The change in Eddie's voice

PJamGrungeFan

mookeywrench wrote:

Jennytree wrote:

Does anyone sound the same after 20-odd years?

Thurston Moore, Stephen Malkmus, Mike Ness, Rivers Cuomo, Billie Joe Armstrong, J. Mascis

to add to that....Geddy Lee, Bruce Dickinson, Lemmy Kilmister, Chuck Billy (for the most part)

The Rock

The voice debate....it never ends.

His deep baritone from the ealy 90s was great on some songs, but Ed just couldn't control it during the live shows. 1991-1993 was pretty rough in terms of vocals a lot of the time because although Ed was super intense and in the moment he just wasn't paying attention to his singing. Some of it could be classed as just shouting.

He really learned how to control the deep howl in 1994, resulting in classic shows where he could sing and growl like a madman. However, by 94/95 it was becoming cliched and its clear he knew that something had to be done. 1995 seems to be the year where Ed was intentionally trying to wreck his voice completely.

In 1996 he calmed down and realised he could actually 'sing' which is were we heard the much softer tones come through which I personally love.

I remember reading an interview where Ed said that before 1996 he wasn't singing properly and that from 96-98 he took the time to actually learn how to sing.

His voice now is great. He has shaky moments and off nights, but so does every other singer in the world. Hearing songs like Jeremy is still a nostalgic experience because of where the song comes from in the band's career. It doesn't need to have Eddie trying to sound like he did in the 90s, that would be very sad.


There are certain shows that most here consider classic - shows such as Pinkpop 1992 and Soldier Field 1995. Now, I know it can't just be me that listens to those shows and cringes a little. They might be classic because of the context of the era and the intensity of the band, but Ed sounds like hell for most of those shows.

LikeAnOcean

PJamGrungeFan wrote:

I wasn't comparing his voice from 89 - 2009 :roll:

I was comparing it from 92/93 to the late 90's (96-99). believe it or not, yes, some singers maintain their singing style over the course of 4 years

He stopped forcing his voice. He sang with an odd style early on that became mimicked by others. He began to sing much more naturaly from No Code on. He also has much more range.

pearl spam

yeah i think ed's voice in the early days is amazing! dont get me wrong his voice now aint too shabby, but just not as good as the early days. imo

Fahka

I love how all of you think you KNOW what happend to vedwards voice * rolls eyes*... Its called aging.. Also.. vedder himself said he hadn't really found his "voice" yet during the first two records... Very douchey thread to put on the porch (or anywhere for that matter)if you ask me... totally useless , uninformative and just rude.

Yuksel

Re: The change in Eddie's voice
by PJamGrungeFan » Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:30 pm

Eh, I'd rather him be pigeonheld to that signature Vedder howl then to what he does now (overly shaky vocals)

Do you think he still has the ability to sing like he use to if he really tried? it'd be great for nostalgic purposes to hear Jeremy sung like it was in the early days!

I totally agree

doompony

i was listening to the auckland boot yesterday *swoon* and how anyone can listen to the way he sounds on just breathe and say he doesn't sound as good as he did in the early days is cuckoo bananas. it's beautiful and tender and rich and like a blanket. snuggletonny.

PJamGrungeFan

LeatherMandi wrote:

I love how all of you think you KNOW what happend to vedwards voice * rolls eyes*... Its called aging.. Also.. vedder himself said he hadn't really found his "voice" yet during the first two records... Very douchey thread to put on the porch (or anywhere for that matter)if you ask me... totally useless , uninformative and just rude.

If anyone's being "douchey" in this thread, it's you. The porch is a place where we DISCUSS all things related to the band. If you don't like the subject matter of the topic, you don't have to respond.

mookeywrench

PJamGrungeFan wrote:

LeatherMandi wrote:

I love how all of you think you KNOW what happend to vedwards voice * rolls eyes*... Its called aging.. Also.. vedder himself said he hadn't really found his "voice" yet during the first two records... Very douchey thread to put on the porch (or anywhere for that matter)if you ask me... totally useless , uninformative and just rude.

If anyone's being "douchey" in this thread, it's you. The porch is a place where we DISCUSS all things related to the band. If you don't like the subject matter of the topic, you don't have to respond.

yeah this whole thread has been a neutral discussion, no one gave any negative connotations to either side of his voice, only preferences.

Not to mention Leathermandi that your post is sort of contradictory in itself. You imply that we don't have the right to act as though we can give any input to his voice, but then your next sentences do nothing but give input on Vedder's voice.

Fahka

PJamGrungeFan wrote:

LeatherMandi wrote:

I love how all of you think you KNOW what happend to vedwards voice * rolls eyes*... Its called aging.. Also.. vedder himself said he hadn't really found his "voice" yet during the first two records... Very douchey thread to put on the porch (or anywhere for that matter)if you ask me... totally useless , uninformative and just rude.

If anyone's being "douchey" in this thread, it's you. The porch is a place where we DISCUSS all things related to the band. If you don't like the subject matter of the topic, you don't have to respond.

yeah since im the one offending someone who probably reads this board or at least gets wind of it.. I just don't get it.. like.. discussing eds voice is gonna bring back the version you like again? Just call me captain douche pants i guess... Just because your not saying something horrible doesnt mean it isn't offensive.. I mean if this was my voice you guys were discussing.. id be more than a lil upset.. thats all im saying..

PJamGrungeFan

Right...

Shouldn't you be trolling the Vs. sheep thread?

ReachingForThinAir

it's called diaphragmatic breath control. He learned it.

He can hold notes a lot longer. He can reach higher and lower.
He can growl better. Gems and Rhinestones.

'tis a richer version nowadays.

PJamGrungeFan

ReachingForThinAir wrote:

it's called diaphragmatic breath control. He learned it.

He can hold notes a lot longer. He can reach higher and lower.
He can growl better. Gems and Rhinestones.

'tis a richer version nowadays.

I totally disagree. Give me an example of a song he growls better in now than he did back then.

and obviously he can get lower...seeing as your voice deepens as you get older.

Chris Fisher

agreed LeatherMandi. Eddie's voice is different now. No doubt. But I find it hard to believe that a vocal style that has adapted, matured and yes, changed over the course of one of the most remarkable careers in music history could be degraded. I love Eddie's early 90's voice-- but there is something about the raw, sratchy style of No Code and beyond that is just so musically original.

That being said, amen Love Reign O'er Me.

And how about In Hiding, Amongst The Waves, Crazy Mary (live), Just Breath.

Just because its not the same, doesn't mean its not as a good.

I love Eddie Vedder!

InHerOwnWorld

Yes it has changed and I think it sounds better then ever.

Newch91

ReachingForThinAir wrote:

it's called diaphragmatic breath control. He learned it.

He can hold notes a lot longer. He can reach higher and lower.
He can growl better. Gems and Rhinestones.

'tis a richer version nowadays.

The part where you mentioned hold notes a lot longer. Correct me if I'm wrong, but "Black" from MSG 1 in 2003 where he holds that note in the lines "...Tatooed all I see/All I am/All I'll beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...HOLY SHIT! I thought that was best thing I've heard in Black since Unplugged. That's one of the reasons why I love his voice now.

marinebionerd

craigb wrote:

bettielee wrote:

I still think he has the most amazing voice in all of rockdom.

Amen. :thumbup:

amen and then some. i love how his voice has matured; it has gained so much depth and character. his voice has suited him through every "era" i think. one of the many things that draws so many people to these guys is that they've never been, and never will be, anything but themselves, take it or leave it. why try to do your 25 year old voice when you're 45 (almost ;-) )? if you do, that's exactly how it will sound - forced. sing your 45 year old ass off in the voice you've gained from 20 years of living life. the passion and intensity come through regardless. he sounded amazing and spot on in philly. i fell in love with those pipes all over again that night. and when he pulls out the growling, screaming, raspy, sexy, whatever you call it, it rocks even harder now, because his voice is always in the present tense. :thumbup:

Princess KJ

Well, I've just listened to my Brisbane boot, and have to say Ed's voice was amazing. I don't know if it was because he was still recovering from the flu, but there was a really special quality to it.

He also managed a mini-growl in the first line of Got Some.

Can't we all just agree he is a man of many talents, and that's why we all love him?

rival.

PJamGrungeFan wrote:

this performance makes me cringe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0fFOfoPrsk&fmt=18

fuck, i couldn't make it through that!

mookeywrench

singularity wrote:

PJamGrungeFan wrote:

this performance makes me cringe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0fFOfoPrsk&fmt=18

fuck, i couldn't make it through that!

about a week and a half before that, he had a flu which then turned into strep throat.