Dylan's Voice/ Better Now?

I have been listening to Modern Times for the past couple of months in my car. I am sort of responding to another person comment in another thread, that to him Dylan sounds like a dead frog. He said he could not listen to any Dylan recordings after a certain year, in the late 60's or 70's.
I think Dylan's voice is like a fine wine, it just keeps getting better as it ages. I love his voice on his last few albums. I like the grumble, croakiness, of his "frog" voice.
To me, there is way more interest, depth, and soul to his voice in his latter recordings.
Where do you stand regarding Bob Dylan's voice. Is it shot? Tolerable? or fantastic?
I have a lot of Dylan in my collection and listen to frequently, but lately he makes me want to continually clear my throat....if you know what I mean. I guess I prefer him in not so modern times :)
I'm with you. I enjoy his vocals on the more recent recordings. Like many a blues-man, it fits Dylan and the music like a shoe. Wouldn't have it any other way. THis ain't AMerican Idol!
You've set the bar awfully low (the old Dylan vocals) for the more recent Dylan vocals.

This thread made me chuckle. Too many years ago, I had a college music professor who refused to call Dylan's craft "singing", instead referring to it as "some sort of free vocal expression". Either way, I will acknowledge that it works for Bob.

I'm with Muncybob: the late Dylan vocals have me looking over my shoulder for the Angel of Death. He didn't have far to fall, in a way, but his brilliant stylings used to compensate; now, not so much. IMO, of course.

By the way, if you're like me, and often like other people doing Dylan, you'll enjoy the pleasantly eclectic "Chimes of Freedom" tribute.
The voice it has been changin'
Don't think he sounded better than on Nashville Skyline...nice warm, velvety smoothness on that one...I'm not a huge fan of more recent offerings...both in terms of material and vocals...but on Modern Times he has a cracking band...
I remember the first time I heard a cut from Time out of Mind on the radio. Kind of shocked me. Wondered if he'd been taking voice lessons from Tom Waits. BUT - that was/is a great album, some of his strongest songs, I think. I got used to the singing and actually came to like it. I guess you could say his voice is an acquired taste. Definitely agree with Todd and Mapman - it's in character and suits his ("anachronistic") style.
I think you will find that among musicians, Bob Dylan's is not and has not ever been considered a very good voice at all. This does not mean, however, that he is not expressive. He is certainly considered a much better songwriter than he is a performer.
I agree with you. He's at his Johnny Cash stage, although Johnny sounded worse and Dylan sounds better. I saw Modern Times while I was in Chicago for work several years ago. Bob was the headliner and Elvis Costello opened the show. I swore I would never waste my money on a Bob Dylan show again but this was a fine concert indeed, and his band was simply amazing. Bob Dylan is a cool dude. I read an interview he did where has mentioned that he took a vacation to Neil Youngs home town in Canada so he could see the house Neil grew up in. When I read that, I realized that Bob Dylan is a lot more like you and I than I ever knew.
I like old Dylan, new Dylan...any Dylan is ok with me. I find that any of his albums take several listenings before they become part of your DNA, so give them a chance. For voice, I prefer his middle period (Infidels, Desire, Street Legal), probably because I have heard them so often. I understand the criticism of Dylan's voice in recent years, but I'll still buy any new album that he puts out. It's the words I'm listening to, and if Dylan's singing them, I'm listening!
When I saw Dylan live last a few years back, his voice was a non-issue. His band was smokin and delivered most all of the goods on that particular night in Philly. Not always the case though based on accounts.

Its inevitable that age will affect the voices of the aging classic rockers these days. Some are starting to wilt to the detriment of their act (McCartney). Some manage to push on, at least for now (Moody Blues). Some seemingly go with the flow and make their technical deficiencies actually work for them stylistically in new ways (Dylan). I admire Dylan more than ever for that!

GOod comment above about the difference between technical proficiency and expressiveness in vocals!
I saw Dylan way back in the early days when he was starting to become a star. I think this concert was the first time I saw people light matches (not cell phones) waving to the music. Of course the matches were already out for other purposes (a dense fog if I remember).

At that time you could actually understand the words he was singing.
Bob's singing works for his stuff but come now.........
"Bob's singing works for his stuff"

TO me that's all that matters. I like the rough edges it adds to the otherwise smooth grooves found in many of his more recent recordings. It has a worn quality that reflects the years of use on it and adds credibility to the message of the song. It's never been pretty or technically refined. That's always been a big part of the Dylan package, like it or leave it. Still the case only more so.
I love Dylan but the simple fact is his voice has faded as the years have passed.

It is unique, it does carry character but it's like suggesting he looks as good as he did in the 60's.

It's the nature of things, they've changed.
Agree with Ben. The range of emotion he was able to express when younger appears to be more limited as his older voice is more monotonic. Things happen. He's still the man.
Thanks for all of your input and opinions. This made for an interesting read for me.
It died for me about the Saved album.