Diana Krall

Gawd - the snobbery here is hilarious. And to think that in my decades of ignorance I had just assumed Krall was a fine jazz artist and performer in her own right.

But now I know she is just a mediocre "entertainer" in a world where only Music - not sports or poetry or drama or visual art -  can elevate the human soul to its goal of achieving Platonic form.

It must be lonely being so perfect in your messianic omniscience.

strongarm13 posts03-04-2018 10:54amI think Diana Krall is best when she is playing the piano. She an outstanding bar singer.

For casual bar performances she's fine agree.

All said and done Simao, i am about as influenced by others opinion as I am of their taste. I actually had someone in my home say they didn't want to listen to Tony Bennett after i suggested a recent purchase of a great vinyl recording of an early Carnegie Hall performance, "i can't stand to listen to that guy" was his response. Who cares what he thinks, not I and we moved on. You like Diana, good for you and be comfortable with it, you are far from alone. I do sometimes wonder why some go beyond their opinion with insulting remarks. It can and does come across as unnecessarily arrogant, that is when my hackles raise and opinion crosses over to rudeness.

@tubegroover It's not a matter of liking or not liking Diana Krall. Up until this thread, I'd never considered it with too much aesthetic thought. However, what raised MY hackles and tugged on my jowls was

1. The hijacking of the OP's original intent and purpose into a rant and demeaning of an artist the OP plainly admires and enjoys. It's like being invited into someone's house and then openly and without shame excoriating his artwork and cuisine.

2. How smug some of the responders come across as. I mean, everyone's an armchair quarterback, but only 32 real quarterbacks suit up every Sunday. That's not to suggest we're not entitled to a learned opinion, but to take someone as respected as DK and claim she's nothing more than a piano bar singer is to suggest you're somehow more learned and musically astute than everyone else. But hey - if you think you are, then feel free to create your own reality (that's "you" as in the responders, not "you" as in tubegroover).

It's like the person who posted several years ago that Steely Dan was nothing more than studio musicians who got lucky. I mean, fascinating.

Please! The etiquette protocols of an online forum are NOT the same as being invited into one’s home. If I was a guest in the OP's home and he was playing DK I would listen politely and grin and bare it.

As far as keeping to the original OP’s intent of his post, FREQUENTLY an OP will raise a subject that then morphs into to a more deep and interesting topic but still related to the original post. Happens all the time and nothing wrong with that. That has happened here. And I don’t see anyone being disrespectful of the OP’s original message. Great, he likes DK.

The broader subject that this thread has morphed into beyond DK is about mediocracy in music and whether “audiophiles” should have the ability to recognize it and tell the difference between it and truly exceptional artists. And if you can then why would one choose the former and not the latter?

I keep reading posters that seem to believe that there really is no difference or that the difference doesn't matter because it is all about taste and anyone who attempts to recognize the difference is a snob. I like to drink low cost red wine, rarely buying a Cabernet above $12 a bottle. When someone tells me I don't have refined tastes in wine I tell them they are right but I don't deny that there is a difference between a $50 bottle of Cabernet and a $9 bottle. I just say I can't appreciate it.