How the hell does LuPone sing this well in her 60s?

Is anyone else struck by the strength of LuPone's voice at this stage in her career and life? I can't think of another vocalist who can not only sing the material she sang 30+ yrs ago as well as she did back then, but even better. I understand it's not that remarkable for a vocalist to still have a strong and dynamic voice in her 60s. What I'm struck by is the way in which her voice has not maintained its quality, but improved -- in strength, stamina, color, range, power.

Is there any other actor-singer or vocalist you can think of who has done the same thing? The only one who comes to mind is the remarkable Shirley Bassey. She can still, even in her SEVENTIES belt out those Bond themes as though it was 1966 again. And the slight addition of huskiness has actually enriched the sound because she can still hit those money notes with such power.

I mean, Aretha can still sing [somewhat] beautifully but there is no way she could sing R-E-S-P-E-C-T as well as she did in the 60s. Hell, there's no way she can sing Freedom as well as she did in the 80s.

Is LuPone remarkable in this way or am I overlooking other vocalists who can, not only sing as well as they did several decades later, but who actually have stronger even more assured voices in their later careers.

I disagree that her voice is better than it was in her 30s. It's thinned out a lot (coming from someone who has seen her live, both then and now). It was more open-throated then, and it's more constricted now.

But what she is able to do these days is definitely defying the odds. I agree her voice is in remarkable shape for her age. She's still "got it."

---

Updated On: 6/10/12 at 07:55 AM

I've only seen Patti once, in "Patti and Mandy" or whatever that mess was ( :P) when she came to Australia, and it's hard to gauge how strong her voice is from that performance because 1. The theatre was carnivorous and Mandy's mic was so much louder, making her sound quite weak in comparison and 2. I think she was sick because she often would not hit the correct pitch of the note which would be corrected when she employed vibrato (if that makes sense) and 3. I think someone told me she was sick lol.

BUT, based on recordings her voice does seem very very strong, I don't think there is a substantial difference from "EVITA" to "GYPSY", at least in comparison to other singers such as Betty Buckley or Bernadette Peters whose voices have noticeably declined from their younger days. I feel that it must be more than just vocal rest or technique etc.., she must be lucky too, because I feel that it would be hard to overcome the effects of ageing..

In fact, I only just realised how close Bernadette Peters (64) and Patti LuPone (63) are in age...I actually thought LuPone was quite a bit younger.

---

Updated On: 6/10/12 at 08:35 AM

But even in its prime, Bernadette Peters' voice was never anywhere close to Patti's.

Yes, it can can.

EDIT: And qolbinau---I'm still laughing over a "carnivorous" theatre in your post. I'm sure Patti and Mandy survived, however.

---

Updated On: 6/10/12 at 09:59 AM

sorry i don't usually proffread my posts till it is too late. And as my computer does not have spell check i often end up making silly typos.

qolbinau----I'm pretty sure you meant "cavernous," but don't change it! I love the typo.



And 112---you fixed your "can can."

---

Updated On: 6/10/12 at 10:10 AM

Ripley has far less formal vocal training than Mazzie. Ripley early in her career was planning on going into rock music, instead of theater. Circumstances changed and she ended up on broadway. Alice as a result her sound is very different than someone who trained classically with a more opetaic influence (Mazzie) as she learned to use her voice diffrently early on. Because of the strain normal placed on her voice, only if she seriously changes her technique and goes on a lot of rest.

There's a simple reason for Patti's singing so well in this point in her life: she's the sun, the moon and the stars!

---

Loved Henrik's Oscar Wilde parody!

Bette Midler still sounds pretty good, but she obviously (to my ear) retrained her voice sometime around the time she did GYPSY on TV. She doesn't sing with the same abandon she did 40 years ago, but she also doesn't pass out during concerts.

It's partly genetics and looking after yourself, isn't it? I mean for every example in the pop world like Aretha, or Dionne Warwick (who goes on about how her heavy smoking has not affected her voice, which makes me wonder if she's heard herself in the past 25 years), who do not have the voice they once had, you have someone like Donna Summer who passed away at 63, but I saw live two years back and aside from an ever so slightly deeper sounding voice, still had the voice she did on recordings thirty years back, which is pretty remarkable.

I think a lot is genetics and training and proper care of the voice. Bernadette still sounds amazing when she is well rested and singing songs that suit her voice (not the songs in Follies). Marin will sound impeccable forever-incredibly well trained.

To me Cook sounds very phlegmy-like shes got something in her throat. I've seen Patti twice recently and she wasn't belting at all, save for a few here and there. She definitely paces herself, which is probably why the shows I saw her in sucked balls.

i think Cyndi and Dolly sounds the same now as they did in the 80s. Actually, I think Cyndi's voice has gotten better with age.

---

The fact is that Patti is a MAJOR MAJOR talent and works very hard. Is her voice the same as it was in 1979? No. She couldn't do "He supports you 'cause he loves you" from Evita anymore, and I doubt she could sing Rainbow High the way she did it then. But her voice has gotten richer and understanding of the songs has deepened.

I find Patti's voice to be way better than Babs Streisand's at this point.

BTW as far a coke use goes- I've heard some things from members of the Vivian Beaumont's Anything Goes orchestra. Nuff said!!