cicerone imposter wrote:
Chumly, Like everything else on this planet, humans have subjective likes and dislikes. Your attempts to challenge Sinatra's singing skills doesn't matter, because his record sales and persohnal appearances show how much his singing was enjoyed by the masses.
I enjoyed his singing for all his "flaws."
"Attempt to challenge" is not the correct working phrase here, if you are not willing to accept my views, go ask a classically trained singer if Sinatra was pitch accurate.
We all know record sales and popularity are not relevant to absolute vocal ability unless you are willing to argue that Bob Dylan, WIlly Nelson, Mick Jagger, Satchmo, Lenny Breau were/are pitch accurate!
Have you taken the headphone challenge as per the above?
Have you taken any singing lessons?
Do you understand how to apply relative pitch to the fundamental tone?
It's only a "flaw" if it's perceived to be, but from a vocal technical perspective, Sinatra was nothing special, and FWIW nor were the actual recordings any type of high-water mark on a purely technical basis. Again that in no way decreases my appreciation of the art, but that's not what I refer to here.
Recordings on a high-water mark purely technical basis would belong to the likes of Les Paul (early example) or Steely Dan (later example). I've already given some examples of singers with much higher technical skills than Sinatra, there are tons more I can give if you like.