The only reason why he is getting such a lot of praise and approval from others is because he is “taking a route” in the direction where the majority is not.

All he is doing is singing old songs, and not even better, just “again”. He does not seem to be singing the songs better either, and just mimicking the styles of mainly Sinatra and Dean Martin. I guess it is because people today want to listen to somebody who is still “alive” and young, not old and dead.

I can probably bet that if Bublé was born in the time when all the real crooners were still alive and young, he would not make it even as far as say… Dick Haymes, Mel Torme or Perry Como. Heck, his voice probably is not even as good as these three. Yet, people are comparing him to Sinatra, Nat Cole and Dean Martin~? Ridiculous~!

Of course if you compare a thirty year old Bublé’s voice to a fifty five year old Sinatra voice, Bublé would probably sound “clearer”. But if you compare a thirty something year Sinatra to a thirty something year Bublé, then you can just hear how much worse Bublé is.

Sure, it is great to see people interested in caring on these styles that are not done as frequently as now. But if all you are going to do is re-sing old pop standards in ways which are inferior to practically every version of a particular song, may it be Sinatra’s, Dean’s, Como’s, Hayme’s or Torme’s or whatever other artist there was, then you might as well stop, because who would want to listen to a version of a song a lot more inferior than a lot of other’s~?

And as others have already stated, even his original songs suck: so does the musical arrangements that go with them. That is what I think about Bublé. And please, do not even compare Bublé with Sinatra again, because he really is not up there.

but let’s face it. michael bublé is a rich and pretensious kid. at least sinatra had the style. and buble? well, he thinks he’s good but his voice isn’t particular like sinatra’s.