Arguments like this are usually unresolvable.    We all like what we like, don't like what we don't like, and find it hard to see why others don't agree with us. Beyond that, there's not much more to say. Nevertheless, there are a few points I'd like to contribute to the discussion.

Shirley Collins was a professional singer for many years. She did a lot of gigs, made a lot of broadcasts, recorded a lot of disks. It's true (and hardly surprising) that some of these were not as good as others. But anyone who's ever performed in public knows how easily a whole range of factors – from inexperience, poor choice of material and limited rehearsal time, to coughs, colds, and sore throats - can produce a less than perfect result.

So, we should not judge performers by occasional weak performances, but by the quality of their very best efforts. By those standards, Shirley deserves respect – even from those who do not find her voice, her delivery or her repertoire appealing. Her best work (for example on "Anthems in Eden", or "No Roses") has won critical acclaim and enduring popularity - as countless reviews, and the regular re-issues of her records testify.

And yes, for what it's worth, I do like her singing. I play her records frequently, and would cheerfully pay to hear her performing live if she were still doing gigs. But that's a matter of personal taste, and I have no quarrel with anyone who thinks differently.

Wassail!