In 1987, the Wheel of Whitney's Fortune landed on a song by two veteran rock songwriters, Steinberg & Kelly! Having tackled all manner of dance'n'R&B, how would she fare with a rock-forward tune?
Thanks so much, Andy! It's a blast to have you on board for these! I keep thinking of her practicing at home to just LEARN the song....and, don't you think, Walden would've constructed a skeletal demo for her to learn from....one that mimicked, just a tad, the arrangement they were going to tackle? Steinberg & Kelly's demo, I suppose, could've been used as her learning template....you know me.....just been wonderin'! I look forward to our next wHITney! I think WE'RE warmed up!😉🎶🎙
Thank you, Brad! I also imagine her practising a lot. I know she was the opposite of an overthinker when it came to recording (unlike my girl Mariah who changes her mind and re-records stuff at the last minute), but in order to be able to do that (I imagine in very few takes), without warming up, she had probably learned the song inside out!
I also look forward to continuing this journey with you! And you can rest assured we’re warmed up and ready! 🎤🎶
Really interesting to listen to the Prince-vibey demo and read about the songwriters' disappointment at Whitney's version. Also to hear John McLaughlin's completely different interpretation.
The Japan video was a wow. She sure gave great concert.
Thank you so much, Ellen, from me as well. Brad did a great job putting it all together!
Jon's cover was indeed something special. I love how he gave the song a new lease on life.
Totally agree with you and Brad re dancing. I mean, for Whitney to be able to even move whilst doing that level of singing... chapeau!
None of the "big vocalists" of that era (Whitney, Mariah, Celine, i.e. the "vocal trinity" as they are collectively known) is/was a great dancer. Madonna and Janet got more moves than voice, although both of them have a sense of musicality which is, in my view, not often recognised enough. They are deeply aware of the limitations in their voice and they adapt songs to suit them perfectly -- that's smart, even if not acrobatic, singing.
Beyonce might have been the first (from my sort of audience "generation") who brought acrobatic singing and high-intensity dancing combined. Never been a huge fan, but mad props to her.
Thanks so much, Ellen! I lucked out twice! Finding the Steinberg/Kelly demo, and a passel of live "So Emotional" vids from which to choose! But, y'know what? As much as I wanted to just for my edification and enjoyment (to watch the others, and pick the best), the Japan vid was the first I auditioned. When it was over, I just thought...."well, no need to go any further!"
We discovered early on that she was not the most innately comfortable dancer, but was game to take lessons and spend the extra time to get more comfortable and, even, better at it. I couldn't help but watch her on this one, and still could see her not over-extending herself, and sticking to steps (with her coach and/or choreographer) that she was comfortable executing! Like an athlete, you're a pro if you can "stay within yourself," and not over-extend. Know your limits, and perfect what's in your natural wheelhouse.
Another gift of hers we dasn't overlook!
Jon's interpretation is gold...As I told Nick, his is the only male cover we've got! I almost wanna say, every guy who might've wanted to record one just threw up his hands and gave mad props to Jon as having "the one that cannot be topped"!
I was thinking as I watched Whitney that she has great rhythm. Plus, it's hard to do moves when you're doing that level of singing.
I mean, when did we start expecting the pop divas to be able to dance as well as sing? It's an interesting question, because the Motown groups all danced, but they were ensembles where no one voice was carrying all the singing duties. Who was the first to raise the bar? I'm wondering if it was Madonna? Because if you look at Donna Summer, she wasn't expected to dance, was she? It seems to have been an 80s thing, if I'm not mistaken. (Although I could be wrong!)
All of that! Dancing (or choreography, as in moves to mirror the lyrics....see, "Stop! In the Name of Love"!!!) has always accompanied, as you mention, the Motown and Philly, etc groups. And, you're right about Summer.....she did the writhing-on-the-floor thing, but, generally, that seemed to be the extent of her "dancing"! Madonna, I think is spot on, as the first, as she even started out as a dancer for Patrick Hernandez, and even The Alvin Ailey Dance Theatre!! I, too, would slap all that directly onto the '80s!!
The only real "dancing" done during pop songs in the '70s was basically the choreography done on and for variety shows, and The June Taylor Dancers coming up with something in the background, say, for Helen Reddy or The Starland Vocal Band!😂
As a huge fan of Whitney's version (it was my number one song of 1987!) I found this to be a very interesting discussion. I love the hard-driving rock sound and drama of Whitney's version. It touched me on a deep level when released. Of course, after that album, Whitney was often accused of appealing too much to her massive white audience. It would have been fascinating to see what would have happened if she recorded it in the same funky Prince-like vibe as the demo. Would have have alienated her fans? Perhaps. It's still a great song!
Thank you so much, Dan! Mad props to Brad for being the mastermind behind the article and, crucially, for condensing all this info and crafting a fun, entertaining and informative piece!
I wasn't born at the time of release, so it's invaluable for me to read about music lovers' appreciation from back then! I was born too late, musically speaking!
Glad you liked this, Dan! Do you remember, at the time, any thoughts you may have had on her sudden turn to the rock sound? Or, did you just enjoy it as another up-tempo Houston hit?
Good point on her at-the-time critics accusing her of pandering to a massive pop audience, at the possible exclusion of an urban base.
Wouldn't it have been cool (this was a thing in '87, as I recall) had she recorded a Steinberg/Kelly-esque/Prince arrangement, and made it a bonus track, say, on an exclusive CD edition, or just simply one of many that might be included on an extended single/EP kind of thing (looking at YOU, Cher, and your 85 different mixes and re-mixes of "Believe" on a CD a mere decade later)!😁👍
I don't think I was savvy enough to put what I thought of the sound of the '87 recording as "rock." It felt like another uptempo Whitney song (she'd release a ballad, then an uptempo track, then a ballad, then another uptempo... and on and on.) Here's the link to my Top Ten Memoir post about 1987: https://danpal.substack.com/p/a-top-ten-memoir-1987-welcome-to?r=lru5s
That's fair, Dan, and that's pretty much how I've viewed the song in the rear-view mirror. Now that I know that rock was the intentional direction Clive, Walden, et al wanted to take her, I'm appreciating the song that much more! I loved Walden's (in his interview vid) reference to "Metallica meets Whitney"! I hope he realizes that deserves a little chuckle!
LOL 😂😂 I'm chuckling for sure! But, in fairness to Walden, the intention was there, and they did an amazing job. Even if they didn't precisely recreate a Metallica kind of sound, they certainly managed to give an edge to Whitney's polished sound!
This piece beautifully captures Whitney’s versatility and McLaughlin’s creative brilliance. It’s a testament to how iconic songs can evolve while preserving their essence! Such a good read.
Thank you, Jon! Andy and I enjoy our Whitney collabs, and uncovering the brilliance behind her magic, as well as finding unique interpretations of her songs! Glad you're aboard! Stay tuned!
This is a great series, and I really like the Jon McLaughlin cover. That's a nice find.
"No disrespect to other genres, but it’s one thing to prioritize emotional delivery when you’re singing a sad folk song while gently strumming your guitar."
I feel like I'm being sub-tweeted here :)
Seriously, though, I appreciate Andres' notes about how impressive it is that Houston could deliver that performance without warming up. That isn't something I would have paid attention to, but is mind-blowing.
Thank you, Nick, for reading and commenting! No sub-tweet intended at all. After you made me discover that "Brown Baby" gem, I know that our appreciation of singers is not, in fact, that different!
My comment was aimed in general at some commentators or, rather, a certain "trend" in indie music journalism (writers and readers) that favours feelings and emotions and the overall "vibe" of the sound whilst ignoring or neglecting the important technical elements that are synonymous with great singing (as traditionally conceived).
There is nothing wrong with this approach but, in my view, the weight some folks attribute to the "emotional" side of things is disproportionate.
In other words, there doesn't seem to be any (or enough) appreciation for technical aspects, and singing is as much a sport as it is art. This is in part what makes it so unique and tremendously difficult to master. When your instrument is your body, there's a lot more at play and at stake: from the physiological to the psychological to the emotional.
I also think there's this obsession with artists being "relatable" which I respect but, as you know, I'm standing on the opposite side of the road here. This is why, when I get the chance to talk about artists who, in my view, achieved things that are EXTRA-ordinary (not just in terms of success, but also what they could produce with their voice), I get really excited because it gives us an opportunity to shed some light on things which, in my view, are criminally underrated.
Thank you Brad once again for the generous space and thank you Nick for coming along on the journey with us!
Genuinely I took no offense or had any feeling that it was actually directed at me. It was just a funny coincidence to read that after my last post had been praising a Rosalie Sorrels performance as being genuinely superb despite the fact that she's not a particularly strong singer technically.
I really appreciate you writing about the technical aspects of singing because it isn't something I am normally attentive to and, as you say, I'm not alone and many people don't appreciate the physical skill, effort, and commitment it takes to sing in that extra-ordinary way.
I'm still going to stand on the other side and say that I find some Whitney Houston performances boring, but you're getting me to listen to them more carefully and appreciate the virtues (and I'm glad that the series started with "Saving All My Love For You" which was a great entry point for me; I think that's an incredibly well-written song and it was helpful for me to have a sense of how much Houston could bring to a song that had that emotional texture and complexity).
Also this back-and-forth, has prompted me to start on another post comparing three versions of the same folk song, and I'll be really curious to know what you will think of that.
Thank you, Nick! Exchanges like this are the reason we write about music.
I’m a vocal technique snob I know 😂 As an amateur singer myself who has been bringing Queen, Stevie Wonder and Sam Cooke to the lessons for more than a decade, and trying his hardest to learn from the very best, I just can’t help noticing how hard certain things are (from a physical perspective), and how little credit some artists get, while some others with zero effort are, in my opinion, so overhyped.
Interesting you find some of Whitney’s performances boring because to me that’s exactly what happens with some folk/indie/“chilled” stuff. I wonder whether it’s got to do with the genre more than with the style/skills of the singer? Just a thought.
In any case, I am very much looking forward to diving deeper into your post when ready. And trust me, you also help me see some things from a different light and hear certain others with a different set of ears!
"I wonder whether it’s got to do with the genre more than with the style/skills of the singer?"
That is absolutely part of it. That's an element of what I was thinking about in the comment, in my last post, about having fluency as a listener to understand what choices a performer is making. Genre is a big part of that; the significance of a musical choice -- what a performer choses to emphasis, or how they phrase something -- is set partially by the expectations of genre, and it's important to know when they're either leaning into the standards of the genre, or doing something unexpected.
To use an imperfect analogy, when I was teenager and would visit my grandmother, she enjoyed watching golf on TV. I found it boring, and I found myself hoping that they would hit the ball into the rough or into a sand trap -- just because that would be something that would be immediately clear to me as someone who didn't know the sport. When they hit the ball into the fairway I didn't have any way to know if that was a good shot or an average shot, or why I should care.
Then, at some point, I switched and I just started to accept, "what they're doing is difficult. Even if I can't yet tell the difference between a good shot an an exceptional shot, appreciate that it's not easy just to be able to reliably hit the fairway."
You can see the analogy with music listening.
That said, I don't think that means that standards or taste are completely arbitrary. It's still possible to have good reasons for preferring something to another.
One of the thoughts that didn't make it into my last post was that, while I was thinking about it, I finally figured out why postmodern jukebox tends to annoy me (even though I love a good cover).
I'll explain with another analogy; one of the techniques of acting is to figure out how to not sound like you're just reading a script -- to act in such a way that the lines feel internally motivated and like what the character would naturally say in that moment.
There are some musical performances that approach that. Obviously song is more artificial (in some ways) than theater, so trying for naturalism isn't always the goal, but Postmodern Jukebox feels like the complete opposite to me. However fun they are musically it never feels like it's motivated by the meaning of the song. It always feels like they're just reading a script which is, on some level, arbitrary.
That's the point at which I feel bored -- a sense of, "if this doesn't have any emotional meaning to you, why should I care?"
I don't think that's a fair description of Whitney Houston, but the points where I get bored are where I think, "there's a lot going on but it's taking a while to get to the moments in the song where I can connect emotionally."
Absolutely, Nick. You raise some very good and interesting points there. Your analogies are spot on. I'd never thought of it that way, but what you say makes a lot of sense.
In a similar vein, an analogy I tend to use is the "hard rock/metal fan" versus me. As you can imagine, I'm not into hard rock or metal at all. (The only bands I am a fan of which could be classed as hard rock are Aerosmith and Lynyrd Skynyrd... they are more blues-rock IMHO, but I don't know enough about rock nomenclature to rule on this).
But let's say, for example, Kiss, AC/DC... bands I can't, for the life of me, listen to for more than ten seconds. To me, it's just pure noise. All those screams, that constantly loud, deafening sound. The only thing I find interesting is some of these singers' distortion technique. The rest to me is just unbearable.
However, I am deeply aware of the fact that, for some of their fans, listening to Mariah or Whitney must be excruciating. All those high notes, all those belts, all those schmalzy ballads, that commercial, pop sound, always trying to please and fit into societal molds, I'm sure they say.
And I think we all have a point.
Now, what I find very interesting is that, notwithstanding all the technical lingo these metal fans and I can throw at each other, there is an inevitable (and beautiful) reality that while metal "feeds" their very needs, soulful singing feeds mine.
And I think it's beautiful because it just goes to show that, generational/cultural differences aside, music comes to our rescue, giving us what we really want, and helping us heal whatever it is we need to heal.
Thank fck there is enough variety for us all to choose from!
This has been one of the most fruitful exchanges I've ever had here on Substack. Thanks, Nick and thank you once again, Brad!
Thanks; I agree that this has been an interesting discussion, and I appreciate your comfort holding strong opinions and not getting frustrated talking to someone with different opinions.
One more thought about this exchange. I had mentioned that this prompted me to write a post about three versions of a song that I was listening to. They aren't directly connected, but in my post I talk about how three different singers each bring out quite different aspects of tone and emotion from the song.
With Whitney Houston I'm not quite sure what emotional texture she's emphasizing (which, again, is partially a sign of lack of fluency on my part). Take "So Emotional" for example. The basic meaning of the song is fairly clear, but there's always a question of how a performance connects to the meaning of the song, and you could highlight different aspects.
Is it a song about pleasure, about feeling overwhelmed and out of control? Is it a tease -- is she singing to her lover to share her pleasure, or singing to herself because she's not comfortable sharing that raw an emotion to the other person?
I'm not quite sure (whereas the Jon McLaughlin cover definitely gives me sense of "forbidden love" -- and likely a homosexual relationship that he's trying to figure out), and that makes it harder for me to connect to the song.
Whereas, I say again, "Saving All My Love For You" was completely clear. In part because of how it showed how her feelings changed over time; it really communicated everything that was going on behind that moment in time (and I think gave a clear sense that the moment in time was not the ending point; that she was ready to make a change, just not quite yet). But "So Emotional" gives me fewer cues to interpret it.
Thanks, Nick! I gave Andy a hard time (you know how I do😁) for taking, quite literally, the ONLY male cover of this song extant! IKR? I never thought, going into this series, that THAT would be a problem! Rare? Sure, on occasion. But, only ONE? Didn't see it comin'! It's almost tough, though, to get through Jon's without a heart-tug, with his voice and low-key arrangement on a song we're used to hearing rockin' out!
But, the good news is (without a male cover for me to pick out), we had the songwriters to flesh out, and I'm always all about the songwriters and their mystical gifts! Not to mention the Springfield add to further illustrate the rock direction Clive was merging her into!
That was a cool find (and, as a singer, the added insight to how she could do it) of Andy's, to uncover how they wanted her to have an edge to her voice for this. That could've been the rightful purview of Walden, only, but I wonder if Clive might've dictated that edict (wanting a still more rock/Springsteen-type sandpaper edge), or, if that was solely a Walden decision. If the latter, I wonder if he had any nervous jitters i.e. "what if Clive....or her manager....finds out"!
The information about the songwriting and development process was also fascinating (and it is remarkable how different the demo sounds from the final production)!
I love that stuff....and, with Whitney and her hit-ness, the decades have, understandably, been filled with documentation on the song, and of course, her! That's a vast difference from what I usually find when I write about the generally little-heard and non-hit (and no less talented) artists that proudly fill the FRONT ROW & BACKSTAGE pages!
Thanks, Chris! It was my pleasure, and I think I speak for Andy (with a British accent, of course) when I say we loved putting it all together! Glad you liked!
A wonderful installment in this series guys, I loved it! I particularly enjoyed the history behind the song and Andy’s insight into Whitney’s vocal gymnastics. I loved the background on the songwriters (what a track record) and hearing Walden talk about the backstory of the song and the recording process was fantastic.
Thanks, Mark! I appreciate Andy's contributions no end! Without them, I wouldn't be this motivated to keep unfolding the layers of Ms. Houston's talent and fascinatingly-crafted career!
I love how fully-documented her career was.....for so many of my posts, when I'm enjoying uncovering the lesser-known, getting info from the 'net is like the proverbial pulling of teeth! Plus, I was so "pop-culture-dark" in the '80s, finishing college and embarking on a completely different career.....I certainly knew all her hits! They were inescapable at the time....on radio, TV, and in the mall!
While I was impressed by the voice I was hearing at the time, I think I really enjoyed the songs that were chosen for her; now, it's a treat to uncover just how her "handlers" chose the songs they did to maximize her talent!
Thank you, Mark, for reading and commenting! The way Brad crafted the narrative of the genesis of the song is truly fascinating. One can read stuff on Wiki, interviews, articles, etc. but it just doesn’t “hit” in the same way, does it?
I’m glad you enjoyed my take on the vocal technique aspect of it all — I love talking about it because it is, in my view, among the hardest things for a musician to master. It surprises me how little coverage it gets, when in many cases it’s the driving force of a performance (particularly in the genres/styles/type of artists I listen to the most).
Lol I love how Brad says he has “pop-culture dark” moments 😂 Brad, give me an ounce of your ignorance! I would ask for a bit of your knowledge as well, but that would just be too greedy!
Thanks again for reading and commenting, Mark! Glad you enjoyed!
What an honour and a privilege to keep collaborating with you, Brad!
Amazing work compiling all those juicy deets from the inception to the production of the song.
Imagine singing all of that without warming up? 🤪 Even more surreal: singing all of that without warming up and still SOUNDING LIKE THIS!! 😅😅😂
She was one of a kind.
And so are you, my friend!
Thanks again!
Thanks so much, Andy! It's a blast to have you on board for these! I keep thinking of her practicing at home to just LEARN the song....and, don't you think, Walden would've constructed a skeletal demo for her to learn from....one that mimicked, just a tad, the arrangement they were going to tackle? Steinberg & Kelly's demo, I suppose, could've been used as her learning template....you know me.....just been wonderin'! I look forward to our next wHITney! I think WE'RE warmed up!😉🎶🎙
Thank you, Brad! I also imagine her practising a lot. I know she was the opposite of an overthinker when it came to recording (unlike my girl Mariah who changes her mind and re-records stuff at the last minute), but in order to be able to do that (I imagine in very few takes), without warming up, she had probably learned the song inside out!
I also look forward to continuing this journey with you! And you can rest assured we’re warmed up and ready! 🎤🎶
Another home run, guys!
Really interesting to listen to the Prince-vibey demo and read about the songwriters' disappointment at Whitney's version. Also to hear John McLaughlin's completely different interpretation.
The Japan video was a wow. She sure gave great concert.
Thank you so much, Ellen, from me as well. Brad did a great job putting it all together!
Jon's cover was indeed something special. I love how he gave the song a new lease on life.
Totally agree with you and Brad re dancing. I mean, for Whitney to be able to even move whilst doing that level of singing... chapeau!
None of the "big vocalists" of that era (Whitney, Mariah, Celine, i.e. the "vocal trinity" as they are collectively known) is/was a great dancer. Madonna and Janet got more moves than voice, although both of them have a sense of musicality which is, in my view, not often recognised enough. They are deeply aware of the limitations in their voice and they adapt songs to suit them perfectly -- that's smart, even if not acrobatic, singing.
Beyonce might have been the first (from my sort of audience "generation") who brought acrobatic singing and high-intensity dancing combined. Never been a huge fan, but mad props to her.
Thanks again for reading and commenting!
Thanks for an overview of the pop diva dance scene. Makes a lot of sense looking back. As you say, they're all icons, whether a dance queen or not.
Absolutely!!
Thanks so much, Ellen! I lucked out twice! Finding the Steinberg/Kelly demo, and a passel of live "So Emotional" vids from which to choose! But, y'know what? As much as I wanted to just for my edification and enjoyment (to watch the others, and pick the best), the Japan vid was the first I auditioned. When it was over, I just thought...."well, no need to go any further!"
We discovered early on that she was not the most innately comfortable dancer, but was game to take lessons and spend the extra time to get more comfortable and, even, better at it. I couldn't help but watch her on this one, and still could see her not over-extending herself, and sticking to steps (with her coach and/or choreographer) that she was comfortable executing! Like an athlete, you're a pro if you can "stay within yourself," and not over-extend. Know your limits, and perfect what's in your natural wheelhouse.
Another gift of hers we dasn't overlook!
Jon's interpretation is gold...As I told Nick, his is the only male cover we've got! I almost wanna say, every guy who might've wanted to record one just threw up his hands and gave mad props to Jon as having "the one that cannot be topped"!
I was thinking as I watched Whitney that she has great rhythm. Plus, it's hard to do moves when you're doing that level of singing.
I mean, when did we start expecting the pop divas to be able to dance as well as sing? It's an interesting question, because the Motown groups all danced, but they were ensembles where no one voice was carrying all the singing duties. Who was the first to raise the bar? I'm wondering if it was Madonna? Because if you look at Donna Summer, she wasn't expected to dance, was she? It seems to have been an 80s thing, if I'm not mistaken. (Although I could be wrong!)
All of that! Dancing (or choreography, as in moves to mirror the lyrics....see, "Stop! In the Name of Love"!!!) has always accompanied, as you mention, the Motown and Philly, etc groups. And, you're right about Summer.....she did the writhing-on-the-floor thing, but, generally, that seemed to be the extent of her "dancing"! Madonna, I think is spot on, as the first, as she even started out as a dancer for Patrick Hernandez, and even The Alvin Ailey Dance Theatre!! I, too, would slap all that directly onto the '80s!!
The only real "dancing" done during pop songs in the '70s was basically the choreography done on and for variety shows, and The June Taylor Dancers coming up with something in the background, say, for Helen Reddy or The Starland Vocal Band!😂
Omg, the June Taylor Dancers -- what a blast from the past!
Good on Whitney learning the moves when her singing was so extraordinary. Respect!
As a huge fan of Whitney's version (it was my number one song of 1987!) I found this to be a very interesting discussion. I love the hard-driving rock sound and drama of Whitney's version. It touched me on a deep level when released. Of course, after that album, Whitney was often accused of appealing too much to her massive white audience. It would have been fascinating to see what would have happened if she recorded it in the same funky Prince-like vibe as the demo. Would have have alienated her fans? Perhaps. It's still a great song!
Thank you so much, Dan! Mad props to Brad for being the mastermind behind the article and, crucially, for condensing all this info and crafting a fun, entertaining and informative piece!
I wasn't born at the time of release, so it's invaluable for me to read about music lovers' appreciation from back then! I was born too late, musically speaking!
Thanks again for reading and commenting.
Thanks again, Andy........You and Shaun........why, you're singin' his song!: https://www.discogs.com/master/419623-Shaun-Cassidy-Born-Late
😊
I’ve found my soulmate!
Glad you liked this, Dan! Do you remember, at the time, any thoughts you may have had on her sudden turn to the rock sound? Or, did you just enjoy it as another up-tempo Houston hit?
Good point on her at-the-time critics accusing her of pandering to a massive pop audience, at the possible exclusion of an urban base.
Wouldn't it have been cool (this was a thing in '87, as I recall) had she recorded a Steinberg/Kelly-esque/Prince arrangement, and made it a bonus track, say, on an exclusive CD edition, or just simply one of many that might be included on an extended single/EP kind of thing (looking at YOU, Cher, and your 85 different mixes and re-mixes of "Believe" on a CD a mere decade later)!😁👍
I don't think I was savvy enough to put what I thought of the sound of the '87 recording as "rock." It felt like another uptempo Whitney song (she'd release a ballad, then an uptempo track, then a ballad, then another uptempo... and on and on.) Here's the link to my Top Ten Memoir post about 1987: https://danpal.substack.com/p/a-top-ten-memoir-1987-welcome-to?r=lru5s
That's fair, Dan, and that's pretty much how I've viewed the song in the rear-view mirror. Now that I know that rock was the intentional direction Clive, Walden, et al wanted to take her, I'm appreciating the song that much more! I loved Walden's (in his interview vid) reference to "Metallica meets Whitney"! I hope he realizes that deserves a little chuckle!
LOL 😂😂 I'm chuckling for sure! But, in fairness to Walden, the intention was there, and they did an amazing job. Even if they didn't precisely recreate a Metallica kind of sound, they certainly managed to give an edge to Whitney's polished sound!
🤘😁I suppose one fan's dance floor is another fan's mosh pit! As they say in the latter....."HANG YOUR BED!!"
This piece beautifully captures Whitney’s versatility and McLaughlin’s creative brilliance. It’s a testament to how iconic songs can evolve while preserving their essence! Such a good read.
Thank you, Jon! Andy and I enjoy our Whitney collabs, and uncovering the brilliance behind her magic, as well as finding unique interpretations of her songs! Glad you're aboard! Stay tuned!
Thank you so much, Jon! Brad did a fantastic job uncovering all the juicy details and crafting the narrative — there was so much to cover here!
Indeed Whitney’s versatility was impressive. She clearly had not just the chops but the stamina to sustain it all!
McLaughlin’s creativity is the envy of many aspiring singers/musicians in all genres.
Thanks a lot for reading and commenting!
This is a great series, and I really like the Jon McLaughlin cover. That's a nice find.
"No disrespect to other genres, but it’s one thing to prioritize emotional delivery when you’re singing a sad folk song while gently strumming your guitar."
I feel like I'm being sub-tweeted here :)
Seriously, though, I appreciate Andres' notes about how impressive it is that Houston could deliver that performance without warming up. That isn't something I would have paid attention to, but is mind-blowing.
Thank you, Nick, for reading and commenting! No sub-tweet intended at all. After you made me discover that "Brown Baby" gem, I know that our appreciation of singers is not, in fact, that different!
My comment was aimed in general at some commentators or, rather, a certain "trend" in indie music journalism (writers and readers) that favours feelings and emotions and the overall "vibe" of the sound whilst ignoring or neglecting the important technical elements that are synonymous with great singing (as traditionally conceived).
There is nothing wrong with this approach but, in my view, the weight some folks attribute to the "emotional" side of things is disproportionate.
In other words, there doesn't seem to be any (or enough) appreciation for technical aspects, and singing is as much a sport as it is art. This is in part what makes it so unique and tremendously difficult to master. When your instrument is your body, there's a lot more at play and at stake: from the physiological to the psychological to the emotional.
I also think there's this obsession with artists being "relatable" which I respect but, as you know, I'm standing on the opposite side of the road here. This is why, when I get the chance to talk about artists who, in my view, achieved things that are EXTRA-ordinary (not just in terms of success, but also what they could produce with their voice), I get really excited because it gives us an opportunity to shed some light on things which, in my view, are criminally underrated.
Thank you Brad once again for the generous space and thank you Nick for coming along on the journey with us!
Genuinely I took no offense or had any feeling that it was actually directed at me. It was just a funny coincidence to read that after my last post had been praising a Rosalie Sorrels performance as being genuinely superb despite the fact that she's not a particularly strong singer technically.
I really appreciate you writing about the technical aspects of singing because it isn't something I am normally attentive to and, as you say, I'm not alone and many people don't appreciate the physical skill, effort, and commitment it takes to sing in that extra-ordinary way.
I'm still going to stand on the other side and say that I find some Whitney Houston performances boring, but you're getting me to listen to them more carefully and appreciate the virtues (and I'm glad that the series started with "Saving All My Love For You" which was a great entry point for me; I think that's an incredibly well-written song and it was helpful for me to have a sense of how much Houston could bring to a song that had that emotional texture and complexity).
Also this back-and-forth, has prompted me to start on another post comparing three versions of the same folk song, and I'll be really curious to know what you will think of that.
Thank you, Nick! Exchanges like this are the reason we write about music.
I’m a vocal technique snob I know 😂 As an amateur singer myself who has been bringing Queen, Stevie Wonder and Sam Cooke to the lessons for more than a decade, and trying his hardest to learn from the very best, I just can’t help noticing how hard certain things are (from a physical perspective), and how little credit some artists get, while some others with zero effort are, in my opinion, so overhyped.
Interesting you find some of Whitney’s performances boring because to me that’s exactly what happens with some folk/indie/“chilled” stuff. I wonder whether it’s got to do with the genre more than with the style/skills of the singer? Just a thought.
In any case, I am very much looking forward to diving deeper into your post when ready. And trust me, you also help me see some things from a different light and hear certain others with a different set of ears!
"I wonder whether it’s got to do with the genre more than with the style/skills of the singer?"
That is absolutely part of it. That's an element of what I was thinking about in the comment, in my last post, about having fluency as a listener to understand what choices a performer is making. Genre is a big part of that; the significance of a musical choice -- what a performer choses to emphasis, or how they phrase something -- is set partially by the expectations of genre, and it's important to know when they're either leaning into the standards of the genre, or doing something unexpected.
To use an imperfect analogy, when I was teenager and would visit my grandmother, she enjoyed watching golf on TV. I found it boring, and I found myself hoping that they would hit the ball into the rough or into a sand trap -- just because that would be something that would be immediately clear to me as someone who didn't know the sport. When they hit the ball into the fairway I didn't have any way to know if that was a good shot or an average shot, or why I should care.
Then, at some point, I switched and I just started to accept, "what they're doing is difficult. Even if I can't yet tell the difference between a good shot an an exceptional shot, appreciate that it's not easy just to be able to reliably hit the fairway."
You can see the analogy with music listening.
That said, I don't think that means that standards or taste are completely arbitrary. It's still possible to have good reasons for preferring something to another.
One of the thoughts that didn't make it into my last post was that, while I was thinking about it, I finally figured out why postmodern jukebox tends to annoy me (even though I love a good cover).
I'll explain with another analogy; one of the techniques of acting is to figure out how to not sound like you're just reading a script -- to act in such a way that the lines feel internally motivated and like what the character would naturally say in that moment.
There are some musical performances that approach that. Obviously song is more artificial (in some ways) than theater, so trying for naturalism isn't always the goal, but Postmodern Jukebox feels like the complete opposite to me. However fun they are musically it never feels like it's motivated by the meaning of the song. It always feels like they're just reading a script which is, on some level, arbitrary.
That's the point at which I feel bored -- a sense of, "if this doesn't have any emotional meaning to you, why should I care?"
I don't think that's a fair description of Whitney Houston, but the points where I get bored are where I think, "there's a lot going on but it's taking a while to get to the moments in the song where I can connect emotionally."
Absolutely, Nick. You raise some very good and interesting points there. Your analogies are spot on. I'd never thought of it that way, but what you say makes a lot of sense.
In a similar vein, an analogy I tend to use is the "hard rock/metal fan" versus me. As you can imagine, I'm not into hard rock or metal at all. (The only bands I am a fan of which could be classed as hard rock are Aerosmith and Lynyrd Skynyrd... they are more blues-rock IMHO, but I don't know enough about rock nomenclature to rule on this).
But let's say, for example, Kiss, AC/DC... bands I can't, for the life of me, listen to for more than ten seconds. To me, it's just pure noise. All those screams, that constantly loud, deafening sound. The only thing I find interesting is some of these singers' distortion technique. The rest to me is just unbearable.
However, I am deeply aware of the fact that, for some of their fans, listening to Mariah or Whitney must be excruciating. All those high notes, all those belts, all those schmalzy ballads, that commercial, pop sound, always trying to please and fit into societal molds, I'm sure they say.
And I think we all have a point.
Now, what I find very interesting is that, notwithstanding all the technical lingo these metal fans and I can throw at each other, there is an inevitable (and beautiful) reality that while metal "feeds" their very needs, soulful singing feeds mine.
And I think it's beautiful because it just goes to show that, generational/cultural differences aside, music comes to our rescue, giving us what we really want, and helping us heal whatever it is we need to heal.
Thank fck there is enough variety for us all to choose from!
This has been one of the most fruitful exchanges I've ever had here on Substack. Thanks, Nick and thank you once again, Brad!
So well said, Andy, and you know I thoroughly enjoy our duets-in-print!🎶
Thanks; I agree that this has been an interesting discussion, and I appreciate your comfort holding strong opinions and not getting frustrated talking to someone with different opinions.
One more thought about this exchange. I had mentioned that this prompted me to write a post about three versions of a song that I was listening to. They aren't directly connected, but in my post I talk about how three different singers each bring out quite different aspects of tone and emotion from the song.
With Whitney Houston I'm not quite sure what emotional texture she's emphasizing (which, again, is partially a sign of lack of fluency on my part). Take "So Emotional" for example. The basic meaning of the song is fairly clear, but there's always a question of how a performance connects to the meaning of the song, and you could highlight different aspects.
Is it a song about pleasure, about feeling overwhelmed and out of control? Is it a tease -- is she singing to her lover to share her pleasure, or singing to herself because she's not comfortable sharing that raw an emotion to the other person?
I'm not quite sure (whereas the Jon McLaughlin cover definitely gives me sense of "forbidden love" -- and likely a homosexual relationship that he's trying to figure out), and that makes it harder for me to connect to the song.
Whereas, I say again, "Saving All My Love For You" was completely clear. In part because of how it showed how her feelings changed over time; it really communicated everything that was going on behind that moment in time (and I think gave a clear sense that the moment in time was not the ending point; that she was ready to make a change, just not quite yet). But "So Emotional" gives me fewer cues to interpret it.
Thanks, Nick! I gave Andy a hard time (you know how I do😁) for taking, quite literally, the ONLY male cover of this song extant! IKR? I never thought, going into this series, that THAT would be a problem! Rare? Sure, on occasion. But, only ONE? Didn't see it comin'! It's almost tough, though, to get through Jon's without a heart-tug, with his voice and low-key arrangement on a song we're used to hearing rockin' out!
But, the good news is (without a male cover for me to pick out), we had the songwriters to flesh out, and I'm always all about the songwriters and their mystical gifts! Not to mention the Springfield add to further illustrate the rock direction Clive was merging her into!
That was a cool find (and, as a singer, the added insight to how she could do it) of Andy's, to uncover how they wanted her to have an edge to her voice for this. That could've been the rightful purview of Walden, only, but I wonder if Clive might've dictated that edict (wanting a still more rock/Springsteen-type sandpaper edge), or, if that was solely a Walden decision. If the latter, I wonder if he had any nervous jitters i.e. "what if Clive....or her manager....finds out"!
The information about the songwriting and development process was also fascinating (and it is remarkable how different the demo sounds from the final production)!
I love that stuff....and, with Whitney and her hit-ness, the decades have, understandably, been filled with documentation on the song, and of course, her! That's a vast difference from what I usually find when I write about the generally little-heard and non-hit (and no less talented) artists that proudly fill the FRONT ROW & BACKSTAGE pages!
Brilliant read! Love the deep deep dive! Thank you.
Thanks a lot from me too! It was Brad who did all of the hard work!
Thank you again. Appreciated greatly
Thanks, Chris! It was my pleasure, and I think I speak for Andy (with a British accent, of course) when I say we loved putting it all together! Glad you liked!
A wonderful installment in this series guys, I loved it! I particularly enjoyed the history behind the song and Andy’s insight into Whitney’s vocal gymnastics. I loved the background on the songwriters (what a track record) and hearing Walden talk about the backstory of the song and the recording process was fantastic.
Thanks, Mark! I appreciate Andy's contributions no end! Without them, I wouldn't be this motivated to keep unfolding the layers of Ms. Houston's talent and fascinatingly-crafted career!
I love how fully-documented her career was.....for so many of my posts, when I'm enjoying uncovering the lesser-known, getting info from the 'net is like the proverbial pulling of teeth! Plus, I was so "pop-culture-dark" in the '80s, finishing college and embarking on a completely different career.....I certainly knew all her hits! They were inescapable at the time....on radio, TV, and in the mall!
While I was impressed by the voice I was hearing at the time, I think I really enjoyed the songs that were chosen for her; now, it's a treat to uncover just how her "handlers" chose the songs they did to maximize her talent!
Thank you, Mark, for reading and commenting! The way Brad crafted the narrative of the genesis of the song is truly fascinating. One can read stuff on Wiki, interviews, articles, etc. but it just doesn’t “hit” in the same way, does it?
I’m glad you enjoyed my take on the vocal technique aspect of it all — I love talking about it because it is, in my view, among the hardest things for a musician to master. It surprises me how little coverage it gets, when in many cases it’s the driving force of a performance (particularly in the genres/styles/type of artists I listen to the most).
Lol I love how Brad says he has “pop-culture dark” moments 😂 Brad, give me an ounce of your ignorance! I would ask for a bit of your knowledge as well, but that would just be too greedy!
Thanks again for reading and commenting, Mark! Glad you enjoyed!