| re: What if..... | |
|
Posted by: |
steven_stuart 04:09 am UTC 01/09/11 |
| In reply to: | What if..... - AndrewG 01:04 pm UTC 01/07/11 |
| It would be interesting if we could know what would have happened if Jim had been a solo artist plugging away his own material. I think both Jim and Meat were charasmatic. Meat had a better singing voice (when it worked) but as you point out, Mark Knopfler is more of a songwriter/musician than a singer (lets not forget that Jim played brilliant piano - like Knopfler played brilliant guitar - something that helped him overcome his Bob Dylan sound-a-like vocals). Surely Jim would have found an audience. I'm not sure if Jim would have had the energy to tour the way that Meat did. I know Jim toured with him but it was Meat who said that he was a train and that he was going out there to win people over and the others had to decide if they wanted to follow. I do think that Jim found a great singer who understood his material. I wish that they had actually formed a band like Knopfler formed Dire Straits. Also, I wonder if BOOH was too successful. How would things have been if BOOH sold a respectable five million copies. Would Meat and Jim have grown together as artists? I can't say that they needed each other after BOOH because Jim had such a massive success with Bonnie. Its more like Meat neeeded Jim. However, nobody ever connected with an audience using Jim's material the way that Meat did. As you say about Rob Evan: "No offence to Rob Evan, but a singer who can't bring emotional connection to the song simply doesn't work for me no matter how well he reaches the notes." BOOH might have sold a few million with Rob or Rory Dodd singing lead vocals but surely it wouldn't have reached the 42 million mark that it reached with Meat. Maybe Jim could have formed a band called "Steinman", like Carlos Santana fromed "Santana". Carlos Santana wrote the music and played a great guitar but he used different singers. Jim could have done that (playing brilliant piano instead of brilliant guitar). > This has probably been hypothesised on before.... > > What if Jim had released Bat himself without Meat? > I do firmly believe Meat had some creative input on the > album (the mix and the story of Paradise for example) > however I am sure he could have done a similar job himself > but obviously not with the power house vocals. > > Would the album have worked as well? > > I personally really like Bad for Good and simply don't > hear the bad vocal that others are always on about. > Perhaps I look at music a bit different and don't always > care about who is fronting/singing the lyrics. Put Rob > Evan on stage instead of Meat, same show I would leave the > auditorium straight away I'm sure for example. No offence > to Rob Evan, but a singer who can't bring emotional > connection to the song simply doesn't work for me no > matter how well he reaches the notes. > > I think there is a great deal of authenticity I hear in > Jim's own vocals during Bad For Good / Left in The Dark / > Graveyard Shift. > > I think Bat, the Jim way, would certainly not have been AS > successful because of the lack of stunning vocals and the > funny fat crazy character on stage. However I think if Jim > had done this and kept plugging away at releasing albums > there is no reason he couldn't have been as successful as > say Bob Dylan or Mark Knopfler who I also regard as > amazing song writers but below average singers, and once > again that latter part I just don't seem to care about as > much when you have the original emotional songwriters' > voice and experience on stage/on the album. > > Does anyone agree? | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | What if..... - AndrewG 01:04 pm UTC 01/07/11 |
| Next: | re: What if..... - rockfenris2005 04:47 am UTC 01/09/11 |
| Thread: |
|