Agnetha v Frida - the debate goes on
The Ghost
six-year-old, I loved ABBA but really had a soft spot for the brunette.
Years later I realised they all had names. Years later I also realised
that - unfortunately - it was Agnetha who had the better voice.
But only in the last five years have I realised how close to perfection
Agnetha's voice was. Not only was her range greater than Frida's, but the
way she moved up and down the register without a hint of breaking proves
those pipes she had were quite a phenomenon.
Leading any other group, Frida would have been a star on her own. If
Agnetha was the Pavarotti of her time, Frida was the Bocelli. Frida and
Andrea Bocelli both have more "smoky cafe" voices which don't soar like
their more gifted (and it is a gift) contemporaries. After all, before
ABBA, Agnetha played Mary Magdolin in JC Superstar and Frida recorded jazz
and swing.
Agnetha winner and still champion...much to my chagrin.
ITSBRY
> that - unfortunately - it was Agnetha who had the better voice.
I certainly respect your opinion and I know this debate has raged
between ABBA fans since the beginning of time, but I really think
it's unfair to say that either of the girls had the "better" voice. I'm
an admitted "Frida-phile", but I am not about to say that Frida had
a better voice. These two women both have incredible singing
ability, but to say that one is better than the other is not a worth-
while comparison.
The "ABBA sound" would simply not have been there without BOTH
voices. I have recently gained a greater appreciation for Agnetha's
wonderful voice (having listened mostly to only Frida's post-ABBA
stuff), but I would not rate Frida as an inferior. The only way I could
compare the two would be song choices for their English albums after
ABBA. Personally, I find Frida's choices much more adventurous and
interesting than Agnetha's. While any song sounds great with these ladies
in the lead, I felt that Agnetha stuck mostly with the adult-contemporary
(love song) genre'. Personally, I AM a fan of that type of music, but it
would have been nice to see Agnetha try things like "The Heat Is On" more
often. I'm hoping to see some variety like this if the upcoming album comes
to fruition.
>Agnetha winner and still champion...much to my chagrin.
Different...not better, in my opinion.
*stepping off the soapbox* :)
Bryan
its...@juno.com
Andy B
As anyone who knows me would confirm, I'm completely "bonkers" about
Agnetha, and I love her voice to bits, (especially her solo Swedish
stuff).....but one would have to be tone deaf to believe that Frida
had (has) anything less than a wonderful singing voice.
Let's appreciate / acknowledge the talents of both of these
extraordinary women......what the hell does it matter who is the
"better" singer, it's all subjective anyhow.
Let's face it, ABBA wouldn't have been the same without the BOTH of
'em!
Cheers,
Andy B (in SUNNY Bolton....honest!)
Charles Milton Ling
>
>
> But only in the last five years have I realised how close to perfection
> Agnetha's voice was. Not only was her range greater than Frida's,
No. This has been discussed here in the past. (I am *not* taking sides, I am
just stating a fact.)
Charley
Frederik Rambout
not always the point.
I mean, "The winner takes it all" would not be THAT song if it had been sung
by Frida. "The day before you came" would not have had the same affection if
it would have been sung by Frida.
But I do believe that in terms of singing on "The Visitors" album, Frida
succeeded more in singing eg: "I let the music speak" than Aggie did on
"Slipping through my fingers".
Oh well, you like Frida songs, you like Aggie songs, but perhaps, if they
would have switched in singing those songs, you wouldn't have liked it at
all :)
Why not the "shared-lead-ones". "I am the city" sounds great with both of
them singing it. Oh well, those are discussions you can't solve. Each have
there own taste...
Bye, Frederik
Edwin de Jongh
The Ghost <gho...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:OjA87.871$Vk2....@ozemail.com.au...
> Agnetha played Mary Magdolin in JC Superstar
Mary Magdolin???? :-)
Good title for her new album :-)
Take care,
Edwin
The Ghost
Benny and Bjorn said the girls sounded phenomenal together (I think everyone
agrees on that) but Benny admitted it was "difficult for Frida to get up
there sometimes" in comparison to Agnetha.
If that is true, doesn't that mean Agnetha's range was greater? Frida
herself said that her voice was a different type of soprano voice to
Agnetha's. I forget the exact terms she used so I won't stumble over myself
and try to repeat them.
"Charles Milton Ling" <cml...@teleweb.at> wrote in message
news:3B630C49...@teleweb.at...
Charles Milton Ling
Note that range is the interval between the highest and lowest note a person can
sing.
Frida's range is three-and-a-quarter octaves. It is obvious that she cannot
follow Agnetha to the very top, but more than compensates for this at the other
end of the scale.
Charley
Ilsor
Please, try be objective. Yes, Agnetha has a beautiful voice with a
very appealing timber, and she is a very good interpetative singer but
she has very obvious technical glitches, and that's why she always had
problems singing live, for example frequently singing off-key and very
thin.
Many here try to dismiss opinions like mine as being matter of taste.
OK, let's forget about my extensive music background...
But what about Harry Edgington and Piter Himmelstrand (Abba's old
friend) who wrote one of the first Abba biographies, and they clearly
stated there that Agnetha had problems singigng on-key, so Abba
resolved this problem in studio by doing numerous re-takes of her
vocal parts?
What about those numerous reviews of Agnetha's pre-Abba career always
mentioning her off-key live singing ( Abba - The Book by JM. Potiez)?
What about reviews of Abba's Australian concerts mentioning Agnetha's
off-key singing, which "dogged her career in Abba" (Bright Lights,
Dark Shadows by CM Palm)?
I could continue...
As I already said in one of the topics, Frida is an extremely good
singer technically, and she is without question (!!!) a better singer
technically than Agnetha. In simple terms, she carries notes long
enough and evenly, she intonates much better, her registers are even,
she is relaxed when singing, etc. Anyone who studied music and singing
will tell you that.
Yes, Agnetha sounds fine on records, but even here there are fine
details which only trained ear can pick up showing that technically
Agnetha was not as good as Frida. Agnetha, however, possibly had an
edge in interpretation of songs, and perhaps the choice of songs was
also to her advantage.
Ilsor
Andy B
called) better singer....all fans have their personal favourites, and
I seriously doubt anyones preference will be swayed by a such
pointless "debate" !!
Give me an "off key" Aggie any day ;-)
Andy (no musical background whatsoever) B
Jay
21:45:13 +0100, Andy B wrote in alt.music.abba:
> To be honest mate, I couldn't give a toss who is "technically" the (so
> called) better singer....
Me neither. Though statistically Aggiephiles seem to brag more often about
her voice. :-)
> all fans have their personal favourites,
But that doesn't mean they can't be objective.
> and I seriously doubt anyones preference will be swayed by a such
> pointless "debate" !!
This is a discussion group Andy. Debates are often pointless, but that
doesn't mean it's not interesting. I completely agree with what Ilsor said
by the way, Frida is the better singer of the two technically and I find it
interesting to read. And again: that has nothing to do with preferences,
both strict-Fridafans and strict-Aggiefans use and/or twist the fact to
their advantage, which is *quite* childish.
> Give me an "off key" Aggie any day ;-)
And that's the whole point. It really doesn't matter who's technically
better, but why the fuss everytime this comes up? It's a discussion group
for crying out loud. Frida is a better singer. That has nothing to do with
her position in ABBA, or with being a nicer/better person or not.
I wanted to get this off my chest for a long time. Sorry to reply on your
post Andy, I didn't speak to you personally. I find the 'hushing up' (oooh,
let's not discuss this) particularly annoying.
Jay
--
Voor het gemak: de hansworst, de dubbeltjesplatte figuur van NES,
dat ben ik. (Jaap Verhoeven - nl.eeuwig.september - 22/07/2001)
M'n homepage: http://www.crosswinds.net/~encoreunefois/jay
Andy B
>> called) better singer....
>
>Me neither. Though statistically Aggiephiles seem to brag more often about
>her voice. :-)
Sorry, that comment is far too silly to respond to Jay! :-)
>
>> all fans have their personal favourites,
>
>But that doesn't mean they can't be objective.
Agreed.
>> and I seriously doubt anyones preference will be swayed by a such
>> pointless "debate" !!
>
>This is a discussion group Andy. Debates are often pointless, but that
>doesn't mean it's not interesting. I completely agree with what Ilsor said
>by the way, Frida is the better singer of the two technically and I find it
>interesting to read. And again: that has nothing to do with preferences,
>both strict-Fridafans and strict-Aggiefans use and/or twist the fact to
>their advantage, which is *quite* childish.
Fine...in YOUR opinion Frida may well be "better" Jay...I've no
problem with that! Don't quite understand what you mean by the
"childish" comment though?
>> Give me an "off key" Aggie any day ;-)
>
>And that's the whole point. It really doesn't matter who's technically
>better, but why the fuss everytime this comes up? It's a discussion group
>for crying out loud. Frida is a better singer. That has nothing to do with
>her position in ABBA, or with being a nicer/better person or not.
Making a "Fuss"!!!??? But I thought this was a "discussion group"
Jay!!?? ;-)
(Oh, and by the way .....your statement about Frida being the "better
singer" is purely subjective!!)
>
>I wanted to get this off my chest for a long time. Sorry to reply on your
>post Andy, I didn't speak to you personally. I find the 'hushing up' (oooh,
>let's not discuss this) particularly annoying.
No need to hush anything up as far as I'm concerned Jay.....go right
ahead and write what you like....I usually do! ;-)
>
>Jay
Andy B
"Off key singers are human too!!!"
Jay
00:34:37 +0100, Andy B wrote in alt.music.abba:
> Jay wrote:
>> Me neither. Though statistically Aggiephiles seem to brag more often
>> about her voice. :-)
> Sorry, that comment is far too silly to respond to Jay! :-)
*grin* Yes it is :-)
>> This is a discussion group Andy. Debates are often pointless, but that
>> doesn't mean it's not interesting. I completely agree with what Ilsor
>> said by the way, Frida is the better singer of the two technically and I
>> find it interesting to read. And again: that has nothing to do with
>> preferences, both strict-Fridafans and strict-Aggiefans use and/or twist
>> the fact to their advantage, which is *quite* childish.
> Fine...in YOUR opinion Frida may well be "better" Jay...I've no
> problem with that!
One addition, which I forgot earlier: technically better doesn't mean the
sound of the voice is lovelier. Agnetha sure has a lovely voice, but she
isn't capable of using it properly in some occasions. That's what I found
most interesting to read in Ildor's posting: the off-key singing.
> Don't quite understand what you mean by the
> "childish" comment though?
What I meant was: you often see the remark here that Agnetha was supposed
to be the 'frontwoman' of the group (which is nonsense) and people defend
that by saying Agnetha was the better singer of the two ladies. (which imho
isn't correct as well, though that's a discussionpoint). It is almost
impossible to have a discussion about singing techniques here, because some
people immediately make the (not so logical) link to the position in the
group and mistake the word 'technical' for 'beautiful'. That, imho, is
childish, to spoil an interesting discussion with preferences and dislikes,
and you often find that with the most fanatic fans of either of the two
ladies. (For the record: I'm not pointing at you here, mate :-))
>>> Give me an "off key" Aggie any day ;-)
>> And that's the whole point. It really doesn't matter who's technically
>> better, but why the fuss everytime this comes up? It's a discussion
>> group for crying out loud. Frida is a better singer. That has nothing to
>> do with her position in ABBA, or with being a nicer/better person or
>> not.
> Making a "Fuss"!!!??? But I thought this was a "discussion group"
> Jay!!?? ;-)
Hehe. You know what I meant. And if you didn't, you'll probably know now by
my reply above. (an off-topic note: I'm having more and more difficulty
expressing myself in English. Am I still making sense? <grin>)
> (Oh, and by the way .....your statement about Frida being the "better
> singer" is purely subjective!!)
No, that was my point. I wasn't being subjective. I really believe Frida
was technically better, and that has got nothing to do with my slight
preference of her over Aggie. You see what I mean? That shouldn't be an
issue, and unfortunately it is in many discussions here.
>> I wanted to get this off my chest for a long time. Sorry to reply on
>> your post Andy, I didn't speak to you personally. I find the 'hushing
>> up' (oooh, let's not discuss this) particularly annoying.
> No need to hush anything up as far as I'm concerned Jay.....go right
> ahead and write what you like....I usually do! ;-)
Thanks :-)
> "Off key singers are human too!!!"
*lol*
Andy B
sarcastic "Brit humour"....it often gets misunderstood for
"unpleasantness" in these here parts!
(I never quite know whether to risk certain "quips" with an audience
for whom English is not their native tongue....it can be a risky
business!)
Cheers,
Andy B
John Tobler
>To be honest mate, I couldn't give a toss who is "technically" the (so
>called) better singer....all fans have their personal favourites
Yes, I see what you mean. To use a chocolate analogy, one could say that
Toblerone is "technically" the best chocolate, but all sods have their personal
favourites, and we have to abide by that.
Regards,
John Tobler
Podmix
> Depends on what you mean by facts. Just a couple on months ago, both
> Benny and Bjorn said the girls sounded phenomenal together (I think
everyone
> agrees on that) but Benny admitted it was "difficult for Frida to get up
> there sometimes" in comparison to Agnetha.
But, unfortunately, being able to sing higher doesn't necessarily mean
having a greater range.
Not that range is the deciding factor in how good a voice is anyway.
I have a reasonable range myself, but I have friends with smaller ranges who
are far finer singers than me.
There are far more factors (and many of them highly subjective) as to what
makes a "good voice".
I think I'm tired of this line of (what appears to be) relatively uninformed
discussion.
Is it really that important to having a love for the music.
I'm sorry, but I don't really give a rat's bottom about who was cuter, who
had the nicest hairdos and clothes, who had the "better voice" (your opinion
is important, but perhaps it's nice sometimes discuss other things as
well...;-)
Perhaps the magic of the music is what should be left under the
microscope...
Cheers
Podmix
No sig
Podmix
"Jay" <four_years...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15cff9ffa...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> In article <v8RlO+9uwhc4t8...@4ax.com> on Mon, 30 Jul 2001
> 21:45:13 +0100, Andy B wrote in alt.music.abba:
Just to jump in here as well with a few points:
> I wanted to get this off my chest for a long time. Sorry to reply on your
> post Andy, I didn't speak to you personally. I find the 'hushing up'
(oooh,
> let's not discuss this) particularly annoying.
I understand that cencorship is very unlikely in a forum like this.
Unfortunately, I happen to find this obssession with "which one is better" a
little childish and unnecessary.
Why is it so important for people to have to either tell us all who they
think is better (I always feel like saying "YIPPEE!!! Good for you! I hope
you're happy liking................... better than
.........................")
The bottom line is usually finally agreed (after much long-winded discussion
and to-ing and fro-ing) as being "Everybody has a right to their opinion".
That's completely logical, but then begs the question: Why are we discussing
this yet again when there's going to be the same outcome. I'm sorry, but I
don't see much point in such a discussion unless there are new perspectives
presented.
I'm not sure how life-changing or astounding it might be for other folk here
if I admitted to not having a preference for either of the fair ladies.
If it's improved somebody's life out there, then that's nice.
But hopefully I won't keep on yaddering about it for the rest of my days...
Cheers
Podmix
No sig
Jay
23:20:42 +1000, Podmix wrote in alt.music.abba:
> Unfortunately, I happen to find this obssession with "which one is better" a
> little childish and unnecessary.
Yeah, but can't you see that's exactly what I mean? People always seem to
takes this kind of discussion personal, because both Agnetha & Frida don't
post here.
> That's completely logical, but then begs the question: Why are we discussing
> this yet again when there's going to be the same outcome. I'm sorry, but I
> don't see much point in such a discussion unless there are new perspectives
> presented.
I found Ildor's posting a very new perspective. And yet again, after
his/her serious posting, the same old discussion starts. I want
subjectivity out of this matter for god's sake. I remember that you
(Podmix) yourself posted a very long reply about the technicalities of the
singing of the two ladies, and that's what I like to read.
> But hopefully I won't keep on yaddering about it for the rest of my days...
Hehe. Everyone has the right to his/her own opinion :-p
Jay
07:52:11 +0100, Andy B wrote in alt.music.abba:
> Points taken Jay...and thanks for seeing through my sometimes rather
> sarcastic "Brit humour"....it often gets misunderstood for
> "unpleasantness" in these here parts!
Hehe. I think that's because of our 'quarrel' last year. I understand you a
little bit better.
> (I never quite know whether to risk certain "quips" with an audience
> for whom English is not their native tongue....it can be a risky
> business!)
Indeed it can :)
Lin S
This discussion AGAIN????? :o))))
Maybe we all better save our early comments and just
re-post them over and over, and over and over, again.....
It saves lot's of time!
(with a winking eye)
Lin :o)
Ilsor
I'm not trying to convince you that Frida is overall a better singer
than Agnetha. It's pointless because you have your own opinion on
that. I was just trying to explain to you that there are certain
objective technical points in singing on which Frida shows herself as
a high-class professional, and Agnetha does not.
The one problem here is that Abba songs are very demanding vocally
unlike the majority of rock and pop music, and you simply have to have
certain vocal techniques to be able to hit those notes and deliver
them properly, and especially live where there's only one take before
the audience.
Anyone who heard Abba live (both on bootlegs and professional
recordings) knows that Frida's voice there is pretty much dominant and
thus the whole Abba sound is different (that's why I never understood
the reluctance to issue Abba's live material - it's different to their
studio sound). Also those who read Agnetha's book should know that she
herself admits that Frida has been "more intense" on stage.
If Abba's songs were on average level vocally noone would even notice
Agnetha's problems. Then again, Agnetha isn't the only one who had
those problems singing live. Madonna, for example, is the brightest
example of constant and quite terrible off-key live singing.
I recall that one reviewer said that the fact that Madonna can't sing
live shouldn't be mentioned anymore since people come to her shows to
watch her not to listen to her voice, and they don't really care
whether she's out of pitch or not. Perhaps it's also the case with
Agnetha's fans?
One more thing. Do you know, Andy, that Stig Anderson was quite
critical of Agnetha's singing? I have no idea if CM Palm would write
about that in his book, but it's a fact. How would you comment on
that? Dismiss, I guess...
I don't want to say that Frida was always flawless. On "Djupa Andetag"
there are parts in a couple of songs when she doesn't intonate nearly
as good as she used to, but in other songs on the same record she
still sounds just awesome!
Ilsor
PeterH
in English is not going to be perfect, because its not their native
language.
Both sing to the best of their abilities in English, any of key notes
is to be expected.
Their performances in English are still far superior to even English
singers.
No more debate on whose better, Frida as mezzosoprano and Agnetha as
soprano, both performed to the best of their abilities which is all
that matters.
PeterH
Andy B
a bit damn painful on the roof of the mouth when taking a bite from
the old "mountain bar"......don't you think?.
Perhaps some may feel Toblerone is a bit "off key" taste wise on
occasion though?
(now THIS is what I call an interesting debate) ;-) )
Cheers,
Andy B
PS. Did Agnetha sign anything "interesting" on the bottom of that
"Super Trouper" period photo I remember seeing framed in your office?!
I seem to remember it was shown in some edition of the "ABBA
magazine"?
Come on Johnny...don't be shy now!! ;-)
On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 11:41:35 GMT, John Tobler <tob...@wombles.com>
wrote:
Jay
09:10:08 -0700, Ilsor wrote in alt.music.abba:
> Ilsor
Whoops. Have been calling you Iltor on several occasions. Sorry!
John Tobler
>Yeah I agree Toblerone is quite tasty John me old son...but it can be
>a bit damn painful on the roof of the mouth when taking a bite from
>the old "mountain bar"......don't you think?.
We can always look into that. Would you prefer a "customised" version?
>PS. Did Agnetha sign anything "interesting" on the bottom of that
>"Super Trouper" period photo I remember seeing framed in your office?!
>I seem to remember it was shown in some edition of the "ABBA
>magazine"?
<cough> I do not know what you're talking about!!!
>Come on Johnny...don't be shy now!! ;-)
The name is John, if you don't mind.
Cheers,
John
Ilsor
Potiez book.
Although everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, there are facts.
One fact is that Agnetha was not a consistently good live singer.
It's funny and weird, but in pop music even a contradiction in terms
is possible - "live singer". In other genres, live singing is
essentially shows what you are as a singer, but not in pop. And
Agnetha is a perfect example that proper live singing is not that
important in order to become a pop star.
This is perhaps why it's called popular music, so you don't have to
learn at least the basics to appreciate it, and you are entitled to
your own opinion whatever substantiated this opinion is. And "canned"
music like recordings where the singer's voice problems can be "fixed"
to any possible extent - Madonna is the prime example and perhaps in
our case Agnetha- are by far the most important thing in this
business. And that's why rock and pop critics don't need to have a
music education, but big mouth and hyper "ego" because who needs any
intelligent and professional analysis of *music* anyway in a
business where truly 'musical' qualities are not important, and where
right and wrong *musically* doesn't mean anything.
What also important to understand is that Abba song are very
demanding vocally, and to perform those song you have to be a good
singer technically. Listen to "I Am The City" - it's a voice
acrobatics with numerous tonal and register changes, wow! I was
thinking how many re-takes they did on it? Could anyone suggest any
comparably complex song as far as vocals are concerned?And it's such a
pity that masterpieces like "I Am The City" are overlooked, but hey
it's popular music, who cares, what's good, what's bad - it's a matter
of taste. What vocal complexity, what are you talking about?
Bob Dylan might not have a voice at all, but his songs are suited for
his voice, and he doesn't need to learn to sing and still he'll be
fine with his material. Abba is a different thing, and that's
essentially why I am engaged in this discussion about Agnetha vs
Frida.
Bähler, Madeleine
Kann mir jemand erklären um was es in dieser Diskussion geht ?
Würde mich interessieren.
Hat jemand eine Ahnung ob es auch eine deutsche Newsgroup gibt?
Danke Euch für Eure Hilfe.
mabba2000
"Ilsor" <yuri...@my-deja.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:5b83fa00.01073...@posting.google.com...
Jay
01:21:42 +0200, Bähler, Madeleine wrote in alt.music.abba:
> My english not so good..... please translate in german......
Leider kann ich Deutsch nur gut lesen, schreiben ist viel schwieriger für
mich. Ich kann Deutsch ins Englische übersetzen aber nicht
umgekehrt. Charles Milton Ling vielleicht? Er ist Österreicher.
Jay
--
Ik ben een oude man, en kan me totaal niet meer inleven in de jeugd
(en in anderen ook niet). (Tigran - nl.roze - 31/07/2001)
Podmix
> In article <_iy97.2134$257....@ozemail.com.au> on Tue, 31 Jul 2001
> 23:20:42 +1000, Podmix wrote in alt.music.abba:
> > Unfortunately, I happen to find this obssession with "which one is
better" a
> > little childish and unnecessary.
>
> Yeah, but can't you see that's exactly what I mean? People always seem to
> takes this kind of discussion personal, because both Agnetha & Frida don't
> post here.
I think it's something to do with the way that the posts are worded. It can
get tiresome when somebody posts something that is obviously a personal
opinion and completely arbitrary, but posts it as though it's gospel truth
and immutable fact.
Then other folks get their back up and respond with the usual "your
opinion...." etc.
Perhaps if this were approached more carefully wording-wise....
> I found Ildor's posting a very new perspective.
Yes, as did I (though not agreeing with all that was said;-). However, the
approach of personalising it by directing it "To those Agnetha-philes" was
not exactly diplomatic (and probably wasn't intended to be).
Is it any wonder then that:
> And yet again, after
> his/her serious posting, the same old discussion starts.
It's interesting that when people discuss this issue, they are very careful
to avoid the whole matter of subjectivity and objectivity. Music and
musicianship are unfortunately based on personal views. There is no way to
analyse music without including personal taste to some extent (because we
all hear music differently, even those who are specialists and highly
trained rarely agree).
What I find surprising is that people will make a sweeping statement without
recognising that it is only a subjective opinion and open to interpretation.
I like the idea of hearing other peoples interpretations, but not at the
expense of others preferences and certainly not when they are exspoused as
gospel truth.
> I want
> subjectivity out of this matter for god's sake.
Unfortunately, you can't have it- sorry.
> I remember that you
> (Podmix) yourself posted a very long reply about the technicalities of the
> singing of the two ladies, and that's what I like to read.
And in that post, (IIRC) I also stated that it still comes down to a matter
of taste....
> > But hopefully I won't keep on yaddering about it for the rest of my
days...
>
> Hehe. Everyone has the right to his/her own opinion :-p
How dare you! I resemble that accusation!!!
;-0
Podmix
No sig
Podmix
"Ilsor" <yuri...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:5b83fa00.01073...@posting.google.com...
> Agnetha sang off-key in Swedish as well, please find references in JM
> Potiez book.
> Although everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, there are facts.
> One fact is that Agnetha was not a consistently good live singer.
> It's funny and weird, but in pop music even a contradiction in terms
> is possible - "live singer". In other genres, live singing is
> essentially shows what you are as a singer, but not in pop.
The main mode of perfomance in pop music is the recorded sound. It's been a
gradual shift over the last 50 years or so. Initially, recordings were only
ever done in a single take (any dud takes being scratched).
By the late 60's, records were being manipulated and vocal and instrumental
perfomances were being edited together from many several takes.
By ABBA's time, the amount of studio fiddling had become almost an art-form
(and I think this is one of the aspects of their music that stands heads and
shoulders above other material of the time).
By the 80's, technology had enabled bands with little musical talent to
suddenly sound professional because any errors could be removed or tinkered
with to improve the final product. It's been pretty much that way since....
> And
> Agnetha is a perfect example that proper live singing is not that
> important in order to become a pop star.
I agree completely.
> And that's why rock and pop critics don't need to have a
> music education, but big mouth and hyper "ego" because who needs any
> intelligent and professional analysis of *music* anyway in a
> business where truly 'musical' qualities are not important, and where
> right and wrong *musically* doesn't mean anything.
But then again, that is the basic purpose of pop music: music for the masses
and not based upon intellectual musicological "rightness of expression".
However, you then run into a problem of defining musical "right and wrong".
Each generation of composers (and certainly the greatest composers) have
always rejected the standard forms of musical expression in the hope of
defining new modes of composing. t's the nature of the beast;-)
> What also important to understand is that Abba song are very
> demanding vocally, and to perform those song you have to be a good
> singer technically. Listen to "I Am The City" - it's a voice
> acrobatics with numerous tonal and register changes, wow! I was
> thinking how many re-takes they did on it? Could anyone suggest any
> comparably complex song as far as vocals are concerned?
Perhaps some of the material by Annie Lennox, Nina Hagen and some of the
very fine soul singers (Aretha for example).
I think the difficulty would have been in getting the intonation correct
(it's reasonably immaculate!!!) between the two women. That's a fine pair of
ears, despite Agnetha's intonation problems.... (she still shows a good
musical sense because at least in the recording studio, her work is
generally clean...)
This is why I prefer discussions about the way the songs are sung (and the
impact they have) rather than addressing the rather lame and tired
subjectivities of "Who has the better voice?"
Every voice can be an effective instrument depending on its use and how well
it achieves the musical expression that a song needs to give it meaning.
Without a musical meaning, the song has no function.
I think it's indicative that both Frida and Agnetha have given the songs of
ABBA musical meaning, since there are fans of both ladies who will proudly
stand and champion their fave. What concerns me is that people will espouse
a personal taste and expect others to agree wholeheartedly.
Is it just possible that both voices were essential to the overall sound? A
preference for one or the other is fine, as long as there is a recognition
that perhaps they were both equally valuable ingredients....
Cheers
Podmix
No sig
Charles Milton Ling
Bravo, Podmix. A sensible view, beautifully expressed.
Charley
Bähler, Madeleine
Du kannst sehr gut deutsch schreiben, versuch es doch einfach einmal.
Danke für den Tip!
mabba2000
"Jay" <four_years...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:MPG.15d16299f...@news.cis.dfn.de...
Daniel L.
squabbles - who is better and who is not... is Agnetha better than Frida...
or is Benny better than Bjorn?!
The simple truth is that without each other they wouldn't have achieved fame
outside Sweden.
Together they created something very special that lasted about ten years -
and their music still lives on today 2001 and will do so even tomorrow,
bringing young and old ones out on the dance-floors around the world to feel
the happiness of being alive... to enjoy life and all it has to offer us.
Both Agnetha and Frida have first-class voices on their own, and the same
should be said of Bjorn and Bennys abilities to create good pop-music.
Bringing these four together resulted in pure magic... called ABBA.
So let us forget this - who is and who's not!
Daniel L.
Ilsor
Thanks for your comments.
Well, as you (and everyone else) have noticed I NEVER ever stated that
*Frida has a better voice*. All I said was that Frida has a much-much
better grasp of vocal technique, and she, I believe, was a saving
grace for Abba in concerts as far as singing is concerned. I also
mentioned that Agnetha had certain obvious problems (and this is a
fact) with her live singing.
I also said that she sounds clean and fine on studio recordings,
however, her live singing as demonstrated, for example, by live
rendition of "Slipping Through My Fingers" (from box set) is less than
perfect, to put it mildly. And what do you, Podmix, think about her
singing on this particular recording?
Ilsor
Ilsor
Just want to add some more thoughts.
Well, I guess your hint of "gospel truth" was directed on me. But you
agreed with me that Agnetha wasn't a *good live singer*, am I right,
and Frida technically was better? These were actually my ONLY points
in this discussion.
As far as rock and pop critics are concerned, I am really appalled by
the lack of any essentially musical analysis in their reviews. But
it's still *music* for God's sake, even if only popular. The worst
thing is that you don't even need a music background to become a rock
critic, only "strong critical skills". I find it a mockery of music
criticism.
Take for example Simon Frith - major authority - but he's a professor
of English.
Don't you think that Abba was dismissed at the time by critics like
Frith because they had no slightest idea about the structural and
tonal complexity of their sound and vocals, in particular? All they
said about their music was "cotton candy", "sickly sugary", "their
glossy costumes", etc. And you call it criticism? This is what I meant
when saying that there's no real need in pop music for professional
analysis if critics like these become really influential.
Read a BBC review of Madonna's concert in London. There's analysis of
her costume changes, light, but not a WORD of how she sang, how she
sounded, how it all was from a MUSICAL point of view. Isn't it the
most important thing by far?
I could understand that a regular fan wouldn't be prepared to make
such analysis. But good critic MUST do it, I think he/she should show
the audience some MUSICAL details this particular audience haven't
noticed, I would even say good critic has to teach the audience to
notice some interesting musical points. But to do this you have to be
a specialist and know what you're talking about.
Don't you think that Abba wouldn't have to endure those attacks on
them from Frith-like critics if these "critics" knew even the basics
of music?
Ilsor
Podmix
> Well, as you (and everyone else) have noticed I NEVER ever stated that
> *Frida has a better voice*. All I said was that Frida has a much-much
> better grasp of vocal technique, and she, I believe, was a saving
> grace for Abba in concerts as far as singing is concerned.
This I would have to agree with. Not perfect, but certainly an asset!
> I also
> mentioned that Agnetha had certain obvious problems (and this is a
> fact) with her live singing.
It's a well-known fact certainly. But probably one that no lessens her
contribution to ABBA.
> I also said that she sounds clean and fine on studio recordings,
> however, her live singing as demonstrated, for example, by live
> rendition of "Slipping Through My Fingers" (from box set) is less than
> perfect, to put it mildly. And what do you, Podmix, think about her
> singing on this particular recording?
I've never been a big fan of live recordings (for any artist). My reasons
being that I always find the sound is less convincing than the far superior
(and obviously more cleanly over-produced) sound from the recording studio.
A pale imitation. It's a matter of my own taste in that matter (as there are
many folks who adore live recordings as being a true indicator etc etc). For
me, I would prefer the actual experience of a live performance in person
over a studio recording (the buzz of the crowd, the thrill of seeing the
artists in the flesh), but a recorded live concert does little for me....
The short answer is: I rarely listen to it, but I will specially for this
post. I found the Dick Cavett special leaving a lot to be desired overall;
the performance lacked any real energy and I found the singing less than
appealing.
As for Aggie's performance, I don't find it completely offensive. The
intonation is far better than I've heard with some of her other efforts.
I'm left pondering how many overdubs may have been added to clean up her
work.... The vowel enuniation is a little laboured at times and there is a
definite lack of depth to the vocal tone (somewhat breathy). These are all
subjective opinions based on my own rather limited knowledge of vocal
technique and what I tend to like in a voice.
I however do admire her voice for its expressive qualities. There are some
wonderful nuances of interpretation that I like (eg the delicacy and
fragility of the opening, and the ending). This is a perfomance that only
Aggie could have carried off- the thinness of her voice is a definite
positive in this situation. Frida would sadly have perhaps over-sung it (or
been a little too powerful...)
It's by no means a perfectly vocally controlled perfomance, but it at least
doesn't have the very obvious flaws of some of her un-dubbed work.
All this is highly subjective, because I know many people who prefer this
version to the one on The Visitors. I always think it's interesting to hear
why another singer likes or dislikes a performance: what people find
appealing and definitely unpleasant...
I would consider neither Agnetha nor Frida to be vocal giants, but as far as
being effective singers in the genre they chose, I think they've made
themselves a definite niche.....
Cheers
Podmix
No sig
Podmix
> Podmix,
> Just want to add some more thoughts.
> Well, I guess your hint of "gospel truth" was directed on me.
Not completely. It was directed at the tone of the conversation from several
different places. This whole debate about which one is better I feel is
completely misdirected and far too limited in its view (IMHO).
Rather than discussing the effectiveness of the performances, people have
focussed on things such as costumes, hair, vocal technique (or lack
thereof). There are many advantages to using voices without superior
training because it expands the possibilities for expression. The voice in
the hands of a composer is after all nothing more than another instrument.
The songs that were chosen for Agnetha generally suited her voice far more
than Frida (ie she sang it better than Frida probably would have considering
the different styles of voice and singing styles).
KLikewise, Agnetha wouldn't have suited some of the Frida stuff.
This I think is the mastery of B&B: to find the appropriate balance.
> But you
> agreed with me that Agnetha wasn't a *good live singer*, am I right,
> and Frida technically was better?
I do agree. It's just that I don't really see that as too much of a
limitation for ABBA.
> As far as rock and pop critics are concerned, I am really appalled by
> the lack of any essentially musical analysis in their reviews.
I teach music, and the general reason for liking a song is usually given as
"It has a really good beat".
This I think is the limit of many critics' ability as well....
> ...you don't even need a music background to become a rock
> critic, only "strong critical skills". I find it a mockery of music
> criticism.
The danger that many music trade rags face is that they alienate their
audience by being too intellectual. So they opt instead for "dumbing-down"
but hiding it with cynicism and "cool-put-down" techniques. I often find
myself laughing at reviews (not *with* them) because there is so little
musical information inserted.
It's more often some piss-take on either how trendy or how dated a release
is.
Rarely anything to do with how effective the music is (arrangements, vocal
performances, expression modes, diversity in styles, interpretations, choice
of blending instruments... etcetc)
> Take for example Simon Frith - major authority - but he's a professor
> of English.
Well, can expect his grammar and spelling to be pretty good then;-)
> Don't you think that Abba was dismissed at the time by critics like
> Frith because they had no slightest idea about the structural and
> tonal complexity of their sound and vocals, in particular? All they
> said about their music was "cotton candy", "sickly sugary", "their
> glossy costumes", etc. And you call it criticism?
No. I call it trying to impress the readers with pseudo-cynicism. It's much
easier to criticise something which may be seen as unfashionable than to fly
in the face of fashion and admit that something is well-constructed
musically and has been cleverly arranged. Instead it's described as cliche
and plastic.
Each viewpoint has many perspectives, but they are limited by popular
taste... sad really.
> Read a BBC review of Madonna's concert in London. There's analysis of
> her costume changes, light, but not a WORD of how she sang, how she
> sounded, how it all was from a MUSICAL point of view. Isn't it the
> most important thing by far?
I'm believing it to be less so. People are less choosey about the music they
listen to (because it tends to blend so much more with everything else or
with what else has gone before). They are interested in the spectacular, but
not in the quality of the original selling-point (ie the music). It's by
Madonna, therefore it's okay because we know she hasn't got a great voice,
but can dance okay.... she doesn't have to make too much effort cos she's
already been excuse the need to sing well.
> I could understand that a regular fan wouldn't be prepared to make
> such analysis. But good critic MUST do it, I think he/she should show
> the audience some MUSICAL details this particular audience haven't
> noticed, I would even say good critic has to teach the audience to
> notice some interesting musical points.
I agree, but then i'm not sure if the audience really desperately want that
either (they've been conditioned not to expect too much musically...)
> Don't you think that Abba wouldn't have to endure those attacks on
> them from Frith-like critics if these "critics" knew even the basics
> of music?
Most reviews of ABBA I have found to be far too snide or condescending in
their approach. I'm always left thinking of the old adage:
Those who can - do,
Those who can't - teach
Those who have no understanding - criticise
Cheers
Podmix
No sig
Ilsor
that they pretty much stem from her lack of some compensatory vocal
technique plus her omnipresent nervousness which is oh so painfully
evident on every live recording, and which sadly flattens and almost
eliminates the fullness of her voice. And all this wasn't inherent, so
it all could've been fixed. And with her distinctive timbre and her
musical sensitivity... oh well.
I guess it hasn't been done because most of pop singers are not good
live singers anyway, and that Abba didn't tour much so there wasn't
any real need for those vocal training sessions (gruelling at times)
which Agnetha (as she herself admitted) hated. So I guess all four of
them just thought, why bother, since on records she eventually sounds
perfect.
The interesting thing, however, is that Madonna, for example, had
regular voice lessons which vastly improved her range and her
expression. But unlike Agnetha Madonna doesn't have a naturally good
ear for music, and so she simply by nature can't keep perfect pitch
all the time, but technically she is quite well prepared. With Agnetha
it's vise versa.
Pete_Ward
the art of music IIsor, but can we give the "Agnetha voice bashing" a
rest now please.....you've made your point already!!!!
Personally I love this woman's voice.....imperfections, off-key live
singing and all...so PLEASE do us a favour and "change the
record".... O.K.!?
Pete Ward
sian.williams
news:l7y97.2125$257....@ozemail.com.au...
.... snipped - hey, look everyone, does anyone else know how to do that??
> I think I'm tired of this line of (what appears to be) relatively
uninformed
> discussion.
>
> Is it really that important to having a love for the music.
>
> I'm sorry, but I don't really give a rat's bottom about who was cuter, who
> had the nicest hairdos and clothes, who had the "better voice" (your
opinion
> is important, but perhaps it's nice sometimes discuss other things as
> well...;-)
>
> Perhaps the magic of the music is what should be left under the
> microscope...
>
<Sighs long and hard> Pod, mate, stop and look at what you've just said and
then ask yourself what the hell else you think this newsgroup is ever going
to discuss without all of the above?
Sian
Ilsor
Thanks for your very intersting insightful thoughts.
Ilsor
"Podmix" <pod...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message news:<Ab3a7.2978$257.1...@ozemail.com.au>...
sian.williams
> Foa Agnetha-philes, and especially Andy B.
>
> I'm not trying to convince you that Frida is overall a better singer
> than Agnetha. It's pointless because you have your own opinion on
> that. I was just trying to explain to you that there are certain
> objective technical points in singing on which Frida shows herself as
> a high-class professional, and Agnetha does not.
>
Excuse me? Agnetha is somehow not a "high-class professional"? That's an
interesting if rather dubious opinion. And you seem to have based it on the
premise that Agnetha wasn't a great live singer. Both women sounded better
on record than on stage, of course. If they didn't then Benny, Bjorn, Micke
and everyone else was wasting their time with all that technology.
You compare Agnetha to Madonna and make the point that both, allegedly, sing
off-key live. But take a look at your own argument: "people come to her
shows (Madonna's) to watch her not to listen to her voice, and they don't
really care whether she's out of pitch or not."
Isn't the performance exactly the point of a live show? I'd sure as hell
rather watch the live performances via ABBA - The Movie or any other video
than sit and listen to the Live CD - and that's minus the obvious atmosphere
and excitement you get of being there 'in the flesh' at a concert. If you
went expecting the singing to be faultless you'd be disappointed at any pop
or rock concert, not just ABBA's.
> One more thing. Do you know, Andy, that Stig Anderson was quite
> critical of Agnetha's singing? I have no idea if CM Palm would write
> about that in his book, but it's a fact. How would you comment on
> that? Dismiss, I guess...
>
Without knowing what specific criticism Stig made, maybe you should bear in
mind that Mr Anderson was initially not keen on *either* of the women
joining forces to make a foursome - he thought Bjorn and Benny were the
talented ones.
> I don't want to say that Frida was always flawless. On "Djupa Andetag"
> there are parts in a couple of songs when she doesn't intonate nearly
> as good as she used to, but in other songs on the same record she
> still sounds just awesome!
Djupa Andetag is great. Frida had (and I hope, has) a beautiful voice. She
certainly wasn't always flawless. Neither was Agnetha - and you know what? I
think you miss the point if you think Agnetha being sometimes off-key was a
problem because the fact that her voice seems to almost break at certain
moments usually emphasises a particularly poignant lyric and adds to the
emotiveness of her voice and the song, rather than detracting. Agnetha's
strength was her vocal style made you believe she really was going through
all that angst - someone made the point elsewhere about how would The Winner
Takes It All sound if Frida sang it, my opinion is it wouldn't pack the same
emotional punch because Frida's voice is just too warm, too soothing, too
comforting (unless distorted as on The Visitors) to make you feel that pain.
But Agnetha's voice is perfect for that.
Sian
sian.williams
Charles Milton Ling <cml...@teleweb.at> wrote in message
news:3B675960...@teleweb.at...
...... SNIPPED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Bravo, Podmix. A sensible view, beautifully expressed.
>
> Charley
Any chance, Charley, you could have saved us scrolling through the two
entire preceding messages before we got to your seven word contribution?
Please, people, snip the unnecessary stuff wherever possible. Thanks.
Sian
Lin S
Comparing Agnetha with Madonna is comparing apples
with peaches I think....
Madonna does HEAVY choreograpy while se is singing
so, it still is very good how M. keeps up her pitch and
voice! It's like singing while you running up te stairs.
Have you tried it??? :o)) Madonna can handle it quite well
so she must be have good singing techniques.
Then again......I personaly like hearing and seïng Agnetha
much better than M, just because Agnetha has such a wonderfull
radiation wich M. has much less of......
Lin
Jay
04:05:07 +0200, Bähler, Madeleine wrote in alt.music.abba:
> Ich danke Dir, werde mich bei ihm mal melden.
> Du kannst sehr gut deutsch schreiben, versuch es doch einfach einmal.
Nein, daß kann ich nicht, entschuldigung. Zu schwierig. Aber vielleicht
kann ich einige Teile für Dich übersetzen in andere Worte?
Ilsor
> record".... O.K.!?
>
> Pete Ward
Shouldn't you say "me" instead of "us", O.K.!?
Or you perhaps were elected to represent those notorious "sweaty,
obsessed crowds" Agnetha was so scared of?
And what "record" do you want to listen to, "Let's Sing Praise to Our
Goddess Agnetha"? But it's counterproductive, my fellow discussion
panelist.
And I hoped for the *intelligent* conversation... Well, at least, I
really enjoyed reading what Podmix wrote.
Ilsor
Podmix
"sian.williams" <sian.w...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:egia7.1573$tQ5.6...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> Podmix <pod...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:l7y97.2125$257....@ozemail.com.au...
>
> .... snipped - hey, look everyone, does anyone else know how to do that??
Yeah, but you were too succinct for me to try it here;-)
> > I'm sorry, but I don't really give a rat's bottom about who was cuter,
who
> > had the nicest hairdos and clothes, who had the "better voice" (your
> opinion
> > is important, but perhaps it's nice sometimes discuss other things as
> > well...;-)
> >
> > Perhaps the magic of the music is what should be left under the
> > microscope...
> >
>
> <Sighs long and hard>
You do that so welllll!!!!
> Pod, mate, stop and look at what you've just said and
> then ask yourself what the hell else you think this newsgroup is ever
going
> to discuss without all of the above?
Perhaps something a little more interesting than which one is better. It
boils down to personal taste; while it's nice to know that somebody prefers
one or the other, it remains a rather futile exercise if people aren't able
to recognise that it's just that- a personal point of view.
Debate for the sake of itself can be a little tiring...;-p
Cheers
Podmix
No sig
JPivenovsky
> I
>think you miss the point if you think Agnetha being sometimes off-key was
>a
>problem because the fact that her voice seems to almost break at certain
>moments usually emphasises a particularly poignant lyric
There is a difference between "breaking" and singing off key. I hope we all
can tell the difference.
Charles Milton Ling
E.g. towards the end of "The Winner Takes It All": "You've come to shake my
hand." Heart-wrenching.
Charley
AndyB
>And what "record" do you want to listen to, "Let's Sing Praise to Our
>Goddess Agnetha"?
Can someone advise where I may obtain this catchy sounding little
number!?
Reckon it'd be a surefire hit myself......providing our "off key
angel" doesn't do a "live" version that is.......;-)
Andy B
PS. Nice one "Sweaty obsessed" Mr Ward!!
Ilsor
> Comparing Agnetha with Madonna is comparing apples
> with peaches I think....
I used them as an example, not compared them! I said that Agnetha had
a good ear for music and not enough technique and Madonna vise versa.
So I said that Agnetha's problems were technical and not inherent.
> Madonna does HEAVY choreograpy while se is singing
No, she DOESN'T always does HEAVY choreography when singing...
For your information, she uses playback a lot, thus mimes her singing,
when she does a really HEAVY choreography
Ilsor
As far as live singing, yes. Again, if you want opinions other than
mine on this subject please read reviews of Abba's concerts.
>Both women sounded better
> on record than on stage, of course.
Frida was technically superb on stage.
> You compare Agnetha to Madonna and make the point that both, allegedly, sing
> off-key live.
I used it to illustrate my point that Agnetha's problems were
technical. I didn't compare them!
> Isn't the performance exactly the point of a live show? I'd sure as hell
> rather watch the live performances via ABBA - The Movie or any other video
> than sit and listen to the Live CD - and that's minus the obvious atmosphere
> and excitement you get of being there 'in the flesh' at a concert. If you
> went expecting the singing to be faultless you'd be disappointed at any pop
> or rock concert, not just ABBA's.
I attended enough pop concerts to tell you that I'd prefer to listen
to a decent singing. Abba's Live CD is too doctored to be considered a
genuine live record let alone enjoy it.
As I already said vocals in Abba songa are too prominent, and any
off-key singing ruin the whole impression.
> Without knowing what specific criticism Stig made, maybe you should bear in
> mind that Mr Anderson was initially not keen on *either* of the women
> joining forces to make a foursome - he thought Bjorn and Benny were the
> talented ones.
I know that
> think you miss the point if you think Agnetha being sometimes off-key was a
> problem because the fact that her voice seems to almost break at certain
> moments usually emphasises a particularly poignant lyric and adds to the
> emotiveness of her voice and the song, rather than detracting.
Tone breaking is NOT singing off-key. This thing is pretty usual for
non-classical stuff.
> strength was her vocal style made you believe she really was going through
> all that angst - someone made the point elsewhere about how would The Winner
> Takes It All sound if Frida sang it, my opinion is it wouldn't pack the same
> emotional punch because Frida's voice is just too warm, too soothing, too
> comforting (unless distorted as on The Visitors) to make you feel that pain.
> But Agnetha's voice is perfect for that.
I guess you haven't really read what I wrote on this
Pete_Ward
>> record".... O.K.!?
>
>> Pete Ward
>Shouldn't you say "me" instead of "us", O.K.!?
>Or you perhaps were elected to represent those notorious "sweaty,
>obsessed crowds" Agnetha was so scared of?
I think not "all knowing one". Judging from the reaction of several of
my "ABBA comrades", I think I'll stick with the original "US" thank
you very much.
As for my enrollment into the ranks of the infamous "Sweaty, obsessed
crowds", I will admit to the odd case of "obsession" (only during a
full moon mind you), but as for the "sweaty" part, I'll have you know
that I take a bath every month....whether I need it or NOT...so there!
>And what "record" do you want to listen to, "Let's Sing Praise to Our
>Goddess Agnetha"? But it's counterproductive, my fellow discussion
>panelist.
Is this one of those "hidden gems" locked away in the Polar vaults?
If so, forget "JLT"...release THIS one instead I say!
>And I hoped for the *intelligent* conversation... Well, at least, I
>really enjoyed reading what Podmix wrote.
Sorry I wasn't capable of coming up with a more "intelligent" reply
worthy of your limitless wisdom and experience your eminence.
"We're not worthy" (to quote from a rather funny recent movie).
Pete
Ilsor
> my "ABBA comrades", I think I'll stick with the original "US" thank
> you very much.
If you prefer to be "ABBA comrades" speaker, so be it. But then please
mention - us, ABBA comrades - so I would know whom you mean.
> As for my enrollment into the ranks of the infamous "Sweaty, obsessed
> crowds", I will admit to the odd case of "obsession" (only during a
> full moon mind you), but as for the "sweaty" part, I'll have you know
> that I take a bath every month....whether I need it or NOT...so there!
Such a revealing information!
> Is this one of those "hidden gems" locked away in the Polar vaults?
> If so, forget "JLT"...release THIS one instead I say!
I think it's, in fact, JLT - la-la-la version, but instead of
"la-la-la" there is "Sing a Praise to Our Goddess Agnetha" line.
Agnetha is in perfect pitch, by the way!!!
> Sorry I wasn't capable of coming up with a more "intelligent" reply
> worthy of your limitless wisdom and experience your eminence.
> "We're not worthy" (to quote from a rather funny recent movie).
Thank you for the kind words about me. Oh, you're so charmingly
humble!
And I prefer not to notice sarcasm...
Ilsor
PeterH
The reason why Agnetha is not perfect on stage is IMO probably due
nerves, and is more comfortable recording songs in a studio.
This reminds me of Jimmy White the best snooker player not to have
won the World Championship, due to nerves.
Agnetha and Frida are both technically very good singers, and sing
with feelings, (Madonna sings flat, limited range, no expression of any
feelings in her singing, beside can Madonna sing in Swedish?)
Its difficult enough to learn a foreign language, but for Agnetha and
Frida to sing in English as well, tells you how much hard work they
did in producing these songs.
In their native language Agnetha and Frida are superb singers, even
if they do occasionally sing of key, nobody is perfect!
Don't forget they sang live at the Eurovision song contest, listening
to their performance of Waterloo leaves no doubt they were the best.
The question of who is technically better is that neither are better.
The fault with Agnetha performing live does not enter the equation, as
how a singer performs on stage depends on their personality, and how
they cope with the crowds.
All this in my opinion of course!
Let the music speak and not the critics!
PeterH
sian.williams
>
> "sian.williams" <sian.w...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:egia7.1573$tQ5.6...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> > Podmix <pod...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:l7y97.2125$257....@ozemail.com.au...
> >
> > .... snipped - hey, look everyone, does anyone else know how to do
that??
>
> Yeah, but you were too succinct for me to try it here;-)
Flaterrer! But even the fact that someone thought of snipping makes me
happy! :-)
>
> > Pod, mate, stop and look at what you've just said and
> > then ask yourself what the hell else you think this newsgroup is ever
> going
> > to discuss without all of the above?
>
> Perhaps something a little more interesting than which one is better. It
> boils down to personal taste; while it's nice to know that somebody
prefers
> one or the other, it remains a rather futile exercise if people aren't
able
> to recognise that it's just that- a personal point of view.
Oh, yeah, but we do all know that. Don't we?
Anyway, it's like comparing two totally different but equally amazing
things. So on one day you might prefer one over the other, but that
shouldn't mean you think less of the one you didn't choose. Sorta.
>
> Debate for the sake of itself can be a little tiring...;-p
It can? What's the emoticon for someone blinking in a disbelieving way?!
> Cheers
>
> Podmix
> No sig
No sig. No pointless debates. Is that really you, Pod??!
Sian xx
sian.williams
> > Excuse me? Agnetha is somehow not a "high-class professional"?
>
> As far as live singing, yes. Again, if you want opinions other than
> mine on this subject please read reviews of Abba's concerts.
>
view on this one. Perhaps you should consider how Agnetha made her break
through in those early days? By singing live. And what about her appearance
on stage in Jesus Christ Superstar? These, plus the live concerts, are more
than enough evidence to believe that she was a better than competent live
performer. If she doesn't reach your "high-class professional" standard then
I'm not sure what benchmark you're applying.
> >Both women sounded better
> > on record than on stage, of course.
>
> Frida was technically superb on stage.
Hmmm. Frida was as good as Agnetha, I'm sure. No doubt she was more
confident and therefore her voice was less affected by nerves. As for
"technically superb" I'm not sure whether I can agree mostly because you
haven't set out the criteria as far as I can see.
> > You compare Agnetha to Madonna and make the point that both, allegedly,
sing
> > off-key live.
>
> I used it to illustrate my point that Agnetha's problems were
> technical. I didn't compare them!
When is a comparison not a comparison? OK, thanks for the illustration then.
Madonna is actually quite an interesting reference point - except, of
course, that she never (to my knowledge) allows herself to be put in the
situation of singing live alongside another female singer, so doesn't suffer
obvious comparison with someone of a completely different range.
>
> > Isn't the performance exactly the point of a live show? I'd sure as hell
> > rather watch the live performances via ABBA - The Movie or any other
video
> > than sit and listen to the Live CD - and that's minus the obvious
atmosphere
> > and excitement you get of being there 'in the flesh' at a concert. If
you
> > went expecting the singing to be faultless you'd be disappointed at any
pop
> > or rock concert, not just ABBA's.
>
> I attended enough pop concerts to tell you that I'd prefer to listen
> to a decent singing. Abba's Live CD is too doctored to be considered a
> genuine live record let alone enjoy it.
> As I already said vocals in Abba songa are too prominent, and any
> off-key singing ruin the whole impression.
>
I agree with you about the Live CD but I'm not sure that I understand what
point you're making when you say the vocals in ABBA's songs are too
prominent. Do you mean that as a point of general criticism of their music
(in which case I disagree) or specifically of the concert performances (in
which case I still think I disagree)?
> > Without knowing what specific criticism Stig made, maybe you should bear
in
> > mind that Mr Anderson was initially not keen on *either* of the women
> > joining forces to make a foursome - he thought Bjorn and Benny were the
> > talented ones.
>
> I know that
Good for you. Maybe you'd like to explain what Stig's criticism was if it's
relevant to this discussion as I don't know it, as I pointed out.
>
> > think you miss the point if you think Agnetha being sometimes off-key
was a
> > problem because the fact that her voice seems to almost break at certain
> > moments usually emphasises a particularly poignant lyric and adds to the
> > emotiveness of her voice and the song, rather than detracting.
>
> Tone breaking is NOT singing off-key. This thing is pretty usual for
> non-classical stuff.
>
Fine. I'd have thought off key singing was pretty usual for live
non-classical singing.
>
>
> > strength was her vocal style made you believe she really was going
through
> > all that angst - someone made the point elsewhere about how would The
Winner
> > Takes It All sound if Frida sang it, my opinion is it wouldn't pack the
same
> > emotional punch because Frida's voice is just too warm, too soothing,
too
> > comforting (unless distorted as on The Visitors) to make you feel that
pain.
> > But Agnetha's voice is perfect for that.
>
> I guess you haven't really read what I wrote on this
Guess again. But if you have a pertinent point that has eluded me perhaps
you'd be kind enough to illustrate it. What exactly are the "objective
technical points in singing on which Frida shows herself as
a high-class professional, and Agnetha does not" other than apparently never
singing off key?
Sian
Ilsor
> No, I don't need to do that, thanks. Other people's opinions won't change my
> view on this one.
Sometimes it's useful to say to yourself "Perhaps I'm not correct on
this one"
And what about her appearance
> on stage in Jesus Christ Superstar? These, plus the live concerts, are more
> than enough evidence to believe that she was a better than competent live
> performer. If she doesn't reach your "high-class professional" standard then
> I'm not sure what benchmark you're applying.
Well, reviews of her performance, singing in particular, in the show
were negative. Her numerous live shows before Abba were also
criticized. If you don't have those reviews, read JM Potiez book.
> Hmmm. Frida was as good as Agnetha, I'm sure.
Why are you so sure that Frida wasn't better?
> confident and therefore her voice was less affected by nerves. As for
> "technically superb" I'm not sure whether I can agree mostly because you
> haven't set out the criteria as far as I can see.
Did you study singing? I'm not sure if you'll understand what I mean
when I'll put this in purely musical terms. Otherwise, we need to sit
together so I could point to certain things for you to see what I
mean.
> > > You compare Agnetha to Madonna and make the point that both, allegedly,
> sing
> > > off-key live.
Not allegedly, Agnetha's singing off-key is a FACT. Why are you so
reluctant to accept it? If you don't hear it, it doesn't mean it isn't
there.
> When is a comparison not a comparison? OK, thanks for the illustration then.
> Madonna is actually quite an interesting reference point - except, of
> course, that she never (to my knowledge) allows herself to be put in the
> situation of singing live alongside another female singer, so doesn't suffer
> obvious comparison with someone of a completely different range.
Your knowledge is obviously limited. Madonna has 2 extremely good
back-up singers who accompanied her most of the times live ( I heard
they are releasing solo albums), and they easily oversang her on a
number of occasion. So she did suffer obvious comparisons, and some
reviewers noted that.
> I agree with you about the Live CD but I'm not sure that I understand what
> point you're making when you say the vocals in ABBA's songs are too
> prominent. Do you mean that as a point of general criticism of their music
> (in which case I disagree) or specifically of the concert performances (in
> which case I still think I disagree)?
I'm impressed you don't understand. Agnetha and Frida's vocals are
essential part of Abba sound both in studio and live. As Benny said
"Take away girls' voices and Abba sound is gone". If there's something
wrong with those voices the whole Abba sound landscape is distorted.
In Abba's case voices are like additional and VERY important
instrument. When we talk about other performers, the role of voice
isn't like that, it's more interchangeable.
> Good for you. Maybe you'd like to explain what Stig's criticism was if it's
> relevant to this discussion as I don't know it, as I pointed out.
Stig didn't like Agnetha's voice, so what explanation do you need? As
I said, perhaps you'll find more information in a new book by Carl
Magnus Palm.
> Fine. I'd have thought off key singing was pretty usual for live
> non-classical singing.
Why do you think so?
> Guess again. But if you have a pertinent point that has eluded me perhaps
> you'd be kind enough to illustrate it. What exactly are the "objective
> technical points in singing on which Frida shows herself as
> a high-class professional, and Agnetha does not" other than apparently never
> singing off key?
As I said before, if you studied singing you'd know those technical
points.
Let's take clarity of a tone as an example. Frida is overwhelmingly
better in that, but does it make sense to you?
Ask also Podmix about who is better *technically* of two or who is
*better live singer*. You seem to trust him.
Ilsor
M&M's
"John Tobler" <tob...@wombles.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:amE97.12971$ar1....@www.newsranger.com...
> In article <cwdnO1YkSQUQmWFPaBX2XrlDcY8=@4ax.com>, Andy B says...
>
> >Yeah I agree Toblerone is quite tasty John me old son...but it can be
> >a bit damn painful on the roof of the mouth when taking a bite from
> >the old "mountain bar"......don't you think?.
>
> We can always look into that. Would you prefer a "customised" version?
>
> >PS. Did Agnetha sign anything "interesting" on the bottom of that
> >"Super Trouper" period photo I remember seeing framed in your office?!
> >I seem to remember it was shown in some edition of the "ABBA
> >magazine"?
>
> <cough> I do not know what you're talking about!!!
>
> >Come on Johnny...don't be shy now!! ;-)
>
> The name is John, if you don't mind.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
>
Brian
I always change my mind which lady i like to listen to best depending
on my mood and choice of song.
I think that we are lucky to have had the talents of these ladies solo
or singing together which is the most magical in my opinion.
Also i love the contrast of the two voices singing those great songs
too!
I have to say Frida has always been my fave lady personality wise but
they are both awesomme in my humble opinion pure pop singing at its
best.
god less em Aggie and princess Fridster Bri Canada
SEBASTIÁN DE SOUSA
En cuanto a la complejidad técnica de Abba diré que es mucha- Los empecé a escuchar desde muy niño y puedo decir que 40 años después siempre encuentro detalles nuevos que admirar en sus canciones. La descripción: fácil de escuchar y difícil de ejecutar nunca tuvo más sentido. Tener 40 años escuchando a una banda y descubrir una línea de voz, una frase en la letra, una línea de voz, una línea de bajo, una harmonía, una modulación, algo nuevo que no habías escuchado antes, no es algo sencillo. Eso sólo significa que su trabajo tenía y tiene mucho contenido. Respecto a quién era mejor vocalista es una discusión estéril, ambas son geniales, simplemente, después de tantos años escuchando sus canciones quería saber si alguien distinguía el hecho de que que Frida tiene una voz con más cuerpo, más presta a tonos graves, aunque tenga un buen registro, y que Agnetha tiene una voz un poquito más aguda y más metálica. De hecho lo divertido es constatar, que aunque sus voces se mezclan tan bien y encajan al punto de ser imperceptibles, las diferencias, alguien podría distinguirlas sin verlas. Yo lo hago, pero es que tengo tantos escuchándolos que me resulta natural y divertido. Las discusiones de si alguien desafina en vivo es estéril. Un concierto es otra experiencia, discutir esas pendejadas no tiene sentido. Un saludo.
CJ Hetle
> I was six years old when "Arrival" hit the airways. Like possibly every
> six-year-old, I loved ABBA but really had a soft spot for the brunette.
> Years later I realised they all had names. Years later I also realised
> that - unfortunately - it was Agnetha who had the better voice.
> But only in the last five years have I realised how close to perfection
> Agnetha's voice was. Not only was her range greater than Frida's, but the
> way she moved up and down the register without a hint of breaking proves
> those pipes she had were quite a phenomenon.
> Leading any other group, Frida would have been a star on her own. If
> Agnetha was the Pavarotti of her time, Frida was the Bocelli. Frida and
> Andrea Bocelli both have more "smoky cafe" voices which don't soar like
> their more gifted (and it is a gift) contemporaries. After all, before
> ABBA, Agnetha played Mary Magdolin in JC Superstar and Frida recorded jazz
> and swing.
> Agnetha winner and still champion...much to my chagrin.
I totally agree, Frida is great but Agnehta is beyond. Frida is a great singer but Agnetha transcends. She is note perfect where Frida, at rare times lingers on the flat. Agnetha's vocals led this band but without Frida it would have been quite too straight forward as she adds the undertone to the vocal equation. Separate great, together AMAZING. Let's not forget the guys who come up with the meat, brilliant B&B, you found a way to deliver for generations of fans (even though, the Mamma Mia movies were cat croppings, you knew how to promote ABBA. Stick to it and dump the commercial cat poo.
