Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4 Apr 2006 09:11:31 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:
Jack Goff wrote: On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:30:34 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:03:01 GMT, Don White wrote: You're not alone. He did well in Halifax last night. http://www.herald.ns.ca/Front/494400.html YAY!!! Who? He's a Harry Conick Jr. clone. Why, because he sings ballads like Sinatra? No, because they *both* sing in Sinatra's style, but Conick did it first. Therefore, it appears that Buble copied Conick. |
#12
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Jack Goff wrote: On 4 Apr 2006 09:11:31 -0700, "basskisser" wrote: Jack Goff wrote: On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:30:34 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:03:01 GMT, Don White wrote: You're not alone. He did well in Halifax last night. http://www.herald.ns.ca/Front/494400.html YAY!!! Who? He's a Harry Conick Jr. clone. Why, because he sings ballads like Sinatra? No, because they *both* sing in Sinatra's style, but Conick did it first. Therefore, it appears that Buble copied Conick. Uh, no, Sinatra did it first, therefore, it appears that Conick copied Sinatra! |
#13
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
basskisser wrote:
Jack Goff wrote: On 4 Apr 2006 09:11:31 -0700, "basskisser" wrote: Jack Goff wrote: On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:30:34 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:03:01 GMT, Don White wrote: You're not alone. He did well in Halifax last night. http://www.herald.ns.ca/Front/494400.html YAY!!! Who? He's a Harry Conick Jr. clone. Why, because he sings ballads like Sinatra? No, because they *both* sing in Sinatra's style, but Conick did it first. Therefore, it appears that Buble copied Conick. Uh, no, Sinatra did it first, therefore, it appears that Conick copied Sinatra! That makes sense.....to everyone but jackoff. Besides... isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery? |
#14
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Don White wrote: basskisser wrote: Jack Goff wrote: On 4 Apr 2006 09:11:31 -0700, "basskisser" wrote: Jack Goff wrote: On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:30:34 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 22:03:01 GMT, Don White wrote: You're not alone. He did well in Halifax last night. http://www.herald.ns.ca/Front/494400.html YAY!!! Who? He's a Harry Conick Jr. clone. Why, because he sings ballads like Sinatra? No, because they *both* sing in Sinatra's style, but Conick did it first. Therefore, it appears that Buble copied Conick. Uh, no, Sinatra did it first, therefore, it appears that Conick copied Sinatra! That makes sense.....to everyone but jackoff. Besides... isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery? Yes, it SHOULD make sense, it's relatively simple........for most, anyway. |
#15
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5 Apr 2006 11:22:15 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:
Don White wrote: basskisser wrote: Uh, no, Sinatra did it first, therefore, it appears that Conick copied Sinatra! That makes sense.....to everyone but jackoff. Besides... isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery? Yes, it SHOULD make sense, it's relatively simple........for most, anyway. Wrong again, Bassy. Sinatra didn’t start it, he is simply one of the most popular of the crooners. It’s a complex concept, and I realize you and Don prefer the simple ones, but try to follow along… Rudy Vallee is considered to be the first crooner, starting the style 10 years before Sinatra ever came on the scene. Bing Crosby is considered the “king” of the crooners, and is who Sinatra copied when he got his start. Sinatra was one of the last and best known today. Now fast-forward to 1989, and Harry Connick, Jr. Connick revives the style of crooning and introduces it to a whole new generation of fans. He builds quite a career out of it over the last 17 years. Buble is a johnny-come-lately who is riding Connick’s coattails. Without Connick, you’d never have heard of Buble. Therefore, a “Connick clone”. Can you think of a quicker, more succinct way to describe him to someone who’s never heard of him? Besides, I never said Buble was bad, or had no talent. In fact, I have one of his CD’s; it’s pretty good “dinner music”. It’s you guys who are getting your panties in a wad over this. Why are you guys so full of bile? The rest of the NG has grown up, so when are you guys going to join us? Anyway, it’s been pretty entertaining. Thanks for the laughs. Consider yourselves educated... on at least this *one* thing. Jack |
#16
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 20:02:02 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote: Jack Goff wrote: On 5 Apr 2006 11:22:15 -0700, "basskisser" wrote: Don White wrote: basskisser wrote: Uh, no, Sinatra did it first, therefore, it appears that Conick copied Sinatra! That makes sense.....to everyone but jackoff. Besides... isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery? Yes, it SHOULD make sense, it's relatively simple........for most, anyway. Wrong again, Bassy. Sinatra didn’t start it, he is simply one of the most popular of the crooners. It’s a complex concept, and I realize you and Don prefer the simple ones, but try to follow along… And thus, Jackoff once again proves he is still...a jackoff. Need a hanky for that snotty comment, Jackoff? When I said that the NG had grown up, I didn't mean you, Harry. Have a good day. Jack |
#17
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Jack Goff wrote: On 5 Apr 2006 11:22:15 -0700, "basskisser" wrote: Don White wrote: basskisser wrote: Uh, no, Sinatra did it first, therefore, it appears that Conick copied Sinatra! That makes sense.....to everyone but jackoff. Besides... isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery? Yes, it SHOULD make sense, it's relatively simple........for most, anyway. Wrong again, Bassy. Sinatra didn't start it, he is simply one of the most popular of the crooners. It's a complex concept, and I realize you and Don prefer the simple ones, but try to follow along... Sorry, but YOU are wrong. Sinatra's style was unique. Rudy Vallee is considered to be the first crooner, starting the style 10 years before Sinatra ever came on the scene. Bing Crosby is considered the "king" of the crooners, and is who Sinatra copied when he got his start. Sinatra was one of the last and best known today. Sinatra's style, tempos, pitch, and vocal range were not copied nor sound anything like either Vallee, or Crosby. Now fast-forward to 1989, and Harry Connick, Jr. Connick revives the style of crooning and introduces it to a whole new generation of fans. He builds quite a career out of it over the last 17 years. Buble is a johnny-come-lately who is riding Connick's coattails. Without Connick, you'd never have heard of Buble. Therefore, a "Connick clone". Can you think of a quicker, more succinct way to describe him to someone who's never heard of him? Yes, and quite easily. Big band genre. Besides, I never said Buble was bad, or had no talent. In fact, I have one of his CD's; it's pretty good "dinner music". It's you guys who are getting your panties in a wad over this. Why are you guys so full of bile? The rest of the NG has grown up, so when are you guys going to join us? What makes you think I'm all upset over this? I could really care less if you are wrong. Perhaps you should follow your own advice to grow up. Anyway, it's been pretty entertaining. Thanks for the laughs. Consider yourselves educated... on at least this *one* thing. Jack Jack, with your narrow minded thinking, I seriously doubt that you could educate anybody on anything, unless it's how to be narrow minded! |
#18
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 6 Apr 2006 04:24:40 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:
Jack Goff wrote: On 5 Apr 2006 11:22:15 -0700, "basskisser" wrote: Don White wrote: basskisser wrote: Uh, no, Sinatra did it first, therefore, it appears that Conick copied Sinatra! That makes sense.....to everyone but jackoff. Besides... isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery? Yes, it SHOULD make sense, it's relatively simple........for most, anyway. Wrong again, Bassy. Sinatra didn't start it, he is simply one of the most popular of the crooners. It's a complex concept, and I realize you and Don prefer the simple ones, but try to follow along... Sorry, but YOU are wrong. Sinatra's style was unique. You said "Sinatra did it first", and he did not. Besides, everyone's unique in their own way. But you are the only person who doesn't think that Sinatra belongs to the crooner genre. Look it up. Rudy Vallee is considered to be the first crooner, starting the style 10 years before Sinatra ever came on the scene. Bing Crosby is considered the "king" of the crooners, and is who Sinatra copied when he got his start. Sinatra was one of the last and best known today. Sinatra's style, tempos, pitch, and vocal range were not copied nor sound anything like either Vallee, or Crosby. He copied the popular style of the time, and the king of that style is Crosby. Look it up. Now fast-forward to 1989, and Harry Connick, Jr. Connick revives the style of crooning and introduces it to a whole new generation of fans. He builds quite a career out of it over the last 17 years. Buble is a johnny-come-lately who is riding Connick's coattails. Without Connick, you'd never have heard of Buble. Therefore, a "Connick clone". Can you think of a quicker, more succinct way to describe him to someone who's never heard of him? Yes, and quite easily. Big band genre. Buble would be quite amused, as you just called him a band leader or musician. Big Bands are just that... big jazz bands headed up by a band leader. Think Benny Goodman, Duke Ellington. Crooner is the genre that Sinatra, Connick and Buble belong to. That style originated in the big band era, and the crooners were typically backed up by a big band, but not always. In the end, Buble is definitely not "big band", he's a crooner. From Wikipedia: "However, crooners have not completely disappeared, with contemporary performers such as Tony Bennett, Harry Connick Jr., Michael Bublé, and Rod Stewart keeping the form alive." And about big bands: "A big band is a large musical ensemble that plays jazz music." Nowhere do they even mention a singer. Jack, with your narrow minded thinking, I seriously doubt that you could educate anybody on anything, unless it's how to be narrow minded! Maybe, but I just broadened your horizons. You're welcome. Jack |
#19
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Jack Goff wrote: On 6 Apr 2006 04:24:40 -0700, "basskisser" wrote: Jack Goff wrote: On 5 Apr 2006 11:22:15 -0700, "basskisser" wrote: Don White wrote: basskisser wrote: Uh, no, Sinatra did it first, therefore, it appears that Conick copied Sinatra! That makes sense.....to everyone but jackoff. Besides... isn't imitation the sincerest form of flattery? Yes, it SHOULD make sense, it's relatively simple........for most, anyway. Wrong again, Bassy. Sinatra didn't start it, he is simply one of the most popular of the crooners. It's a complex concept, and I realize you and Don prefer the simple ones, but try to follow along... Sorry, but YOU are wrong. Sinatra's style was unique. You said "Sinatra did it first", and he did not. Besides, everyone's unique in their own way. But you are the only person who doesn't think that Sinatra belongs to the crooner genre. Look it up. Rudy Vallee is considered to be the first crooner, starting the style 10 years before Sinatra ever came on the scene. Bing Crosby is considered the "king" of the crooners, and is who Sinatra copied when he got his start. Sinatra was one of the last and best known today. Sinatra's style, tempos, pitch, and vocal range were not copied nor sound anything like either Vallee, or Crosby. He copied the popular style of the time, and the king of that style is Crosby. Look it up. Now fast-forward to 1989, and Harry Connick, Jr. Connick revives the style of crooning and introduces it to a whole new generation of fans. He builds quite a career out of it over the last 17 years. Buble is a johnny-come-lately who is riding Connick's coattails. Without Connick, you'd never have heard of Buble. Therefore, a "Connick clone". Can you think of a quicker, more succinct way to describe him to someone who's never heard of him? Yes, and quite easily. Big band genre. Buble would be quite amused, as you just called him a band leader or musician. Big Bands are just that... big jazz bands headed up by a band leader. Think Benny Goodman, Duke Ellington. BWAAAAHAAAAA!!!!! : Do you think that the Big Band Genre is limited to instruments??? You are a bit correct when you link him to the jazz stylizing, though. Here, some education for you, CLEARLY listing Buble, and Connick in the big band genre!: http://www2.apra.com.au/BulletinBoar...9f821e 02294d Which, the title says: New Release - Big Band Genre (Buble/ Harry Connick style) Crooner is the genre that Sinatra, Connick and Buble belong to. That style originated in the big band era, and the crooners were typically backed up by a big band, but not always. In the end, Buble is definitely not "big band", he's a crooner. From Wikipedia: "However, crooners have not completely disappeared, with contemporary performers such as Tony Bennett, Harry Connick Jr., Michael Bublé, and Rod Stewart keeping the form alive." There's NO SUCH THING as a "crooner genre"!!!! And about big bands: "A big band is a large musical ensemble that plays jazz music." Nowhere do they even mention a singer. Again, the GENRE.........jeez. I can tell, although you may think you do, that you don't know much about music!! Jack, with your narrow minded thinking, I seriously doubt that you could educate anybody on anything, unless it's how to be narrow minded! Maybe, but I just broadened your horizons. You're welcome. No, you just proved yourself ignorant of the facts. |
#20
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 7 Apr 2006 10:37:12 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:
BWAAAAHAAAAA!!!!! : Grow up. Do you think that the Big Band Genre is limited to instruments??? You are a bit correct when you link him to the jazz stylizing, though. Here, some education for you, CLEARLY listing Buble, and Connick in the big band genre!: http://www2.apra.com.au/BulletinBoar...9f821e 02294d Which, the title says: New Release - Big Band Genre (Buble/ Harry Connick style) Iit took you two days to find a site that had all those words together? Did you even read the site? It's an announcement for a release of some Big Band Genre *sheet music*, note there's no mention of LYRICS, and it's in, parenthetically, the Connick/Buble STYLE. Someone is peddling some sheet music arranged for a Big Band, and is using two big names to advertise it. He's hoping people will think it might sound similar to the music to which Connick and Buble apply their crooning skills. Do you understand, or are you stupid? Crooner is the genre that Sinatra, Connick and Buble belong to. That style originated in the big band era, and the crooners were typically backed up by a big band, but not always. In the end, Buble is definitely not "big band", he's a crooner. From Wikipedia: "However, crooners have not completely disappeared, with contemporary performers such as Tony Bennett, Harry Connick Jr., Michael Bublé, and Rod Stewart keeping the form alive." There's NO SUCH THING as a "crooner genre"!!!! You're kidding, right? That's a news flash for the entire music industry! A google search for "crooner genre" returns about 364,000 hits, and scanning just a few of them shows music industry rags, artists, newspapers, and music websites all referring to, and describing themselves as, the "crooner genre". Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? And about big bands: "A big band is a large musical ensemble that plays jazz music." Nowhere do they even mention a singer. Again, the GENRE.........jeez. I can tell, although you may think you do, that you don't know much about music!! Evidently, more than you. We've now established that while there is a Big Band genre, and there is also a Crooner genre. People do indeed croon to big band music, but big band does not define crooning. Buble and Connick are crooners, NOT big band. Sinatra was not first, he came ten years after the first crooner. All these things are facts, backed up by research, that prove wrong the things that *you* have said in this thread. Understand? Jack, with your narrow minded thinking, I seriously doubt that you could educate anybody on anything, unless it's how to be narrow minded! Maybe, but I just broadened your horizons. You're welcome. No, you just proved yourself ignorant of the facts. Yes, you did. And I quote: There's NO SUCH THING as a "crooner genre"!!!! Giggle. Indeed. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT For you digital media fans | General | |||
Combine Fans with Lighting Electrical | Electronics | |||
For all the stringed instrument players and fans... | General | |||
For all the stringed instrument players and fans... | General | |||
Naval history fans.... | General |