    My oh my, I must really be intimidating you.



    Seeing as you don't seem to be able to come up with much more than that, I think I am going to leave it here. I feel you sufficiently demonstrated your pomposity at this point. Anybody with half a brain got it and the rest will never be able to see it for what it is anymore than you are.



    ps Taylor, You don't "don someone as". :-)

    ReplyDelete
  135. shes a great singer
    but she's nowhere near as amazing as the queen kelly clarkson


    its been more than a decade and shes still releasing hits and staying relevant whereas carrie has stayed somewhat under the radar with an exception of a handful of her singles

    ReplyDelete
  136. shes so cute though and much more down to earth than most country artists

    ReplyDelete
  137. I don't quit understand how popularity equates to someone having a better output of music but I can't dive into your perspective too much considering I don't really like either woman. It just doesn't seem to be the most sensible.

    ReplyDelete
  138. i hear that dramatic soprano's have bigger voice than dramatic coloratua that's right?

    ReplyDelete
  139. I'm not 100% sure but I doubt it since the coloratura classification is not something you're born with, it's something you become (although, of course, there are people that have naturally enough aglity to be called coloraturas). Anyway, Serendipity or Black Robin will be able to tell you about it better than me, they're much more informed than me in pretty much everything related to music.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Fail, you continuously try to correct something that's already standard. In fact, you do so only because your understanding is matter of fact & lacks the flexibility to comprehend things higher than your substandard understanding merits. As a result, you "don" (or should I "brand") things as nonsensical. If I'm unable to lower the bar to your subpar understanding, I apologize, but don't undermine language simply 'cause you're ignorant to it. Iz im clearer 'nuff fer u 2 under stannn???

    ReplyDelete
  141. You fail to mention the song went #1 because it was automatically downloaded for each Artpop preorder. That's why it was ineligible in the UK.


    Moreover, the song has "only" sold 156.000 copies in the first week, that's not so much for a song that alledgedly broke a record.

    ReplyDelete
  142. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky_B7vyGIAc

    ReplyDelete
  143. She's a soprano, lyric, although with a poor technique.

    ReplyDelete
  144. 20 seconds, IIRC.

    ReplyDelete
  145. LOL I am not going to bother trying to explain why Bangerz is easily fresher than any of the number of songs I have heard from Gaga's new album...obviously it is not something you'd get no matter how much anybody tried to explain. After all, your vocal standard is the Billboard top ten. "nuff said.

    But I gotta say..you are a Gaga stan and are telling me you haven't heard at least half a dozen songs yet of her new album? Maybe you should pay closer attention to this blog because I could swear DD reviewed that performance were she sang like half a dozen new songs.

    The "rapper" accusation is hilarious considering this above reviewed song features...R. Kelly.

    And can you fucking stop putting words in my mouth already. How many times do I have to ask you?
    I never called Gaga a "fame whore" . I never call singers "whore".
    What I have said is that she is only in it for fame.Not music.
    The reason I don't say that about Miley is because I get the impression Miley uses pr to get attention for her music. Not just for getting attention. That's because I hear Miley talk about music and referencing music in a way that indicates she cares for music.
    All I hear Gaga talk about is Fame and attention and what a victim she is. Just like this song once again addresses those three subjects. The woman clearly has nothing else to say.

    I mean for fuck sake dude...every song I have heard of Artpop is about Gaga and her "struggle" for and with attention. How delusional are you exactly???

    ReplyDelete
  146. Dude, this is the last time I will respond to you because you are such an utter dimwit...you really have used up all the attention you deserve.

    No, I did not say Miley's songs indicate she cares for music, her words and actions and delivery do. Nevertheless...that is actually true that they do but you being an ignoramus supremo who's standard for vocals is the Billboard top ten, would not recognize that anyway.

    And I know R Kelly is not a rapper. Point is he is a big name featuring and it shows how stupid you are to criticize the use of other artists when your favorite does just that in the song discussed above.


    And I doubt very much Gaga was performing rejected songs. if those songs got rejected, it's probably because she realised that aside from diehard delusional Gaga fans, most people who heard them were terribly underwhelmed.

    Now I did not say Miley's songs are deep, I said that Gaga clearly has nothing to say. This has been clear from day one. That is why she was using other artists themes right from the start.


    A for Miley's behavior. That is her behavior and clearly much of it is for pr....point is ,musically she delivered.

    Good to see you at least have the minimum braincells to at least realize Gaga does not care for music all that much.
    The woman is not a musician at heart (yes, before you in your inability to understand go there..I know she plays the piano. That's because her parents put her up to that as a child and she at some point realized that's a way into a world where she can achieve her empty goal) or even a singer. As she and her fans like to pretend..she is a "performance artist" who unlike one of the names she likes to drop - Abramovich- has absolutely nothing to say to the world.

    Other than,"give me attention", " I am a victim","oops I got the attention and now I am a victim of that attention"

    There is not a eye roll big enough.

    Now you have a nice life devoid of any understanding of what music can actually be and do while I will from now on ignore your dimwitted comments on subjects which basically elude you.

    ReplyDelete
  147. I said it once, and Ill say it again. The Instruments and chorus remind me so much of Gwen Stefani and No Doubt. Like in crazy amounts. Its an ok song though.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Lorde... oh god she's everywhere =_=
    Overrated.

    ReplyDelete
  149. It surprises me because most people who play instruments actually should have better ears, Katy can play the guitar but she sings as if she does not play at all...


    I can hear the potential of a unique and talented singer tho.

    ReplyDelete
  150. She writes too leith...


    Most of her successful charts hits she has written, and she also plays the guitar which many don't know...


    I'm not a fan of Katy or Taylor but She does have some artistic ability, but that was a little ignorant.

    ReplyDelete
  151. Dude you are one angry bitch

    ReplyDelete
  152. I'm watching "Sound of Music Live!" and ooooh child, her profile is going to need redecorating after this.

    ReplyDelete
  153. New highest note! A Bb5! Here's Carrie tackling the high note at the end of "Do Re Mi," at about the 4:52 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMzrJ7c8MW0

    ReplyDelete
  154. After her performance of "The Sound Of Music" tonight we might need to re-do this.

    ReplyDelete
  155. Here's Carrie singing the Bb5 live, at 6:25: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31v13ukJknE

    ReplyDelete
  156. mellynumerounoo o7 December 2013 at 07:23

    She hit a C6 in a rehearsal of The Lonely Goatherd too.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Can you give a link to the C6? i wish she had a more up to date live vocal range video with more recent performances and SOM music included.

    ReplyDelete
  158. Primo Uomo Assoluto9 December 2013 at 03:25

    I'd say is the other way around, it's not a dramatic voice with agility
    It's an agile voice with dramatic weight :P

    ReplyDelete
  159. I could hardly hear the Bb5. It's almost as though it was drowned out. I could have a hearing problem, 'cause problems and I seem to be acquainted quite well, but I'm sure it was low in volume (the note). It would've been helpful so I could've easily determined whether or not it was Fals. or HV, but due to the fact that the volume and quality wasn't as pure/strong, I'm inclined to believe it was Falsetto. HV would have a much clearer, cleaner, and stronger quality that would project fairly well. Is there any better audio?

    ReplyDelete
  160. it was head voice the audio is just a little low listen to the studio vocal someone posted below

    ReplyDelete
  161. Listening to the repeat of SoM, if she's a lyric, I'd say she's terrified of her top notes.

    ReplyDelete
  162. I am banging my head at the Youtube comments to this...
    God, this was a TERRIBLE cast. They all performed to the best of their abilities, but they completely lacked any warmth (or acting ability), save for Audra McDonald.
    Carrie Underwood should never have been cast as Maria. Her voice is too belty and metallic for the role. Honestly, when she gets put into a televised performance of 'RENT', remind me of her.

    ReplyDelete
  163. mellynumerounoo o19 December 2013 at 21:18

    It wasn't falsetto. There were problems with the music being louder than the singers' voices in the production. Listen to the studio version though.

    ReplyDelete
  164. She sounds like a light soprano to me, IDK. I think she tries imitate her mezzo soprano, deeper sounding vocal idols too much to sound more like a powerhouse but naturally she sounds like your atypical soprano. I could be wrong. But her voice is so light and girly,,, I dont hear a mezzo sound, she could change into one as she ages if she keeps pressuring her voice the way she does but... IDK.

    ReplyDelete
  165. mellynumerounoo o12 January 2014 at 05:02

    That's just the thing, though - it's not NATURALLY "belty" or metallic like that. She makes it that way by manipulating the color of her voice. Notice how throaty she sounds? She's deffo a natural lyric soprano.

    ReplyDelete
  166. mellynumerounoo o12 January 2014 at 05:03

    It's because her technique is crap. But she did hit the highest note that was on the original soundtrack...the Bb5 at the end of Do Re Mi.

    ReplyDelete
  167. True, but what do I know? I think Beyoncé should be singing baroque opera. Melisma like those are just screaming for some Monteverdi.

    ReplyDelete
  168. She's a Soprano. She could even pass for Full Lyric, too. But yes, she belongs to the Lyric fach.

    ReplyDelete