She proved on Stars Are Blind she can actually sing better than a fair few out there!

 

oh pur-lease. Her voice is masked by 1001 studio techniques - do you really honestly believe that's how she REALLY sounds? And if she allegedly sings better than anyone else - please tell me who's worse than her? I'm perplexed. :wacko:

 

oh pur-lease. Her voice is masked by 1001 studio techniques - do you really honestly believe that's how she REALLY sounds? And if she allegedly sings better than anyone else - please tell me who's worse than her? I'm perplexed. :wacko:

 

Absolutelly. Even with all the help her voice gets in a recording studio, she still has a truely diabolical vocal. The only people I've heard worse are those jokes that appear on the X Factor auditions. I'd love to see what Simon would say to her if she was some stranger who came in. :lol:

I've heard Stars Are Blind and it sounded not very good, and I'm guessing alot of autotuning was used

 

All acts use autotuning though, even rock and indie acts

I'd love to see what Simon would say to her if she was some stranger who came in. :lol:

 

He'd show her the door pretty damn quickly I reckon if she wasn't Paris "my daddy is like, really rich" Hilton.....

 

She proved on Stars Are Blind she can actually sing better than a fair few out there!

 

Oh come on, a lot of studio manipulation proves bugger all, with Autotuning you could probably get a tone-deaf baboon to sound acceptable..... And "Stars Are Blind" is a truly diabolical song in any case..... You'ver clearly never heard Blondie's "Tide Is High"..... And she sure dont sing anywhere NEAR as good as any of the astounding female vocalists in Rock and Metal bands that I listen to, or indeed the likes of Alison Goldfrapp or Shirley Manson..... I'd just love to see Paris do a "sing-off" with someone like Within Temptation's Sharon Den Adel, Amy Lee, ex-Nightwish singer Tarja Teruenen (who is classically trained...) or Ms Goldfrapp or Ms Manson.... That would be a "no-brainer" (a bit like Paris herself really.... :lol: ). Hell, I think I'd rather listen to a Kelly Clarkson..... album than Paris'.....

Of course studio manipulation was used, but that doesnt mean much because nearly every other act out there does the same! To think of a few far far worse female 'singers' of the top of my head - Beth Ditto, Luciana, Bjork the screecher ffs!

why does it not surprise me that someone like Jark simply doesn't get Bjork? Or Beth Ditto? Right over his head. Totally.

 

Bless.

Oh STOP. You are so damn patronising, im embarassed for you. Why waste your obvious intelligence on stupid comments like that?

 

Theres literally NOTHING to 'get' about that FOUL Beth Ditto creature - she screeches her way through decent music and ruins it with her awful, awful vocals. Truly hideous stuff!

I think you need to sit down in a shuttered room listening to pop fluff like Rihanna for a few weeks, Jark.... it seems suitable punishment.

 

My comment was aimed at you because your musical tastes are incredibly light, camp and fluffy - something with depth and meaning - well, it's just not your thing, is it? To critiscise some one as wholly inspiring and interesting and influential as Bjork, whether you 'get' her music or not - well, it really says a lot for you that you simply fail to appreciate any music as an art form.

 

And I find that, ultimately, extremely sad.

 

If music were paintings, you'd be shunning Renoir for wide eyed teary girls hugging horses, I think.

Of course studio manipulation was used, but that doesnt mean much because nearly every other act out there does the same! To think of a few far far worse female 'singers' of the top of my head - Beth Ditto, Luciana, Bjork the screecher ffs!

 

Fair enough - "Different Strokes for different folks", each to their own tastes.

 

You can stick to your musical McDonalds & I'll stick to my musical gourmet three course meals.

 

 

 

I like Bjork!

She's more "artistic" than Paris

on another level!!

:lol: You must all be confusing me for somebody who has said I like Paris! I dont as such, im not a fan of her music - im just saying her voice isnt as bad as you're making out, studio-enhanced though it is. And Russt, you know sh!t all about me, my music tastes and if you think my entire collection is 'light' and 'fluffy' you're wrong.

And Russt, you know sh!t all about me, my music tastes and if you think my entire collection is 'light' and 'fluffy' you're wrong.

 

Rihanna? Amerie?

 

err... as light and fluffy and poppy and girlie as they come, I'd say, Jark, wouldn't you? :)

 

QUOTE(Jark @ Jul 21 2007, 09:43 PM)

And Russt, you know sh!t all about me, my music tastes and if you think my entire collection is 'light' and 'fluffy' you're wrong.

 

 

Rihanna? Amerie?

 

err... as light and fluffy and poppy and girlie as they come, I'd say, Jark, wouldn't you?

 

What's the point in insulting someone's music taste?

I mean it's their opinion, what business of it is yours?

What's the point in insulting someone's music taste?

I mean it's their opinion, what business of it is yours?

 

if you had read the thread you wouldnt be asking that question :)

Of course studio manipulation was used, but that doesnt mean much because nearly every other act out there does the same! To think of a few far far worse female 'singers' of the top of my head - Beth Ditto, Luciana, Bjork the screecher ffs!

 

So you actually believe that Paris Hilton is a better artist than Bjork or Beth Ditto.....?? You've totally lost ALL credibility with that statement mate..... Not that you had very much to begin with mate.... Slagging off Macca in the most spurious, illogical terms on another thread, now slagging off inspirational artists such as Bjork.... I'm with TiP on this one, you're on a diet on "McDonalds and KFC" when it comes to music mate.... "There's nothing to get about Beth Ditto????! Please.... There's nothing to get with Paris Hilton more like... Nothing. At all...

 

Rihanna? Amerie?

 

err... as light and fluffy and poppy and girlie as they come, I'd say, Jark, wouldn't you? :)

 

I would say so too Russ.....

 

I would say that Rihanna and Amerie are basically the equivalents of their respective genres as stuff like The Rasmus and The Darkness are for "Rock/Metal" - I continually pish myself laughing at silly sods who say sh"t like "hey, yeah, I'm into RAWWWKKKK, I really dig The Darkness and Rasmus. They RAWWWKKKK MAN!!!!".... :lol: :lol: Amerie is basically The Rasmus of Dance/Techno...... :lol: :lol:

What's the point in insulting someone's music taste?

I mean it's their opinion, what business of it is yours?

Thanks for the support :D I'd like to add that we're on a forum where the overwhelming majority of people like the pop music I do and Russt, are you not a big Madonna fan?

 

Anyway, Grimly, I never once said Paris was a better artist ffs - I simply said she can SING better than Bjork and Beth, in my opinion. I didnt say at any point she was more credible as an artist, so stop trying to make me look bad.

what i don't understand is how can anyone like a "singer" when they have never once sang live, there are certain rules that must be followed in pop music and proving that it is your voice on the cd is one of the most important!! you need to know that what you are buying is not a lie, why would you buy deception!? unless you are really sucked in by the image. now i would understand if the ones that liked paris's "talent "were children under 15 years old cause they aren't mature enough to ask questions about the live singing topic but once you hit 15 you start to engage in your "quality control" and you don't fall for such blatant bull$h!t tactics. you have to believe in truth not lies

 

there is no question she will flop 100% so hard if she doesn't sing live and prove its her voice the same situation happened to rachel stevens, she did so much promo appearances on tv but never once sang live and the public started to get suspicious and then they stopped buying resulting in her flop singles and album even though the critics gave her album good reviews. she messed up her career by not singing live, you can't mess with the public and fool us! you can fool and mess with kids making your money from their pocket money cause they are niave. the fan bases may be deluded too and support artists that never sing live but they are on a sinking ship cause that artist has zero credibility and will flop in the end and lose their record deal.

 

 

Thanks for the support :D I'd like to add that we're on a forum where the overwhelming majority of people like the pop music I do and Russt, are you not a big Madonna fan?

 

Anyway, Grimly, I never once said Paris was a better artist ffs - I simply said she can SING better than Bjork and Beth, in my opinion. I didnt say at any point she was more credible as an artist, so stop trying to make me look bad.

 

Dont agree with that either... Both Beth and Bjork can convey complex inner emotions through their singing, so, to me that makes them good singers regardless of any technical ability... I feel NOTHING when I listen to Paris Hilton's bland, studio manipulated "vocals".... Paris says NOTHING, she conveys NOTHING, as an artist, she is NOTHING.... I'd rather listen to someone like Courtney Love or Tarrie B who blatantly cannot sing technically to save their lives, but have a defined character to their voices and convey their whole incredibly physically and emotionally scarred life histories in one agonised howl from the depths of their very being than Paris fukkin' Hilton who doesn't say a damn thing, because she essentially HAS nothing to say....

 

And anyway, define "Pop".... Personally, I define "Pop" as being Pop(ular) music.... So, that would kinda have to include acts like Bjork, Goldfrapp, Nirvana, Depeche Mode, Morrissey, etc, all of whom have shifted MILLIONS of units over the years..... There's a big diff between good quality Pop Music and bad quality, manufactured Pop Muzak.... The acts I mentioned and Madonna (well, on a good day...), are all examples of the former, the likes of Paris Hilton, Amerie and Rihanna are deffo the latter......