Yes. Ironically the non-falsetto portion (low and high notes, particularly belted in the last chorus) is much harder than the falsetto note. Most singers can do the falsetto note. But for whatever reason that impresses people more.
What does "easy" and "hard" mean? Approaching the range? Matching the pitch? Sustaining it for a time?
There are not many tasks that can be cut-and-dried as universally "easy"/"hard". "The Star Spangled Banner" is a more challenging melody because of its wide range. Also, because it's often sung solo, with minimal accompaniment, to huge crowds.
If I were singing falsetto notes, I could probably launch into the range, but could I match pitch and harmonize without AutoTune?
The Take On Me chorus has a two octave range in full voice (A2 to A4) and a falsetto at E5. I think it's harder to find people who can sing that chorus A2-A4 consistently than to find people who can squeak out a falsetto at E5. Yet the falsetto is more "impressive".
I guess I could be biased because I find it easy and not everyone finds reinforced falsetto easy. But for example Bohemian's Rhapsody famous falsetto high note is Bb5, a full half-octave higher.
I don't think Steve Perry ever pitched down his vocals. IMO there are two types of singer, ones with good technique (due to practice or genetics) who can sing easily, and those who have to really force notes out in the studio (relying on perfect conditions) then pitch down live.
I agree he always seemed to me comfortable in that range, on talk shows, etc. The guy from Aerosmith on the other hand I would be surprised if he could match the radio version regularly in concert. As for Layla, I guess I only know the live/mtv unplugged and the original had higher notes?
It's not fine at all? Before social media the average was 28 hours a week of viewing per person, obviously a non negligible percent of people watch TV for 100% of their free time.
Modern social media is even more addictive - always with you even when you're not home, short form, customized to your tastes, you can skip videos so you no longer need to feel any pain at all.
One argument (while unsatisfying) is there are trillions of possible configurations, but ours is the one that happened to work which is why we're here to observe it. Changing any of them even a little bit would result in an empty universe.
There’s a name for that: the Anthropic principle. And it is deeply unsatisfying as an explanation.
And does it even apply here? If the charge on the electron differed from the charge on the proton at just the 12th decimal place, would that actually prevent complex life from forming. Citation needed for that one.
I agree with OP. The unexplained symmetry points to a deeper level.
I was born to this world at a certain point in time. I look around, and I see environment compatible with me: air, water, food, gravity, time, space. How deep does this go? Why I am not an ant or bacteria?
youtube's algorithm seems to be "oh you watched this video? now here's every other video by this creator, pretty much without a break, until you downvote it"
It never reliably gives me videos similar but not exactly the same, i.e. things I might be interested in.
For me it's the same exact 5 videos on repeat, over and over and over again. I've gotten in a loop a lot of times, where it'll autoplay the same video I just watched, it's absolute madness
reply