Steve Schwartz <[log in to unmask]> writes:

>To paraphrase the critic Gene Lees...  If Sinatra were only the best male
>pop singer of his time, that would be something, but, as Clarke points
>out, Sinatra became central to the culture - even an icon.  For a certain
>generation, he epitomized hip and cool, even though his personal life ran
>often at violent odds with the image.

I think it was his personal life, so highly publicized, that made him
stand out.  As far as I'm concerned he was at his peak in his stage-show
days singing for Tommy Dorsey.  It was then that he had all the bobbysoxers
climaxing over that certain wobble, or grace note, that he slipped into
aromantic passages, here and there.  Moreover, it was done as naturally as
Satchel Paige ever knew how to throw a spitter.

Later on, Sinatra morphed into a Vegas balladeer, about as natural as Solti
conducting: At that, he mostly did bespoke stuff, like French balladeers,
things that other topline performers didn't care to touch.  But of voices
in that era there was no paucity.  Der Bingle had a fine delivery of his
own invention, and Dick Haymes was by no means chopped papaya.  Nor was
the Ray Eberle.  Vaughn Monroe had as fine a voice as jazz could permit.

Frankie was great,but I still listen to the others with pleasure--and
no,erm, moral reservations.  For a great singer with no voice, but yes,
yes, yes, expressiveness, may I offer you Hoagy Carmichael? No one to
touch him.

Denis Fodor