Shimrod, you might wait until that actually happens before you run out and lynch Sting.

I don't think anybody said anything about "innovative." But Sting's venture into this music will certainly make it better known to a wider range of people who would find his singing of it more palatable than the singing of, say, Peter Pears. And it has made it more accessible to singers such as myself, who, I admit, was perhaps a bit intimidated by the fact that the songs of Dowland and other Renaissance composers are heard sung only by classically trained tenors and counter-tenors, so assume that my deeper voice is not suitable for this kind of song.

I don't mean this as any kind of put-down to Sting, but hearing him sing these songs and bringing them off nicely, I ask myself, "Well, if he can do it, why can't I?"

There you have it.

It's interesting to note that often the same people who say that Sting's voice is wrong for these songs are the same people who run out and up-chuck at the mention of Richard Dyer-Bennet, whose voice would conventionally be considered perfect for these songs.

Since when should a particular type of music be limited to a small, select coterie? And why should a particular popular singer be bad-mouthed because he has the guts to follow his own musical interests wherever they lead him and breaks the mold in the process? Just because he's best known for one type of music, why should he be restricted to doing only that? Who makes these rules, anyway?

Perhaps Sting's recording will precipitate a renaissance of interest in Renaissance songs.

And perhaps that's innovative after all.

Don Firth