Re: WH New Vocal

[Ben Miller <bmiller5@ix.netcom.com>]

> - --- Karen Newcombe wrote:
> Most refreshing to see IED rise to defend Kate's musical honor this
> week!  We need the occasional reminder that Kate is without fault
> in every way.
> - --- end of quoted material ---


> Well, I for one, am not convinced that the "new vocal" version of WH is without
> flaw.

While I'll leave the discussion of Kate's perfection to those wiser than
I, (if Kate is perfect, does she then define what perfection is, and
hence everything she does is also perfect by definition?) I am also of
the opinion that the original Wuthering Heights is a work of shimmering,
crystalline perfection in itself.  So, the question for me is not so
much whether or not Kate's voice cracked on the new vocal version, but
why she bothered to rerecord the song in the first place. 

I seem to recall reading an interview where Kate said that her voice had
matured a lot between the two versions, and she was keen to hear what
the song would sound like with her more mature voice.  Is this correct. 

I don't dislike the new vocal version of WH, but I do  think it 
inferior to the orignal, and I have a little difficulty including it
with the rest of the Kate canon.    

Cheers,
Ben
-- 
Ben Miller
bmiller5@ix.netcom.com
_________________________________________________
You must be the change you wish to see in the world.
                        --M.K. Ghandi