|
|
Post by lol on Jul 1, 2009 8:23:20 GMT -5
or
?
|
|
|
|
Post by thetarrynator on Jul 1, 2009 12:24:37 GMT -5
Aerosmith by miles. Steven Tyler is just plain awesome.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Tyler on Jul 3, 2009 14:44:28 GMT -5
I already hate Kelly Clarkson's version just by that ugly fucking facial expression she's bearing on the video before you press play.
|
|
|
|
Post by THE Man They Call Uberto on Jul 15, 2009 16:42:09 GMT -5
Anyone who says kelly clarkson is either A retarded or B Tartar Sauce.
|
|
|
|
Post by SimpsonsWWE316 on Jul 15, 2009 20:24:11 GMT -5
Both suck. There. Argument solved.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaasa on Jul 21, 2009 19:51:26 GMT -5
Aerosmith's is far superior. Not that it matters, I mean, it's the same song as "Crazy".
|
|
|
|
Post by ThePunisher_129 on Jul 22, 2009 1:45:28 GMT -5
Aerosmith.
Kelly Clarkson is a silly pop singer.
Pop sucks ass anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by lol on Jul 22, 2009 6:34:39 GMT -5
A silly pop singer who can outsing all of your favourite metal 'vocalists' combined.
|
|
|
|
Post by hypercringe on Jul 22, 2009 15:38:27 GMT -5
Not a huge fan of the song but I will just be a sheep and go with aerosmith on this one
Also Kelly appears to be holding the mic in a rather suggestive manner
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Tyler on Jul 22, 2009 21:25:45 GMT -5
Depends what you mean by "outsing". Kelly Clarkson has a different style to metal vocalists. She can sing pop music better than metal vocalists, and metal vocalists can sing metal music better than Kelly Clarkson. The only way she could possibly be a superior vocalist would be if pop was superior to metal.
Anyway, in ten years, Kelly Clarkson won't be popular. She massive over here when she released "Because of You" but her latest stuff has hardly been a big deal. Give it even five years and she'll be practically forgotten. Meanwhile, bands like Pantera, Metallica, Iron Maiden, Anthrax, Judas Priest, etc, will still be popular and will still have large fanbases. Hell, if Metallica and Iron Maiden are still going in ten years, they'll probably still be able to sell out stadiums, whereas Kelly Clarkson will probably be playing "intimate" acoustic gigs in bars around America.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaasa on Jul 22, 2009 21:50:48 GMT -5
Sorry, but Kelly Clarkson doesn't stand a chance against Vinnie Vincent. As someone else said, she's just a silly pop singer, who will be playing in nightclubs and fairs in the next couple of years.
|
|
|
|
Post by lol on Jul 23, 2009 6:54:57 GMT -5
Depends what you mean by "outsing". Kelly Clarkson has a different style to metal vocalists. She can sing pop music better than metal vocalists, and metal vocalists can sing metal music better than Kelly Clarkson. The only way she could possibly be a superior vocalist would be if pop was superior to metal. Anyway, in ten years, Kelly Clarkson won't be popular. She massive over here when she released "Because of You" but her latest stuff has hardly been a big deal. Give it even five years and she'll be practically forgotten. Meanwhile, bands like Pantera, Metallica, Iron Maiden, Anthrax, Judas Priest, etc, will still be popular and will still have large fanbases. Hell, if Metallica and Iron Maiden are still going in ten years, they'll probably still be able to sell out stadiums, whereas Kelly Clarkson will probably be playing "intimate" acoustic gigs in bars around America. 'Because Of You' was huge, yeah, but it was the fourth single AFTER 'Breakaway', 'Since U Been Gone' and 'Behind These Hazel Eyes'. Kelly thus far has released two singles from AIEW, neither of which has been a ballad, yet MLWSWY was bigger than all of the first three Breakaway tracks over here. We'll see what happens when she releases a few more tracks. Kelly has all the potential to be popular in ten years, depending on the type of music she does. If she loses the teen-pop/rock by then and releases a few albums highlighting her pure vocals (a blues album or w/e, or a standards album, then she'll do fine. She's already proven that she can do exceptionally well in those two genres, and she could be a pretty huge album artist based on how good a techncial singer she is. And she can 'outsing' him technically, in pop, in classical music, in country, in blues, in jazz/big band, in R&B, and in soul. So yeah, Kelly's superior. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Tyler on Jul 23, 2009 13:31:05 GMT -5
Kelly Clarkson isn't any more special than a million female pop solo artists who have come before her. You might prefer her to all the others but that doesn't make her any more special than them. She won't be remembered for decades to come like say Mariah Carey. Realistically Kelly Clarkson will not be an artist that many care about in ten years. You can just tell.
She isn't superior because all those styles you listed are irrelevent to a metal band. James Hetfield from Metallica sings in a metal band, therefore his ability to sing that style is all that matters. Kelly Clarkson couldn't sing Metallica songs better than James Hetfield. So as I said, it really depends whether or not you think pop music is superior to metal music. Metallica have been around since the 80s and will be remembered forever really. You can't seriously think in decades to come people will still be crazy about Kelly Clarkson.
|
|
|
|
Post by lol on Jul 23, 2009 14:49:31 GMT -5
Speaking as someone who's followed her since the start, I can tell you that she IS special. The music doesn't showcase it to a great extent, but she's easily one of the best vocalist in mainstream music. Easily. Mariah Carey nowadays isn't a quarter as good as Kelly. And yes, I do think Kelly has longevity. She's been receiving praise from a bunch of people from EVERY genre since the beginning (including, say, Jeff Beck), and her voice is recognisable and versatile. On top of that, there are still a bunch of areas which she could still explore. Like I said, now that she's back on top, she could easily release a standards or blues album, or she could go into country for a bit (and country fans would respect her, because she's received a ton of praise and has a lot of respect for the likes of Reba McEntire), she could tackle Broadway, she could do more an R&B thing...the possibilities are endless. The girl's more versatile than 99% of the people around today, and that's gonna help her in the longevity department. Fact is, most people can't appreciate it her talent because of the genre she's in at the minute, particularly us in the UK, what with most of us not getting the opportunity to grow with her on Idol. She's a vastly superior vocalist than, say, Leona Lewis, who is supposedly our best.
|
|
|
|
Post by ehren on Jul 25, 2009 14:09:20 GMT -5
Aerosmith. But I have to say I really loved Adam Lamberts version of it too.
|
|
|
|
Post by lol on Jul 25, 2009 16:32:13 GMT -5
The backing singer ruined Adam's for me. He was fine, but she sounding like an off-key cat.
|
|
|
|
Post by malfunkshun on Feb 28, 2010 19:58:36 GMT -5
All of Aerosmith's songs sound the same to me. That mini-series of music videos with Alicia Silverstone was their redeeming factor.
|
|
|
|
Post by bfizzle on Feb 28, 2010 20:00:50 GMT -5
The Aerosmith version by far. And yes, it helps that Alicia Silverstone was their video girl.
|
|
