Andrea Bocelli (?)

Couldn't agree with you more Max.
I guess every now and then classical music (as a genre in general) feels a need to appeal to the 'masses' (whatever that means).
Currently we are being served Andrea Bocelli.

It's a bit similar to the 'produced' acts in pop music. A smidgen of a natural talent, so they don't embarrass themselves on stage, and loads and loads of production / marketing.

I call it 'chewing gum' for the ears

I agree all the above;  however in his defence he brings a taste of opera to those who don't know opera & he might just light a spark that developes into real opera discovery.     

Like Mike he has brought a certain genre to people who normally not be open for that type of music. So he should be praised for that regardless of the quality of his voice....

I love his voice and his music, own several of his albums and enjoy listening to them. Perhaps there are millions of others who enjoy him as well and are willing to pay to see him perform live and/or listen to his recorded material.

I don't need to defend him.  Andrea has carved out a place in the world of music, is successful, and from what I can see makes a living and lives a wonderful life.  

Different strokes for different folks.

I quite like Bocelli's voice, although I realise that this might be damning him with faint praise. However, my point is that as someone who listens only occasionally to classical music, I intensely dislike many classically trained voices which I find to be shrill, contrived and completely unnatural. This is of course just my personal taste. Because of this, I tend to switch off completely when I attempt to listen to many operas and classical vocal performances. Bocelli's voice is warmer and much more acceptable to my 'untrained' ears. As earlier posters have suggested, I suspect that many other 'non-classical' music lovers may be attracted by his voice to music that they might otherwise completely ignore.

As a matter of interest, and to broaden out the thread a little, there are a few more mainstream classical singers (but not very many) whose voices I do genuinely like very much. The ones that spring to mind at the moment, and each of whom I listen to quite a bit as a diversion from my normal listening tastes are Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau and Dame Janet Baker on the mainstream classical front, and Emma Kirkby & Evelyn Tubb who specialise in a particular sub-genre of classical music that I happen to like quite a bit.

I am afraid I have to admit that although I quite like his voice, I don't actually listen to Bocelli very much, if at all.

20 years ago in Los Angeles I started going to the LA Phil and a friend of mine studied classical and went to operas, he really knew everything about that music.  Perfect pitch, orchestration, instruments so I relied on him.  Plus the classical DJ at night sometimes would do disparaging comparissons of singers.  Bocelli doing Nessun Dorma and then early Pavarotti,   it was no comparison. Bocelli sounded like he was slightly off and ran out of steam, where Pavarotti had power to spare. The DJ could be really snarky with bad performers even in live interviews which was embarrassing. 

My friend John was really taken with a new talent Jonas Kaufmann who was in an opera we went to and I must say his voice was incredible. He could go all out, high and wide, then soft and tender.  I have his CD of Romantic Arias and he is really clear and rich in voice, certainly the romantic leading man looks.

I'm glad people like Bocelli, and he does hit that popularist stage presence, but I'd rather train my ear on a great voice.  John did say Pavarotti in later years got sloppy not breathing right and pretty much just a famous figure.  AND there is that thing of a classically trained BIG voice trying to do something popular and casual that just doesn't come off for me either. I'm really tired of singers that feel they have to belt everything out and they just don't have the chops.  Ella god bless her, and Sarah, just sang the songs beautifully and let them rest.

He has a good voice but somehow for me he inadvertently makes the musical piece sound so ponderous, predictable and verging towards boring.

Max_B posted:

I have heard Bocelli sing a number of times, with a choice of all possible repertoire and of the most possible kitsch arrangements. These, to my ears, can't conceal the fact that he's not a lyric singer, not a proper chamber music one, he hasn't the proper 'pasta di voce', nor the necessary power, is just decently in tune, and has two dynamic modes: an uniform, soporific piano and a somehow theater-ish forte. Both modes are unmodulated, poor in shades, flat as an old Naim amp and only the most elementary emotions are conveyed. A real tenor is a completely different thing. 

He started his career with a boring pop song at the Festival di Sanremo (Partirò, a sort of meditative bolero) which, in fact, has become his musical acronym in every TV show in which he appears. Every comparison with Pavarotti is, to say the least, offensive. I am no great fan of opera singing, but Bocelli is an evident misunderstanding and a marketing idea. How is it possible that he's so successful? He's as expressive as a herring and everything is played on the ground of his 'eyes to the floor', grim and humble attitude; yet, in his private life, he's a jolly guy ready to give air to his Tuscan rascal side, and to tell dirty jokes.... 

Please, if anyone wish to comment, only solid arguments, not 'I like him' or the sort.

Thanks

Max

Totally agree Max, bearing in mind that i'm everything but a fan of such genre, that is only "Opera For The Masses" just to please tv crowds and boring events. Just my 2p worth of course.

Oh! just for record, a while ago my Naim dealer in Tuscany told me that Bocelli himself payed him a visit to evaluate a  hi fi system, possibly Naim but as far as i know such thing vanished at the end.

Regards

Roberto