Now I hope that what I write doesn't sound offending to you, Padmachou, as it's in no way meant to decrease what you enjoy - I don't intend to take your fun away. It's just my opinion.
To begin with, I have always had a general problem with interpretations of Libera originals other than by Libera itself. Even if a cover is quite good, I just can't help feeling reluctance, watching over their songs to remain solely belonging to them. As if it was a sacrilege.
Like, for example, theoretically I'd love to sing their songs in a choir, but I'd never
actually suggest it there. Less for doubts how it would turn out, but because I consider these songs as Libera's own. And if our conductor brought one of their songs to sing it with us, I would feel that above opposition against it.
Okay, this is probably just me. I'm very puristic about them.
Regarding Daniel Chien, I have to agree with Surpinto. He can sing, but I think that, if he wants to publish something on YouTube sung by him, it should be something with more distinct elements that come from him. If that makes sense?
However, what makes me angry, is the video of "If" (and I'm aware that Libera's version is a cover itself). Libera has not yet published the concert recording, and he or whoever does these videos with/for him puts concert material of a brandnew song on Youtube with his voice before Libera does. This would never come to my mind - why didn't he wait? I also find the form of this video misleading: He does properly credit who is singing. That's completely fine. But the way he, as a co-singer, is placed in the video, draws the viewer's eyes on Libera's Daniel more than on him, and someone who isn't familiar with it, assigns the wrong voice to Daniel White. I feel sorry for Daniel W. in the moment I see that.
If Libera explicitly permitted the video, I take all of this back, of course.
I understand that he would love to be a part of Libera and yes, that's stirring! But in my opinion there are better ways.
I'm sorry, Padma.
[Edited bc. of a typo in the name and for more clarity of the two Daniels]