Psychology often says that variation in sensations is a key factor in our attention focusing on something, and we are often naturally drawn to things such as movements and sounds that are different or novel. With music as well, we often search for new sounds, new ways of expression, or new interpretations of things that we are already familiar with. Sammy Rae’s vocals in her song “The Good Life” displays a variety of techniques, styles, and ranges, and the band’s musical style itself is a blend of many different genres (funk, jazz, folk, rock). But is there something deeper about the variation of her voice that makes us connect with her as human beings?
To begin with, I want to note different aspects of her vocals into two different groups: those leaning towards a purity of sound and those that can be thought of as the grain of the voice, an understanding of Roland Barthes’ ideas about the voice. We’ll use a bit of a working definition of each of those, defined by the elements that appear in the song. The first noticeable aspect is found in the range, dynamics, and shape of the sound in the beginning. Her first phrase joins with a mellow, low range, soft voice. One of the defining factors of “grain” is how it connects to the body, and this can also be an important factor of how we connect with music. This focused though quiet sound, draws the attention of the listener and other elements that appear later on such as a bit of growl in her voice or a strong chest or mix belt (0:29-35 growl; 1:46-54 belt with slide/break imperfections) give us a sense of the full body being grounded and engaged in the music in a way that the listener might even be able to feel themselves. This type of engagement is effective not only because of the way we physically feel when hearing it, but in understanding the connection in ourselves it gives an impression of the singer being fully engaged in the music and can be a powerful emotive tool.
In contrast, on the purity side of her vocal techniques, there are various elements that appear for a few moments in the song, but especially in the final section (3:28). After the final chorus that is sung with the full energy built up by the instrumental bridge, she releases the intensity and flips up to her falsetto, adding a breathy tone to her voice with sparse and quick vibrato. These floating vocals in the head voice accompanied by a sparse accompaniment of suspended chords are placed with accuracy and relatively little sliding in the attack of the pitch, all giving it a light and airy head in the clouds feeling, a definite disconnect from the grounded feeling given at the beginning.
In Barthes’ article about the grain of the voice, he speaks about the enunciation of words, particularly consonants and vowels, and the difference between pheno-song and geno-song. The use of this most interesting and distinct contrast that appears in this song could be argued that it reflects trends in modern pop music as well. The pronunciation of words seems to take on interesting changes from artist to artist, especially in the manipulation of vowels. But first, to define pheno-song and geno-song. Pheno-song follows rules and structures of genre, the focus is on clear pronunciation of words so that the listener is able to focus on the meaning behind the lyrics. When Sammy Rae switches to her falsetto or a voice that has more clarity and purity in the tone, the lyrics are also easier to understand, consonants are more pronounced, and it is easier to grasp the lyrical content of the song. Geno-song is focused on the interaction between language and melody, and the literal sound of words is the focus. This is often achieved by the manipulation of vowels mentioned before as well as the treatment of consonants. In the first verse and chorus, you may notice that especially in a first listen it can be difficult to understand what exactly the lyrics are, and that is partially because of the vowels pronounced in specific and unique ways. Another notable element is the interaction between clearly pronounced consonants placed together with accents in the instrumentals, or typically ‘m’ and ‘n’ being elongated at the end of words (specifically the pre-chorus at 0:38), and often smoothed into the vowels and further focusing your ear on the sound of the word, rather than the meaning. The ear is also often directed to the switching of vowels as she switches between vocal ranges, especially to the very open vowels in the mid-to-lower register (at 2:04-2:15 you can note the difference in her pronunciation of “one” and “bitter” as it’s repeated in different registers). These things may not be things intuitively understood, but it is interesting to note that in these moments when the lyrics are not clearly understood, your mind is not any less engaged in the music, simply because of her use of geno-song, of enjoying the interaction between the sound of the words, the melody line, and the accompaniment played by the band.
The use of all of these techniques together create variation, which keeps the mind engaged in the vocal acrobatics happening, but it also raises questions in the listener’s mind. When you are enjoying music, what is it that is engaging you and connecting you to it? Is the distinction between the meaning of the words and the sound of the words something that you actively consider? And lastly, when comparing and contrasting grain/geno-song versus pure tones/pheno-song, do you connect to one or the other in a music of the heart, connected to your body, or music of the head, focused on your intellect? The blend of these elements in this song “The Good Life”, is an intriguing study for these questions, as you can often hear elements switching within the same line of music. It gives a beautiful comparison and combination of these different ways of thinking and expressing music.