There are two terms that need to be clarified.

1) Vocalist: Someone whose vocal cords resonate and subsequently produce sounds in a manner pleasing to the listener. Picture here Luciano Pavarotti singing "Blowin' in the Wind" in an operatic voice. Hear in your mind's ear Joan Baez singing "Walls of Redwing" in that note-perfect soprano voice. My gawwwwddd!

2) Singer: Someone like Bob Dylan. He does often acknowledge where the note should be, but he's not hung up on keeping his voice there while he expresses the meaning inherent in his words. Bob Dylan is a songwriter and a song singer--he is not a song vocalist.

I recall Barry McGuire's "Eve of Destruction" and cringe--as I do when Joan Baez sings "Love is Just a Four Letter Word." McGuire proves that bad vocalization can destroy a poorly-written song and Joan Baez proves that excellent vocalization can destroy a well-written song.

I do not think we can separate the writer from the singer in Dylan's case, nor can we separate the singer from the song. When I listen to Bruce Springsteen's rendition of "Chimes of Freedom" I am blown away. I feel like crankin' the volume and shakin' the walls. It is GREAT. Fantastic production, good studio mix, wow! And then I listen to Dylan singing it and my soul is touched in its deepest recess, and I realize in my heart that there are people on Earth who have been--through one circumstance or another--removed from the company of their peers and their lives. And I hear a voice that speaks for the disenfranchised of our societies and our world. He misses quite a few notes when he sings it, but sing it he does. In the words of Johnny Cash from the liner notes of Nashville Skyline, "This man can rhyme the tick of time, the edge of pain, the what of sane."

Any good vocalist can sing "Mares eat Oats" and miss no notes. That does not mean the same person can sing "Sad-eyed Lady" and make the song work. Baez tried and failed miserably because she turned a piece of song-writing 'literature' into a limp imitation of itself. (Listening to her sing that song is an experience for me much like listening to an Oxford don recite "A Child's Christmas in Wales." Thank you, but I'll take a hungover Dylan Thomas, because Thomas made it work, and I will gladly hear the sacrifice of 'perfect' English for the blend of OK English and absolute meaning that Thomas brings to his work. Operatic voice, note perfect though it may be, will not replace the need for the song to be sung.) When I hear Dylan sing it, I know that he has reached a place that broken-hearted lovers know about, maybe even live, and he spoke with eloquent words to define and expose the pain and remorse of love beyond the reach of stretched-out arms and outstretched hands.

If there is a testimonial to the power of Dylan's singing, it might be this: Few people are able to sing his songs well after he has sung them because his rendition defines context, meaning and purpose. "Mr Tamborine Man" is an example. The Byrds had a hit with it, but that was the newness of hearing a Dylan song electrified, and twelve-strings DO add a special sound to music--especially electric twelves. But I think the definitive recording is Dylan's, broken voice and all. Dylan is not a great vocalist, but I think we would be hard-pressed to find a better singer.