I’ve been listening to a lot of post punk lately, and it suddenly struck me that yes, there really are a lot of hopeless singers fronting post punk bands. I think the Pinefox first pointed this out, in connection with Gang of Four (definitely not the worst offenders, mind).
What was it about post punk that attracted adventurous musicians but suckass vocalists?
PEW??
I know!
Haha, yes!
Worse than punk singers?
I mean Ian Curtis? He’s out of tune all the bloody time and he just moans in a drone!
They should re-record all the Joy Division songs and get a real singer like Leona Out Of The X-Factor to sing them.
“LOVE!” (toom!)
“Love will tear us a-parrrrt oh wo oh woohoh LOVE!” (toom)
I mean Ian Curtis? He’s out of tune all the bloody time and he just moans in a drone!
Curtis is a bit of an exception... it was maybe the tuneless screechings of James Chance or yer man from the Pop Group I was thinking of. That said, Curtis is not the best thing about Joy Division.
Yes, that Mark Stewart, what a ponce, he wouldn’t last two seconds with Simon Cowell.
They should do a topical re-recording of “We Are All Prostitutes” featuring the melodic tones of plucky Ray Scouse!
Also, those old Contortions records—take out that horrid saddo sax and bring in Kenny G instead!
In my dreams, Stump perform “Buffalo” for Simon, Louie and Sharon.
Anyway, I’m warming to my previous post.
Whitney Houston type doing “Love will tear us apart” .. it’s not that farrrrr!!!
Wasn’t Paul Young bad enough first time round?
No, not bad enough!
MORE BAD!!
“Why is my bedroom so cohollllddd... You turn awayyy on your sideyhide....”“
I would like a reformed Whitney to perform an inimitable take on “Sex” as featured on the LIMITED EDITION FREE 12-INCH wot you got with No Parlez.
Whitney Houston type doing “Love will tear us apart” .. it’s not that farrrrr!!!
It is a strange song—its tune is so pop even while the lyrics are so whingey. I reckon some of the Popjustice acts could do a great version of it.
lots of pop lyrics are whingey.
That’s very true. I do not see why certain people are intent on turning this into a post punk v. pop thread.
It’s because certain people are reactionary.
It’s you thrusting Dubyakids who are the real reactionaries, son.
“son”?
“thrusting”?
Marcello, fuck off.
DV: Given the time period that these bands come from, the scenes they were coming out of and the directions they pushed “popular” music, I think the lack of polished vocals were an integral part to why they worked so well and had the impact they had. If these bands had come out with slick, perfectly in-tune vocals, they would have been much too far on the pop side of the equation and would not have been able to generate the frisson they did that keeps them remembered today. It isn’t about having “good” vocals, it’s about having the “right” vocals for what you’re trying to do.
Dan, I see where you are coming from, but some of the vocalists are still a lot better than others. I’m not even talking about singing v. not singing, more the contrast between different types of atonal shouting and others. I thinking maybe the difference between John Lydon or even yer man from Go4 versus James Chancer and that guy who keeps going on about how we are all prostitutes.
sometimes they’re just fucken annoying, as with early scritti politti.
What about...
Green Gartside?
Lora Logic?
The Raincoats?
I think the “adventurous” musicians were often initially incompetent as well, just a bunch of folks with good taste and good ideas, but it’s easier to find a groove that works when being a non-musician, and eventually learning your instrument, then being a non-vocalist singer.
But I’d also say in post-punk you get more examples of vocalists as band-leaders, who contribute not just vocals and lyrics but the whole aesthetic of the thing even if they’re not the adventurous musicians...the Mark E. Smiths and Robert Lloyds of the world...
BTW, this thread starter is not the original pre-sandbox Dirty Vicar of Dublin. I’ve alerted the real DV about the existence of this imposter, and he has vowed Vicar Justice upon the false one.
Sending emails...
Notifications were sent successfully.
Maybe this thread was started by the real Vicar after all!
I AM THE REAL DIRTY VICAR!
I AM THE REAL DIRTY VICAR
You fuck off, underpant hiccuper.
Pfff.
“Underground rock singing” died in 1973 anyway. It was in a coma since 1965. “Post Punk” singing is just the sound of a postal service worker talking to you anyway. Yeah. Postal Punk. That’s what I call it.
postal punk! my stars, how cheeky! oh you’ve really done it this time!
i think lydon’s singing on early PIL is genius...i can’t conceive of the band w/o the vocals being the way they are.
I really like PiL, but I have strong suspicions that Lydon is tone deaf
If only he had spent some of his childhood singing gospel in African-American Baptist church...
Whitney Houston type doing “Love will tear us apart” .. it’s not that farrrrr!!!
haha featuring: fred frith....whitney houston!
Post Punk Vocalists—why are they so rubbish?
Lou Reed
Hmm. They’re shit-but-good. But what about Billy Mckenzie? His vocals are pretty much amongst the best vocals I have ever heard. But is he to be counted as “new pop” rather than post punk?
I’m actually really fond of the singing style of a lot of post-punk women (or at least English ones). What’s strangest about it is that it’s a style that seemed to exist for a couple years and then entirely vanished — there’s that particular quavery choirgirl stance running around the whole scene (Slits, say, or especially Logic singing for Red Krayola), but I’m not sure I could realy locate it in anything else ever.
As for the men, yeah: really functional and well-suited to the style, but not always particularly engaging in itself. The interesting thing there, though, is how that helped have a certain impact on what a band was supposed to be like — helping shift it from the idea of a vocal performance over a backing track to something where, you know, the song was the song in a lot less of a differentiated way. But yeah, as for sitting around swooning over male vocal performances or whatever, it kinda required a wait until a few years into the 80s, where expressive male singing seemed to come back in such a huge way (surely in part as a reaction to punk).
elaborate troll thread or what
not at all, though I am amused by the post punk rockism that rejects any criticism whatsoever of any aspect of any post punk band.
i sort of agree. john lydon i find amazingly grating on ‘metal box’, and green on the early stuff is embarrassing. extending it a bit forward: barney fucking sumner.
waiting for you ‘it’s SUPPOSED to be grating’ answers here.
How about an “Early Green is Grating?” answer.
I remember the first time I heard “Is and aught the western world” and thought compared to what was going down, Green’s vocals were as smooth as the skin on a tambourine.
I have to write “Post Punk Rockism” down for future reference.
They are generally horrible.
Don’t forget, you can make any position sound stupid by appending “rockism” to it. I look forward to denouncing someone for Pop Rockism.
Iggy Pop Rockism
Please refrain from your Happy Hardcore Rockism.
Given that Green has in the past collaborated with Robert Wyatt, one could make a case for Canterbury Rock Rockism.
Historically Billy Mac was New Pop.
Anyone mentions Billy Mackenzie in this thread again and I’m calling it New Pop Rockism.
People who slag off the Pipettes are guilty of Brighton Rockism.
People who slag off nu_metal singers married to Pamela Anderson are guilty of Kid Rockism.
People who slag off the Motorcycle Boy are guilty of Big Rock Candy Mountainism.
it’s SUPPOSED to be grating...
if The Affectionate Punch isn’t a post-punk album, I don’t know what is.
To settle the issue:
Fourth Drawer Down is just about post-punk, Sulk is New Pop.
Sulk is a bit more proto-new pop or something. It’s pretty experimental and dissonant in a way that say ABC, Human League, Heaven 17, Scritti etc weren’t around that time.
Fourth Drawer Down is a in a league by itself. Affectionate Punch at least still feels like a “rock” band playing.
I mean, I know it’s considered a defining record of “new pop” and I know Club Country and Party Fears Two were UK hits and dancefloor smashes, but the rest of it is pretty intense, they even had to put on the poppier 18th Carrot Love Affair/Love Hangover to make it accessible enough for the US...
So how would you consider Alison Stratton? She’s one post-punk vocalist that doesn’t quite fit your criteria. No harsh atonal shouting or over-emoting there. She reminds me of a bossa nova singer who’s cool, detached, restrained, and perfectly controlled. And when does post-punk merge into new pop? Somewhere Orange Juice and some Scotsmen are involved. I agree with Dan that some records have feet in both the post-punk and new pop camps.
Post Punk Vocalists—why are they so bad and hated?
The vocals on Entertainment! are some of my favorite ever.
Sorry I’m late, but Curtis is the best thing about Joy Div.
He was also the best thing about the Impressions.
Tru dat.
Ian Curtis vs. Curtis Mayfield fite!! I’d have to go with Mayfield on that one.
Anyone who thinks Jon King’s vocals are bad has a fight coming on. On Entertainment! his vocals are just a little bit on the rough side, but by Solid Gold the beauty of his voice shines through. As for other post-punkers: I always thought Stephen Fellowes had a lovely voice. Kinda emotive and melancholy, which are both very good qualities to have. Same case with Adrian Borland, though Borland’s vocals are (understandably) a lot more filled with emotion and sadness. And I’d definitely rather hear Paul Haig’s croon than Taylor Hicks’s showboating for SURE. So hey, lay off on the post-punk vocalists.