Norah Jones a tinge short


I love female vocals, Kd Lange, Linda Rondstat, Bonnie Ryatte to name a few. And I love Norah Jones voice, So I ran out and purchased come away with me. Though I could easily listen to it, I was a tad dissapointed in the reocording quality on CD. I could hear her mic shean (glare), tinny and a tad thin, which kept her wonderful voice from ringing clear through my Theil 3.6s. I tried some Sheryl Crow bam she was right there in my living room. I tried the Norah CD again and the sound thined and tinned. I was saddend, anybody else share this same opinion, or dissagree?
max_pain
I didn't realize that it was fashionable to bash Nora. I love her stuff. She's a real-deal musician that can play piano very, very well, write and sing. Comparing her to Madonna is sick. Maybe I like her so much because I spent a few decades in Texas and love the Texan in her voice and her subtle interpretations.

I bought every piece of vinyl I could with her on it and all have good mic selections and great sound. I think there must be a problem with the CD production, because the vinyl sounds excellent.

I love women singers and have Karrin Alyson, Sarah Vaughn, Ella Fitzgerald, Diana Krall, Jane Monheit, Stacey Kent, Rose Marie, Blossom Dearie, Diane Hubka, Jennifer Warnes, Erin Bode, Melody Gardot and that's just what's on my iPhone, so don't assume that I've never heard good singers. It's fine and good not to like a particular vocalist, but this thread seems to bash a great artist.

Dave
Like Sheryl Crow, Madonna, Jewel, et. al. Norah Jones is a product of great marketing.

Her albums benefit from very good production, superb studio musicians, and great promotion.

She is an average vocalist with extremely limited range.

Absolutely agree - you can add Diana Krall too - to me this is mostly about good looking women "crooners" with good backing and production and slinky video shots and album covers - a complete package. This is the same in many music genre's but serious audiophiles should be able to distinguish what is physical driven atttraction of a "performer" versus real talented musicianship.

In the male genre "Michael Buble" is the current equivalent - good looking crooner - too bad he can't sing!
Shadorne, are you saying that good looks has something to do with being popular? I'm shocked! Truly!

I don't understand the level of vitriol directed at Ms. Jones. So she's a limited vocalist - so was Billie Holiday. She's pretty - is that really a problem? Her music is soft - so is Paul McCartney's. Here dad is Ravi Shankar - well, yours isn't.

As Scroobious Pip so eloquently stated:
Thou shalt not stop likin' a band just 'cause they’ve 'come popular.
Playa' hating is so unbecoming.
04-03-08: Shadorne said:

"Absolutely agree - you can add Diana Krall too - to me this is mostly about good looking women "crooners" with good backing and production and slinky video shots and album covers - a complete package. This is the same in many music genre's but serious audiophiles should be able to distinguish what is physical driven atttraction of a "performer" versus real talented musicianship."

Well then friend, name a few female singers that are worthy of our "serious audiophile" ears. (Not that I need your help, but you seem like such an authority that I want to see what you come up with that I might not already have).

Dave
>>name a few female singers that are worthy of our "serious audiophile" ears<<

Linda Ronstadt for starters.

She embarrasses everybody on your list.