Quote:
That being said, it is Adele’s flawless execution that makes these winners. She is, after all, the closest successor we have to Whitney Houston, who could definitely sell a crowd-pleasing ballad while keeping things from getting too cheesy. Adele seems to have a similar universal appeal.
|
#1- "Closest successor". Based on selling ballads? So what about Mariah, Celine, Christina and others who've had great success selling ballads?
"Without getting too cheesy"- Funny. Back in the day, critics stayed accusing Whitney of being cheesy. Two instances of rewriting history in one point.
#2- Whitney's appeal was not based on ballads. Whitney's crossover and universal appeal was so strong that she could put in any kind of musical format and market and thrive. White, black, pop, R&B, gospel, uptempo, midtempo, ballad, Grammy stage, Soul Train stage, Academy Award stage, Essence Award stage.
Visually, it was her her beauty combined with her vocal virtuosity and her stage presence, a presence Adele sorely lacks.
The whole point of Whitney Houston was "this girl can sing anything". Not so much Adele. Adele's music is very personalized, both in sound and lyric. Whitney's not so much. Adele is a singer-songwriter too. Strong folk roots (with soul influences). She's more so in the vein of folk and pop singers like Joan Baez, Joni Mitchell, Carole King than Whitney Houston. Whitney is a product of the church who combined gospel vocality with pop malleability in her singing style.
The only similarity is that they stand and sing and Adele has huge sales. That does not make her the new Whitney Houston.