Britney's Voice

[filmandstage13]

I don't think it's a stretch to say Britney's voice has been more scrutinized in the public sphere by experts, fans, and the general public, than almost any other pop artist in recent history.  It's been one realm (of many) in her career where she is never given enough credit.

But even putting aside what naysayers say, I feel like it also bothers me how some fans speak about her voice as well.  I think we all agree that she has one of the most iconic and frequently imitated voices in pop music history, but the discourse in the fanbase I think also diminishes Britney's power and her own agency in using her voice.

The story typically goes - Britney had this amazing belter's voice akin to Whitney, Christina, etc., but the studio execs "forced her to use this baby voice" and "ruined" her natural tone.

First - I'd like to retire the term "baby voice."  I get why it’s gotten that name, but honestly I feel like her mid nasal sound is a stylistic choice that doesn’t serve to infantilize her, but rather she uses to punctuate certain words and play off the production. She has used that technique (or some version of it) for the majority of her career as a recording artist, including material that is very adult and empowering, and "baby" is not a term that belongs anywhere near the work.

But this idea that she was "forced" to sing in a particular way irks me.  I could be wrong, but I don't think we've heard Britney make this claim (maybe we will in the book?), but rather we have heard that she worked with Eric Foster White during the her debut era to create the sound we most closely associate with her today.  This doesn't seem nefarious, or even very one-sided.  It makes a lot of sense that a producer would work with a new artist to showcase specific aspects of her voice and find her own identity in the vast pop landscape.

What she ended up doing was what every artist strives to do - put their indelible stamp on a work that is instantly recognizable and unquestionably theirs.  It's a stroke of genius in terms of branding.  Everyone knows a Britney song when they hear one.  And she's had an incredible number of imitators over the years (including some VERY notable examples), but let's be honest - we can always tell *who* they're imitating, but we'd never actually mistake their voice for Britney's.  Britney's voice is one-of-a-kind, in spite of the imitators.

But the way the story is told, it's like she had no choice in the matter.  Unless she says that directly, I think there is plenty of evidence that this isn't the case. First, I think it undersells the diversity of styles she's used in her recordings to date.  Songs like "Lucky" are the clearest examples of the mid nasal voice styling, while songs like "Let Me Be" and "He About to Lose Me" explore her lower register while still incorporating some riffs and flairs that mimic vocal fry and are so closely associated with her.

If we look at the point in her career where she indisputably had the most control - the In the Zone and Blackout eras - she continues to employ the same vocal stylings that made her famous - just look at "Toy Soldier."  Also, between these albums and during what we'll call the Original Doll era, Britney was extremely prolific in the studio, clearly doing her own thing, even if these things never made it to an album.  And the available recordings we have, we still see her using this nasal tone.  Take a look at the original demo of "Mona Lisa," where she takes her nasal tone to an extreme where it almost sounds menacing or demonic.  When the track was finally released by the label, her vocals were much more subdued and less nasal.  Even her more obscure demos that represented a much more distinct genre shift - like her Otis Redding tribute "I've Been Loving You Too Long" - still uses her "changed" voice.

So I guess I just don't buy that this vocal technique was something that was "forced" upon Britney.  It seems like it was purely a sound that producers helped her to create, and then she just kinda took it and ran with it.  And the end result is one of the most iconic voices in pop music history.  And I love every iteration of her voice, because even though her post-BOMT recordings really lean into the new, higher, more-nasal sound, I think Britney's DNA is all over all versions of her voice.  And there are few voices that I think have so much character and are so good at emoting and remain so interesting to listen to!

So unless Britney tells us otherwise (in the book or at some other point), let's not perpetuate this idea that her iconic voice was someone else's doing.

Edited September 26 by filmandstage13

[Lex993]

Bored huh?

[Onyx_Zone-89]

8 minutes ago, filmandstage13 said:

I don't think it's a stretch to say Britney's voice has been more scrutinized in the public sphere by experts, fans, and the general public, than almost any other pop artist in recent history.  It's been one realm (of many) in her career where she is never given enough credit.

But even putting aside what naysayers say, I feel like it also bothers me how some fans speak about her voice as well.  I think we all agree that she has one of the most iconic and frequently imitated voices in pop music history, but the discourse in the fanbase I think also diminishes Britney's power and her own agency in using her voice.

The story typically goes - Britney had this amazing belter's voice akin to Whitney, Christina, etc., but the studio execs "forced her to use this baby voice" and "ruined" her natural tone.

First - I'd like to retire the term "baby voice."  I get why it’s gotten that name, but honestly I feel like her mid nasal sound is a stylistic choice that doesn’t serve to infantilize her, but rather she uses to punctuate certain words and play off the production. She has used that technique (or some version of it) for the majority of her career as a recording artist, including material that is very adult and empowering, and "baby" is not a term that belongs anywhere near the work.

But this idea that she was "forced" to sing in a particular way irks me.  I could be wrong, but I don't think we've heard Britney make this claim (maybe we will in the book?), but rather we have heard that she worked with Eric Foster White during the her debut era to create the sound we most closely associate with her today.  This doesn't seem nefarious, or even very one-sided.  It makes a lot of sense that a producer would work with a new artist to showcase specific aspects of her voice and find her own identity in the vast pop landscape.

What she ended up doing was what every artist strives to do - put their indelible stamp on a work that is instantly recognizable and unquestionably theirs.  It's a stroke of genius in terms of branding.  Everyone knows a Britney song when they hear one.  And she's had an incredible number of imitators over the years (including some VERY notable examples), but let's be honest - we can always tell *who* they're imitating, but we'd never actually mistake their voice for Britney's.  Britney's voice is one-of-a-kind, in spite of the imitators.

But the way the story is told, it's like she had no choice in the matter.  Unless she says that directly, I think there is plenty of evidence that this isn't the case. First, I think it undersells the diversity of styles she's used in her recordings to date.  Songs like "Lucky" are the clearest examples of the mid nasal voice styling, while songs like "Let Me Be" and "He About to Lose Me" explore her lower register while still incorporating some riffs and flairs that mimic vocal fry and are so closely associated with her.

If we look at the point in her career where she indisputably had the most control - the In the Zone and Blackout eras - she continues to employ the same vocal stylings that made her famous - just look at "Toy Soldier."  Also, between these albums and during what we'll call the Original Doll era, Britney was extremely prolific in the studio, clearly doing her own thing, even if these things never made it to an album.  And the available recordings we have, we still see her using this nasal tone.  Take a look at the original demo of "Mona Lisa," where she takes her nasal tone to an extreme where it almost sounds menacing or demonic.  When the track was finally released by the label, her vocals were much more subdued and less nasal.  Even her more obscure demos that represented a much more distinct genre shift - like her Otis Redding tribute "I've Been Loving You Too Long" - still uses her "changed" voice.

So I guess I just don't buy that this vocal technique was something that was "forced" upon Britney.  It seems like it was purely a sound that producers helped her to create, and then she just kinda took it and ran with it.  And the end result is one of the most iconic voices in pop music history.  And I love every iteration of her voice, because even though her post-BOMT recordings really lean into the new, higher, more-nasal sound, I think Britney's DNA is all over all versions of her voice.  And there are few voices that I think have so much character and are so good at emoting and remain so interesting to listen to!

So unless Britney tells us otherwise (in the book or at some other point), let's not perpetuate this idea that her iconic voice was someone else's doing.

Her voice was changed by producers, her mom mentioned it in her book through the storm. There was also an interview with Max martin during the recording of baby one more time. He talks about how he had to push her to do a nasal tone. Similar to NSYNC and backstreet boys. Notice how NSYNC and Britney both pronounce me like a hard "may"? It's in the production from producers. However I think she just took it and ran with it. Most celebs play a character for the public

[BritneyWiki]

Personally I think she has a great voice and has not lost it. She simply lacks the confidence to do live performances. And I don't blame her. She's still an incredible studio musician and performing artist.

It will be interesting to hear if she mentions anything about singing, recording, lip syncing, etc, in the book.

[Sana Babish]

Yes to retire the baby voice idea. I never believed the record company execs forced her to sing in a baby voice. WHO THE F WOULD ANYONE WANT HER TO SING IN A BABY VOICE. Nobody would. I don’t understand how more and more people claimed this over the years. People can’t even imagine that perhaps it was Britney all along who chose to sing in a baby voice. I just believe she has no F clue how to use her voice. Somewhere in her voice lessons as a kid, she missed a concept and the voice teacher neglected her progress. But how is anyone going to get through to Britney NOW and tell her she doesn’t know how to use her voice, that sometimes she sings extraordinarily well but most times she doesn’t? This is all part of a nasty combination of flawed self perception with fluctuating elements of delusion of what she believes is artistic versus her true untapped potential and talent. It’s really a shame. But she likes to be mysterious so perhaps this is all part of her plan. 

[nux1989]

I think neither "baby voice" nor the heavy chest voice in Something to Talk About is her real voice.
People always use her young audition video as proof that her real voice is deep and very chest-ey,
but to me that's just "trained-child-star" voice trying ot imitate 90's divas like Whitney Houston. (think Xtina)
But in her debut era, she did some live in her so-called "real voice". and they're still pushy and cracked here and there.
The thing is, she has no trouble use deep chest voice or falsetto but struggle to blend them in the middle range, which consist majority of a song.