Two questions:

1. What does it mean scientifically when somebody has a great singing voice. Can a singing voice be scientifically identified by analyzing the overtone spectrum?

2. Is there an anatomical difference between people who can sing and people who cant?

I'm guessing that scientifically it means that they are able to sing with good tone and intonation, and, in the case of group singing, with good balance and blend.

I don't think there is an anatomical difference between people who can sing and people who can't or that there is a specific type of voice that is better than another. Those differences are cultural. Either you know how to sing or you don't, and people either like your voice or they don't, but its all culture when it comes to other people, and its practice when it comes to you.

I'm guessing that scientifically it means that they are able to sing with good tone and intonation.
Yes but is there a scientifically identifiable way of distinguishing a 'good' tone?

Being able to stay on pitch is a different matter.

I don't think it's anatomical, I think it's definately a mental thing. I've noticed there's a certain type of personality that can always sing- funny people. It's seriously uncanny.

I think possibly observant people who listen and notice little things in life in general tend to be able to sing. Like deaf people can't even talk properly, that's kind of an extreme extension. People who, aren't necessarrily deaf, but just don't really pay attention or notice the subtle rhythms and melodies of music (and related things too, like the subtle nuances of being cool) tend to not be able to sing.

I doubt there is a scientific basis for determining that Skip James - or Bob Dylan, even - is a better singer than Luciano Pavarotti.

But many well-informed people would say so.

The kind of precise muscle memory and resilience of ligament etc necessary to recreate the exact vocal resonating cavity that amplifies specific remembered formants or produces a particular desired tone and holds it at volume, is only available in a few percent of the species - just as the ability to balance on one hand easily enough that one can employ the trick as a mere part of a more complicated maneuver is only found in some of us.

I think theres a number of factors which all have to be present.

1. Range of pitch...Lemmy of Motorhead doesnt even qualify in this category, with a range of maybe five notes max.

2. Vibrato...a slight variation in pitch that wavers on sustained notes. Robin Gibb and Dolly Parton for example have a very FAST natural vibrato. Gives the voice a shimmering quality.

3. Intonation...a mental sense of relative pitch or, even more rare...perfect pitch.

4. Projection...the ability to belt it out.

5. Confidence...we all know this ALONE isnt enough, just from watching
American Idol.

5. Tone...most mysterious of all qualities. Pianos and guitars sound different because of differences in tone.

I don't think that scientists can create a experiment to determine what a great singer really is. I feel that is determined by those people that listen to them and enjoy their singing. Bad singers would just fade away as time goes by. Many people try to show us that they can sing but many times the only ones they sound good to is only themselves.

None of those silly karaoke machines seem to ever work when they rate how well you sing something.

Almost everyone in China can sing well. The tonal language and KTV popularity are the obvious reasons.

What about Death Metal singers? How do you judge them objectively?

What about Death Metal singers? How do you judge them objectively?

Kind of a oxymoron isn't that? Death Metal Singer

What about Death Metal singers?
The most bizarre example is the singer in Opeth...forget his Swedish name???

I say bizarre because he really has a great singing voice. Its almost comical how their excellent songs are suddenly ruined by all that amorphous growling.

Doesnt even matter what hes growling about because you cant even make out more than a few words.

Objectively speaking, singing can be measured. If you play notes on a piano. The measurement is the accuracy of an individual's voice when matching a particular note. Tone, pitch, volume, or whatever. All measured by some sort of device. But the answer to your original question, indeed an individual's singing ability (accuracy to harmonic sound) can be done.

I know one thing for damn certain, I cannot sing worth a crap! :D

I'm not sure how to exactly define tone, but I do know that it has to do with the temperature of the instrument and environment.

Its interesting to think about though.

mathematically a great song/music is related to a "harmonic series" in math

mathematically a great song/music is related to a "harmonic series" in math
Yes, every note has the same overtone series. What characterizes TONE is the wave shape and the different volumes of the series.

This is why A sharp sounds different on a piano than a guitar.

For some reason the human mind perceives some tones as good and others as unpleasant.

Yes, every note has the same overtone series. What characterizes TONE is the wave shape and the different volumes of the series.

This is why A sharp sounds different on a piano than a guitar.

For some reason the human mind perceives some tones as good and others as unpleasant.

probably matches the human sound frequency...perhaps has to do a lot with how well cochlea perceives these vibrations of sound in the water, if it is not disturbed it perceives it as good...if it is rhytmic and soft it perceives it well too.

Have you noticed how people are relaxed when they listen to smooth jazz or classical music and how people are usually tense and ready-to-fight when they listen to rap and r&b? The way each person perceives the music depends on the cochlea perception of vibrations in the fluid within it, if the vibration do not cause harm, the music is good, if the vibration cause harm the music is bad.

thats my opinion, of course. :p

mathematically a great song/music is related to a "harmonic series" in math

So you think Smells Like Teen Spirit was a great song solely because of its harmonic series? :rolleyes:

Knowing someone has a nice voice is like knowing when something is porn. "You know it when you hear it" Just because you have perfect pitch doesn't make you a great singer. I went to school with a guy who had perfect pitch, but his voice was terrible. Which would make him a bad singer.

So you think Smells Like Teen Spirit was a great song solely because of its harmonic series? :rolleyes:

well obviously it has to do with neural system...associations and so forth

well obviously it has to do with neural system...associations and so forth

That's like someone asking you where you live and so you hand them a map of the world and say "somewhere around here."

Of course it has to do with the neural system... you wouldn't be able to perceive music without a neural system.

Who's a good singer and who's not is a subjective thing but I feel like there's some objectivity to it too. Look at a singer like Bob Dylan and it's almost split down the middle between people who love his music and people who hate it (usually because of the tone of his voice.)

As far as my own tastes in music and singing go I find myself drawn (subconsciously really) to people who just feel genuine. Of course tone matters and so does harmonic progressions or whatever but all up to a certain point.

Most musical virtuosos I can't stand listening to. A lot of them seem to get their heads lodged up their ass. A bad song is almost always attributed to the artist not serving their energy to the song itself. Ynwie Malmsteen (or however you spell it) doesn't make songs, he makes obstacle courses.

Have you ever gotten chills from a part of a song? That's what I search for when I listen to music. Good music MOVES you. It makes you MOVE.

No mathematical formula will ever be able to figure out how to do that.

We're not talking about songs we're talking about singing.

We're not talking about songs we're talking about singing.

Can you sing without making a song? What is a song? :confused:

The human voice is essentially an instrument in itself. Yah this thread's about singing but the only differences between the voice and a guitar or piano is the tone and the variability.

When you asked "Is there an anatomical difference between people who can sing and people who cant?" you implied that some people can sing and some people can't sing which can further be implied that there are certain qualities in singing that are considered good and certain qualities that are considered bad.

I was trying to isolate those qualities. I stepped into other very closely related mediums to do this.

I don't see how what I said was off topic.