The best live singer on the planet!

AngelR wrote:

I knew you'd like this video!

Angel - I hope you are not a link spammer like someone we know, and that you will actually offer an articulate, thoughtful opinion devoid of words like "marvelous", :"stupendous" and "spectacular:"

Saint Jiub wrote:

I see that the video did not downgrade any vocalists for having a homgenous non-distinctive voice. Most of the vocalists in this video left me cold.

The video rated Nate Ruess (whoever he is) as only a C+, and apparently did not give much credit for his pleasant, powerful, unique and distinctive style. I believe he deserved an A rating.

However, I have not seen Nate Ruess live, so apparently my opinion is worthless.

Anyone else rated that was rated B+ or lower was indistinctive, except for Lionol Richie who was severely underrated and should have received a top STAR rating.

Bono and Axl did not deserve their A ratings, as their voices are only distinctive in that their voices have a consistent grating annoying sound "quality". I would give them at best a C rating comparable to what Ozzy might deserve.

In my opinion, Steven Tyler, Marvin Gaye and Phil Collins were underrated and should have gotten the top STAR rating. George Michael also clearly deserved the A rating that he received.

To me, Steve Perry, Freddie Mercury and Stevie Wonder were the only vocalists presented that received the top STAR rating and genuinely deserved the top rating. Frank Sinatra's phony voice deserved a B rating (or worse).

How did Elvis, Paul McCartney, Robin Zander, Geddy Lee, Neil Diamond, Billy Joel, and Elton John not receive a top STAR rating (or get rated at all)???

I think the video was pretty much click bait.

Angel, AMEN! I agree qith all pf those atimgs









Angel, AMEN! I agree with all of those ratings!

SweetCaroline wrote:

Angel, AMEN! I agree qith all pf those atimgs









Angel, AMEN! I agree with all of those ratings!

Sure you do...not. I doubt you have heard more than two songs by most of those artists. I wonder what you'd think if AL wasn't included.
I'm surprised Jon Bon Jovi is rated so high. I don't get that one.

Iron Butterfly wrote:


I'm surprised Jon Bon Jovi is rated so high. I don't get that one.

Because it's on technical ability and he has or at least had good technical skills.

Bon Jovi a real musician and not maufactured cheese like Lamberk.

Saint Jiub wrote:

I see that the video did not downgrade any vocalists for having a homgenous non-distinctive voice. Most of the vocalists in this video left me cold.

The video rated Nate Ruess (whoever he is) as only a C+, and apparently did not give much credit for his pleasant, powerful, unique and distinctive style. I believe he deserved an A rating.

However, I have not seen Nate Ruess live, so apparently my opinion is worthless.

Anyone else rated that was rated B+ or lower was indistinctive, except for Lionol Richie who was severely underrated and should have received a top STAR rating.

Bono and Axl did not deserve their A ratings, as their voices are only distinctive in that their voices have a consistent grating annoying sound "quality". I would give them at best a C rating comparable to what Ozzy might deserve.

In my opinion, Steven Tyler, Marvin Gaye and Phil Collins were underrated and should have gotten the top STAR rating. George Michael also clearly deserved the A rating that he received.

To me, Steve Perry, Freddie Mercury and Stevie Wonder were the only vocalists presented that received the top STAR rating and genuinely deserved the top rating. Frank Sinatra's phony voice deserved a B rating (or worse).

How did Elvis, Paul McCartney, Robin Zander, Geddy Lee, Neil Diamond, Billy Joel, and Elton John not receive a top STAR rating (or get rated at all)???

It's based on the technical criteria at the start of the vid so while I love some people's voices I can recognize they aren't the most technically skilled when it comes to things like melisma, runs, breath support and especially belting/holding long notes. For me Steve Perry is one of the best technically, Freddie obviously and IMO Adam also has all those technical skills but whether you like his tone or style of singing is a different matter as it is with all of them really. Dimash (don't really know what to make of him) he's undoubtedly skilled but he mostly just sounds like he's singing various notes and styles to show what he can do without much thought to interpreting the song so he doesn't do it for me personally. Elvis was great but technically he didn't have all the skills they're listing although I really loved his voice and the tone was amazing IMO.

I agree Axl has a strange tone and way of singing which people seem to love or hate but technically he's skilled and has one of the widest ranges, or had, not sure how his voice has held up. Nate's hit and miss live, he sounds good sometimes but not that skilled when it comes to the criteria used.

Obviously whoever made the vid will have had preferences to which singers they included so some are missing that are great.

rockchic65 wrote:

Iron Butterfly wrote:


I'm surprised Jon Bon Jovi is rated so high. I don't get that one.

Because it's on technical ability and he has or at least had good technical skills.

Does he? He's the one artist I purposely don't listen to. Haven't for years, but I never thought of him as a technically good singer.

Iron Butterfly wrote:

rockchic65 wrote:

Iron Butterfly wrote:


I'm surprised Jon Bon Jovi is rated so high. I don't get that one.

Because it's on technical ability and he has or at least had good technical skills.

Does he? He's the one artist I purposely don't listen to. Haven't for years, but I never thought of him as a technically good singer.

I would say he's pretty skilled technically, he's lost range now but he was good but he has a distinct way of singing that might not be to your taste.

SweetCaroline wrote:

Angel, AMEN! I agree qith all pf those atimgs

Angel, AMEN! I agree with all of those ratings!

I see you have provided your usual superfluous stock answer that took zero thought ...

How can you agree with all those ratings if you have not seen most of the artists live?

Icy, mind your own friggin business! You do not live with me (thank God) so you do NOT know what singers I have seen or listened to over a very long lifetime. I do not agree with Saint Jiub about Nate Ruess. He has been successful with his group and a collaboration with Pink but his very loud voice is misleading because it is very nasally and monotone and IMO rather annoying!

I do think that Elvis should have the STAR rating for his gorgeous baritone voice. His "Can't Help Falling In Love With You" and Hawaiian Wedding Song" are beyond perfection!

SweetCaroline wrote:

Icy, mind your own friggin business! You do not live with me (thank God) so you do NOT know what singers I have seen or listened to over a very long lifetime.

A message board is for discussion. I repeat, a message board is for discussion.

If you don't want your posts discussed, then don't post.

I am fine with discussing on a discussion board but I don’t need nosy people telling me what I know or like and that I hate Freddie and Queen fans and that the only entertainer I like and follow is Adam Lambert and that posting information about him and his collaboration with Queen is SPAMMING. BTW I have been next to Freddie and Queen fans for 5 years since 2014 at concerts and not only that, I consider myself a Freddie and Queen fan. It is NOT being disloyal to Freddie to love both him AND Adam! When I have posted about his harlequin onesie and short shorts, it is in retaliation for the nasty comments about Adam’s stage outfits! All of the nastiness has been totally unnecessary and started when nasty people couldn’t stand that Adam’s performances were so outstanding and had to demean his excellent vocals by comparing him to a goat! Why? Why can’t we be happy that Queen music is still being performed live?

I am fine with discussing on a discussion board but I don’t need nosy people telling me what I know or like and that I hate Freddie and Queen fans and that the only entertainer I like and follow is Adam Lambert and that posting information about him and his collaboration with Queen is SPAMMING. BTW I have been next to Freddie and Queen fans for 5 years since 2014 at concerts and not only that, I consider myself a Freddie and Queen fan. It is NOT being disloyal to Freddie to love both him AND Adam! When I have posted about his harlequin onesie and short shorts, it is in retaliation for the nasty comments about Adam’s stage outfits! All of the nastiness has been totally unnecessary and started when nasty people couldn’t stand that Adam’s performances were so outstanding and had to demean his excellent vocals by comparing him to a goat! Why? Why can’t we be happy that Queen music is still being performed live?

SweetCaroline wrote:

Icy, mind your own friggin business! You do not live with me (thank God) so you do NOT know what singers I have seen or listened to over a very long lifetime. I do not agree with Saint Jiub about Nate Ruess. He has been successful with his group and a collaboration with Pink but his very loud voice is misleading because it is very nasally and monotone and IMO rather annoying!

I do think that Elvis should have the STAR rating for his gorgeous baritone voice. His "Can't Help Falling In Love With You" and Hawaiian Wedding Song" are beyond perfection!

You have said much, much worse about me than my saying I doubt you have heard two songs from most of the artists in that video.
Oh there you go, ranting about Nate again. Still upset he took away from AL's time with Brian and Roger for one song? Anyways, how would you know about Nate's voice bring misleading and annoying, you have never saw him live. Misleading voice, that's a new one.
You sound nuts. Try thinking for yourself for once.