So because he sings in a soft manner and doesn't have a powerful range it's not singing?
Congratulations! That's the most pretentious thing I've heard in a long, long time.
Congratulations on interpreting it as a slam on your idol. It's obvious you live for finding conflicts where they have no reason to exist, though, as you perpetuate your role as the resident obnoxious post-whore with oppositional defiance disorder.
"He doesn't always sing in the traditional sense of the word" doesn't mean he doesn't sing. I don't see how anyone fluent in English could possibly sincerely derive that meaning. It means exactly what it says: a lot of the time, when he isn't singing in what
I would consider the traditional sense of the word (that's an opinion, but one I'm sure plenty of people could find agreement with--Kevin Moore isn't a typical vocalist), he is doing what I said in my third sentence. Let's go over that one next:
"A lot of OSI resembles spoken word as much as melodic vocals as he doesn't exert himself much when singing." "A lot of OSI" implies "A lot of OSI's vocals," given that we're solely discussing the vocals. "Resembles spoken word as much as melodic vocals" means, in the context of the previous sentence, some of the time, when he isn't singing traditionally, I find his style to be part spoken word/part singing. That's why I said "as much as," because I consider it to be significant parts of both spoken word and melodic vocalization. I said nothing about his range. He "sings" in a soft manner that resembles a typical speaking voice set to music in that he doesn't "exert" himself to the extent a typical person would when projecting one's voice as people typically do when singing in what is surely everyone's default concept of what typical singing sounds like. It isn't the only kind of singing, hence the "traditional" distinction.
Do we understand my opinion now? Is it still terribly insulting to the honor of your personal Midas? Didn't think so. You say he sings in a soft manner--I quipped "or weak speaker" when someone called him a "weak singer" as I think some of his vocals are part spoken word, part singing. I didn't say "HUHUH more like weak speaker, KM SUX," and in my first reply to you, I explained exactly what I believe as innocuously and as explicitly as any literate adult would possibly require to reach understanding.
Kevin Moore fanboys can apparently be worse than DT fanboys, and I like KM/OSI. Absurd. I can't believe I bothered to detail my meaning to a recreational contrarian who could find disagreement in anything. So glad you assumed the worst possible intended meaning devoid of any consideration for the meaning of the words I actually used. I have no idea how you manage it, except with perhaps a great deal of intellectual dishonesty.
