Talk:Josh Groban/Archive 3

Comedian
It says he is a comedian? How so? Is this correct? 99.149.193.21 (talk) 23:13, 15 June 2010 (UTC)MaeBelle
 * see the Ally McBeal episode or attend one of his concerts, funny man. DocOfSoc (talk) 01:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

His 2011 appearance on Jimmy Kimmel included a video that went viral on Youtube, where he sang the tweets of Kanye West. He has made numerous comedy appearances on Kimmel, a couple on Never Mind the Buzzcocks, at least one on Adult Swim. HIs concerts are characterized by comedic banter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skysong263 (talk • contribs) 03:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skysong263 (talk • contribs)

Emmy Awards
When listening to his Emmy Awards TV Medley, I noticed that Josh Groban hit a high B during the Baywatch theme song at 2:08 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4ndAFcopzk). I am going to change the vocal range section of Groban's wikipedia page. If for some reason my observation is incorrect, someone please explain why and how come this change cannot be made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.53.177 (talk) 01:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you have a reliable source stating this? Respectfully, "you" alone are not a reliable source.  x42bn6 Talk Mess  15:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

There is no official newsite reporting this, but when I played this clip over a pitch perfect tuner it showed it as a High B. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.53.177 (talk) 00:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Then unfortunately it shouldn't be put in. x42bn6 Talk Mess  13:35, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Voice types
I don't completely understand why there was a discussion about Groban's voice type. Just attribute it to sources, and leave it at that. To use "unclear" as a vocal classification is simply poor and unprofessional. It's perfectly fine to list more than one voice types (a similar case arose with the Mariah Carey article: Carey classifies herself as an alto, and other sources stated that she was soprano. So we listed both, with sources). The field does say "voice type(s)", as in more than one, if necessary. People have sung comfortably in different ranges, and people's vocal tessitura sometimes changes with age, technique, etc. Oran e   (talk)  02:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * To simply just list both voice types is misleading as a reader would assume they have both voice types simultaneously; an impossibility in voice classification (although voices do change over time creating the possibility of more than one throughout a career). Listing as unclear is really more accurate. I don't think it's unprofessional to treat the subject as we have done so. Rather the opposite. It would be more unprofessional to list both voice types which at best would only reflect on the editor's ignorance on voice classification or at worst would create a misinformed reader. As for the Carey article, I think they should do a similar thing that we have done here as opposed to this article conforming to theirs. FYI the Carrey article has been highly unstable in regards to their voice type info box information. This article used to be in a similar situation until we implemented the "unclear" suggestion. This has frankly solved a lot of headaches. Nrswanson (talk) 04:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Seriously, what's the point of a "voice type" field, if we're only going to say we don't know what the voice type is? And of course he can use both voice types simultaneously. They are not particularly exclusive of each other, and I'm sure that that is why different sources claim different types during the same period in his career. Precedence implies that comments such as "unclear,see below/disputed, see below" have no place in an infobox because of how unprofessional it is. We do not point to a piece of information and then claim t

hat we don't know what it is. Oran e  (talk)  04:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI, we are not here to "solve headaches" or appease editors. We're here to build an objective encyclopedia. Fact: some sources list the singer as "baritone". Fact, some sources list the singer as "tenor". Natural conclusion, list the voice types in the voice type field. That's what the field is there for. I'll be bringing this up on the project's music infobox talk page to see if they can explain come guideline or parameter for the field. Oran e   (talk)  04:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Sigh, go ahead but I find some of your assertions to be entirely inaccurate, particularly the statement that he can "use both voice types simultaneously" which according to everything I have read is entirely untrue. A singer has only one voice type, period. (I can provide several sources stating the fact that a singer can have only one voice type at time. FYI I have a masters in vocal pedagogy) Vocal range is not the only factor considered when determining voice type. In fact it is not even the main one. Other considerations such as vocal tessitura, vocal weight, coloratura facility (although this is more an issue in opera), and vocal timbre are also considered when determining whether a singer is a soprano, mezzo, contralto, tenor, baritone, or bass etc. There really isn't an ambiguity in the system that you are suggesting. What we have in play here is an uneducated media and an uneducated set of popular singers who are not familiar with the intricacies of voice classification and its history. Groban has rightly described himself consistantly as a tenor. Of course we can and should say only what is found in reliable sources. What we have here is two different sets of opinions. Once camp says Groban is a baritone and the other a tenor. Both views should be stated in context. In no place, however, does a source say that he is both a baritone and a tenor.To infer so, like you are suggesting, is not only inaccurate but original research.Nrswanson (talk) 07:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Then if that is the case, why not put the voice type by which Groban classifies himself? Isn't that the most accurate of all. I'm assuming that he should know his voice more than anyone else. And according to what I've read, a capable singer with a range wide enough, may be able to move between vocal roles. And to suggest that a singer's voice always fits neatly in a niche based on obvious and clear cut criteria on a vocal classification scale is equally as erroneous. I do not have a masters in music. But I did grow up singing competitively in a (non-classical) choir competing at national and international levels, and know a thing or two about voice production. I was naturally an alto, in my early teens, but settled into baritenor in my later years, where I could perform both roles equally well and may easily be classified as either. Now, I'm not in any way claiming that I know as much as you. But I know a thing or two about the subject, and I disagree with the singularity of your classification, based both on experience and education. Oran e   (talk)  11:44, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * That's perfectly true that singers do move between roles (by roles of course you mean opera roles) but the voice type itself does not inhabit multiple places at once. For example, the role of Carmen, a mezzo-soprano role, has been sung by sopranos. Does that make a soprano who sings Carmen a mezzo? No it doesn't. That singer is still a soprano based on their voice's vocal timbre and tessitura. Likewise mezzo-sopranos like Cecilia Bartoli and Joyce DiDonato have sung soprano roles but are clearly mezzo-sopranos. If you listen to a recording of a mezzo doing Carmen and then a soprano singing Carmen, you can hear a distinct difference between the vocal colors in the line and the way the vocal weight rests in the arias. It really changes the way the role sounds. This is where most people make a mistake. Voice classification is not so much about vocal range but about tessitura, vocal weight, and vocal timbre. Take Jessye Norman for example. She has sung high dramatic soprano roles all the way down to contralto roles. Her voice though has always been described as a dramatic soprano. Singers also can cycle through voice types during their career (i.e. Lucia Popp) Often sopranos voices will deepen as they get into their middle age and they will start tackeling mezzo roles. Also, I wouldn't suggest that every voice fits neatly into a niche. I merely meant that the sort of ambiguity you were advocating wasn't necessarily accurate. There is ambiguity, just not the kind you were suggesting (i.e. multiple voice types at the same time). Opera is really particular on this point. You won't find singers billing themselves in multiple voice types. Placido Domingo for example has sung several baritone roles but would he be considered a baritone? or both a baritone and a tenor? No. He's obviously a tenor based on the timbre of his voice. A tenor has a distinct sound and a baritone has a distinct sound (albight with variations which leads to sub-types within voice types). One can not be both at the same time. FYI that baritenor link is an exact copy of an old wikipedia article that was deleted in an AFD. It's really not a widely accepted term among vocal music professionals. Singers like yourself, depending on the vocal color and weight of the voice, would be classified as either a Baryton-Martin (a baritone with good upper extension to usually around an A flat below the infamous Tenor C) or a Heldentenor (a tenor with a baritone like quality of the voice that can sing up to the Tenor C). Of course all of this relates to classical singers and is therefore somewhat disconected with Groban who is really a contemporary artist. There are several problems inherent in classifying contemporary singers, namely because the voice classification systems (German Fach system, Italian opera system, etc) are all routed in the idea that the singer needs to project over an orchestra without a microphone. Contemporary singers are not limited to defining their voices in terms of opera roles where they have to be able to project notes without a microphone over a full orchestra. This enables singers to extend performance ranges, particularly in the lower register although also in the upper register for some singers, where they would not have previously been able to perform (those notes wouldn't have carried over an orchestra). This really has changed everything and it makes it difficult or sometimes impossible to apply voice type terms to contemporary singers accurately. See Voice classification in non-classical music. Regardless, it would be original research to refer to Groban as being both a tenor and a baritone simultaneously. The presentation as it stands is both accurate and neutral by presenting both sides. As for listing him as a tenor only, per Groban's statement in the NYT, we tried to go down that road before and it was a mess causing edit wars and accusations of bias. With media sources refering to him as a baritone and others as a tenor it really is best for NPOV reasons to present it the way we have by presenting both sides. I personally think having a voice type section in infoboxes is a bad idea and wikipedia would be better served if the section was removed encyclopedia wide. It really is too complicated of a topic to neatly fit into an infobox without causing the information to be skewed in one way or another. It's much better to talk about the voice and its development in context to the person's career. The opera project has already decided to do this on opera singer articles.Nrswanson (talk) 11:56, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for not replying sooner. Was at work. Anyway, I also see the problems caused by the voice type field in the infobox. A similar discussion arose regarding the genre field about a week ago, where it was deemed too complicated to simply list terms without proper contextualization. But I digress. I understand fully what you're saying. But my main issue was one which you pointed out: the difficulty in classifying non classical singers. Operatic music is written in particular fachs and singers are sought and classified by the roles they perform. However, in pop music, people sing various songs in various ranges. Ultimately, the issue that I have with the idea that a voice falls into only one category is that, most of the time, vocal classification is subjective: the only "fact" one has to go by is the notes that set the parameters (i.e a baritone singing between A2 and F4); colour, weight, tessitura, timbre are mostly determined by ear. What if I listen to Groban, and I conclude that his tone is as light as Pavarotti's, but you state that it's darker, and closer to Nmon Ford's. Who is right? Since a pop song isn't a "written vocal role", a singer isn't defined by the notes he/she sings, and the voice is free to explore. What if Groban possess the ability to sing between A2 and C5, and sound darker at the bottom end and very light at the top end. Wouldn't that mean that someone classifying Groban as a baritone would be right, and likewise for someone classifying him as a tenor? If he is able to sing fluently throughout, wouldn't he be both a baritone and a tenor in this sense? Oran e  (talk)  23:22, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * PS: If I'm an opera singer, and I'm sought after for both tenor and baritone, and gain popularity for singing both "roles", does that make me both? Oran e   (talk)  23:36, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No I don't think so. I've certainly never seen or heard of such a case, and none of the numerous books I have on vocal pedagogy suggest that possibility. As for your question about the voice I really can't say without hearing it. I'd be listening for register breaks and vocal comfort and other clues such as the age of singer, etc. All I can say for sure is that to my knowledge in no place has a professional singer marketed themselves as both a tenor and a baritone simultaneously. Typically singers that move inbetween roles in opera still concentrate their repertoire primarily in one area. I have never seen or heard of a case where it has been evenly divided at the same point in their career. Even in cases like Maria Malibran, a mezzo who did an equal amount of soprano roles, the soprano high notes were rewritten or the keys lowered for her in the soprano arias so she could sing them. Their have been singers who sang in one fach for one point in their career and then, as the voice changed over time, moved primarily into another area. But in those cases, the voice had changed so that they couldn't perform the roles that they used to perform and were able to perform roles that they couldn't do earlier. The voice isn't a static thing. It's dynamic, constantly changing throughout a singers career. I agree with you on popular music (note that I said the exact same thing in other words above). However, I still hold to the general opinion that a baritone has a unique and different characteristic sound from that of a tenor and that for this reason a singer can't be both at the same time. Otherwise, why have voice types to differentiate voices at all if they can sound the same? The question is not about whether a baritone can sing some tenor roles or vice versa. That's not really the point of voice types. Voice type is about classifying the qualities of the voice. Not just vocal range or where it sits comfortabilty, but the tone quality and the weight of the voice. All of that put together makes a specific and totally unique kind of voice. Hence why singers can't posess more than one voice type at a time. A perfect example would be Cecilia Bartoli who, although posessing the ability to sing a good high C, has a vocal timbre that sounds like a mezzo. She therefore describes herself and is described by music critics as a mezzo-soprano. To my ears Groban sounds like a tenor and not a baritone. Regardless, my opinion really doesn't matter. What matters is presenting all sides in a neutral way, which the article already does effectively.Nrswanson (talk) 00:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * On second thought, I agree with you. I guess my main issue was explicitly listing "unclear, see below" in the infobox field (especially the "unclear" part. Unclear to who? The writers of the article/those involved in the discussion, or unclear to everyone else, including music critics etc). But now that it states "see voice section", it's a bit more presentable. There was also the difference in interpretation of the voice field itself. For example, you claim that listing two fields may confuse readers into thinking that his voice fit both fachs simultaneously, while I simply felt that listing two voice types (with sources) indicated that his voice is classified as either one or the other by various sources, or in various points in his career. But again, that's irrelevant now. So anyway, I won't push anyone to change it. Was nice talking to you; you certainly know a lot on the subject. Have you written anything?  Oran e   (talk)  20:54, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes actually. I've written some articles for the Music Educators Journal. In terms of wikipedia, I've contributed significantly to hundreds of articles and I am an active member of several music related projects. Most of my time on here is spent on articles related to opera and to singing though. Recently I completely redid the articles on singing and vocal pedagogy. Most of the voice type article, the vocal registration article, and vocal resonation articles are my work as well. If you look at my user page I have about half of my significant contributions listed.Nrswanson (talk) 22:39, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow, the MEJ. Impressive. I've sought a couple articles from that journal. And keep up the good work on Wikipedia. By the way, I have one last dumb question. You probably don't listen to pop music a lot (though i could be wrong), but listening to this song, how would you classify this singer? I say mezzo soprano, the singer herself claims alto, and the book Rock and Roll Gold Rush and many others classify her as a coloratura soprano. It's shocking that the range of responses are so varied. I'm interested to hear yours and why. Is she a soprano with a lower, husky range, an alto with a freakishly high range, or a mezzo with an expansive range in both directions? Oran e   (talk)  06:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * PS: Is there a term for the "breathiness" in her voice when she sings "the stars are brightly shining"? What register is she using? It can't be falsetto, since the notes are so deep. Or maybe her voice is just screwed up... O.k that is all. Oran e   (talk)  06:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll respond on your talk page rather than clutter up this one.Nrswanson (talk) 12:17, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

If you look at his 2008 Emmys performance, you can hear him switch seamlessly from a booming low voice that sounds almost like a bass to an extremely light tenor, almost a countertenor, along with various falsetto sounds. At some point one starts to hear a different word, not baritone, not tenor, but genius.

Recent Years section
This needs a lot of work. It's written like a fan club blog and has now become quite incoherent. Events are out of chronological order and several have month and day listed but no year. Given the chronological incoherence, it's impossible to tell which year is being referred to. Voceditenore (talk) 14:44, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Template
I'm surprised that a template for him hasn't been created. Should we start one? -- Cartoon Boy (talk) 9:17, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Sentence in the intro
The sentence "He has concentrated his career so far mostly in concert singing and recordings, although he has stated that he wishes to pursue music theater in the future.[citation needed]." doesn't really belong in the intro but under the career section. The intro is primer to the person and why they are notable, not a list of what they want to accomplish. In addition it's un-citied.24.190.34.219 (talk) 02:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Jewish Culture?
"This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish culture on Wikipedia."

Can anyone explain why? He's Episcopalian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.82.181.237 (talk) 21:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

He's half Jewish- from his dad, I think?Smilez888 (talk) 00:29, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * The banner should be removed. First of all, the project is no longer active, see the large banner at the top of WikiProject Jewish culture. Secondly, the subject of the article has only the most tangential relationship to Jewish culture, i.e. his father was Jewish. Note also his Christmas album, Noël. Voceditenore (talk) 07:29, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "Half Jewish", you are either Jewish, or you are not (75.69.241.91 (talk) 19:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC))
 * Agreed. Besides, he is both a Christian himself and he sings Christian music, "Christian culture" would be more appropriate. The fact that some of his ancestors might have been Jewish (while he is not) is irrelevant. Mogladdaim (talk) 02:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There seems to be some confusion here about the difference between a category and a project.


 * Categories go in the article itself and are used to help readers to find sets of related articles – either on a particular topic, or as is the case with most biographical articles, on subjects who are all members of a particular set; e.g. American male singers. Issues can arise with the application of categories of which the subject may not be a member, or is only marginally a member.


 * Project banners go on the talk pages and are not meant as navigation aids or to indicate that a singer has "influence on" or "belongs to" an area. The banners are to indicate that an article falls securely within the scope of a particular project. Normally this means that the project would actively  "look after" the article, and be a place where readers or editors of the article could ask questions, get expert help etc. on the subject.


 * Apart from the fact that Groban does not perform Jewish music and that Judaism is not his religion, WikiProject Jewish culture is no longer an active project. Its page is kept for historical purposes only. The Jewish culture banner on this page is simply inaccurate banner clutter. I'm going to remove it. Voceditenore (talk) 08:46, 20 November 2009 (UTC) Whoops I see some has already done this. Good! Voceditenore (talk) 08:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Religion
The article says he was raised an Episcolian. I wonder why. If his father was born Jewish (but converted to Christianity upon his marriage to a Christian), it's unlikely he's the Episcopalian one. If his mother is a Norwegian-American, I find it strange that she would be an Episcopalian. There are hardly any Episcopalians in Norway. The Church of Norway is Lutheran. Mogladdaim (talk) 02:45, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

All I can say is that I too came from a mixed Jewish-ancestry-father/Protestant-mother family and was also raised Episcopalian -- and my father's cousins ended up Episcopalian. My father did not participate much in church. Episcopalians are unusually tolerant amongst Protestants. The Episcopal church is the US branch of the state church of England, which necessarily has to have a broad base in order to be acceptable to a democratic state. The Episcopal church includes people with a wide range of beliefs. Not believing the material that is recited or sung in church is commonly regarded as perfectly acceptable and indeed a manifestation of mature flexibility. Moreover, there is a lot of entertaining ritual: e.g. music, vestments, and incense, which can be satisfying and inspiring to people of diverse beliefs. In addition, there is frequent movement between sitting, standing and kneeling positions, which tends to keep the circulation going. Moreover, Episcopalians tend to be highly educated and bookish, which might appeal to people of Jewish ancestry who are also bookish.

Awards Nominations
The introductory section to the article states that Groban was nominated for an Academy Award in 2005 for the song 'Believe'. I have removed this statement as it is incorrect - although Groban recorded the song and performed it at the Oscar ceremonies, only the composers/writers of a song are actually nominated and not the person who performs it, unless that performer was also involved in the creation of the song itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.189.164 (talk) 10:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Addition to Discography section
In February 2007, Josh Groban released an album only available in Hallmark stores during the Valentine's season. It was called With You and was available for $9.99 with a purchase of three cards--$14.95 without the three cards. There were 8 songs: 6 were selections from his other albums, and 2 were new songs:  "With You" and "My Heart Was Home Again".

If his album A Collection was included in the Discography, then With You should be included since it's also a collection album that included new songs specially for the album. It's not like it was just a single or a collaboration with another artist. Beth228 (talk) 09:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

how many langauges can he speak or sing in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.108.164.51 (talk) 11:17, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Anyone can sing any language. It's only a question of memorizing some sounds. Speaking the language is a whole other question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.6.182.153 (talk) 01:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * He sings in four languagesDocOfSoc (talk) 05:08, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

additional information requested
1. How tall is he? Height: 6' 0½''. 2. He has an album entitled "With You." Why isn't this listed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skysong263 (talk • contribs) 04:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

3. This says he attended "Bridges Academy," which is a school for gifted kids with learning differences. Has he ever said anything about his "learning differences?" "I didn't feel that I was getting enough creative input. So I went to Bridges Academy to get my grades up to straight A's." and While at the Bridges Academy, Josh Groban took regular classes from 9:00 AM to 1:00 PM, and afterwards Josh Groban attended the theatre classes." DocOfSoc (talk) 03:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Upcoming Album
Why is Groban's upcoming album not mentioned in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.24.35.196 (talk) 22:48, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

ref to explore
 Was he featured on the Simpsons, singing "So She dances? DocOfSoc (talk) 00:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * archives http://www.grobanarchives.com/
 * Another biography, interesting. DocOfSoc (talk) 11:52, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

New Tour
The Straight to You tour is not an "America Only" tour. The dates annouced so far are only the American leg of the tour. Overseas dates have not been annouced yet but Josh has stated that there will be an overseas leg of the tour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.52.241.226 (talk) 21:12, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Residence
I doubt he lives in the Time Warner Center. Isn't that a commercial building? There was a confusing reference in a magazine article to such a location that appeared to indicate that he lived there, but that was probably the location of the interview, not of his residence. In any case, the specific location of his residence should not be publicly listed, to avoid crazies attempting to visit him. Remember what happened to John Lennon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skysong263 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 13 March 2011 (UTC)