George Michael's Incredibly Underrated Voice

Live, Freddie was not consistent. I have no trouble pointing that out. On an off day- he was FAR from what he could be.
Paul Rodgers is a safe bet live compared to Freddie. But when Freddie was on? Not even Paul Rodgers could come remotely close

 

Him suffering from vocal nodules is mentioned on Wiki >

"Professional singers on extended tours with tight schedules run a substantial risk of damaging their voices unless they make sure to rest the vocal cords and get enough sleep and proper diet.

Some famous singers known to have developed vocal nodules are Luciano Pavarotti, Mariah Carey, Whitney Houston, Freddie Mercury (who refused to have surgery out of fear that it would permanently damage his voice) and Joss Stone.[13][14]"

Robert Plant also said at the Mercury tribute concert that "A lot of people are changing the keys to these songs because they just can't do a Freddie."

 

Glad to see some folks discussing this - I should say that my basis for calling George Michael's voice underrated wasn't because I thought that most people think his voice is awful or anything, but more that he isn't really listed critically (or listed at all on the Rolling Stones list of great singers) or the masses as one of the greats, as Freddie Mercury, Michael Jackson, Whitney Houston, and Elvis are.

I almost feel like Michael took a lot of what made Freddie Mercury one of the best (and Freddie was the best vocalist, if not singer) smoothed it out, combined his own flair and as a result was an incredibly versatile singer. I have trouble seeing Mercury singing Father Figure - my main complaint with FM was that he had trouble showing emotion sometimes due to the overwhelming operatic power of his voice which left me cold - but I can see George Michael singing most Queen stuff, and doing pretty well, same for most of Michael Jackson's catalog - George Michael was just that versatile as a singer while still making things his own.

 

Rolling Stone magazine's best lists are often a joke. They didn't have Kate Bush or Mike Patton (6 octave range) in their top 100 singers. Mercury, who usually ends up at no.1 or no.2 on these lists, was at no.18 (they've never liked Queen), Jackson was way further down the list, no 35 or something like that, I think(?). And not including George Micheal is just ridiculous.

 

I always thought he was well known as a great singer

 

Haven't seen it mentioned yet, but his singing ability declined rather sharply over time and a bit too early. I saw him live in '88 and '08, and while the latter was an enjoyable time, it wasn't really close to the '88 Faith show in terms of singing ability, I imagine age was the main factor for the decline. That Faith show though was absolutely incredible from a vocal perspective, and he was better than many of his contemporaries, even Michael Jackson, and at that point Freddie Mercury himself, let alone the others.

But due to his lack of content it's kind of hard to fully appreciate his voice, which is why I imagine he is considered underrated (I consider him to be, at least). It would be like if Freddie Mercury stopped singing for a while after Sheer Heart Attack, or Michael Jackson quit recording follow Off the Wall, etc. There just isn't a wealth of material to judge from his solo prime, and he didn't always give it his best with the Wham! material.

 

Ok, thanks for saying exactly what I was going to say. Not a fan, not my type of music but that vocal was stunning.

 

well 2 out of 3 ain't bad
I used to frequent the Rec.Music.Opera newsgroup back then and he was very divisive there as well. You claim he's a mediocre pop singer but I completely disagree, he's an exceptional pop singer who's plagued by mediocre material
I also saw him perform Werther in Detroit with D. Graves, and she was likewise impressed with his voice. I also had conversations with Steven Mercurio the conductor who considered him a real talent and a pleasure to work with.

The Kennedy Center performance was definitely without microphones and his voice and all instruments came from their exact location. It was probably the quietest concert I've ever attended. If someone in the hushed audience would so much as utter a cough it was just as loud as the entire ensemble. As I mentioned, I've talked with him face to face and his voice is of a normal volume, neither exceptionally loud or quiet, but I've found his devotion to the art of Opera (don't think he even really likes pop except for a few artists like Sinatra) is sincere and his 'special circumstance' is not the sole reason for his popularity, which if that were so, would have fizzled out about as fast as an American Idol chart entry I mean, if you don't like him that's totally cool with me, lots of people don't but hype alone will not make a career that endures decades.
Now back to the George Michael channel.

 

I believe that's what also caused Adele to cancel her final 2 shows.

 

Boccelli is definitely a sincere opera freak, with great knowledge and admiration about the legendary opera singers (AFAIK Franco Corelli is his idol), but what you said about him performing without amplification really intrigued me, and I take your word, although it's still hard to believe...anyway, no more off-topics

 

He had a great voice for sure, very expressive. Watching these live videos, I am wondering:

Why does George Michael wear sunglasses on stage?

 

Yeah, I always wondered what was up with that too for the Tribute Concert. Maybe it was an anxiety thing? It was a big crowd.

If you notice, when he hits the falsetto peak in Somebody to Love, he turns away from the crowd and belts it out to the choir and Brian May.

 

I have no reason to lie, but just to put a final on it...Opera by its nature involves acting and projection, which is usually exhibited by an extroverted personality. Bocelli is completely introverted which I can understand being a put off to many trad Opera fans but to me it's an examination of inner space and has an almost psychedelic quality at times for lack of a better word.

Obligatory George Michael content, wonder if George was a fan?
...also, the very title of this thread invites comparison to other singers via use of the word 'underrated' ..as in, underrated to other singers perhaps? lol

to make this more George, the 12" mix of Everything She Wants is better than the other versions.

 

True story - he's MUCH under rated by many ..... including myself. Funny thing is yesterday wifie was sitting in my office reading while I was doing some work so I decided to play something I knew she'd like. I pulled out GM's greatest hits recording and put it on and actually listened to it. Great voice.

I have to admit that I hadn't seen or heard his cover of Queen as posted in this thread. That was quite impressive.

 

Or listen to Innuendo. The man gave everything he had for that album while suffering from AIDS. (There was no medication back then)

 

Here's the rehearsal... What. A. Voice.

 

But not just the tribute concert. He also wears them here:

 

Apples and pears, Rodgers is the ultimate blues/rock/soul voice, Mercury more technical/operatic.

Rodgers with Queen was an absolutely dire pairing, probably borne out of respect I feel.

 

They should have brought George Michael on since they planned on continuing the band. They were actually poised to make a comeback in the 90s after Freddy passed, in large part due to Wayne's World featuring Bohemian Rhapsody.

 

I think the sunglasses thing was about image, like during the Faith era.

 

GM had a great voice, but I'd still pick FM over GM.
As for GM wearing sunglasses all the time, perhaps his eyes were sensitive to light.
As I recall GM was far-sighted.
I think I recall seeing a photo of GM from his Wham days & he was wearing reading glasses.

Darryl

 

Very well said! When covering a song, George Michael often sang better than the original version. He had an extraordinarily expressive voice. To me, songs on Make It Big and Listen Without Prejudice really showcased his voice. Waiting For That Day is one of my favorite songs of his. I can always feel the emotion of the song because of his passionate singing.

 

GM with Queen was a total missed opportunity (though I'm sure it must have been discussed at some point). Being kept busy with the Queen organisation and having someone as intelligent and caring as Brian May by his side maybe things would have turned out differently?

 

Things would have been different if they had toured together. Brian May apparently appreciates GM. On the other hand, I am not sure that GM had wanted it. He was pretty much a lone wolf about his music and career, and a self admitted control freak. Wham! worked well because Andrew Ridgeley let GM to completely control the music part.

 

Talking about GM working with the Queen, this nice video summarized their collaboration and the 5 Live LP. You can see how Brian May thinks about GM.