Apparently some people feel very strongly about Louis Armstrong. My shot at his vocals was...well, not well received in some quarters.
Never mind that many famous, successful musicians have poor voices...Bryan Adams, Rod Stewart, Bruce Springsteen, Johnny Cash, Macy Gray, etc. Note that I leave out anyone from hair metal, thrash, indie, etc. because they often do not even try...they just scream tonelessly and that is the style. But the names noted above DID try to be harmonic.
A lot of people would add Bob Dylan to the list. Maybe. But if you do that, you pretty much have to add 97% of folk music...not to mention all the talentless hacks mangling chords and singing off-key with their open guitar case blowing your eardrums at various downtown locations.
Anyhow, back to the original point. Just because I think he has a horrible voice does not mean I do not enjoy the work of Mr. Armstrong. In fact, having a good voice does not equal enjoyment in and of itself...I cannot think of any Mariah Carey music I enjoy, but I recognize she does have an excellent voice. You could add a lot of singers to that...Whitney Houston, Celine Dion, etc.
Bad voices do not mean unlistenable and good vocals do not mean listenable.
Armstrong had "it". His songs often had meaning, he had expression, emotion, and feeling.
And I have never seen anybody do stuff like what you are about to see to a lot of people with better voices and less talent.
So my apologies to the girl offended that I think Armstrong has a poor voice. I do like some of his stuff anyway. Here is an example, with or without the spectacular visuals..
Cancer, you're a dick. - Dear Cancer, Fuck you. With a capital F. I get that death is the cycle of life. What I do not get is why, despite pouring billions of dollars into research...
1 week ago