When I hear/see someone rail against an enormously popular something/someone, it comes across as very reminiscent of hipster chic: "Oh, a huge number of people love such-and-such? Let me tell you why I recognize it to be inferior."

But I'm sure that you're perfectly sincere in your critique, and it only happens to follow the formula of hipster dismissals.

whatthehey

(3,660 posts)

15. There is a difference though

Reply to Orrex (Reply #13)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 01:24 PM

Oct 2016

This is not subjective pop music, where performers are often writers, everyone has different songs, and where there is no defined standard. There the "elitist" tendency is to look for the obscure and the "original", even the self-aware and reflexively "original."

Opera is different. Everybody sings the same material which has been down in black and white for, mostly, a century or two. Fans have seen decades of different star performers with yes subtle nuance of voice and delivery but very consistent, widely taught and easily identifiable criteria of technique. Here the "elitist" tendency is to seek conformity to an established ideal. Exactly the opposite to your claim, most opera fans are more than happy to keep to those singers who are the most popular and well known...to other opera fans though, not crossovers.

Bocelli has poor laryngeal control which limits the depth and resonance of his voice to this standard. He also pushes his chest voice artificially into what should naturally be his head voice range to try to maximize what depth it has. He can sing way better than I can, and has millions of fans yes, but that's not the point. Tim Tebow is a wildly popular QB who can play way better than any of us can, but it doesn't take much football knowledge about analogous established performance criteria to realize why he's out of the NFL and even relatively unsung QBs like Bradford or Wentz aren't. What you are, for whatever reason, doing to try to defend Bocelli is like trying to defend Tebow to people aware of NFL performance standards. Both are decent enough at what they do, and good enough for most who aren't really into the details of what it takes to be at the very top of their pursuits, but very much not good enough for those who are aware of those details.

People outside Florida and evangelical circles seem to accept insider knowledge of Tebow's limitations. That doesn't seem to be true for non-opera fans and their favorite crossover singers though.

Orrex

(63,220 posts)

16. That strikes me as an elitist distinction

Reply to whatthehey (Reply #15)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 02:59 PM

Oct 2016

Last edited Tue Oct 25, 2016, 05:46 PM - Edit history (1)

And it goes back to "People who like them must be fools!"

If a person feels more profoundly moved by a given performer than by a "more technically proficient" performer, then why can that not be sufficient for them?

In an ideal world, the "more technically proficient" performer would give the more profoundly moving performance, but that's certainly not always the case. Given the choice, there are plenty of people who would, for purely aesthetic reasons, rather watch The Magnificent Seven than The Seven Samurai, even though the latter is considered the "better" film.

Similarly, a robot could be programmed to play a piano concerto to the point of technical perfection, yet people might still prefer a human pianist's performance.

I'm not claiming that technical merit is of no value, nor that people trained in the field can't accurately assess technical merit. Instead, I'm asserting that technical merit is only one standard, and there's no reason why people must be forced to accept that one standard.

whatthehey

(3,660 posts)

17. Aesthetics and emotion may be de gustibus, but expertise is objective

Reply to Orrex (Reply #16)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 03:35 PM

Oct 2016

And I do have to wonder how many who respond so warmly to Bocelli (I focus on him rather than Brightman because I'm more familiar with the mechanics of the male voice; they are both though in a very similar relationship to opera counterparts) have ever sat down and listened to him and a first-ter tenor singing the same piece back to back and compared them even on feeling/emotional aesthetics. I actually have an mp3 I cut for a friend for exactly this purpose I'd be happy to email to you if you like. His version of Recondita Armonia from Tosca and Carreras', joined in one file. Because so few people listen to opera, people like these are the closest a large proportion of listeners have heard to what a classically trained voice is supposed to sound like. Trust me the emotional and dramatic component are part of that training just like the technical mechanics are, and a star tenor is likely to have a greater impact on most observers, especially sight unseen since Bocelli is, or at least was in his youth (I haven't seen recent pictures), an undeniably handsome chap.

Orrex

(63,220 posts)

21. That, too, is an elitist distinction

Reply to whatthehey (Reply #17)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 05:45 PM

Oct 2016

Expertise is about as far from objective as you can get! It it were objective, no two experts would ever disagree.

As for the rest, I can assure you that I lack the musical chops to offer a worthwhile impression of any MP3 you'd care to send, and that's actually the point.

I enjoy what I enjoy, and I'm not interested in someone advising me--as you are advising me--that I'm wrong or ill-informed in my enjoyment. I don't even particularly care about Bocelli, because he's not central to the point, handsome bastard though he be.

I'm told that Aaron Neville had an amazing voice, but I can't stand to listen to more than ten seconds of it before I want to puncture my eardrums. I do not care to revel in the technical marvel of a voice that I find aesthetically unappealing, no matter how deeply it troubles the elitists.

stopbush

(24,396 posts)

26. Nope. Whatthehey is right on this one.

Reply to Orrex (Reply #21)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 07:16 PM

Oct 2016

Two horribly overrated singers.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,810 posts)

19. Thank you!

Reply to whatthehey (Reply #15)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 04:09 PM

Oct 2016

This would explain why Boccelli so often sings so painfully flat. And it isn't arrogant "hipster dismissal" to criticize a technically inferior performance or compare it to the performance of singers who are, in fact, more accomplished. If a lot of people like Boccelli and Brightman (and Josh Groban, another overrated crossover singer) that's fine, but if you are familiar with really accomplished opera singers you do notice the difference. Those singers didn't take the easy route to fame and fortune by singing crossover/pop songs; they stuck with the hard, demanding stuff and perfected their art. It's not elitist or "hipster" (I'm about 30 years too old to be a hipster) to make those distinctions.

Orrex

(63,220 posts)

20. Your tone is what made it "hipster dismissal"

Reply to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #19)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 05:43 PM

Oct 2016

DU is replete with this sort of self-congratulatory bragging. Someone mentions that they enjoy McDonalds french fries, and a parade of know-betters leap into action to ridicule the simple-minded tastes of the poster.

From the way you worded your hipster dismissal, it appeared that your primary intent was to ridicule the OP. Whether or not you feel that to be the case, the fact remains that your phrasing was poignantly smug. Why?

You could have said "Well, I prefer so-and-so for such-and-such reasons," but for some reason it was more important for you to demonstrate your expertise and your super-knowledgeable take on the subject.

Go on with your bad self. We're all very impressed.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,810 posts)

22. That was not my intent at all.

Reply to Orrex (Reply #20)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 05:53 PM

Oct 2016

I think I expressed my opinion in an objective and non-hipster way (I don't actually know what that means, being at least 30 years older than what I understand hipsters to be), but if you're going to keep insisting on something that I didn't intend at all, I can't do anything about that. I explained the reason for my opinion in subsequent posts, and I did not intend to "impress" anybody with my "expertise," as you claim. If you love Brightman and Boccelli, please feel free to enjoy their performances. I don't, for the reasons I stated, but don't assume things about me or presume to read my mind.

Also I was posting from my phone so was perhaps more succinct than I should have been, to be clear.

And one other thing: the OP posted the link to the Youtube video without comment. Maybe one could infer that it was posted with approval, but there was no reason to assume from a commentless post that no criticism might or should ensue.

Orrex

(63,220 posts)

24. Well, that's a bit of a reach, but let's go with it.

Reply to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #22)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 06:38 PM

Oct 2016

the OP posted the link to the Youtube video without comment. Maybe one could infer that it was posted with approval, but there was no reason to assume from a commentless post that no criticism might or should ensue.

Really? Do a lot of Loungers post videos without comment in hope of inviting harsh feedback?

Every day I see a dozen or so posts linking to music videos without comment; never once have I inferred that the poster was saying "tell us why your enlightenment leads you to dismiss this video that I've shared."

For that matter, if someone does intend to invite that sort of comment, they usually title the post something like "posted without comment." But posting nothing but the name/description of the video and the video itself, I'm inclined to think that they're sharing.

And even if I don't care for it--as is the case with 99% of the videos I see posted online--I don't see any need to blast the poster. Absent something greatly objectionable, I'm generally content to let them enjoy it and to share it with others who might enjoy it.

And "hipster" is the tone--that too-cool-for-you attitude that assures the poster that the respondent knows better.

If your phone was at issue, then ok. I've been there, I get it. But rather than smugly telling us why your original smugness was justified, you might do well to reflect upon your intended sentiment and the sentiment that you actually conveyed.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,810 posts)

25. Just stop it. I'm done. Think whatever you want.

Reply to Orrex (Reply #24)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 06:39 PM

Oct 2016

Orrex

(63,220 posts)

27. Hey, I'm just holding up a mirror

Reply to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #25)

Tue Oct 25, 2016, 10:42 PM

Oct 2016

If you're content in your smug hipster vibe, then roll with it.

Aristus

(66,438 posts)

2. I'll stand up for them.

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Mon Oct 24, 2016, 01:30 PM

Oct 2016

Every singer has his or her weakness. Focussing on the strengths can be rewarding.

Sarah Brightman's voice is as clear as a bell.

Bocelli's voice is warm and steady, and transportive.

It's a lovely song. I enjoy it very much.