TAXI.com

May I ask for your advice on this topic?

I'm just beginning to discover the songs of Carole King. I think she is a great songwriter, as many have said already. And it seems she is also an excellent piano player.

However, when I listen to her singing, even in the Tapestry days, I could not appreciate her voice. In some cases, I could not appreciate the songs as well, because I don't appreciate her voice.

Is this a common feeling among people?

My sincere thanks,

Of course the biggest "how did he become a singer" question is Bob Dylan. Or even "talk sing" guys like Lou Reed and Mark Knopfler. I guess it's just like what a panelist said once, if it resonates with everyone then that's what counts. I guess sometimes it's that "not so perfect" thing to where people can relate.

I was never "into" Carole King to the extent that I ever noticed she was only so-so a singer. She sounded good to me. However, I think Dave made a great point. Taking a little liberty with what he said, people like to have a point of reference. I think there are good singers, songwriters, and instrumentalists that are very popular largely because what they sing, write, or play is approachable and someone with some basic abilities (or not a musician at all) can relate (and can think, "I could do that!"). This is not a bad thing. There is plenty of room for the unbelievably fantastic too. But just good enough can really "nail it" sometimes.

Just opinion as always. (I should add that to my signature.)

Bob P.

ha!...man...you kinda opened a can of worms there, didn'tya?!

As Dave pointed out, she's not the only prolific songwriter whose singing chops have been suspect.
To answer your question; I'm one that agrees with you about her voice. Case in point being, James Taylor having covered her songs made them much more palatable to most ears. And when they toured together...it was both iconic and difficult at the same time; I don't think her voice has aged nearly as well as his.

Another in that debate, for me, is Jimi Hendrix. No doubt at the top of the guitar icons. But his voice: for what it's worth...it just fit, flaws and all, with what he was doing; which is probably the same said about Dylan, maybe even Willie Nelson.

Another is Jimmy Webb: he's written some of the best-loved songs...but without the rendering from Glen Campbell, maybe some of those would never have been #1 hits. In that case: as a great partnership the results were much better than just the sum of their parts!!
And there are many, many examples of that. Burt & Deyonne come to mind. It's a long list.

Bottom line: some not-so-perfect voices are, in fact, a perfect fit; even "signature" for the artistic expression.

Meanwhile...I'm always listening for the right voice for songs I have in mind, that I cannot deliver properly.
So: who am I to comment on whose voice works? Gonna like what our ears like, is about it.

Thanks for posting. Cheers.
Peter R

Most of the time I've ever seen or heard her she was playing live, maybe that has a little to do with it. I don't think she's a bad singer, I mean if I listen to her version of "You Make Me Feel, Like a Natural Woman", I don't really hear that much difference in delivery from Aretha Franklin's cover, and that says mucho, because Aretha is one of the greatest!
She has a little New York nasaliness sometimes, but then she was born and raised there. So it might depend a little on how accustomed you get to certain dialects. I've never been around many Alaskans, so the Sarah Palin dialect is somewhat harsh to my ears.
Someone mentioned James Taylor, the very smooth velvety delivery, is great, for a while, it's hard for me to listen to a whole album, because that smoothness gets real boring, especially if the song isn't that great.
Janis Joplin even admitted she didn't have a very pretty voice, but not unlike Carol King, was very soulful and passionate. Maybe that is what Carole King is, a Janis Joplin singing pretty?

It is all about "Zeitgeist", not that I spelled it correctly. Carole King wrote a whole bunch of songs that other people recorded, Her album "Tapestry" was really well done and really well received. "Zeitgeist" refers to an artist being into tune with the tenor of their time. Carol King pulled this off, wonderfully. I realize that the vocals of an individual singer might not appeal to a particular listener. What does that have to do with the essence of a well written, and well produced song? A song sucks because your eardrums don't appreciate the message, the heart, of a song, because you don't like the vocalist's chops? Carol King had both the message and the vocals, to my ears. And a lot of other ears. Ott

yes, carole king is a bad singer. i know, because i am. her main contribution is songwriting huge hits for other artists, e.g., 'natural woman' that aretha tore up.

I will respectfully disagree. I loved her vocals on "Tapestry". As did a lot of other people. Ott

I actually like her voice, and Tapestry is still one of the tops on my list for best ever pop albums. I don't hear where she might be considered a bad singer. Also a great reference for well produced singer songwriter pop, been listening to lately and it still stands up, songwise and productionwise.

To be blunt and following a hunch, is the real question whether you submit to listings with a vocal yuou know is average, or , ehm, slightly below? The answer to that is I would find a better singer. Too many good voices out there. Doesn't have to be spectacular voice, but good technique, being on key, etc. is a must in my opinion.