#26
Posted: 6/29/04 at 5:34am
Ball has much the best "theatrical" voice!
Michael Ball vs. Anthnony Warlow — Page 2
#27
Posted: 6/29/04 at 1:02pm
Both are great musical theatre singers. (I can never quite see the point of insulting someone by calling them "THAT THING" ???)
I cannot comment on Anthony Warlow as a live performer as I have never seen him in concert, though I love his voice on recordings.
I do know however that comparing Michael Ball's recordings (which are sometimes fabulous but also occasionally flat and mediocre) to his live concert performances is like comparing a crack in the pavement to the Grand Canyon. As a live performer he really is sensational.
There's something about Michael's voice which hits the right spot in my soul, so I would have to vote for him! :)
I cannot comment on Anthony Warlow as a live performer as I have never seen him in concert, though I love his voice on recordings.
I do know however that comparing Michael Ball's recordings (which are sometimes fabulous but also occasionally flat and mediocre) to his live concert performances is like comparing a crack in the pavement to the Grand Canyon. As a live performer he really is sensational.
There's something about Michael's voice which hits the right spot in my soul, so I would have to vote for him! :)
#28
Posted: 6/29/04 at 1:13pm
I would think that any songwriter, past or present, would love to have either one of these gentlemen perform their work. Both are fantastic at interpreting lyrics and melodies.
#29
Posted: 6/29/04 at 3:23pm
I think they are both amazing and quite unique.
I prefer Michael for some showtunes. Whilst a lot of Anthony's work is amazing (his show albums in particular - eg Jekyll and Hyde, The Secret Garden), I think Michael has the edge on emotion and, like many others on here, I LIKE the fact that his voice has a more raw sound than Anthony's. I think that in some recordings (including some showtunes on his solo albums) Anthony can sound a little too cold. Technically he is perfect - certainly better than Michael, whose technique is actually quite bad in places - but technical brilliance cannot make up for a lack of emotion. To be fair, I know a ot of classically trained singers who concentrate a little too much on technique and tone, forgetting that sometimes little imperfections can make the difference between a coldly technical recording and one full of passion and life.
However, I think there are certain songs Anthony sings a LOT better than Michael. Whilst there are many songs on Anthony's albums that I would LOVE Michael to record, I for some reason can't see Michael singing IT'S A DANGEROUS GAME, UNEXPECTED SONG, or I AM WHAT I AM (which isn't to say I wouldn't like him to try! Lol). Nor does Michael record the individual songs in quite as much context. One of the things I alternately love and hate about Anthony's albums (depending on my mood) is that, while there are moments where you lose the emotion, the accent is always spot on for the show! This can be confusing and a little weird when you don't know the show, but if you do know the shows it's great! (Though I AM A PIRATE KING is set on dry land so the sound of the King falling into the sea at the end and the 'battle' in the instrumental make no sense - but are VERY amusing). There are some songs and genres where Anthony's technique does give him the edge, Opera being one of them. That said, I WOULD very much like to hear Michael do a lot of songs which Anthony has already recorded.
Suffice it to say that I own every album each of them has recorded and they are the most listened to out of my collection.
I prefer Michael for some showtunes. Whilst a lot of Anthony's work is amazing (his show albums in particular - eg Jekyll and Hyde, The Secret Garden), I think Michael has the edge on emotion and, like many others on here, I LIKE the fact that his voice has a more raw sound than Anthony's. I think that in some recordings (including some showtunes on his solo albums) Anthony can sound a little too cold. Technically he is perfect - certainly better than Michael, whose technique is actually quite bad in places - but technical brilliance cannot make up for a lack of emotion. To be fair, I know a ot of classically trained singers who concentrate a little too much on technique and tone, forgetting that sometimes little imperfections can make the difference between a coldly technical recording and one full of passion and life.
However, I think there are certain songs Anthony sings a LOT better than Michael. Whilst there are many songs on Anthony's albums that I would LOVE Michael to record, I for some reason can't see Michael singing IT'S A DANGEROUS GAME, UNEXPECTED SONG, or I AM WHAT I AM (which isn't to say I wouldn't like him to try! Lol). Nor does Michael record the individual songs in quite as much context. One of the things I alternately love and hate about Anthony's albums (depending on my mood) is that, while there are moments where you lose the emotion, the accent is always spot on for the show! This can be confusing and a little weird when you don't know the show, but if you do know the shows it's great! (Though I AM A PIRATE KING is set on dry land so the sound of the King falling into the sea at the end and the 'battle' in the instrumental make no sense - but are VERY amusing). There are some songs and genres where Anthony's technique does give him the edge, Opera being one of them. That said, I WOULD very much like to hear Michael do a lot of songs which Anthony has already recorded.
Suffice it to say that I own every album each of them has recorded and they are the most listened to out of my collection.
#30
Posted: 6/29/04 at 4:11pm
I really like Michael on all his cast recordings, but I don't care for his solo CDs. The orchestrations and quality are just too syrupy for me.
The same for Anthony Warlow. I love him in cast recordings, but while his solo CDs are technically spot on, they have little emotion or intent in the songs.
Considering they have completely different vocal and phsyical styles, I really can't compare the two as I don't think they share anything similar. I couldn't see Anthony as a Marius or Michael as a Jekyll. They are well-suited for opposite character types.
The same for Anthony Warlow. I love him in cast recordings, but while his solo CDs are technically spot on, they have little emotion or intent in the songs.
Considering they have completely different vocal and phsyical styles, I really can't compare the two as I don't think they share anything similar. I couldn't see Anthony as a Marius or Michael as a Jekyll. They are well-suited for opposite character types.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
#31
Posted: 6/29/04 at 6:29pm
as i have never seen warlow perform live, it is not possible for me to comment on his live performances. but i have seen michael ball live several times, and it is hard to imagine anyone better than he! as others have pointed out , it is the untrained quality of MB's voice that make it so wonderful, so emotional. when i took a MB cd to my voice coach to listen to a song i wanted to do , she fell in love with his voice! she said that he plays with every note. that he takes every note and dances with it. well put !!
#32
Posted: 6/30/04 at 3:30am
Both wonderful voices for sure but I would go in the end go for Michael Ball.It's difficult to explain why it's like trying to say why you prefer one brand of chocolate to another...you just do :) LOL!!
I personally like the untrained quality of MBs voice and because he is not worrying about the notes being technically right all the time.There is nothing getting in the way of the emotion of the song coming through.To be able to get up on stage and produce
that sound natrually is amazing and for me and it gives his voice
an extra warmth.He has sung some operatic pieces before but I think to do more and really do them justice he knows,he'd have to train (he's said as much in interviews)and I guess it's a bit like,if it aint broke don't and fix it.
It's a shame really that'Passion'didn't come along a bit later in
his career and that it didn't run for longer.I think he'd handle it better now than he did back then and given longer in the role could have made it his own.Acting wise 'Sunset Boulevard'in Cork recently showed how good he can be and 'alone together' proved he has a good dramatic performance in him,so I could see him in something like Jekyll.I disagree with the earlier Chitty comment,
I felt especially where his connection with the children was concerned that he was spot on.But this is something we could all agree and disagree about forever more,we are all going to have our favourites
As others have said there is no comparison between and cd and seeing the man live.He sings every song,as if it's the first one of the evening but as I haven't seen Anthony Warlow live it wouldn't be fair to compare them in that respect.
Yes Both wonderful singers,both deserve greater recognition,I agree let's enjoy both.......good discussion!
I personally like the untrained quality of MBs voice and because he is not worrying about the notes being technically right all the time.There is nothing getting in the way of the emotion of the song coming through.To be able to get up on stage and produce
that sound natrually is amazing and for me and it gives his voice
an extra warmth.He has sung some operatic pieces before but I think to do more and really do them justice he knows,he'd have to train (he's said as much in interviews)and I guess it's a bit like,if it aint broke don't and fix it.
It's a shame really that'Passion'didn't come along a bit later in
his career and that it didn't run for longer.I think he'd handle it better now than he did back then and given longer in the role could have made it his own.Acting wise 'Sunset Boulevard'in Cork recently showed how good he can be and 'alone together' proved he has a good dramatic performance in him,so I could see him in something like Jekyll.I disagree with the earlier Chitty comment,
I felt especially where his connection with the children was concerned that he was spot on.But this is something we could all agree and disagree about forever more,we are all going to have our favourites
As others have said there is no comparison between and cd and seeing the man live.He sings every song,as if it's the first one of the evening but as I haven't seen Anthony Warlow live it wouldn't be fair to compare them in that respect.
Yes Both wonderful singers,both deserve greater recognition,I agree let's enjoy both.......good discussion!
#33
Posted: 6/30/04 at 12:12pm
Very true. A thoughtful and intelligent discussion. Yea both performers
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95