Still has a decent body.
Wonder if her voice has survived the ravages of time as well.
Wonder if her voice has survived the ravages of time as well.
Bette Midler
Originally Posted by ooo-la-la:
“lol... it sure has. I think she's sensational!”
“lol... it sure has. I think she's sensational!”
For 63 she looks fine
She's been the first guest over the last few weeks that has sung in tune. She always delivers and is so down to earth. 
Originally Posted by hansue:
“She's been the first guest over the last few weeks that has sung in tune. She always delivers and is so down to earth.”
“She's been the first guest over the last few weeks that has sung in tune. She always delivers and is so down to earth.
”
Dame Shirley also delivered!
Love Bette - love The Rose, but must confess I've heard better arrangements and if Sid does not come onto this thread and say, "she was singing our song," I might get cross.
Originally Posted by Ignazio:
“Love Bette - love The Rose, but must confess I've heard better arrangements and if Sid does not come onto this thread and say, "she was singing our song," I might get cross.”
“Love Bette - love The Rose, but must confess I've heard better arrangements and if Sid does not come onto this thread and say, "she was singing our song," I might get cross.
”
Arch should be able to play that exactly as Amanda McBroom wrote it and not mess around with it
I thought her voice sounded on the weak side. Not the worst celeb performance by far, but not how she used to sound.
The Bruce thing was just awful. Didn't they learn that lesson from last year?
The Bruce thing was just awful. Didn't they learn that lesson from last year?
No. She's lost her range. The Rose had very limited range, and she still cleverly lowers the notes at some point. Mind you, this song she was singing is only ONE OCTAVE in range. Normally a non-pro singer like most of us have at least one and a half octave range. Mariah Carey (I don't like her) apparently had four (!) and most professional diva-type singers have at least two and a half. She used to have much wider range (wind beneath my wings for instance, which she did appallingly last year), but now, it was bad.
She looked stunning in that figure-hugging dress though.
She looked stunning in that figure-hugging dress though.
Originally Posted by mr.bojangles:
“I thought her voice sounded on the weak side. Not the worst celeb performance by far, but not how she used to sound.
The Bruce thing was just awful. Didn't they learn that lesson from last year?”
“I thought her voice sounded on the weak side. Not the worst celeb performance by far, but not how she used to sound.
The Bruce thing was just awful. Didn't they learn that lesson from last year?”
What the, you kiss my @rse and I'll kiss yours routine??
Originally Posted by SCD-Observer:
“No. She's lost her range. The Rose had very limited range, and she still cleverly lowers the notes at some point. Mind you, this song she was singing is only ONE OCTAVE in range. Normally a non-pro singer like most of us have at least one and a half octave range. Mariah Carey (I don't like her) apparently had four (!) and most professional diva-type singers have at least two and a half. She used to have much wider range (wind beneath my wings for instance, which she did appallingly last year), but now, it was bad.
She looked stunning in that figure-hugging dress though.”
“No. She's lost her range. The Rose had very limited range, and she still cleverly lowers the notes at some point. Mind you, this song she was singing is only ONE OCTAVE in range. Normally a non-pro singer like most of us have at least one and a half octave range. Mariah Carey (I don't like her) apparently had four (!) and most professional diva-type singers have at least two and a half. She used to have much wider range (wind beneath my wings for instance, which she did appallingly last year), but now, it was bad.
She looked stunning in that figure-hugging dress though.”
It's not the hardest one to sing, but it needs the power to drive it towards the end (else, the tone is quite repetitive) which she doesn't have.
I find it almost annoying, as they are some incredible singers out there who are now capable of greater feats but of course don't have the Bette Midler (/Andy Williams) name to trade on. Ah well.
Yes, Mariah's range is ridiculous because she can reach the whistle register. Not really an attractive sound, but as an instrument, it's admirable.
I liked it, mind you I love that song so much and Bette is great.
I was just glad it wasn't Wind Beneath my Wings she sang, words cannot describe how much I detest that song!!
I was just glad it wasn't Wind Beneath my Wings she sang, words cannot describe how much I detest that song!!
Originally Posted by SCD-Observer:
“No. She's lost her range. The Rose had very limited range, and she still cleverly lowers the notes at some point. Mind you, this song she was singing is only ONE OCTAVE in range. Normally a non-pro singer like most of us have at least one and a half octave range. Mariah Carey (I don't like her) apparently had four (!) and most professional diva-type singers have at least two and a half. She used to have much wider range (wind beneath my wings for instance, which she did appallingly last year), but now, it was bad.
She looked stunning in that figure-hugging dress though.”
“No. She's lost her range. The Rose had very limited range, and she still cleverly lowers the notes at some point. Mind you, this song she was singing is only ONE OCTAVE in range. Normally a non-pro singer like most of us have at least one and a half octave range. Mariah Carey (I don't like her) apparently had four (!) and most professional diva-type singers have at least two and a half. She used to have much wider range (wind beneath my wings for instance, which she did appallingly last year), but now, it was bad.
She looked stunning in that figure-hugging dress though.”
Ah! A like-minded thinker about octave ranges of popular singers. One frequent poster would have us believe, most singers have a range of four octaves.
The range of popular music for all the classic songs of the last century used for ballroom and I mean those written by Cole Porter, Gershwin, Carmichael, Rogers & Hart/Hammerstein, Berlin, etc., followed the same formular. A range of little more than an octave and a half at the most. (Sinatras comfortable range, in some keys though he could still struggle a bit at the top end). Sarah Vaughan and Ella Fitzgerald and other female "household names" could easily manage two and a half octaves, but really didn't need it, though it would enable them to sing songs in many more keys, if they chose.
This was because songwriters earned their living by selling lots of sheet music for people to buy, play at home on the piano and sing along with their friends. It would have been pointless trying to sell songs with a range greater than the average man/woman in the street.
Most American families had a piano or access to one, even before radio came along. The "Top Twenty" was actually based on the sales of sheet music until well into the fifties.
As an example of not being able to hit it "live," of a tune many will recall (from distant memory), the Bangles lead singer couldn't sing the top note live, on the last chorus in "Eternal Flame." This was before singing along or miming to, became the most common practice.
The SCD band singers get the most criticism on here when thay have to attempt to replicate contemporary songs, (with little rehearsal and probably not in their most "comfortable key") where the original singer is a bit of a "vocal athlete" or their recorded voice has been enhanced.
