On a slightly phiolosophical note and without wishing to stir up animosity, it does stike me that many singers get away with murder. If they were an eqivalent standard on a whistle, fiddle or guitar, no one would suffer them for an instant. What is is about WORDS that makes singing so special? It generally takes a very good singer (does not have to have a good voice, though this helps) to really tell the story and communicate with an audience. I suspect that prior knowledge of a song and story by an audience causes them to be moved by what they already have in their heads - their own ideal version if you like - NOT by what they are actualy hearing (unless it is REALLY good or bad). This creates an interesting bias which causes us to have a disproportionate desire to listen to and enjoy the songs we know rather than songs brilliantly performed that we don't know. As a thought experiment to test this hypothesis, would an excellent band, who sang songs that no one knows be entertaining (disregearding humour)? It does seem that being able to join in is a crucial part of being entertained. This is no bad thing but it does seem a little unfair to instrumental players who may be exceptionally tallented but relatively far less entertaining. Should we make more of an effort to appreciate the unknown? Should we have to make an effort at all?