I’ve been wondering what Billie Joe Armstrong’s range is. I find it easy for me to sing along with most Green Day songs, and I was wondering if he and I have really similar ranges, or if perhaps he just has a relatively small range.
My singing range isn’t too big - the E below middle C to about the D above the C above middle C.
All the Beatles had fairly limited ranges, and I believe that helped make them so successful as pop songwriters - pretty much anyone can sing any Beatles song.
Completely and utterly disagree. George and Ringo, as part time singers perhaps, but John and Paul were all over the map.
Compare John in “Twist and Shout” to “I Want You (She’s so Heavy).” In the former he rips his vocal chords out and gives it everything he’s got, and in the latter he’s laid back, more baritone and bluesy, and he’s got everything in between. On “Just Like Starting Over” he goes from Elvis impersonator to his usual familiar nasal tone and back throughout the song.
Paul is a wonderful singer who took inspiration from Little Richard for his high-pitched “OOOOOOOOs” and shows a wide range on “Oh Darling” and “You Never Give Me Your Money.”
These guys are almost the antithesis of limited range, IMHO.
I just did, and what a nice surprise! I hadn’t listened to any of Elvis’ gospel stuff before and those were good tunes. I think I might have to change my mind.
I’ll be going back to listen to more of his gospel stuff, that’s for sure. I wasn’t mature enough to appreciate it back in the day. Thanks for the horizon-broadening.
Agreed. I can sing most popular songs without too much problem, maybe some adjustments here and there. A lot of Paul McCartney songs have a wide vocal range with high tones for a guy to hit. His stuff is typically more difficult than average to sing for limited range folks such as myself. I usually have to lower either the chorus or verse an octave to get through it without straining too much. Lennon could hit some higher notes too in songs such as In My Life.
Waters is an interesting case. I’d agree that, for the bulk of his performance career, he had very limited range either due to young inexperience, or older vocal age/damage.
He had a very short sweet spot though, peaking right at The Final Cut, book-ended by The Wall and Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking, where he showed an incredible range. I’d compare his range to Billy Joel or Ian Anderson in their prime. Prior to these, he was simply outdone in comparison to Gilmour’s superior range. Afterward to these, he still had the emotional expression, but his vocal chords were shredded into near-monotone.
Or the stuff post-disco (specifically the stuff from just before Maurice died).
Hell, even the disco stuff isn’t all the heavy falsetto of Stayin’ Alive. How Deep Is Your Love is generally on the high side, but within a natural vocal range for the most part.
I was singing along with Pearl Jam’s “Jeremy” in the car yesterday. It struck me that I wasn’t having problems hitting any notes, and I have a very small range.
I love the discussion. I’d just say that it’s not so much how many octaves you can sing, but more what you can do with the music to thrill your audience, then that’s the ticket. Elvis could sing 2.25 octaves but could make love with his low baritone and get you dancing with his higher baritone to low tenor. Frank Sinatra had more vocal dexterity than range. Jazz singers have an agility that keeps us engaged. Johnny Cash was a bass-baritone but the resonance of the voice made his ballads immensely enjoyable. I thing Tom Waits is more about texture than range. Bob Dylan and Leonard Cohen smoked and drank their way to change their voice to what we have heard in their later years.