|
Post by trebor on Mar 26, 2019 9:52:15 GMT -5
David Foster once commented that Jackie had the unique ability to see the whole score and lyrics in her head.
Building on that thought, after watching her sing for the last nine years, I think when she closes her eyes she is seeing the score and lyrics on the inside of her eyelids. It is like an endless loop with ALL of her repertoire that keeps her on track. She is amazing!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2019 11:15:12 GMT -5
David Foster once commented that Jackie had the unique ability to see the whole score and lyrics in her head.
Building on that thought, after watching her sing for the last nine years, I think when she closes her eyes she is seeing the score and lyrics on the inside of her eyelids. It is like an endless loop with ALL of her repertoire that keeps her on track. She is amazing! That ability has been attributed to Jackie's possibly having a photographic memory for lyric, that being why she has rarely, since the age of nine, forgotten a line. She once almost lost a lyric line when singing "Wishing You Were Someone Here Again" at a talent contest but recovered instantly to perform the rest of the song flawlessly, although sheepishly but with perfect pitch of course. That is another innate ability that might be considered a kind of mental picture along with the physical apparatus working together automatically in executing pitch with perfection and without effort. She somehow sees without apparent concern where her voice must go to hit each note, in the center as it were, regardless of the interval or the range. That is called "perfect relative pitch". Those innate abilities to "see" the lyrics and to "sense" pitch have served Jackie in being a reliably consistent performer. One never feels anxious about her remembering a lyric or being on key.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2019 13:39:06 GMT -5
That ability has been attributed to Jackie's possibly having a photographic memory for lyric, that being why she has rarely, since the age of nine, forgotten a line. Actually "photographic memory" is more an assumption than a fact, at least with regard to long term recall according to professor of Psychology, Alan Searleman and other sources. There seems no scientific explanation for Jackie's ability to recall the lyrics to numerous and often difficult songs as a child, but as a teenager it would naturally result from repeated familiarity, having performed most of them countless times over the years. Nevertheless, it does seem an extraordinary, innate attribute.
|
|
|
Post by rick158 on Mar 27, 2019 7:29:58 GMT -5
As I am sure others can attest, I have witnessed Jackie dropping a line, and losing her place in a song from time to time. Not a criticism, just an observation. For instance in Portsmouth, NH (Aug 2014) she forgot what song she was supposed to be singing and missed the first line of "Can you Feel the Love Tonight." There is also video evidence that Jackie can and occasionally does miss a line during a performance on you tube, I couldn't find the clip but in the middle of one song I believe in Pittsburgh 2012ish you see she misses a line, pumps her fist, and then jumps in a line later. It is not realistic for Jackie, or anyone else, to be perfect all the time. Since 2014 at Longwood, I have noticed a teleprompter on stage (Longwood it was actually behind the audience on large displays) with the song lyrics scrolling through as she sings. I am not sure she needs it for the majority of her songs, but I have noticed that she glances at it more often during new songs, or older songs that she's not performed recently. Perhaps more of a security blanket for her. See the attached photo.
|
|
|
Post by jamesn on Mar 27, 2019 9:52:12 GMT -5
David Foster once commented that Jackie had the unique ability to see the whole score and lyrics in her head.
Building on that thought, after watching her sing for the last nine years, I think when she closes her eyes she is seeing the score and lyrics on the inside of her eyelids. It is like an endless loop with ALL of her repertoire that keeps her on track. She is amazing! That ability has been attributed to Jackie's possibly having a photographic memory for lyric, that being why she has rarely, since the age of nine, forgotten a line. She once almost lost a lyric line when singing "Wishing You Were Someone Here Again" at a talent contest but recovered instantly to perform the rest of the song flawlessly, although sheepishly but with perfect pitch of course. That is another innate ability that might be considered a kind of mental picture along with the physical apparatus working together automatically in executing pitch with perfection and without effort. She somehow sees without apparent concern where her voice must go to hit each note, in the center as it were, regardless of the interval or the range. That is called "perfect relative pitch". Those innate abilities to "see" the lyrics and to "sense" pitch have served Jackie in being a reliably consistent performer. One never feels anxious about her remembering a lyric or being on key. Are you referencing her performance in competition when she had just turned 8? If so, that fact alone might have contributed to any problem - plus the fact that that particular song's lyrics are something of a tongue-twister!
|
|
|
Post by Julia Trenholm on Mar 27, 2019 9:54:26 GMT -5
As I am sure others can attest, I have witnessed Jackie dropping a line, and losing her place in a song from time to time. Not a criticism, just an observation. For instance in Portsmouth, NH (Aug 2014) she forgot what song she was supposed to be singing and missed the first line of "Can you Feel the Love Tonight." There is also video evidence that Jackie can and occasionally does miss a line during a performance on you tube, I couldn't find the clip but in the middle of one song I believe in Pittsburgh 2012ish you see she misses a line, pumps her fist, and then jumps in a line later. It is not realistic for Jackie, or anyone else, to be perfect all the time. Since 2014 at Longwood, I have noticed a teleprompter on stage (Longwood it was actually behind the audience on large displays) with the song lyrics scrolling through as she sings. I am not sure she needs it for the majority of her songs, but I have noticed that she glances at it more often during new songs, or older songs that she's not performed recently. Perhaps more of a security blanket for her. See the attached photo. Yes, why, on earth, would be this be important, in any case? Jackie has a lovely voice. That's what she's selling. Not her intellect. I thought this effort by some in the beginning to establish Jackie as superhuman in all ways, had died. It's clear that none of the Evancho's, beginning with Ma and Pa are much interested in intellectual pursuits. Let's just be happy that Jackies still a very pretty girl with a lovely voice, which gives her a shot at adult stardom, as soon as she figures out what kind of career she wants to pursue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2019 15:23:09 GMT -5
As I am sure others can attest, I have witnessed Jackie dropping a line, and losing her place in a song from time to time. Not a criticism, just an observation. For instance in Portsmouth, NH (Aug 2014) she forgot what song she was supposed to be singing and missed the first line of "Can you Feel the Love Tonight." There is also video evidence that Jackie can and occasionally does miss a line during a performance on you tube, I couldn't find the clip but in the middle of one song I believe in Pittsburgh 2012ish you see she misses a line, pumps her fist, and then jumps in a line later. It is not realistic for Jackie, or anyone else, to be perfect all the time. Since 2014 at Longwood, I have noticed a teleprompter on stage (Longwood it was actually behind the audience on large displays) with the song lyrics scrolling through as she sings. I am not sure she needs it for the majority of her songs, but I have noticed that she glances at it more often during new songs, or older songs that she's not performed recently. Perhaps more of a security blanket for her. See the attached photo. Yes, why, on earth, would be this be important, in any case? Jackie has a lovely voice. That's what she's selling. Not her intellect. I thought this effort by some in the beginning to establish Jackie as superhuman in all ways, had died. It's clear that none of the Evancho's, beginning with Ma and Pa are much interested in intellectual pursuits. Let's just be happy that Jackies still a very pretty girl with a lovely voice, which gives her a shot at adult stardom, as soon as she figures out what kind of career she wants to pursue. Yes, Rick158. I recall that, while performing "Memories" in concert, she confused the lines, mistakenly repeating a stanza that is not repeated in the lyrics. She has made a few mistakes in her recordings as well, small ones likely unnoticed or at least ignored as insignificant, and no doubt she has forgotten part of the lyrics on stage on occasion. No one has suggested she doesn't rely upon lyric notes taped to the floor or a teleprompter while performing live on stage. I'm well aware that she does. Her recall with regard to lyrics is not as important as you assume it is thought to be, Julia, and no need to exaggerate the reference as "superhuman". However Jackie's "intellect" with regard to understanding music structure and quickness to learn lyrics, which David Foster has acknowledged as "amazing", along with certain other attributes are what made her the artist she was as a child and is today. And among those attributes is her innate ability and her willingness to record and perform live without the aid of pitch-altering technology which does change the vocal tone to some degree although unnoticeable to those accustomed to hearing the auto-tuned divas of today. Having perfect relative pitch (attested to by professionals), the emphasis of my comment, and integrity as well, together distinguish Jackie an exceptional young recording artist and performer, one who has refused to compromise her innate talent as a vocalist; nor should she have, in my opinion. I would say, as would countless others, she is more than a "pretty girl with a lovely voice".
|
|
|
Post by rick158 on Mar 28, 2019 6:37:51 GMT -5
Her recall with regard to lyrics is not as important as you assume it is thought to be, Julia, and no need to exaggerate the reference as "superhuman". However Jackie's "intellect" with regard to understanding music structure and quickness to learn lyrics, which David Foster has acknowledged as "amazing", along with certain other attributes are what made her the artist she was as a child and is today. And among those attributes is her innate ability and her willingness to record and perform live without the aid of pitch-altering technology which does change the vocal tone to some degree although unnoticeable to those accustomed to hearing the auto-tuned divas of today. Having perfect relative pitch (attested to by professionals), the emphasis of my comment, and integrity as well, together distinguish Jackie an exceptional young recording artist and performer, one who has refused to compromise her innate talent as a vocalist; nor should she have, in my opinion. I would say, as would countless others, she is more than a "pretty girl with a lovely voice". I agree, Jackie's innate ability to interrupt the lyrics (especially non-English) and vary the timing, and her tone and emotion in the songs makes her very special. Some performers deliver a lovely performance, but leave me doubting their emotional connection with the song. I've never gotten that feeling from Jackie. Her performances are rarely perfect, but the imperfections make it better, more "Jackie".
|
|
|
Post by Willyiam on Mar 28, 2019 8:09:35 GMT -5
Her recall with regard to lyrics is not as important as you assume it is thought to be, Julia, and no need to exaggerate the reference as "superhuman". However Jackie's "intellect" with regard to understanding music structure and quickness to learn lyrics, which David Foster has acknowledged as "amazing", along with certain other attributes are what made her the artist she was as a child and is today. And among those attributes is her innate ability and her willingness to record and perform live without the aid of pitch-altering technology which does change the vocal tone to some degree although unnoticeable to those accustomed to hearing the auto-tuned divas of today. Having perfect relative pitch (attested to by professionals), the emphasis of my comment, and integrity as well, together distinguish Jackie an exceptional young recording artist and performer, one who has refused to compromise her innate talent as a vocalist; nor should she have, in my opinion. I would say, as would countless others, she is more than a "pretty girl with a lovely voice". I agree, Jackie's innate ability to interrupt the lyrics (especially non-English) and vary the timing, and her tone and emotion in the songs makes her very special. Some performers deliver a lovely performance, but leave me doubting their emotional connection with the song. I've never gotten that feeling from Jackie. Her performances are rarely perfect, but the imperfections make it better, more "Jackie". INTERPRET
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2019 12:58:19 GMT -5
Some performers deliver a lovely performance, but leave me doubting their emotional connection with the song. I've never gotten that feeling from Jackie. Her performances are rarely perfect... It is interesting that so often in the comments on YouTube videos of Jackie's recorded performances the term "perfection", in various forms, is part of the description of one's impression. One would say, "well, those are OTT fans who think everything Jackie does is perfect" and the like. That may be true of some who regularly praise Jackie with superlatives, not without cause however, but I'm referring to the uncommon posters, random comments. The point is that "perfection" in a performance is not a reference to her vocal technique and skill. Jackie's technique is not that of a trained vocalist, actually quite imperfect from a professional critic's point of view, but rather she sings from her heart with emotion that is real for her, as seen in several performances when she has become almost overwhelmed herself. Jackie's sense of rhythm, timing, pitch, connection with the orchestration, internal vision of the score and its dynamic are relatively innate with her, a natural awareness. Whereas with the vocal student and aspiring vocalist, those are mental considerations that must be learned and practiced diligently and become part of the conscious effort to perform beautifully. Because of that, the effect is rehearsed, even with seasoned artists. Those considerations are not a mental distraction from Jackie's immersion into the essence and meaning of the song, the emotion she experiences and conveys to the audience. An individual feels something personal, intimate and ineffable. The purpose of music, whether vocal or instrumental, is to reach inside a person and stir his own emotion, his memories or desires perhaps. Jackie has a unique and special ability to do that effortlessly and naturally, regardless that her vocals are not technically perfect. Her "flaws" seem irrelevant if not unnoticed. The technician, expert and critic listens for the flaws, while the audience is being swept away to a different place, one of "aesthetic perfection", if you will.
|
|
|
Post by Julia Trenholm on Mar 28, 2019 13:54:14 GMT -5
Yes, why, on earth, would be this be important, in any case? Jackie has a lovely voice. That's what she's selling. Not her intellect. I thought this effort by some in the beginning to establish Jackie as superhuman in all ways, had died. It's clear that none of the Evancho's, beginning with Ma and Pa are much interested in intellectual pursuits. Let's just be happy that Jackies still a very pretty girl with a lovely voice, which gives her a shot at adult stardom, as soon as she figures out what kind of career she wants to pursue. Yes, Rick158. I recall that, while performing "Memories" in concert, she confused the lines, mistakenly repeating a stanza that is not repeated in the lyrics. She has made a few mistakes in her recordings as well, small ones likely unnoticed or at least ignored as insignificant, and no doubt she has forgotten part of the lyrics on stage on occasion. No one has suggested she doesn't rely upon lyric notes taped to the floor or a teleprompter while performing live on stage. I'm well aware that she does. Her recall with regard to lyrics is not as important as you assume it is thought to be, Julia, and no need to exaggerate the reference as "superhuman". However Jackie's "intellect" with regard to understanding music structure and quickness to learn lyrics, which David Foster has acknowledged as "amazing", along with certain other attributes are what made her the artist she was as a child and is today. And among those attributes is her innate ability and her willingness to record and perform live without the aid of pitch-altering technology which does change the vocal tone to some degree although unnoticeable to those accustomed to hearing the auto-tuned divas of today. Having perfect relative pitch (attested to by professionals), the emphasis of my comment, and integrity as well, together distinguish Jackie an exceptional young recording artist and performer, one who has refused to compromise her innate talent as a vocalist; nor should she have, in my opinion. I would say, as would countless others, she is more than a "pretty girl with a lovely voice". CL, let's not use David Foster's comments on a performer and an album he was being paid big bucks by Columbia to produce, plus a royalty on every sale, as though they were those of a disinterested observer. It's not necessary. Jackie's voice remains lovely and her presentation is improving. She will have a career of some kind. How big depends on her. Nobody in the business cares at all what Foster said when she was 10 and he was being paid to work for her.
|
|
|
Post by johnnyb on Mar 28, 2019 14:09:18 GMT -5
Yes, Rick158. I recall that, while performing "Memories" in concert, she confused the lines, mistakenly repeating a stanza that is not repeated in the lyrics. She has made a few mistakes in her recordings as well, small ones likely unnoticed or at least ignored as insignificant, and no doubt she has forgotten part of the lyrics on stage on occasion. No one has suggested she doesn't rely upon lyric notes taped to the floor or a teleprompter while performing live on stage. I'm well aware that she does. Her recall with regard to lyrics is not as important as you assume it is thought to be, Julia, and no need to exaggerate the reference as "superhuman". However Jackie's "intellect" with regard to understanding music structure and quickness to learn lyrics, which David Foster has acknowledged as "amazing", along with certain other attributes are what made her the artist she was as a child and is today. And among those attributes is her innate ability and her willingness to record and perform live without the aid of pitch-altering technology which does change the vocal tone to some degree although unnoticeable to those accustomed to hearing the auto-tuned divas of today. Having perfect relative pitch (attested to by professionals), the emphasis of my comment, and integrity as well, together distinguish Jackie an exceptional young recording artist and performer, one who has refused to compromise her innate talent as a vocalist; nor should she have, in my opinion. I would say, as would countless others, she is more than a "pretty girl with a lovely voice". CL, let's not use David Foster's comments on a performer and an album he was being paid big bucks by Columbia to produce, plus a royalty on every sale, as though they were those of a disinterested observer. It's not necessary. Jackie's voice remains lovely and her presentation is improving. She will have a career of some kind. How big depends on her. Nobody in the business cares at all what Foster said when she was 10 and he was being paid to work for her. Bingo! You're exactly right Julia, David Foster was getting paid big bucks and it was in his best interest to say those things. David is the King of showmanship and most of the banter on stage is his basic schtick material.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2019 15:09:30 GMT -5
Yes, Rick158. I recall that, while performing "Memories" in concert, she confused the lines, mistakenly repeating a stanza that is not repeated in the lyrics. She has made a few mistakes in her recordings as well, small ones likely unnoticed or at least ignored as insignificant, and no doubt she has forgotten part of the lyrics on stage on occasion. No one has suggested she doesn't rely upon lyric notes taped to the floor or a teleprompter while performing live on stage. I'm well aware that she does. Her recall with regard to lyrics is not as important as you assume it is thought to be, Julia, and no need to exaggerate the reference as "superhuman". However Jackie's "intellect" with regard to understanding music structure and quickness to learn lyrics, which David Foster has acknowledged as "amazing", along with certain other attributes are what made her the artist she was as a child and is today. And among those attributes is her innate ability and her willingness to record and perform live without the aid of pitch-altering technology which does change the vocal tone to some degree although unnoticeable to those accustomed to hearing the auto-tuned divas of today. Having perfect relative pitch (attested to by professionals), the emphasis of my comment, and integrity as well, together distinguish Jackie an exceptional young recording artist and performer, one who has refused to compromise her innate talent as a vocalist; nor should she have, in my opinion. I would say, as would countless others, she is more than a "pretty girl with a lovely voice". CL, let's not use David Foster's comments on a performer and an album he was being paid big bucks by Columbia to produce, plus a royalty on every sale, as though they were those of a disinterested observer. It's not necessary. Jackie's voice remains lovely and her presentation is improving. She will have a career of some kind. How big depends on her. Nobody in the business cares at all what Foster said when she was 10 and he was being paid to work for her. Bottom line David Foster was paid a lot money to say a lot of nice things about Jackie. However, I would also like to believe that he meant most of the very nice things that he said about her. :-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2019 15:23:20 GMT -5
CL, let's not use David Foster's comments on a performer and an album he was being paid big bucks by Columbia to produce, plus a royalty on every sale, as though they were those of a disinterested observer. It's not necessary. Why not necessary, Julia? Not everyone is familiar with Jackie and some may not know the extent of her musical prowess. New fans may be interested. David Foster is an accomplished, knowledgeable musician who is widely acknowledged for recognizing the abilities and potential of extraordinary talents and working with them as up-and-coming stars. He made his "big bucks", in part, from promoting and producing many of the most famous singers/musicians of our time, not by inventing unrealistic praise to promote unexceptional wannabes, but by giving those individuals the opportunities to demonstrate their extraordinary attributes, like Whitney Houston with whom he compared Jackie's ability to understand his requests immediately and "give him more than he asked". Jackie was a recognized prodigy, meaning she possessed those attributes and capabilities he spoke of and which he made known through his interviews with her and introduction to those new audiences who would soon be fascinated by her performances because of her ability to apply them. She retains those abilities integral to being the artist she is today.
|
|
|
Post by jamesn on Apr 1, 2019 11:36:13 GMT -5
Some performers deliver a lovely performance, but leave me doubting their emotional connection with the song. I've never gotten that feeling from Jackie. Her performances are rarely perfect... It is interesting that so often in the comments on YouTube videos of Jackie's recorded performances the term "perfection", in various forms, is part of the description of one's impression. One would say, "well, those are OTT fans who think everything Jackie does is perfect" and the like. That may be true of some who regularly praise Jackie with superlatives, not without cause however, but I'm referring to the uncommon posters, random comments. The point is that "perfection" in a performance is not a reference to her vocal technique and skill. Jackie's technique is not that of a trained vocalist, actually quite imperfect from a professional critic's point of view, but rather she sings from her heart with emotion that is real for her, as seen in several performances when she has become almost overwhelmed herself. Jackie's sense of rhythm, timing, pitch, connection with the orchestration, internal vision of the score and its dynamic are relatively innate with her, a natural awareness. Whereas with the vocal student and aspiring vocalist, those are mental considerations that must be learned and practiced diligently and become part of the conscious effort to perform beautifully. Because of that, the effect is rehearsed, even with seasoned artists. Those considerations are not a mental distraction from Jackie's immersion into the essence and meaning of the song, the emotion she experiences and conveys to the audience. An individual feels something personal, intimate and ineffable. The purpose of music, whether vocal or instrumental, is to reach inside a person and stir his own emotion, his memories or desires perhaps. Jackie has a unique and special ability to do that effortlessly and naturally, regardless that her vocals are not technically perfect. Her "flaws" seem irrelevant if not unnoticed. The technician, expert and critic listens for the flaws, while the audience is being swept away to a different place, one of "aesthetic perfection", if you will. This is one big reason why I love to WATCH Jackie singing MHWGO on the MOTM DVD - She completely throws herself into the performance, perhaps moreso than many of her other songs.
|
|