.

seriously, youre probably the only person who would say this

and then there is you

ColdGlassEye

They're completely different creatures. Don't have sex.

See - the dvd of some show in Chicago for a LOL fest of epic proportions.

Yes.

I used to declare I didn't like him only to be greeted with a kind of feeling that I just "didn't get it" and I was stupid for not getting it.
And then they'd go "yeah but you gotta admit he has a good voice?". NO! This was the thing I hated the most, I found it incredibly irritating.

And as for having the complete package of voice, lyrics and musicianship?
Well, Todd Rundgren is the man who takes that one.

what gazbid was saying was that he had a great combination of all of those things which allowed him to realise some amazing songs. Not that each one on its own makes a great artist.

That's an interesting and thorough analysis you've made there.

Maybe we could hear some of your stuff so we could do a compare and contrast?

Oooh what's that? You don't have any albums out? Thats a shame....

In all seriousness, I don't have that much time for Jeff Buckley but to claim him 'shite' is a little off mark.

But back to the question...is he an angel?

sheeeeshhhhhh.

"Go and get the John Cale version to find out how it should be sung" - how it should be sung...ok I will. I wonder if Leonard Cohen would agree.

And in response to your other points:

"Vocal range - yes, technically impressive, but it sounded thin, reedy, and annoying."

Not as good as Tom Waits -i expect you compare chalk and cheese all the time do you? No I'm not talking about tone which granted Waits has got an incredible voice. I'm talking about vocal range which for Tom Waits was probably about 2 octaves less.

"Musicianship - do you mean technical proficiency on your instruments? In which case Dream Theater are the best band ever. They're not. Good musicianship can't rescue poor songs."

No I dont. I mean the ability to play songs after hearing them once - to be able to play his own songs different almost every time they were played live. To be able to sing a song in pakistani without sounding like a knob. To be able to score string arrangements on the fly without being able to play the instruments. I could go on.

"Lyrics - not as good as Nick Cave, Leonard Cohen, Bob Dylan, Tom Waits, Bill Callaghan, his dad, Woody Guthrie, Billy Bragg ... I could go on."

his lyrics resonate with me - those people's lyrics don't (mostly).

"Songwriting - well, given that his most respected work is a poor cover version, I think that juat about says it all." - Who says it's his most respected? It's just the one everyone knows.

I'm not saying he and his band produced the 'best' music (using the kind of objective you'd use). I'm saying as an an individual with that much varied talent - we wont see his like again.

"He was shite" - I personally put him up there with someone like Prince. I've no doubt you think he's "shite" too.

Jeff Buckley and Tom Waites?????

fucking gash.

I don't find his voice appealing. I find his songs to be pretty poorly written. I also can't remember another record so lacking in humour. Did anyone ever take themselves so seriously?

And I genuinely detest his version of "Hallelujah".

When I saw Rufus Wainwright cover it in that Leonard Cohen ass kissing movie I thought well, that's it , no one's given that song more than Jeff Buckley- including Leonard Cohen.

I don't know, I get shivers just thinking about "Grace" and the way he checked out.
The whole scenario of his emergence with "Grace", a few thousand concerts and disappearance into the river on the eve of recording his second album seemed so fleeting and cosmic. As if he'd just stopped by to say "Listen to this cd - Oh, I gotta go."

Jeff could and did write beautiful original songs, when listening to his cd's I find his cover material let's me down some and when he gets back to his own songs, things pick up.

True enough, he wasn't the only amazingly talented artist in his family but that shouldn't detract from what he did.

He was definitly more than just a pretty voice. He had a way of singing from his heart or deep within like no one I else I can think of including Billy Holliday.
His concerts were truly mystical, never seen anything like it and probably never will again.

But not everyone gets the same reaction from Jeff

And his voice still was heard
On the weak second album
And difficult third
Then the critics, who broke him,
He couldn't forgive -
Would grow old and forget him
If Jeff Buckley had lived"

Artists tend to be measured by 'what is' multiplied by 'what might have been'.

The ecstatic reaction that "Grace" inspired inevitably lends itself to that kind of prescriptive mythologising; the fact that he then died under mysterious circumstances means there's nothing to counteract that.

Whereas the truth seems to be that he was a singer/songwriter made out of Marmite.