|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Is being the "lead singer" about range at all? - 12/1/2008 5:47:36 PM
|
|
|
Kings_Ransom
Posts: 94
Joined: 11/26/2008
Status: offline
|
I almost didn't want to write this, but it's a fair question. For tenors, and basses, clearly range is the heart of the issue. You don't want a guy who can't go above High A at his best singing tenor, no matter how "tenor-ish" he sounds, and you don't want a guy who can't at least get to Low D if not Low F singing bass.
But when it comes to "lead" and "baritone", I've noticed there doesn't seem to be an appreciable difference. There's numerous quartets out there where the lead and baritone seem to be equals as far as range, vocal quality, showmanship, ability to "sell" a song, etc. The only real difference between the two seems to be that the lead sings the melody (and gets more solos) and the baritone sings harmony.
An example: Is there any reason why Doug Anderson is the baritone of EH&SS and Ryan Seaton is lead? Many times on recordings I have to really listen to even tell which one it is, and just recently re-watching one of their videos reminded me that it's Doug doing lead on a song I could have sworn was Ryan's solo.
For that matter, why was Ed Hill the baritone of the Stamps (or even Statesmen) and Ed Enoch (or Buddy Burton) the lead? It certainly had nothing to do with range there, nor do I think Hill's voice had less "quality" than the leads in question.
Sometimes the lead singer actually can't even sing as high as the baritone can. Doy Ott apparently had a fine tenor voice, and we all know Jake Hess was, while a great singer, not a very high one. Didn't Scott Fowler actually sing an octave ABOVE Glen Payne?
And the Imperials, well, once they got away from being labeled as "southern" gospel, pretty much did away with the stigma of "baritone" vs. "lead" and just had two leads who switched out between harmony and melody interchangeably.
Now, some people will tell me it has to do with a lead singer being more "warm", having more "personality", "selling" the song better, etc. That doesn't explain why some quartets have baritones equally capable of this (and in some cases the baritone has seemed moreso), nor why some baritones are later "promoted" to lead, even if it means getting hired with a new quartet.
When I was in high school I sang in barbershop quartets and was always baritone, less because I couldn't sing as high as the second tenor and more because of my vocal timbre. However, what decided the order was ultimately always a question of range. It had little to do with who took the melody (it switched between songs) or who could sell the song best and not one of us seemed to get more solos than everyone else.
However, in SG you get "leads", which is basically second tenor, who not only nearly always have baritone timbres, but seem often to also have baritone range. It's made me wonder what qualifies someone as a lead. What made Glen Payne a lead and Doy Ott a baritone?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/1/2008 7:01:29 PM
|
|
|
Qtman
Posts: 9587
Joined: 3/21/2006
From: Crimson Tide Country
Status: offline
|
You have a good question. One that I have addressed several times on here. There are few natural baritones out there in Southern Gospel. Most groups have two capable lead singers with one of them doing the baritone part. I am a natural baritone and cannot sing the lead part because I lack the range to do so. I can get into the lower part of the lead range and the upper part of the bass range. But to sing comfortably I have to stick to baritone.
_____________________________
STRESS = The internal struggle created when the brain trys to over ride the heart's desire to tell off some jerk that really deserves to be told off.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/1/2008 7:21:20 PM
|
|
|
Lead1
Posts: 35
Joined: 3/4/2007
Status: offline
|
Someone said it here before, and I tend to agree that with two singers of comparable ranges, the one with the most unique voice will sing lead. In the case of Hill and Enoch, in the 70's Ed Hill could sing higher than Enoch, but Enoch's unique voice qualified him for the lead. Ed Enoch happens to be one of if not my favorite lead singer, in spite of the fact that that he pales in comparison to other leads as far as range goes, his voice is unique, and he possesses perhaps the strongest voice in terms of power gospel has ever heard.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/1/2008 10:36:15 PM
|
|
|
Kings_Ransom
Posts: 94
Joined: 11/26/2008
Status: offline
|
I think the Imperials had the best approach to this issue.
Every time I watch EH&SS I wonder why I have think of Doug as the "baritone" when he's as good a lead as Ryan is.
The GVB is one quartet where the lead and baritone clearly have different ranges. However, while Marshall Hall may not be able to soar up to the rafters like Guy can, I love his voice, and I would like to hear it more often, but he's the "baritone" so he has to have fewer solos than Guy.
This was even more frustrating during the Lowry years because I LOVE Mark Lowry's voice, but he was lucky to get three solos per album (and here I'm counting when he gets two lines of one song or something as a "solo").
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/1/2008 10:58:37 PM
|
|
|
dbmurray
Posts: 381
Joined: 2/27/2006
From: NC
Status: offline
|
King's Ransom,
I think in the case of Doug Anderson, he is only considered the baritone because Shane Dunlap was the more recognizable name/voice when the group formed. Part of the issue is the annual Singing News ballot and the perception of fans. Sometimes, the fans get it backwards. For example, Gerald Wolfe sings under Rodney Griffin who sings the melody as often if not more often than Wolfe. Yet it's Wolfe who the fans vote for in the lead slot each year and Griffin who gets categorized as the baritone.
On a particular song, though, the person on the melody is the lead at that moment while the person singing the middle harmony part is the baritone, regardless of who is thought of as the group's "baritone" in a general sense.
I agree with those who theorize that it's best to give the guy with the most unique voice the melody most of the time. In the case of Enoch and Hill, which you mentioned, Hill had the smoother, rounder tones...so I believe that's what made him the better fit at baritone.
Another issue to consider is which singer has the most dynamic personality and interacts most effectively with an audience. I know you downplayed this due to some baritones later moving to a different slot. What matters is the combination at any given moment. Some singers are flexible enough to move from one role to the other. When Loren Harris was with the Perrys, he was more animated on stage and with his vocal style. When he left and Joseph Habedank moved up to the lead slot, Habedank became more expressive with his delivery.
Other singers embrace the baritone position. Mark Trammell will always be a baritone, because he has that rich blending tone that works in a fantastic way when it's either on the bottom (in a trio) or just above the bass singer.
To answer your question about Scott Fowler, no, he didn't sing a full octave above Glen Payne. He did, however, often sing the part just above Payne rather than harmonizing below him as is more typical for a baritone.
_____________________________
David Bruce Murray
http://www.musicscribe.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/2/2008 7:23:31 AM
|
|
|
danielmount
Posts: 7650
Joined: 2/28/2006
From: Ohio
Status: offline
|
Ditto to dbmurray, except...
quote:
ORIGINAL: dbmurray
To answer your question about Scott Fowler, no, he didn't sing a full octave above Glen Payne.
Unless you count the ultra-falsetto note he does (just for the comedic effect) on "I'm Winging My Way Back Home."
_____________________________
Author of The Faith of America's Presidents
http://www.danielmount.com/
http://www.southerngospelblog.com/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/2/2008 10:41:15 AM
|
|
|
JoeyWest
Posts: 723
Joined: 10/1/2008
From: Alabama with a guitar in my hands
Status: offline
|
in my opinion a lead needs to have more range than just a baritone. on nights when the tenor just isnt sounding woman enough, the lead needs to help him out by keeping the vocals tight.
i tend to stay away from how these ranges go. I am in military, a range is where i go shoot weapons.
a tenor that can crack glass or a bass singer that sounds like a jake break on a truck isnt singing pure sound.
Arthur Rice is most likely the best lead out there and he is a range if you must of baritone to low tenor
_____________________________
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A TASTE THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW.
If today was your last day
and tomorrow was too late
Could you say goodbye to yesterday?
Would you live each moment like your last? "Nickelback"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/2/2008 3:28:20 PM
|
|
|
Billboy
Posts: 879
Joined: 3/26/2006
From: S. Illinois
Status: offline
|
I think the lines have been blurred in recent years between the lead and the baritone spot. As others have already mentioned, the baritone frequently sings more solos or leads than the lead singer as in the case with GV or SSQ. I think if you go way back the lead singer may have been one who was more comfortable with the melody and the baritone was possibly the more comfortable of the 2 singing harmony, but so many of the SG song arrangements today are mostly solos with harmonies on the chorus, and that has changed my above perception quite a bit. I do think that normally the lead singer would be the one with the most range, if there was a range difference between 2 candidates for lead/baritone.
_____________________________
I'm a God-fearing, hard working, So. Gospel music loving, Cub watching, tractor driving, International Harvester man.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/2/2008 5:57:08 PM
|
|
|
danielmount
Posts: 7650
Joined: 2/28/2006
From: Ohio
Status: offline
|
To get jobs with most any top-level pro group, lead singers have to be able to sing high Fs and Gs. Baritones can get away with not singing any higher than D or E-flat if they're a good blender.
_____________________________
Author of The Faith of America's Presidents
http://www.danielmount.com/
http://www.southerngospelblog.com/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/2/2008 10:22:40 PM
|
|
|
Kerrlaw
Posts: 9462
Joined: 5/24/2006
From: Big Orange Country
Status: offline
|
Does any of this explain why Don Reid sang lead for the Statler Brothers and Phil Balsley sang baritone?
Someone told me once, but I have forgotten.
_____________________________
That which does not kill us makes us fatter. ~ crankius
Coffee sinners lovers click here.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/3/2008 9:24:10 AM
|
|
|
CzarofSGMR
Posts: 91
Joined: 9/26/2007
Status: offline
|
I think a lot of it is attitude. A good lead singer needs a dynamic personality with a bit of chutzpah thrown in for good measure.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/3/2008 9:31:11 AM
|
|
|
clout
Posts: 139
Joined: 1/23/2008
Status: offline
|
I don't think the lead part gets its fair shake in a quartet. If you take the Blackwood Brothers and Statesmen, in what I believe to be the benchmark of examples, James and Jake were the glue and RW, Cecil and Doy were always the complimentary part. You can't always have 4 soloists. When that happens you lose quality of blend. My unprofessional opinion.
_____________________________
Melvin Klaudt
Colossians 16:b, "teaching and admonishing one another in Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord".
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/3/2008 9:59:13 PM
|
|
|
Billboy
Posts: 879
Joined: 3/26/2006
From: S. Illinois
Status: offline
|
Is the Statler Bros. ownership with Don and Harold? I have always thought that Phil has a higher range than Don, but their harmony is great. Singing together so many years certainly can't hurt anything either. There is nothing wrong with a lower pitched lead singer and a higher baritone if the resulting sound is pleasing and harmonious.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kerrlaw
Does any of this explain why Don Reid sang lead for the Statler Brothers and Phil Balsley sang baritone?
Someone told me once, but I have forgotten.
_____________________________
I'm a God-fearing, hard working, So. Gospel music loving, Cub watching, tractor driving, International Harvester man.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/3/2008 10:09:25 PM
|
|
|
Kerrlaw
Posts: 9462
Joined: 5/24/2006
From: Big Orange Country
Status: offline
|
The Statlers always sounded great to me.
_____________________________
That which does not kill us makes us fatter. ~ crankius
Coffee sinners lovers click here.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/4/2008 9:44:13 AM
|
|
|
rtide
Posts: 5
Joined: 4/14/2006
Status: offline
|
I have always felt that James Blackwood had it all-he actually sang first tenor on some of their early "78's", so he had incredible range. He could be a big-voiced power singer and yet had marvelous finesse. Added to that, a beautiful voice.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is being the "lead singer" about range at... - 12/4/2008 10:48:11 PM
|
|
|
CzarofSGMR
Posts: 91
Joined: 9/26/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rtide
I have always felt that James Blackwood had it all-he actually sang first tenor on some of their early "78's", so he had incredible range. He could be a big-voiced power singer and yet had marvelous finesse. Added to that, a beautiful voice.
Can't argue with that!
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
