To spoil the good mood

[laura*]

I think a lot of the "cool" artists these days are not cool at all. They are just overrated and dull. In my opinion, Mika is cooler than these artists because he is unique and talented and doesn't compromise his uniqueness by trying to be cool. He writes songs because he wants to write them, not because he thinks they will be cool.

 

Of course!

Unfortunately "cool artists" are cool because most people think they are, although other people think they are just .

What's wrong with the world?

[Marilyn Mastin]

I think a lot of the "cool" artists these days are not cool at all. They are just overrated and dull. In my opinion, Mika is cooler than these artists because he is unique and talented and doesn't compromise his uniqueness by trying to be cool. He writes songs because he wants to write them, not because he thinks they will be cool.

We're not cool

We aaaare free!

 

And he's not afraid to say that in his music! He's out there and proud about not being cool! Good for him. That makes him cooler than anyone.

[suzie]

When I first heard him on the radio in 2007, I didn't know what he looked like, but I knew he was a man with a truly amazing falsetto voice. I was mesmorised by that voice, but not only the voice, the song as well. It was Love Today.

Even though I didn't (at that time) know Mika's name or anything about him, I just KNEW he had written that song himself. It suited him like it would suit no other and it made the day seem brighter. That's when I knew I had to get to know this awesome singer-songwriter and I'm so glad I did.

 

That is a great point, Marilyn. I think you can usually tell if a singer has anything to do with the song they are performing. You cannot exactly describe why, but somehow you can figure it.

This is also what I thought of Lady Gaga when I saw her on tv. It was only a video but you still got the vibe from her that she was highly involved in the creation of the song and was not just another manufactured pop starlet (or was at least one who created herself )

 

I would never slag him off because he's a competent actor but I have never understood the fascination with Johnny Depp. My sister-in-law had a thing for him back in the 21 Jump St. days and I just didn't get it.

 

Me, neither and the other one of such actors for me is Leonardo Dicaprio.

 

I loved Grace Kelly from the second I heard it but the overuse of the falsetto in Love Today, Lollipop and Happy Ending used to do my head in at times.

 

I only had that problem with Love Today but only the radio edit / the video version.

I remember being rather disappointed about the way they edited it as it clearly just focused on the falsetto parts while I loved the version I first heard of it before the album release (his live performance at Virgin Radio) and the short original version ().

I always considered LT a great song and loved the parts where he is basically speaking and shouting. I found it a pity how that was basically edited out in short versions.

[Marilyn Mastin]

That is a great point, Marilyn. I think you can usually tell if a singer has anything to do with the song they are performing. You cannot exactly describe why, but somehow you can figure it.

This is also what I thought of Lady Gaga when I saw her on tv. It was only a video but you still got the vibe from her that she was highly involved in the creation of the song and was not just another manufactured pop starlet (or was at least one who created herself )

 

 

 

Me, neither and the other one of such actors for me is Leonardo Dicaprio.

 

 

 

I only had that problem with Love Today but only the radio edit / the video version.

I remember being rather disappointed about the way they edited it as it clearly just focused on the falsetto parts while I loved the version I first heard of it before the album release (his live performance at Virgin Radio) and the short original version ().

I always considered LT a great song and loved the parts where he is basically speaking and shouting. I found it a pity how that was basically edited out in short versions.

What I have grown to love about Mika's music is that he will use (maybe) two, or three different versions of the same song. Like with WAG, there is the recorded version, then an accoustic version, then also the live version with the extra bit at the beginning. He's done stuff like that with other songs of his. Recently he put a little bit extra on the end of Happy Endings. So his music is never static, it's always fluid and ever changing.

He's amazing!!

[sienna]

What I have grown to love about Mika's music is that he will use (maybe) two, or three different versions of the same song. Like with WAG, there is the recorded version, then an accoustic version, then also the live version with the extra bit at the beginning. He's done stuff like that with other songs of his. Recently he put a little bit extra on the end of Happy Endings. So his music is never static, it's always fluid and ever changing.

He's amazing!!

 

Oh you're absolutely right I really agree!

 

That is why you can listen to his music over and over again, like a mad teenage-girl:naughty: and when you get tired of one version it's time to pick up another one!

[laura*]

What I have grown to love about Mika's music is that he will use (maybe) two, or three different versions of the same song. Like with WAG, there is the recorded version, then an accoustic version, then also the live version with the extra bit at the beginning. He's done stuff like that with other songs of his. Recently he put a little bit extra on the end of Happy Endings. So his music is never static, it's always fluid and ever changing.

He's amazing!!

 

More than the different versions, I like the fact that sooner or later the original song written for piano and voice comes up and it is usually even more beautiful than the album track. I loved the bit of Blue Eyes he played during the interview in his flat and I still love the PDP Rain, sung like a real song for sorrow.

[Siu]

More than the different versions, I like the fact that sooner or later the original song written for piano and voice comes up and it is usually even more beautiful than the album track. I loved the bit of Blue Eyes he played during the interview in his flat and I still love the PDP Rain, sung like a real song for sorrow.

 

I totally agree! Before I ever new anything about I See You, I loved the demo version I'm Falling. I still prefer it to the CD version. The few notes on the piano, especially at the beginning, and the voice - it's so simple, yet expressive.

 

There's another song, which is not on either of the albums that is so minimal and so beautiful! As much as I wish it found it's proper place on a future album I don't want anything in the song to change.

 

I know MIKA's demos are often very minimal and he elaborates them during the recording process, but in very many cases, although the final result is a lot more sophisticated and layered and thus more intriguing, I find the simpler version so much better.

 

I totally agree on the interview bit of Blue Eyes, which simply took my breath away when I first saw it, as well as the acoustic version of Rain. In the CD version there are layers that you notice only when you have listened to the song for dozens of times and you think you know every note in it. Nevertheless, the acoustic (or even the a capella) version IMO is much better in many ways. The pace is slower and you don't just go along with the beat, but have time to enjoy the voice (especially in the a capella version) and notice the message of the song already the first times you listen to it.

[Siu]

A little EDIT to my last post: just finished watching Rain in Live @ home - no CD version, no a capella, no acoustic or concert version will ever be more perfect than that.

[Dreamy_Queen]

A little EDIT to my last post: just finished watching Rain in Live @ home - no CD version, no a capella, no acoustic or concert version will ever be more perfect than that.

 

Live @Home - is the most perfect performance, as for me. Relax is just killing! And OFB acoustic - it's something impossible.

Moreover, I admire how they cooperate, work as a whole united mechanism (I dunno if you understand it - sounds not like English). How he turns to iMMa and shows by signs how to sing next bit.

It is utter perfection

[Siu]

Live @Home - is the most perfect performance, as for me. Relax is just killing! And OFB acoustic - it's something impossible.

Moreover, I admire how they cooperate, work as a whole united mechanism (I dunno if you understand it - sounds not like English). How he turns to iMMa and shows by signs how to sing next bit.

It is utter perfection

 

I watched only bits and pieces last night, cause it was already sooo late (or actually rather early in the morning ) when I found it. Now I've downloaded it and cant wait until everybody's off to bed tonight. Big cup of coffee to keep me awake (though I think I won't really need it cause I already have an adrenaline rush every time I think of the vid) and a cup of hot chocolate for the final five minutes. Mmmm, I'm going to have the bestest night! Only 12 more hours and then!

 

It was there all the time without me knowing about it and now I have it on my hard disc! Can life get any better!?

[suzie]

In Estonian there's a saying that a child's mouth doesn't lie, meaning that they're too innocent to be able to lie, that they say what they mean without trying to varnish it.

 

Why I'm telling this? Because when I started listening to MIKA's music my two young children often asked me, who's the woman singing or why is the man singing with a woman's voice.

 

We have that saying, too, but I wonder what point that proves. If you show them a picture of Michael Jackson, they are likely to say that it is a woman and if you ever exposed them to a baroque opera aria they’d also say it is a woman singing. It is not that Mika is not aware that not everyone is pleased to listen to his falsetto.

 

 

When I discovered MIKA I wanted to share it with everyone and it doesn't bother me when somebody mocks me because of this "high-voiced", "possibly-gay" ""queen" of pop" or whatever, because I just don't care!

 

Yes, luckily everyone on MFC seems to have overcome this.

 

I know MIKA's demos are often very minimal and he elaborates them during the recording process, but in very many cases, although the final result is a lot more sophisticated and layered and thus more intriguing, I find the simpler version so much better.

 

I quoted you because I wanted to come back on this topic but not sure who exactly said that in general acoustic versions are better. I’d only say that they are different.

 

At the same time, I get what you all mean by saying that the recorded version of a song can be a bit of a disappointment vs earlier heard demo / concert / acoustic versions ( the latter recorded at a radio show, for example). I do understand that some of his simple but beautiful songs (e.g. I See You) needed to be made into a more radio / listener friendly version that have the capability to attract a wider audience. I like the recorded version of I See You but I am so pleased to have heard the original, too, which I actually prefer, too.

 

To me, all these multi-layers added to recorded versions only become useless and counter-productive when you actually have a brilliant idea and you completely destroy it by overthinking it. A typical example to me was WAG, BIOTG and Rain on the second album. I had big expectations from these songs in terms of the music (not the melody) after I heard some bits in his vlog but the actual result disappointed me as you need to ’look for’ the gospel choir in WAG, the violin pizzicato in Rain and even the clapping does not play a significant part in BIOTG – all the computer sounds just destroy what I thought would be a more acoustic sound in these songs

[laura*]

To me, all these multi-layers added to recorded versions only become useless and counter-productive when you actually have a brilliant idea and you completely destroy it by overthinking it. A typical example to me was WAG, BIOTG and Rain on the second album. I had big expectations from these songs in terms of the music (not the melody) after I heard some bits in his vlog but the actual result disappointed me as you need to ’look for’ the gospel choir in WAG, the violin pizzicato in Rain and even the clapping does not play a significant part in BIOTG – all the computer sounds just destroy what I thought would be a more acoustic sound in these songs

 

It sounds just perfect to me!

I love the fact that all the tiny details are mixed and you discover them slowly one at a time. At the beginning I used to hear something new during each listening session.

[sariflor]

I quoted you because I wanted to come back on this topic but not sure who exactly said that in general acoustic versions are better. I’d only say that they are different.

 

At the same time, I get what you all mean by saying that the recorded version of a song can be a bit of a disappointment vs earlier heard demo / concert / acoustic versions ( the latter recorded at a radio show, for example). I do understand that some of his simple but beautiful songs (e.g. I See You) needed to be made into a more radio / listener friendly version that have the capability to attract a wider audience. I like the recorded version of I See You but I am so pleased to have heard the original, too, which I actually prefer, too.

 

To me, all these multi-layers added to recorded versions only become useless and counter-productive when you actually have a brilliant idea and you completely destroy it by overthinking it. A typical example to me was WAG, BIOTG and Rain on the second album. I had big expectations from these songs in terms of the music (not the melody) after I heard some bits in his vlog but the actual result disappointed me as you need to ’look for’ the gospel choir in WAG, the violin pizzicato in Rain and even the clapping does not play a significant part in BIOTG – all the computer sounds just destroy what I thought would be a more acoustic sound in these songs

 

Yes, I totally agree with this. If you have to really try hard in order to find something in the song, IMO it's not worth it. It should be apparent and spring out to you. Simpler, cleaner lines are much nicer in my opinion, when someone has a beautiful powerful voice like Mika. He doesn't need all these gimmicks that other singers (mediocre ones) use to hide the fact that their voice or singing ability is not up to par.

He has a strong voice that is beautiful on its own. He doesn't need these extras.

[sienna]

 

I quoted you because I wanted to come back on this topic but not sure who exactly said that in general acoustic versions are better. I’d only say that they are different.

 

At the same time, I get what you all mean by saying that the recorded version of a song can be a bit of a disappointment vs earlier heard demo / concert / acoustic versions ( the latter recorded at a radio show, for example). I do understand that some of his simple but beautiful songs (e.g. I See You) needed to be made into a more radio / listener friendly version that have the capability to attract a wider audience. I like the recorded version of I See You but I am so pleased to have heard the original, too, which I actually prefer, too.

 

To me, all these multi-layers added to recorded versions only become useless and counter-productive when you actually have a brilliant idea and you completely destroy it by overthinking it. A typical example to me was WAG, BIOTG and Rain on the second album. I had big expectations from these songs in terms of the music (not the melody) after I heard some bits in his vlog but the actual result disappointed me as you need to ’look for’ the gospel choir in WAG, the violin pizzicato in Rain and even the clapping does not play a significant part in BIOTG – all the computer sounds just destroy what I thought would be a more acoustic sound in these songs

 

Yes, I totally agree with this. If you have to really try hard in order to find something in the song, IMO it's not worth it. It should be apparent and spring out to you. Simpler, cleaner lines are much nicer in my opinion, when someone has a beautiful powerful voice like Mika. He doesn't need all these gimmicks that other singers (mediocre ones) use to hide the fact that their voice or singing ability is not up to par.

He has a strong voice that is beautiful on its own. He doesn't need these extras.

 

Just one word: I agree!

[Dreamy_Queen]

But, in spite of hiding a great voice, as you told, some music places sound very powerful like in I See You. I think orchestra places in the songs are totally right. Clear voice is good, I greatly enjoy Lonely Alcoholic and Lady Jane, but the songs have to be DIFFERENT. I was nuts about acoustic WAG with different beginning, but is there would be only this WAG, the word would be poorer it ix great that various versions of the same song exist, but I can't agree that album versions are worse.

[Marilyn Mastin]

We have that saying, too, but I wonder what point that proves. If you show them a picture of Michael Jackson, they are likely to say that it is a woman and if you ever exposed them to a baroque opera aria they’d also say it is a woman singing. It is not that Mika is not aware that not everyone is pleased to listen to his falsetto.

 

 

 

 

Yes, luckily everyone on MFC seems to have overcome this.

 

 

 

I quoted you because I wanted to come back on this topic but not sure who exactly said that in general acoustic versions are better. I’d only say that they are different.

 

At the same time, I get what you all mean by saying that the recorded version of a song can be a bit of a disappointment vs earlier heard demo / concert / acoustic versions ( the latter recorded at a radio show, for example). I do understand that some of his simple but beautiful songs (e.g. I See You) needed to be made into a more radio / listener friendly version that have the capability to attract a wider audience. I like the recorded version of I See You but I am so pleased to have heard the original, too, which I actually prefer, too.

 

To me, all these multi-layers added to recorded versions only become useless and counter-productive when you actually have a brilliant idea and you completely destroy it by overthinking it. A typical example to me was WAG, BIOTG and Rain on the second album. I had big expectations from these songs in terms of the music (not the melody) after I heard some bits in his vlog but the actual result disappointed me as you need to ’look for’ the gospel choir in WAG, the violin pizzicato in Rain and even the clapping does not play a significant part in BIOTG – all the computer sounds just destroy what I thought would be a more acoustic sound in these songs

Agreed! But Mika is gaining experience and is learning about what works. Which is why I think his new album will be more stripped down.

For me, the most disappointing song on the 2nd album was BIOTG. But for me, it's because the chorus lets it down. It's okay for the singing contests he encourages at the shows, but for a hit single, it was never going to make it.

Blame it on the giiiiiirls

Blame it on the booooooys

Blame it on the giiiiiiirls

Blame it on the boooooooys.

The fact that Rain and BIOTG failed to make it in the UK, could be, at least, a part of the reasong that KA was never given a chance. If KA had come out on the back of a couple of hits (eg: Good Gone Girl and Touches You) I think they might have played KA, and maybe also ISY which was also sadly lost because it was included with KA.

[Mika4Life13]

I hate when people cast him off as a one hit wonder, when they have heard both grace kelly and relax played on the radio numerous times

 

Not to mention the weird fact nearly everyone I've met has heard lollipop and/or big girl

[Marilyn Mastin]

I hate when people cast him off as a one hit wonder, when they have heard both grace kelly and relax played on the radio numerous times

 

Not to mention the weird fact nearly everyone I've met has heard lollipop and/or big girl

I remember telling someone about Mika once and she'd never heard of him. So I started humming Grace Kelly and she hadn't heard that. I tried singing Love Today and Happy Ending and she still hadn't got a clue. So then I went "Big girl, you are beautiful!" She's like... "Oh wow, you mean HIM! We play that song to the kids on the bus every day (she escorts kids with special needs to their school every day) and they love it!!!" Is that really Mika? I said, "Yes it is."

She really loves him now.

[Shine]

I remember telling someone about Mika once and she'd never heard of him. So I started humming Grace Kelly and she hadn't heard that. I tried singing Love Today and Happy Ending and she still hadn't got a clue. So then I went "Big girl, you are beautiful!" She's like... "Oh wow, you mean HIM! We play that song to the kids on the bus every day (she escorts kids with special needs to their school every day) and they love it!!!" Is that really Mika? I said, "Yes it is."

She really loves him now.

 

I must say that apart from "Relax", I became his music fan not so much due to GK, but "Any Other World", "Happy Ending" and "Big Girl". GK sounded perfectly to me, but as some new, modern opera piece and quite remarkable lyrics.

And I have to used to Love Today, I admit. They played it here every day in the summer 2007 and after being watching the video, I was totally in love with it. Keti's got back from UK in November 2007 and she was quite infected with that tune. The rest is history