Is Michael Buble the Bubluonic plague of popular music?

mike65 · 23-12-2011 8:14pm #1

I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels nauseous when the sickly sweet tones of glorified night club warbler Michael Buble seep out of the radio or tv speakers.

If you can't abide him please sign in and if you have time post a youtube video which illustrates the original version of a song he has covered so badly

I'll kick of with a personal favourite

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByUOFV5TusE

Dark Artist · 23-12-2011 8:37pm

I'm fairly indifferent to him to be honest, but one thing that I like to do if I need a laugh is put on a live YouTube video of him with the audio muted. It can be hilarious at times.

MrStuffins · 23-12-2011 8:41pm

He's a cabaret/pub singer who happened to be popular for a while last year.

He was a bit tubby, nobody cared. He lost a bit of weight and girls started buying his CDs. Now he's put a bit of weight back on and he's been relegated to releasing Christmas albums.

I have nothing against him but my opinion is that even though he has a "good" voice, each of the songs that he choses to cover is always sang better by the original singer, at least the ones i've heard so far. So I find him pointless.

Mars Bar · 23-12-2011 9:56pm

Like Dark Artist, I'm indifferent to him.

I'd say Justin Bieber is the bubonic plague of music.

adox · 23-12-2011 10:16pm

He's harmless and not particularly offensive. He'd be way down my list of a musical cull.

take everything · 23-12-2011 10:24pm

Bubonic plague might be a bit harsh. :pac:
But yeah he is annoyingly bland.

Scubadevils · 23-12-2011 11:01pm

I'd say popular music is the bubonic plague of music.

rcaz · 23-12-2011 11:37pm

Scubadevils wrote: »

I'd say popular music is the bubonic plague of music.

It's not so bad

Scubadevils · 23-12-2011 11:56pm

What really gets me and I suppose I tend to use it as a measure of 'popular' music are the various music channels on Sky, I dunno how many there are but there are a lot - at times I'd feel like a browse of some music channels, maybe before bed and its just channel after channel of absolute tripe... Pretty much every time I do it its the same and that's how I've arrived at the conclusion!

JerryHandbag · 24-12-2011 12:45am

The Canadian Daniel O'Donnell

adox · 24-12-2011 12:49am

JerryHandbag wrote: »

The Canadian Daniel O'Donnell

Harsh.

washman3 · 24-12-2011 12:50am

JerryHandbag wrote: »

The Canadian Daniel O'Donnell

but Daniel's got a nicer house......

The Golden Miller · 24-12-2011 2:41am

he's mock jazz for people that dont know any better

MrStuffins · 24-12-2011 5:36am

Scubadevils wrote: »

I'd say popular music is the bubonic plague of music.

Sorry but this is a silly statement! Doesn't matter whether you're into Electro, Rock, Thrash Metal............ everyone loves a good Pop song!

Kadent · 24-12-2011 5:41am

I don't get Michael Buble I really don't. I don't consider his voice record producing worthy and I really have no idea what those attractive qualities that make women worship him are. I don't even get his songs. I don't get Michael Buble at all.

henryporter · 24-12-2011 8:31am

The Golden Miller wrote: »

he's mock jazz for people that dont know any better

I thought that was Paddy Cole:D

Scubadevils · 24-12-2011 11:19am

MrStuffins wrote: »

Sorry but this is a silly statement! Doesn't matter whether you're into Electro, Rock, Thrash Metal............ everyone loves a good Pop song!

Ah yeah I know - I'd had a few Christmas drinks and felt like a sweeping statement!

LowOdour · 24-12-2011 11:24am

if he was michael smith from cavan, he would probably be a regular on tg4's Glor Tire, and thats about it

Rigsby · 24-12-2011 11:33am

The Golden Miller wrote: »

he's mock jazz for people that dont know any better

This sounds a bit snobbish and condescending to me. Not everyone came out of the womb to the sound of Coltrane in full flight

Maybe by listening to Buble, people's curiosity will be stirred into delving deeper into jazz. He fills a niche and people like him. So I don't really see every one's problem here.

rcaz · 24-12-2011 12:03pm

MrStuffins wrote: »

Sorry but this is a silly statement! Doesn't matter whether you're into Electro, Rock, Thrash Metal............ everyone loves a good Pop song!

Popular music is wider than just pop songs though. I looked up 'Popular Music' in the Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, it said;

A term used widely in everyday discourse, generally to refer to types of music that are considered to be of lower value and complexity than art music, and to be readily accessible to large numbers of musically uneducated listeners rather than to an élite.

I don't agree that it's of lower value and complexity than any other music (a lot of it is, sure, but it's not a defining characteristic), I don't really like how that definition is kinda classist. But Philip Tagg, a musicologist who specialises in pop said;

"Popular music, unlike art music, is conceived for mass distribution to large and often socioculturally heterogeneous groups of listeners...

Is that better? It's music not designed to be really challenging (though I can think of plenty of difficult popular albums...), to be distributed, with groups of listeners in mind... Tunes for the lads? :pac:

Da Shins Kelly · 24-12-2011 1:33pm

He doesn't really offend me. I can think of far worse people out there. Having said that, yes, the originals of his songs are much better.

Pretty disheartening that his version of this song has millions more views on Youtube than Nina Simone's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8tuTSi6Sck

MrStuffins · 24-12-2011 2:18pm

El Pr0n wrote: »

Popular music is wider than just pop songs though. I looked up 'Popular Music' in the Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, it said;

I don't agree that it's of lower value and complexity than any other music (a lot of it is, sure, but it's not a defining characteristic), I don't really like how that definition is kinda classist. But Philip Tagg, a musicologist who specialises in pop said;

Is that better? It's music not designed to be really challenging (though I can think of plenty of difficult popular albums...), to be distributed, with groups of listeners in mind... Tunes for the lads? :pac:

Well I don't mind a good brainless tune. I mean, I love a good complex thrller when I go to the cinema with plot twists and shocks and the whole shabang!

But then I also love sitting down and watching Arnie blow things up with a massive bazzoka while saing "GET TO DA CHOPPAAAAAAAAA!!!!!".

So bring on the pop music :pac:

super_furry · 24-12-2011 2:34pm

He's a watered down Sinatra impersonator.

Dudess · 24-12-2011 3:35pm

"Lounge" style, rat pack worshipping etc puts me off anyway - Tubridy-tastic. Covering standards in a lounge style with a fairly mediocre voice - just horrible. Something a bit smug about it too.

His Christmas compilation is bellowing out all over the place - it's punchably bad.

MrStuffins · 24-12-2011 3:39pm

And there is only one man who can get away with being a lounge singer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRwgNtv29ig

Auvers · 24-12-2011 4:06pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4hSUDCWKDc

love a bit of Cheese

Da Shins Kelly · 24-12-2011 4:21pm

Dudess wrote: »

"Lounge" style, rat pack worshipping etc puts me off anyway - Tubridy-tastic. Covering standards in a lounge style with a fairly mediocre voice - just horrible. Something a bit smug about it too.

His Christmas compilation is bellowing out all over the place - it's punchably bad.

I agree with the rat pack thing being off-putting. I don't have any problem with anyone singing those old American classics - Feelin' Good, Cry Me A River, Summertime, etc. - as it's not as though the people who sang them originally wrote them or that the originals are always best (Billie Holiday's version of Summertime was and is the best in my opinion, but it was sang by other people before and since her). They are old standards that are open to interpretation, that's what makes them great songs. The problem is, Buble doesn't really pick songs that mean anything to him, he just sings what his idols sang without bringing anything new to it. And that's the key to bringing that type of music to life - the songs have been around forever, but it's the singer that has to make them sound fresh. Buble doesn't really do that. He just sounds like he's acting the role of Sinatra. He hasn't lived the kind of life Nina Simone lived, so his interpretation of Feelin' Good feels a bit empty or something. He also doesn't have a particularly distinctive voice. Sinatra was great because he had that wonderfully expressive and effortless style, and he sang songs that he could bring something new to.

The old jazz classics are all great songs, but they need to be in the right hands so they don't sound cheap or meaningless. I don't think that Buble has the voice or the personality to pull it off. That said, there are far, far worse people out there that offend me more. For example, I'd much rather listen to Buble than listen to Christina Aguilera's screaming. She's a truly horrible singer, in my opinion.

Joe10000 · 24-12-2011 4:28pm

He sells a lot of records so I assume a lot of people enjoy listening to him, live and let live.

"Artists" that bug me are the ones where the music is the by product of the marketing, I don't think booblay is in the bracket.

Sinfonia · 24-12-2011 5:10pm

El Pr0n wrote: »

Popular music is wider than just pop songs though. I looked up 'Popular Music' in the Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, it said;

A term used widely in everyday discourse, generally to refer to types of music that are considered to be of lower value and complexity than art music, and to be readily accessible to large numbers of musically uneducated listeners rather than to an élite.

That's in the Grove? Who wrote the entry?