I can see your point, Guitaristic. Maybe the question would be better phrased-"Can I sing-yet?" There is a continuum of skill, as with any other instrument, and we all have- taste, which means that we don't agree on what sounds good. My teachers tried for years to teach me Bel Canto, and eventually I realized that their goals and mine were just not the same. They wanted me to sound like Pavarotti, and I was more interested in Dan Fogelberg, or Roger Daltrey. They did, however, teach me breath control, projection, diction, and how to use head tone and falsetto. They helped me toward my goals, but not because they really wanted to.
In the end, there *is* a sound to your voice that you can't escape, and it would be better if Willie Nelson didn't try to be Barbara Streisand, at least in public. I improved my range massively by singing Wilson Phillips for years in the car and in the shower. You won't see me try that on stage-it would not be pretty. I've learned that if your voice isn't the prettiest, it helps to have a good story to tell. You can't escape taste- I'd rather listen to Jordan Sparks than Gwen Stefani- that's just me.
My experience tells me that the more you worry about how your voice sounds, the less progress you make. It's more useful to concentrate on the technique of singing than your personal timbre. In other words, I think most would-be singers would do better to worry about how to sing, rather than how they sound. Whether you sound good is more a matter of taste than technique. When I was 16, I could sing Queen or Black Sabbath convincingly. Now I'm not 16, and I do better with David Wilcox. But what the hell, I still sing John Lennon, Alice Cooper, Don Henley, Steve Goodman. My biggest current challenge?-Skip James. Jesus, that's difficult. All I'm saying is that instead of asking "Can I sing?", it's more useful to ask, "What can I do to help me learn to sing better?". Singing is learned. It's not something you *are*, it's something you *do*.-Richie