Bowie is OK, but there is more

PJ_Soul

It's all subjective no matter how you look at is, so there probably isn't much point in overthinking this one. People can go right ahead and think that Justin Beiber is the best singer of all time for all I care, and I wouldn't blame them for thinking they totally know what they're talking about, because to them, it's true, which makes them right. That's their truth. I simply wouldn't agree. I've got my own truth as far as who the best singers/artists are (Bowie was amazing btw. I prefer Bowie to Cornell personally - Bowie was just so much more interesting, as much as I liked Cornell as well. But I don't expect anyone else to give a crap! ).

karmadefect

PJ_Soul said:

It's all subjective no matter how you look at is, so there probably isn't much point in overthinking this one. People can go right ahead and think that Justin Beiber is the best singer of all time for all I care, and I wouldn't blame them for thinking they totally know what they're talking about, because to them, it's true, which makes them right. That's their truth. I simply wouldn't agree. I've got my own truth as far as who the best singers/artists are (Bowie was amazing btw. I prefer Bowie to Cornell personally - Bowie was just so much more interesting, as much as I liked Cornell as well. But I don't expect anyone else to give a crap! ).

I understand what you say. I don't mind my friend liking Bowie. I mind the arrogance alot of Bowie fans I know seem to have.
I mentioned Bowie's voice because I thought my friend would say Yeah you are right that isn't Bowies strongest point.I just didn't expect her to put Bowie on such a height that noone could hold a candle to him in any regard. I thought mentioning Bowies voice would bring her down to earth.

For instance if I would be rambling on about how great Motorpsycho is and someone would say that the singer can't sing I wouldn't try and defend them just because I like them. I know Motorpsycho are far, far from the best singers. If someone would say Pearl Jam isn't quite as inventive as Bowie was, I would have to agree. Eventhough I love Pearl Jam. It seems rather silly to claim Pearl Jam is more inventive than Bowie was.

Likewise it seems rather silly to think Bowie had a better voice than Chris Cornell did. You say Bowie is more interesting. I guess that's an open door. Interesting is putting it mildly. But as a mucisian I feel it's despite his voice that he is an icon. Where Cornell seems so great in large part due to his voice.

PJ_Soul

karmadefect said:

PJ_Soul said:

It's all subjective no matter how you look at is, so there probably isn't much point in overthinking this one. People can go right ahead and think that Justin Beiber is the best singer of all time for all I care, and I wouldn't blame them for thinking they totally know what they're talking about, because to them, it's true, which makes them right. That's their truth. I simply wouldn't agree. I've got my own truth as far as who the best singers/artists are (Bowie was amazing btw. I prefer Bowie to Cornell personally - Bowie was just so much more interesting, as much as I liked Cornell as well. But I don't expect anyone else to give a crap! ).

I understand what you say. I don't mind my friend liking Bowie. I mind the arrogance alot of Bowie fans I know seem to have.
I mentioned Bowie's voice because I thought my friend would say Yeah you are right that isn't Bowies strongest point.I just didn't expect her to put Bowie on such a height that noone could hold a candle to him in any regard. I thought mentioning Bowies voice would bring her down to earth.

For instance if I would be rambling on about how great Motorpsycho is and someone would say that the singer can't sing I wouldn't try and defend them just because I like them. I know Motorpsycho are far, far from the best singers. If someone would say Pearl Jam isn't quite as inventive as Bowie was, I would have to agree. Eventhough I love Pearl Jam. It seems rather silly to claim Pearl Jam is more inventive than Bowie was.

Likewise it seems rather silly to think Bowie had a better voice than Chris Cornell did. You say Bowie is more interesting. I guess that's an open door. Interesting is putting it mildly. But as a mucisian I feel it's despite his voice that he is an icon. Where Cornell seems so great in large part due to his voice.

If your friend thinks that Bowie's voice is definitively the best voice out there, then that's what she thinks. I don't think she needs to be "brought down to Earth". As far as she is concerned, his voice is Bowie's strongest point... I don't even think she's all that off-base. A "great voice" can have all kinds of different qualities. Some people think Chris Cornell's voice absolutely sucks, so.... As for this "arrogance" you're talking about... I dunno, I just don't see it that way at all, or, if the arrogance must be present in this conversation, I can't say you're showing any less than anyone else in this scenario, no offense.

2-feign-reluctance

tempo_n_groove said:

I do not get Bowie.  Never had.  Not my thing man...

jeffbr

Replace Bowie with Vedder in the original post. One could see why a Bowie fan might feel the desire to defend their favorite singer. I'm sure there are fans here who do feel that Ed is the best rock singer out there.

I can't see why Vedder is that great. I think he is OK, but not the absolute best.
I often get the feeling that I am supposed to feel Vedder is the summit. An obvious point of critique for me would be his singing.
To me it seems plain to see-hear that there are better voices in rock music than Vedder is.
I mentioned this to a friend of mine which has a wide range of music but is also a Vedder fan amongst a few others.
There was no discussion possible. Saying there where better singers was equal to not being educated enough.
Although I do see what Vedder has to set him apart or make him pop out to someone. I can´t see why he should be the standard of things.
In my opinion Chris Cornell is a better singer with a greater voice and range than Vedder is. 

PJ_Soul

jeffbr said:

Replace Bowie with Vedder in the original post. One could see why a Bowie fan might feel the desire to defend their favorite singer. I'm sure there are fans here who do feel that Ed is the best rock singer out there.

I can't see why Vedder is that great. I think he is OK, but not the absolute best.
I often get the feeling that I am supposed to feel Vedder is the summit. An obvious point of critique for me would be his singing.
To me it seems plain to see-hear that there are better voices in rock music than Vedder is.
I mentioned this to a friend of mine which has a wide range of music but is also a Vedder fan amongst a few others.
There was no discussion possible. Saying there where better singers was equal to not being educated enough.
Although I do see what Vedder has to set him apart or make him pop out to someone. I can´t see why he should be the standard of things.
In my opinion Chris Cornell is a better singer with a greater voice and range than Vedder is. 

I actually suddenly sympathize with the post a lot more after your edit, haha!

JH6056

PJ_Soul said:

karmadefect said:

PJ_Soul said:

It's all subjective no matter how you look at is, so there probably isn't much point in overthinking this one. People can go right ahead and think that Justin Beiber is the best singer of all time for all I care, and I wouldn't blame them for thinking they totally know what they're talking about, because to them, it's true, which makes them right. That's their truth. I simply wouldn't agree. I've got my own truth as far as who the best singers/artists are (Bowie was amazing btw. I prefer Bowie to Cornell personally - Bowie was just so much more interesting, as much as I liked Cornell as well. But I don't expect anyone else to give a crap! ).

I understand what you say. I don't mind my friend liking Bowie. I mind the arrogance alot of Bowie fans I know seem to have.
I mentioned Bowie's voice because I thought my friend would say Yeah you are right that isn't Bowies strongest point.I just didn't expect her to put Bowie on such a height that noone could hold a candle to him in any regard. I thought mentioning Bowies voice would bring her down to earth.

For instance if I would be rambling on about how great Motorpsycho is and someone would say that the singer can't sing I wouldn't try and defend them just because I like them. I know Motorpsycho are far, far from the best singers. If someone would say Pearl Jam isn't quite as inventive as Bowie was, I would have to agree. Eventhough I love Pearl Jam. It seems rather silly to claim Pearl Jam is more inventive than Bowie was.

Likewise it seems rather silly to think Bowie had a better voice than Chris Cornell did. You say Bowie is more interesting. I guess that's an open door. Interesting is putting it mildly. But as a mucisian I feel it's despite his voice that he is an icon. Where Cornell seems so great in large part due to his voice.

If your friend thinks that Bowie's voice is definitively the best voice out there, then that's what she thinks. I don't think she needs to be "brought down to Earth". As far as she is concerned, his voice is Bowie's strongest point... I don't even think she's all that off-base. A "great voice" can have all kinds of different qualities. Some people think Chris Cornell's voice absolutely sucks, so.... As for this "arrogance" you're talking about... I dunno, I just don't see it that way at all, or, if the arrogance must be present in this conversation, I can't say you're showing any less than anyone else in this scenario, no offense.

Yes, this! And Karmadefect, if you're not sure it's important to your friend you're REALLY putting a lot of effort into proving her wrong, especially if you're the only one who really cares about this!

BinFrog

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpIhsGg2SJ0

rgambs

BinFrog said:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpIhsGg2SJ0

I can't smoke a blunt fat enough for that to sound like a song. 
This reminds me of Dewey Cox in his psychadelic period.

https://youtu.be/g2RJvCFSeK0

rgambs

I just don't care for schmusic, it sounds amateurish every single time, Heyfoxymophandlemama certainly included.

PJ_Soul

rgambs said:

I just don't care for schmusic, it sounds amateurish every single time, Heyfoxymophandlemama certainly included.

Station to Station sounds like "schumusic" to you?? ... Maybe you didn't get through the whole thing? Or our ideas of what "schmusic" is might be very different... But I like Foxymop too, so... yeah.

rgambs

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

I just don't care for schmusic, it sounds amateurish every single time, Heyfoxymophandlemama certainly included.

Station to Station sounds like "schumusic" to you?? ... Maybe you didn't get through the whole thing? Or our ideas of what "schmusic" is might be very different... But I like Foxymop too, so... yeah.

It's like four different (not very good) songs smashed together and it's filled with sound effects like Ross playing keyboard on Friends.
It's a 10 minute song, if you skipped ahead in 2 minute intervals and played it for someone who never heard it, there is no way they would think it's all one song.  It reminds me of how amateur musicians always have bits and pieces of songs but not complete songs.  Then someone decided it would be a good idea to just mash them together and call it a song, it's art so it doesn't need to actually sound good.

rgambs

And Foxymop is a mess.
It's fine to appreciate it for what it is, but what it is is not a good song.
I wish I had a thousand dollars for every time a good vibe was spoiled by that earsore.  Sex, parties, dinner, anytime you have guests...that "song" comes on and whatever good feelingsfeeli in progress are crushed instantly.

rgambs

My comments on station to station are a bit exaggerated to make a point, in case that wasn't obvious.

PJ_Soul

I think they're both good songs (the Bowie one is way better though, obviously) ... so they are indeed good songs.
I also have no issue with sound effects at all, assuming they're well-used, and in this case I think they are. Nothing amateurish about either of those songs IMHO!

brianlux

Bowie was not my favorite singer but I thought he was a good singer.  But Bowie was more than a singer- he was a composer, a fine actor and a talented multi-instrumentalist.  It's the sum of all he did that made him great.

rgambs

PJ_Soul said:

I think they're both good songs (the Bowie one is way better though, obviously) ... so they are indeed good songs.
I also have no issue with sound effects at all, assuming they're well-used, and in this case I think they are. Nothing amateurish about either of those songs IMHO!

I just kept waiting for the didgeridoo.
An army of them, 50,000 didgeridoos!

PJ_Soul

rgambs said:

PJ_Soul said:

I think they're both good songs (the Bowie one is way better though, obviously) ... so they are indeed good songs.
I also have no issue with sound effects at all, assuming they're well-used, and in this case I think they are. Nothing amateurish about either of those songs IMHO!

I just kept waiting for the didgeridoo.
An army of them, 50,000 didgeridoos!

Out of curiosity, I just looked up when the most didgeridoos played at one time was - no mention of Bowie at all - and look at what the search revealed.

rgambs

Hahaha ok that's just crazy!  Skynet is online apparently.
I'm assuming you have seen Walk Hard and get the reference?

mfc2006

brianlux said:

Bowie was not my favorite singer but I thought he was a good singer.  But Bowie was more than a singer- he was a composer, a fine actor and a talented multi-instrumentalist.  It's the sum of all he did that made him great.

Very well put.