First Blood

Originally posted by Gideon
No, he says that the scene always -- original and otherwise -- like that.

For the final time, you need to be more specific in exactly what it is you're arguing here. If anything, logic points to Palpatine willingly putting himself in a situation where he could die to force Anakin's hand. For that to occur, the threat on his life has to be very real. I doubt that Palpatine could have just effortlessly destroyed Mace from that position with the Force. I very doubt it. The most he could have done is held him at bay or finally defeated him after an agonizing struggle.

Mace was going to lose if Palpatine continued. Palpatine's facial features changing are not the result of lightning deforming him. Those are facts.
Either Palpatine is thinking on his feet when things go bad for him, or he fully intends to fake a weakness rather than destroy Mace there.

Originally posted by Gideon
Define "top tier". I'd consider that class to be the likes of Neil Peart, Jimi Hendrix, Freddie Mercury, ect. Axl really does not compare to these giants.

Top Tier as in the greatest singers/songwriters of our century. That doesn't include Jimi Hendrix. I personally think that the artists that died before their time got over hyped, such as Hendrix, Joplin, Kobain, etc.

While I doubt I've explored Richard Marx's catalogue as well as you have, I can assure you that I know enough about him to make a statement. The fact that he has never been lauded as "one of the best" singers on technical (vocal) ability also leads me to believe this. I don't doubt Marx is a great singer and a great songwriter but that doesn't make him one of the best. As for pure vocals, Elvis is actually one of the greats -- but he doesn't compare to Mercury or Perry.

I believe he has helped write the music. He is a lyricist, but I would say that Neal Schon and Jonathan Cain wrote most of the music. But I don't play an instrument. [/B]

However, if we are going by pure voice, you can look no further than Michael Bolton and Josh Groban.

Except in this singular instance, apparently. What I'm disputing is that Mace was legitimately overpowering Palpatine in the lightning portion

Because it'd look fake otherwise? Tell me: Mace WAS losing...why would Palpatine want to genuinely kill him there when his plan was obviously to force Anakin to join him on the whole Padme issue?

I very much dobut it either. I also very much dobut that unless Palpatine is holding himself back, that Mace would be able to force his lightning back for any period of time.

Mace was going to lose if Palpatine continued. Palpatine's facial features changing are not the result of lightning deforming him. Those are facts.
Either Palpatine is thinking on his feet when things go bad for him, or he fully intends to fake a weakness rather than destroy Mace there. [/B]

Top Tier as in the greatest singers/songwriters of our century. That doesn't include Jimi Hendrix. I personally think that the artists that died before their time got over hyped, such as Hendrix, Joplin, Kobain, etc

Kobain? Certainly. Hendrix, however, was an innovator. 'Greatest' and 'Most Skilled' are two different things. There are guitarists who are as technically skilled (and likely moreso) than Hendrix, but are not as great because they haven't had the impact or the innovation that he has. Joplin is great as well.

What do you mean he hasn't been heralded as (insert category here). I haven't seen Perry mentioned either. Next you're going to tell me that because Steve Perrty sold more records, he's better. More sales or more recognition doesn't necessarily mean better.

You haven't been looking hard enough. Any credible website or analysis of popular male vocalists will have mentioned Perry. Digitaldreamdoor is the name of a very popular website -- they analyize this shit front to back and back to front -- many of them are vocal coaches and singers themselves. It's been debated, discussed, and such on numerous occasions. In terms of talent and ability, Perry is ranked second only to Mercury in the '70s and '80s (in the '90s, Perry lost quite a bit of power and Mercury died 🙁). In a live environment, Perry is considered the greatest singer (not frontman) ever.

As for the record sales argument, I wasn't going to debate that at all.

However, if we are going by pure voice, you can look no further than Michael Bolton and Josh Groban.

What you're arguing is subjective. Objectively speaking, Bolton is not as talented as Mercury or Perry, and neither is Groban (though Groban is a powerhouse).

What do you define as talent? If we are speaking strictly of their voices, I don't think there's anyone on the level of Groban or Bolton. Maybe it's subjective and I love Perry but in terms of pure voices, those two are the best in my book.

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
What do you define as talent? If we are speaking strictly of their voices, I don't think there's anyone on the level of Groban or Bolton. Maybe it's subjective and I love Perry but in terms of pure voices, those two are the best in my book.

I define talent as ability. Range, power, and control. Range = the ability to hit notes on a spectrum (ie: high, low, medium/tenor, bass, baritone). Power = the strength/force of one's voice. Control = the ability to maintain and continuously hit a note.

In these three areas, Mercury and Perry are better than Bolton and Groban. Mercury was a trained opera singer, a baritone who could sing tenor (and pretty damn well) which is not only amazing, but rare. And he was a heavy chain smoker. Perry is a natural tenor who allowed himself to sing and maintain baritone notes (see 1983 on up), he lowered his pitch to sing with a stronger, gutteral metal sound, and from then on, he managed to go back and forth. Perry's control is relatively peerless (even Mercury is not his equal), he is never -- not even in a live setting -- off pitch. In fact, more people prefer Journey's live performances on Youtube than their studio versions. The disparity is none. And that in itself is rare.

Weird. Groban does opera in 4 different languages. Michael Bolton was voted as the best vocalist in the 90s on some VH1 program..

Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Weird. Groban does opera in 4 different languages. Michael Bolton was voted as the best vocalist in the 90s on some VH1 program..

I'm aware of Groban's talents. But, again, Mercury was a chain-smoker and a baritone, yet he could sing tenor and maintain it as well as most tenors could themselves. Groban has no such accolade, and while he is definately one of the best, he's not on par with Mercury or Perry.

And VH-1 is a popularity contest to begin with. I watch it, but it is no more credible than MTV. Though I don't dispute, again, that Bolton is very talented.

I don't know dude. I don't think it gets better than "When a Man Loves a Woman" or 'Remember when it Rained"..

Originally posted by Janus Marius
[B]Using nonlethal training sabers exactly the same as their existing blades save for their inability to cut, the following have been lumped into a tournament by some cynical KMC punk:

Match 1: Anakin Skywalker (RotS) versus Obi-Wan Kenobi (RotS)

Match 2: Exar Kun versus Malak (Exar Kun at his peak; Malak likewise)

Match 3: Count Dooku versus Mace Windu (Both incarnations as of RotS)

Match 4: Darth Maul versus Asajj Ventress and Sora Bolq (Maul as of TPM, obviously; Asajj as of Obsession; Sora at his peak, whatever that was.)

1) At first I thought Anakin since he seems to be faster and stronger, but on second thought I decided Obi-wan would win. They are very close in terms of abilities. However, Anakin tends to eventually make mistakes (running at Dooku instead approaching slowly along with Obi-wan, leaping above Obi-wan on Mustafar), while Obi-wan always takes advantage of mistakes (killing Maul after he didn't finish Obi-wan, chopping off Anakin's limbs on Mustafar).

2)I say Exar Kun. Both of them are considered extremely skilled duelists, but Exar was the best sith of his time, while Malak was second to Revan.

3)This would be a close match. Both are powerful with the force, and are masters of their respective forms. Vaapad would give Mace an edge against darkside powers, but they have dueled before, and Sora Bulq was an adept of Dooku, so Dooku would not make the mistake of using lightning against Mace. Also unlike most darksiders Dooku is very detached and does not seem to use rage. I agree with Janus that Makashi is a better form than vaapad for one on one dueling. Dooku has more experience, but Mace has the very important shatterpoint ability. If Mace finds Dooku's shatterpoint he wins. The majority of the time Dooku wins barely.

4) I do not know that much about Sora and Assaj, however they were both very skilled duelists who defeated multiple jedi. I think their combined force would be enough to defeat Maul, who has not done much.

You know I was just thinking Escape. If you are arguing who has the better "natural" talent, then I would have to agree with you that Perry BARELY nudges Marx. However, due to the fact that Groban and Bolton have been known to do operas (especially Groban who's the best in the world), I would still put their natural talent above Perry..

However, my definition of "talent" is, as you say, subjective. I view talent as not only having an incredible voice, but also having the innate ability to write lyrics and music. Richard Marx has proven time and time again he is in in the top 5 of all time in singers/songwriters, while Perry has not..

You know I was just thinking Escape. If you are arguing who has the better "natural" talent, then I would have to agree with you that Perry BARELY nudges Marx. However, due to the fact that Groban and Bolton have been known to do operas (especially Groban who's the best in the world), I would still put their natural talent above Perry..

'Barely'? I'm sorry but, again, I have to disagree. Steve Perry's vocal ability greatly surpasses Richard Marx's own; it isn't a close match or a 'nudging', it's pure slaughter. Perry has the superior range, the superior control, and the superior vocal power. As for Josh Groban and Michael Bolton, again, neither of them has exhibited vocal ability that surpasses Perry's own. You could argue that they are close (and indeed the gap is much smaller than the one between Perry and Marx), but they have done nothing that surpasses Perry's performances; which he performed live -- again, the disparity between Journey's live performances versus studio performances is professionally considered "zero" -- on numerous occasions.

However, my definition of "talent" is, as you say, subjective. I view talent as not only having an incredible voice, but also having the innate ability to write lyrics and music. Richard Marx has proven time and time again he is in in the top 5 of all time in singers/songwriters, while Perry has not..

As you know, I don't like to go into subjectivity unless we're discussing which people we prefer. Who is better -- as far as singing ability -- isn't subjective. It's just fact. Perry is a much more capable singer than Richard Marx. Songwriting skills, by the way, are subjective. They can't be gauged or debated properly since there is no universal source. Most people think jackass-from-Nirvana is the greatest songwriter of all time; I think Nirvana's entire catalogue of songs is shit. But that's just me. Likewise, there are people on Earth who think Perry is a greater songwriter than Marx, and vice versa. Vocal ability can be gauged and compared, writing ability can't.

Nirvana is the best band ever

Originally posted by tulakhordpwns
Nirvana is the best band ever

😘

Originally posted by Gideon
😘

😎

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Match 1: Anakin Skywalker (RotS) versus Obi-Wan Kenobi (RotS)

If this is lightside anakin then Obi-Wan creams him. Obi knows his apprentice forward and backward and taught him almost everything he knows.

If this is pre-suit vader anakin then the fight is very close but i would still say Obi takes it with his wits. Anakin would be to much in a frenzy to rationalize things and Obi will out wit him into doing something stupid.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Match 2: Exar Kun versus Malak (Exar Kun at his peak; Malak likewise)

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Match 3: Count Dooku versus Mace Windu (Both incarnations as of RotS)

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Match 4: Darth Maul versus Asajj Ventress and Sora Bolq (Maul as of TPM, obviously; Asajj as of Obsession; Sora at his peak, whatever that was.)

Maul takes this one in a heat beat. Asajj would get her bald head sliced off in no time and Sora would go down shortly. Maul is just too experienced and fast for them. He killed Qui-Gon and Asajj hasnt done much except annoy Obi and Ani.

Windu takes this one but not without injuries

The conditions of victory are a single strike with the lightsaber.

Janus didnt say anything about not being allowed to knock them around with the force and i think mace would get some pretty nasty bruises

Maul takes this one in a heat beat. Asajj would get her bald head sliced off in no time and Sora would go down shortly. Maul is just too experienced and fast for them. He killed Qui-Gon and Asajj hasnt done much except annoy Obi and Ani.

Ventress herself is another story entirely. She didn't "annoy" Anakin and Obi-Wan, she very nearly killed them multiple times. Anakin had to go all Darth Vader on her to come out alive in both of their major duels, and she's actually outfought Obi-Wan before.

So Maul, faced with two people very near his own level of prowess and wielding dual/double-bladed styles of their own, is not going to come out of this on top. Since this is by first strike he might be able to tag one of them out, but there's no way he can win.

Originally posted by Gideon
['Barely'? I'm sorry but, again, I have to disagree. Steve Perry's vocal ability greatly surpasses Richard Marx's own; it isn't a close match or a 'nudging', it's pure slaughter. Perry has the superior range, the superior control, and the superior vocal power. As for Josh Groban and Michael Bolton, again, neither of them has exhibited vocal ability that surpasses Perry's own. You could argue that they are close (and indeed the gap is much smaller than the one between Perry and Marx), but they have done nothing that surpasses Perry's performances; which he performed live -- again, the disparity between Journey's live performances versus studio performances is professionally considered "zero" -- on numerous occasions.

As you know, I don't like to go into subjectivity unless we're discussing which people we prefer. Who is better -- as far as singing ability -- isn't subjective. It's just fact. Perry is a much more capable singer than Richard Marx. Songwriting skills, by the way, are subjective. They can't be gauged or debated properly since there is no universal source. Most people think jackass-from-Nirvana is the greatest songwriter of all time; I think Nirvana's entire catalogue of songs is shit. But that's just me. Likewise, there are people on Earth who think Perry is a greater songwriter than Marx, and vice versa. Vocal ability can be gauged and compared, writing ability can't. [/B]

I think singing abilities ARE subjective, which is why we are arguing over Bolton, Groban, Marx, and Perry.