Karaoke Forums

Which of the two following scenarios do you enjoy more at karaoke:

1.) Exact duplication of the original artist's performance

OR

2.) The karaoke singer putting their own "spin" on a song.

I ask this, as I'm more of a #2 guy myself, and had a bar regular tell me one of my performances was "bad" when I put a metal/rock type spin on a Sinatra song.

I've been known to sing Sinatra "That's Life", Johnny Cash "Ring of Fire", Rolling Stones "Satisfaction", or "Paradise by the dashboard lights", but put my own more modern "spin" on the songs. In other words, "rock them out" a bit by taking things up an octave or getting "dirty" with the vocals in a rock fashion. Think David Lee Roth or Sebastian Bach style... over-the-top.

What's your opinion? Would you be offended by a "raunchy, over the top" version of an older song ? To me, the singer putting their own spin on a song IS karaoke and more fun than a straight reproduction of the original. Keeps thing fresh.

Whatever floats their boat. Wouldn't bother me nor fascinate me in general, it would all be dependent on how good the performance is.

I know some people who practice the same song over and over again hoping to get it to sound exactly like the original. They end up with one or five songs they can do that with, and that is what they do.

I like to do lots of different songs in what I hope is a musical fashion. I listen to the original to begin with to get it, then put it away and let myself diverge a slight amount. My voice is not the usual type, very dark and heavy, so my timbre isn't like other singers (except maybe Charley Pride). I am OK with that.

I *am* beginning to realize that most popular singers, with a few outstanding exceptions, tend to do only the kind of song that fits their voice best. They sound kind of silly doing other types of songs. True for me as well. If I am looking for a good audience reaction, I need to do Randy Travis or Marshall Tucker, not Brooks and Dunn or Jackson Browne. But I like doing a lot of different songs, so I have a few hundred I can do pretty well. They never sound just like the original, but they are sung competently in my own style.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

I personally give major respect to a singer who's versatile; i.e. willing to do songs out of their "comfort zone", even if they are silly. The folks that show up night after night with the same lineup of songs tend to get stale pretty quick, even if they give a good performance.

There's a gal at one of my regular venues who has an excellent voice, but never tries anything other than the same Dixie Chicks songs and duplicates them exactly like the original. This girl's voice seems like it has so much potential...would love to see her try a Heart song or similar and even better, put her own spin on it....

The first time I sang Frank Sinatra's That's Life, I had only heard the song from another karaoke performer doing it. I think the kj put the song in for me, thinking everyone knew it, so I sang it as best I could, kind of approximating certain parts if you know what I mean! When I was done, the KJ said something like, "I liked what you did with that high part there!" It was funny, because I probably couldn't have repeated it if I wanted to! After that I started paying attention to how the song was really sung, and now I could only sing it a-la-Frank style, !

Some songs I'm not sure I've ever sung correctly. Songs like the Beatles Oh Darling seem to give the singer a lot of room to move around in. I also used to like singing the Pioneer version of Duke Ellington's Mood Indigo, because if the sound is right, it's really fun.

On the other hand, I've sang the 10cc song, The Things We Do for Love, and that one I'd really like to sing exactly as they do if possible, because it seems like the kind of song that doesn't lend itself to experimentation.

One of the interesting thing about meeting other singers and kj's is realizing that some of them have incredible ears for knowing exactly how the song is supposed to sound. I might think I've sung the song per the original, but hear some other singer humming the song beside me, and realize, "Oh, that's right, that's how the song really goes! I'd forgotten!" So it's amazing what musical memory some people have.

I've been told that I was the only guy in the world that could make Bon Jovi sound country.......So I guess you know my answer......

EVery time I do Sinatra, I think it sounds more like Joe Piscopo's old SNL skits!

I think it depends on how comfortable one is with the song. It's easier to ape the original artist because it doesn't require a lot of thought. The last thing you want to do (or listen to) is sing *around* the melody or improvise some of the words or change the phrasing and it doesn't come out as "original", but like we messed up.

For everyone who sings along with the radio, I think it's a charge to sound like the artist. To me, that's a karaoke singer. Someone who wants to be more of a "vocalist"? Like the girl with the curl in the middle of her forehead...when it's good it's very very good, and when it's bad, it's horrid.

_________________
[font=Lucida Console]DangerousKaraoke.com[/font]
[font=Lucida Console]"Sing for the day, sing for the moment, sing for the time of your life!"[/font]

t4d said;

IMHO: I don't particularly care for "raunchy, over the top" because I don't believe it to be in good taste and most of the time it's simply a singer who wants to get attention by see how loud they can scream a 4 letter word. The song "Closer" by Nine Inch Nails is a perfect example. I don't care if you sing it up or down an octave, it's still a duck.

I don't have a problem with a singer "styling" a song by putting their own spin on it if they're keeping within a reasonable range of the original. And I don't have a problem with a singer going out of that range if it's within good taste as well; i.e. putting a "comedy" spin on a standard song to "keep it fresh." We had one guy that would come in and sing "Walk Like A Man" (Frankie Valli) but did it in a John Wayne voice.... it was halarious!

Too often, (speaking from the KJ point of view), I see singers that just want to "get loud n' dirty" like it's some kind of special talent. But songs like "At A Medium Pace" by Adam Sandler or "A$$hole" by Dennis Leary are only funny once or twice... to hear that kind of stuff week after week is more than tiresome. Injecting a 4-letter word in the middle of a song that doesn't contain it ("Total Eclipse" and "I F****ng need you more than ever") is.... IMHO .... nothing but showboating in a distasteful way.

That being said, there are times when a "dirty" song can be fun, but that is less often than most singers think it is...

I should clarify that by "dirty" or "raunchy" I was referring to the tonal quality of the voice (i.e. "dirty" versus "clean" vocal), not the actual lyrics and words being sung.

Sorry - going to disagree with Simon on AI - I LOVED Adam's version of Ring of Fire...now THAT was different. Country week for a rocker like Adam? He fixed their wagon.

I think the best performances are those where the singer has "made the songe their own." Their comfort level is high, and they exude confidence.

I enjoy something original, done well... that's entertainment.

_________________
Good music, good friends, howling good times!

As a listener: I much prefer someone to make the song theirs - I see more fun in this I guess.

As a host: Do what you feel, it matters little to me

Doesn't matter to me as long as you - the singer - is having fun!

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

Bad singers can entertain and energize the crowd. I can sing crazy like Louis Armstrong. As far as talent I am in the upper 5% but I do not flaunt it.

_________________
Join The Karaokle Singers Social Network. Upload Your Music!!

Can you really stray that far from the original on a commercial karaoke track????
After all they are duplicates of the orginal and radio versions ??? ( except the few live tracks out there). I think if you sing as YOU and not try to IMPERSONATE the orginal artists thats as good as you can get. ( there are some songs that impersonations are required )

Respectfully I disagree.

I have a regular who does a briliant version of Angels, delibrately singing it pretty different to the original, and it's awesome.

The way I sing "Breakfast At Tiffany's" or "Obviously" (McFly) are not the same as the original.

The backing track, sure it's the same, but you can still make a song your own. Agreed: within limits.

I've got a guy who's memorized Devil Went To Jamaica and does it over Devil Went To Georgia.

Goes over fantastic in the room. Definitely a "hit" --------------heh heh

A great spin on a tired old karaoke classic that we all wish we didn't have to hear again if it's done straight.

I wish I could get that on karaoke. I'm going to have to learn how to do my own.

It isn't that hard, I suspect especially for a musician. On Karaoke Home Producer, the program I have, you just listen to the music and hit the space bar to begin/end highlighting a word, shift to suspend highlighting. It gets to be like playing an instrument with the words as the cues.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

Then that's something I'm going to have to try Mickey J.

But just not today.

I can agree you can make a song your own within limits

OMG I just Googled those lyrics. Hilarious! I must do some CDG editing...