Judy Garland - superchops !

Joe Baker · Post by **Joe Baker** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 12:29 am

Grooving for Heaven wrote:Don't have much use for her either, but at least she hasn't killed herself by abusing her body with drugs and alcohol.

Here's some names that I would like to throw out

Ella (almost named my daughter after her)
aretha
Billie Holiday
Patsy Cline
Mahalia Jackson
Allison Krauss

oooh, Alison Kraus. There are more "beautiful" voices out there, but there is an effortless precision in her singing, a delicateness with phrasing -- she is my absolute fav-o-rite singer, bar none.
______________________
Joe Baker, who is going to bed now.

Leland · Post by **Leland** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 8:37 am

Well, private vices aside, Judy could sing, that's for sure.

I move to add Norah Jones as a most recent Really Good Singer.

UDELBR · Post by **UDELBR** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:26 pm

Courtney Love!!!

JB · Post by JB » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:57 pm

UncleBeer wrote:Courtney Love!!!

YIKES!!!!

NO!

funkcicle · Post by **funkcicle** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 6:03 pm

Diana Krall mmmmmm

I don't really get the whole Norah Jones thing(the success part of it), but I can't wait to see where she's going.

Leland · Post by **Leland** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 6:27 pm

funkcicle wrote:I don't really get the whole Norah Jones thing(the success part of it), but I can't wait to see where she's going.

I'm surprised that she became as successful as she did -- she's hard to categorize, she's not hot & sexy (not in the Britney or Christina sense, that is), she doesn't sing a gajillion notes like so many R&B girls, and I can't imaging that she'd ever hit the piano keys. Maybe her label decided to give her a promotional push with videos and whatnot, and that's what got her big, but Grammys aren't just handed out to anyone, either.

She's what I put on when I want to forget about rush hour, or take a nap, or just chill out. She sounds clear, unencumbered, and genuine. I'll even say that I feel like I'm in a warm blanket when she's on.

YOMV (Your Opinion May Vary)

And, yeah, I agree that Judy Garland was a monster singer. It never really occurred to me until I saw a show on her on Biography or something like that, and I was blown away.

(notice I only said "singer")

JB · Post by JB » Thu Jun 17, 2004 6:58 pm

Sarah Vaughan (

), anyone?

funkcicle · Post by **funkcicle** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:42 am

With Norah I can't help but see someone who the record label, for some reason or another, wanted to see succeed so they promoted the hell out of her. She's not bad, but certainly not great. She's gotten a very fortunate(though undeserved) jumpstart on her career, and maybe some day she'll be great. Even more surprising to me is that was on the Blue Note label.. uncharacteristic of Blue Note, and puts her in a position where she can not possibly even begin to compete with her peers(she just doesn't "have it").

...as for Grammies not just being handed out to anyone, did you watch this year's ceremony? Sting vs. Michael MacDonald vs. George Harrison vs. Justin Timberlake.... and the Grammy goes to...!!

UDELBR · Post by **UDELBR** » Fri Jun 18, 2004 4:51 am

There's definitely a market for Norah's stuff; there'll always be a market for laid-back, tasteful yuppie music.

Norah's got several other things going for her: She can play some serious jazz piano when she wants-- she apparently wowed 'em when she attended North Texas State (or whatever they're calling it these days). Also: she's Ravi Shankar's kid. No fooling!