Euphoria Morning was fucking brilliant and "Wave Goodbye" is one of the most beautiful songs I've ever heard (add onto that "Preaching the End.." and maybe "When I'm Down").
I really like his solo album. I like the first Audioslave album but I'd prefer either a solo album or a soundgarden reunion to what he is currently doing. I really hope his new solo album is good. I have heard there is a cover of billy jean on it....
Euphoria Morning was fucking brilliant and "Wave Goodbye" is one of the most beautiful songs I've ever heard (add onto that "Preaching the End.." and maybe "When I'm Down").
And let me guess... "Show Me the Meaning of Being Lonely" is beautiful too?
Just kidding with ya. I'm not a huge EM fan, that's all. No need for name-calling. You must have missed the post a couple scrolls down where I actually gave credit to the album where it was due.
It's a town full of losers and I'm pulling out of here to win
Haha, as predicted this thread has turned into a total free for all for people insulting each others' musical tastes.
What I will say, is that Cornell has sold millions of albums with EVERY band he's been with, he is highly revered by other artists and critics and usually hits the top five in polls for best rock singers. Furthermore, he has sung many different styles of music through his career showing a great versatility in his voice. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, and I in no way think my opinion is more valid than anbody else's, but to say the guy 'sucks' or is 'talentless' is complete and utter bull shit. I wonder why people enter into such debate armed with the only defense of "well it sounds shit to me'. Seriously, have a go at singing along to something like Say hello to heaven, or Birth Ritual. You might hate both songs, but it takes an AMAZING amount of power, range, and control to sing in such a way. You know, I don't much care for opera music, but I wouldn't say 'Pavarotti sucks' - it would just make me sound like I have no idea what I'm talking about.
From where I'm sitting, it seems a lot of people can't differentiate between Chris Cornell the singer, Chris Cornell the songwriter and Chris Cornell the performer. Fair enough his vocal style might not be everybody's cup of tea, his songs might not do anything for you, or you may just find the guy 'smug' or 'arrogant' (as I've seen some people say in the past), but the fact remains, that in the most traditional translation of the word 'talent', at his peak he was virtually untouchable.
Haha, as predicted this thread has turned into a total free for all for people insulting each others' musical tastes.
What I will say, is that Cornell has sold millions of albums with EVERY band he's been with, he is highly revered by other artists and critics and usually hits the top five in polls for best rock singers. Furthermore, he has sung many different styles of music through his career showing a great versatility in his voice. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, and I in no way think my opinion is more valid than anbody else's, but to say the guy 'sucks' or is 'talentless' is complete and utter bull shit. I wonder why people enter into such debate armed with the only defense of "well it sounds shit to me'. Seriously, have a go at singing along to something like Say hello to heaven, or Birth Ritual. You might hate both songs, but it takes an AMAZING amount of power, range, and control to sing in such a way. You know, I don't much care for opera music, but I wouldn't say 'Pavarotti sucks' - it would just make me sound like I have no idea what I'm talking about.
From where I'm sitting, it seems a lot of people can't differentiate between Chris Cornell the singer, Chris Cornell the songwriter and Chris Cornell the performer. Fair enough his vocal style might not be everybody's cup of tea, his songs might not do anything for you, or you may just find the guy 'smug' or 'arrogant' (as I've seen some people say in the past), but the fact remains, that in the most traditional translation of the word 'talent', at his peak he was virtually untouchable.
perfect response to a pointless thread
“Life is life everywhere. Life is in ourselves and not outside us. There will be men beside me, and the important thing is to be a man among men and to remain a man always, whatever the misfortunes, not to despair and not to fall - that is the aim of life, that is its purpose.”
Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Haha, as predicted this thread has turned into a total free for all for people insulting each others' musical tastes.
What I will say, is that Cornell has sold millions of albums with EVERY band he's been with, he is highly revered by other artists and critics and usually hits the top five in polls for best rock singers. Furthermore, he has sung many different styles of music through his career showing a great versatility in his voice. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, and I in no way think my opinion is more valid than anbody else's, but to say the guy 'sucks' or is 'talentless' is complete and utter bull shit. I wonder why people enter into such debate armed with the only defense of "well it sounds shit to me'. Seriously, have a go at singing along to something like Say hello to heaven, or Birth Ritual. You might hate both songs, but it takes an AMAZING amount of power, range, and control to sing in such a way. You know, I don't much care for opera music, but I wouldn't say 'Pavarotti sucks' - it would just make me sound like I have no idea what I'm talking about.
From where I'm sitting, it seems a lot of people can't differentiate between Chris Cornell the singer, Chris Cornell the songwriter and Chris Cornell the performer. Fair enough his vocal style might not be everybody's cup of tea, his songs might not do anything for you, or you may just find the guy 'smug' or 'arrogant' (as I've seen some people say in the past), but the fact remains, that in the most traditional translation of the word 'talent', at his peak he was virtually untouchable.
THANK YOU!!!!!!! might I add that smug and arrogant are descriptives best suited for peorple who ACTUALLY KNOW the person...not occassional listeners or fans.
IF YOU WANT A PLATE OF MY BEEF SWELLINGTON, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THE COVERCHARGE.
Haha, as predicted this thread has turned into a total free for all for people insulting each others' musical tastes.
What I will say, is that Cornell has sold millions of albums with EVERY band he's been with, he is highly revered by other artists and critics and usually hits the top five in polls for best rock singers. Furthermore, he has sung many different styles of music through his career showing a great versatility in his voice. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, and I in no way think my opinion is more valid than anbody else's, but to say the guy 'sucks' or is 'talentless' is complete and utter bull shit. I wonder why people enter into such debate armed with the only defense of "well it sounds shit to me'. Seriously, have a go at singing along to something like Say hello to heaven, or Birth Ritual. You might hate both songs, but it takes an AMAZING amount of power, range, and control to sing in such a way. You know, I don't much care for opera music, but I wouldn't say 'Pavarotti sucks' - it would just make me sound like I have no idea what I'm talking about.
From where I'm sitting, it seems a lot of people can't differentiate between Chris Cornell the singer, Chris Cornell the songwriter and Chris Cornell the performer. Fair enough his vocal style might not be everybody's cup of tea, his songs might not do anything for you, or you may just find the guy 'smug' or 'arrogant' (as I've seen some people say in the past), but the fact remains, that in the most traditional translation of the word 'talent', at his peak he was virtually untouchable.
and i have stated repeatedly that i think he's a decent songwriter, and a decent person, that i have no idea what technical ability is or means, but that i cant stand the sound of his voice. where did i ever claim my opinion was fact?
and i have stated repeatedly that i think he's a decent songwriter, and a decent person, that i have no idea what technical ability is or means, but that i cant stand the sound of his voice. where did i ever claim my opinion was fact?
If you have no idea what technical ability (in terms of singing) is, may I suggest you aren't best equipped to be passing judgement on somebody's ability to sing. For the record, I quite clearly stated in more than one post EXACTLY why people rate him as a singer (range/power/control), this was merely a rebuttal of the claim that he was overrated. As a technical singer (sorry if you don't understand that term) he is not overrated at all. If someone doesn't like his vocal tone, or songwriting abilities, that is a completely separate issue, and to that I would say, 'whatever butters your muffin'.
Who cares about technical ability, vocal control, range, power, blah, blah, blah...when you can't stand the sound of someone's voice?
Simply "can't stand the sound of his voice". That alone should draw a conclusion to this thread.
Way to miss the point.........
Had the original post said "I can't stand the way his voice sounds", I doubt I would have posted anything in this thread. But when somebody brings into doubt whether he can sing or not based on not liking his vocal tone, I find it hard not to react - since tone has nothing to do with whether someone is a 'good' singer.
If you have no idea what technical ability (in terms of singing) is, may I suggest you aren't best equipped to be passing judgement on somebody's ability to sing. For the record, I quite clearly stated in more than one post EXACTLY why people rate him as a singer (range/power/control), this was merely a rebuttal of the claim that he was overrated. As a technical singer (sorry if you don't understand that term) he is not overrated at all. If someone doesn't like his vocal tone, or songwriting abilities, that is a completely separate issue, and to that I would say, 'whatever butters your muffin'.
once again, where did i ever comment on his ability to sing? i said i cant stand the sound of his voice.
Who cares about technical ability, vocal control, range, power, blah, blah, blah...when you can't stand the sound of someone's voice?
Simply "can't stand the sound of his voice". That alone should draw a conclusion to this thread.
why not? people dismiss u2 becos they had a song in a commercial. dismiss creed becos of the sound of his voice. dismiss modest mouse becos they're too weird. how is subjective taste somehow an irrational grounds for disliking a particular musician?
why not? people dismiss u2 becos they had a song in a commercial. dismiss creed becos of the sound of his voice. dismiss modest mouse becos they're too weird. how is subjective taste somehow an irrational grounds for disliking a particular musician?
i got the impression "Who cares about technical ability, vocal control, range, power, blah, blah, blah...when you can't stand the sound of someone's voice?" was supposed to be kinda sarcastic. like who needs talent? if you were being serious, then you're right, that has basically been my point. you can have all the technical ability in the world, but if it doesn't reach people it doesn't matter. conversely, you can be limited in your abilities but still shake people up (kurt cobain on guitar, ringo starr on drums).
and the whole technical ability thing really lost weight with me when my ex-gf said ed was a horrible singer and incapable of singing on key. i dont know if she was right or not (anyone?) but once i heard her say it i decided id never give a fuck what anybody said about a particular musician's technical ability.
and the whole technical ability thing really lost weight with me when my ex-gf said ed was a horrible singer and incapable of singing on key. i dont know if she was right or not (anyone?) but once i heard her say it i decided id never give a fuck what anybody said about a particular musician's technical ability.
I suspect your ex was talking about from a technical stance, i.e ed may not have the best technique in the world. And by your reasoning, you are denying the existence of vocal talent. I absolutely 100% agree that an amazing voice shouldn't be what defines a performer's talent - some of my favourite singers are very average singers, but they have plenty of other things going for them. It just pisses me off when people won't even acknowledge somebody's talent. It's like denying a certain footballer is a good player despite the fact they have scored the most goals in a season.
If the original poster wanted to make a more interesting post they should have said why they think his voice sucks, rather than just making inflammatory remarks.
I think it's juvenile (100x) to use the word "sucks" without quantifying it. He has talent, he has moved and inspired a good number of people I know, artists and whatnot. I think I have enough reason to say... he's talented!
I think it's juvenile (100x) to use the word "sucks" without quantifying it. He has talent, he has moved and inspired a good number of people I know, artists and whatnot. I think I have enough reason to say... he's talented!
Good point. But I said "I think" he sucks. Sorry, I just don't like his voice. Different strokes for different folks.
Good point. But I said "I think" he sucks. Sorry, I just don't like his voice. Different strokes for different folks.
Just to clarify-
"I don't like his voice" and "His voice sucks" are not synonymous.
"I don't like his voice" - Very straightfoward, means what it says, is a reflection of opinion.
"I think his voice sucks" - That has nothing to do with opinion, the quality of ones voice is judged on a number of things such as range, power, technical ability etc AND regardless of whether or not you like his voice, his high ranking in the aforementioned categories is undeniable. I MUCH PREFER Eds voice yet if I were to say he had a BETTER voice I'd be lying, he doesn't, despite the fact that I'd take Ed's voice over ornell's anyday.
Hopefully this is a case of you misunderstanding your words, cause if you seriously believe he can't sing, well it's confusing.
~*~*~*~*PROUD EVENFLOW PSYCHO #0026~*~*~*~*
*^*^*^*^*^*^*^RED MOSQUITO #2^*^*^*^*^*^*^*
Dublin 08/06
Katowice 06/07 London 06/07 Dusseldorf 06/07 Nijgemen 06/07
"I don't like his voice" and "His voice sucks" are not synonymous.
"I don't like his voice" - Very straightfoward, means what it says, is a reflection of opinion.
"I think his voice sucks" - That has nothing to do with opinion, the quality of ones voice is judged on a number of things such as range, power, technical ability etc AND regardless of whether or not you like his voice, his high ranking in the aforementioned categories is undeniable. I MUCH PREFER Eds voice yet if I were to say he had a BETTER voice I'd be lying, he doesn't, despite the fact that I'd take Ed's voice over ornell's anyday.
Hopefully this is a case of you misunderstanding your words, cause if you seriously believe he can't sing, well it's confusing.
what are you, an attorney? you're just playing semantics here... regardless of which he typed it's clear the either one is his opinion. i think his voice sucks means i THINK his voice sucks. that's a clear expression of his dislike for the sound of the voice. it's not like he said "his vocal abilities are crap and his technique is horrible." you're looking for reasons to be offended.
It is pretty clear that this guy is just stirring things up. He has simply decided to take an outrageous stand point and defend it and then go and run behind the "its my opinion" banner. I wonder whether he really expected to find more than one other person who actually would support him or does he just like to get caned by the firm hand of truth?
Why all the rage towards Cornell? He put out awesome albums with Soundgarden and pretty good ones as a member of Audioslave. Certainly, he was one of the better vocalists to come out of the Seattle scene and that takes some talent.
Comments
Lets not forget Pillow of Your Bones, awesome.:)
and the crybabies trying to defend them.
And let me guess... "Show Me the Meaning of Being Lonely" is beautiful too?
Just kidding with ya. I'm not a huge EM fan, that's all. No need for name-calling. You must have missed the post a couple scrolls down where I actually gave credit to the album where it was due.
What I will say, is that Cornell has sold millions of albums with EVERY band he's been with, he is highly revered by other artists and critics and usually hits the top five in polls for best rock singers. Furthermore, he has sung many different styles of music through his career showing a great versatility in his voice. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, and I in no way think my opinion is more valid than anbody else's, but to say the guy 'sucks' or is 'talentless' is complete and utter bull shit. I wonder why people enter into such debate armed with the only defense of "well it sounds shit to me'. Seriously, have a go at singing along to something like Say hello to heaven, or Birth Ritual. You might hate both songs, but it takes an AMAZING amount of power, range, and control to sing in such a way. You know, I don't much care for opera music, but I wouldn't say 'Pavarotti sucks' - it would just make me sound like I have no idea what I'm talking about.
From where I'm sitting, it seems a lot of people can't differentiate between Chris Cornell the singer, Chris Cornell the songwriter and Chris Cornell the performer. Fair enough his vocal style might not be everybody's cup of tea, his songs might not do anything for you, or you may just find the guy 'smug' or 'arrogant' (as I've seen some people say in the past), but the fact remains, that in the most traditional translation of the word 'talent', at his peak he was virtually untouchable.
perfect response to a pointless thread
Fyodor Dostoyevsky
THANK YOU!!!!!!! might I add that smug and arrogant are descriptives best suited for peorple who ACTUALLY KNOW the person...not occassional listeners or fans.
and i have stated repeatedly that i think he's a decent songwriter, and a decent person, that i have no idea what technical ability is or means, but that i cant stand the sound of his voice. where did i ever claim my opinion was fact?
If you have no idea what technical ability (in terms of singing) is, may I suggest you aren't best equipped to be passing judgement on somebody's ability to sing. For the record, I quite clearly stated in more than one post EXACTLY why people rate him as a singer (range/power/control), this was merely a rebuttal of the claim that he was overrated. As a technical singer (sorry if you don't understand that term) he is not overrated at all. If someone doesn't like his vocal tone, or songwriting abilities, that is a completely separate issue, and to that I would say, 'whatever butters your muffin'.
Who cares about technical ability, vocal control, range, power, blah, blah, blah...when you can't stand the sound of someone's voice?
Simply "can't stand the sound of his voice". That alone should draw a conclusion to this thread.
...signed...the token black Pearl Jam fan.
FaceSpace
yes but because of this he was claiming cornell sucked..
08/02/07 - LOLLA!!!
Way to miss the point.........
Had the original post said "I can't stand the way his voice sounds", I doubt I would have posted anything in this thread. But when somebody brings into doubt whether he can sing or not based on not liking his vocal tone, I find it hard not to react - since tone has nothing to do with whether someone is a 'good' singer.
And no point was missed...in fact the one that you're debating with isn't even the one who started this thread; the source of your ire.
But on any note, cheers and carry on.
...signed...the token black Pearl Jam fan.
FaceSpace
once again, where did i ever comment on his ability to sing? i said i cant stand the sound of his voice.
why not? people dismiss u2 becos they had a song in a commercial. dismiss creed becos of the sound of his voice. dismiss modest mouse becos they're too weird. how is subjective taste somehow an irrational grounds for disliking a particular musician?
I think you have me confused with someone else.
...signed...the token black Pearl Jam fan.
FaceSpace
i got the impression "Who cares about technical ability, vocal control, range, power, blah, blah, blah...when you can't stand the sound of someone's voice?" was supposed to be kinda sarcastic. like who needs talent? if you were being serious, then you're right, that has basically been my point. you can have all the technical ability in the world, but if it doesn't reach people it doesn't matter. conversely, you can be limited in your abilities but still shake people up (kurt cobain on guitar, ringo starr on drums).
and the whole technical ability thing really lost weight with me when my ex-gf said ed was a horrible singer and incapable of singing on key. i dont know if she was right or not (anyone?) but once i heard her say it i decided id never give a fuck what anybody said about a particular musician's technical ability.
Later,...
...signed...the token black Pearl Jam fan.
FaceSpace
I suspect your ex was talking about from a technical stance, i.e ed may not have the best technique in the world. And by your reasoning, you are denying the existence of vocal talent. I absolutely 100% agree that an amazing voice shouldn't be what defines a performer's talent - some of my favourite singers are very average singers, but they have plenty of other things going for them. It just pisses me off when people won't even acknowledge somebody's talent. It's like denying a certain footballer is a good player despite the fact they have scored the most goals in a season.
If the original poster wanted to make a more interesting post they should have said why they think his voice sucks, rather than just making inflammatory remarks.
I think it's juvenile (100x) to use the word "sucks" without quantifying it. He has talent, he has moved and inspired a good number of people I know, artists and whatnot. I think I have enough reason to say... he's talented!
Just to clarify-
"I don't like his voice" and "His voice sucks" are not synonymous.
"I don't like his voice" - Very straightfoward, means what it says, is a reflection of opinion.
"I think his voice sucks" - That has nothing to do with opinion, the quality of ones voice is judged on a number of things such as range, power, technical ability etc AND regardless of whether or not you like his voice, his high ranking in the aforementioned categories is undeniable. I MUCH PREFER Eds voice yet if I were to say he had a BETTER voice I'd be lying, he doesn't, despite the fact that I'd take Ed's voice over ornell's anyday.
Hopefully this is a case of you misunderstanding your words, cause if you seriously believe he can't sing, well it's confusing.
*^*^*^*^*^*^*^RED MOSQUITO #2^*^*^*^*^*^*^*
Dublin 08/06
Katowice 06/07 London 06/07 Dusseldorf 06/07 Nijgemen 06/07
what are you, an attorney? you're just playing semantics here... regardless of which he typed it's clear the either one is his opinion. i think his voice sucks means i THINK his voice sucks. that's a clear expression of his dislike for the sound of the voice. it's not like he said "his vocal abilities are crap and his technique is horrible." you're looking for reasons to be offended.
amen... this should put an end to this thread immediately. that screech is cringe-inducing.
this thread sucks. "gimme" something with substance. i'm just in this thread to practice my typing skills.