Despite the ridiculous and far-fetched attempt at lending innocence to little more than another attack on Ozzy as a performer and vocalist by "innocent" posters on this site (regurgitating an idiotic article as if that makes things credible), this discussion points to the obvious question. Grab your Diet Coke and Raisonets guys, this is interesting.
Is a voice that has been classically trained better than one that is not? What makes a superior rock singer and star? Does it matter if they are trained? Is there something MORE ... something undefined, magic ... that has to be present for fans to connect? What makes a voice captivate? Timbre? Enunciation? It's ability to convey emotion? Can a voice be separated from the entire body it's connected to or is perception of the voice a function of total body perception? Hmmm. Good questions. All. And Gates, will you PLEASE scale that graphic? It's sooooooooooooo annoying. Where your image is embedded, use something like this [img height=200 and close the bracket. I can't show you that or it will disappear and expect an image here in this text.
I'll believe it the day Ozzy sings a real love song. ::animatedlaugh