Quote:
Originally Posted by Kathy
You didn't read carefully. I was differentiating between discussion of how Meat uses his voice and discussion of his voice itself. Some have confused the two, and made statements about Meat's voice based on his singing on a given occasion, e.g. the last moment of "America the Beautiful" in Defiance.
We all have ears to hear him sing, but only Meat himself and Eric Vetro (and any other professionals he may employ to help him care for and develop his voice) are qualified to criticise that voice.
This is not a trivial distinction. And for the purposes of this board, the fewer sweeping generalizations made the fewer heated arguments we'll have.
|
Sorry, anyone with an appreciation of music is qualfied to criticise.
The question for me is the degree of relevance of those criticisms. Objectivity is significant - Vetro by his being on the payroll is not necessarily objective - he is just employed to get the most out of the current voice.
He isn't doing a bad job either, but completely objectively?
Nah, sorry. Meat gives everything. It's good enough for me, but is my opinion objective? no.
There have been times in Meat's career that even negatively bised critics have had to conceede that performances were objectively outstanding. You don't share a stage with Pavarrotti otherwise.
Meat has vocal ability capable of being the best objectively. More recently "outstanding" has been a more subjective appraisal based on effort, cultural significance, and fandom - not that that isn't something to be immensely proud of.