Who cares? He's got a much better sounding voice. I'd take that over range any day. Mariah Carey has the most range, does that make her good?
The answer is no.
This is true. But Ed actually has better skills and a wider range than the average rock or pop singer. Not to mention resonance. With that instrument of his he could have had a career in opera if he wanted to.
I knew who I was before other people started telling me who I was. J.Joplin
I've checked Beyond the Wheel on youtube.
I'm gona be hated for this but he sounds like he is trying to impersonate Eddie in that low tenor start and let me ad has a hard time doing it as he's barely on key.
I'm subjective here I don't like singes trying to sound like Robert Plant trying to sound like Janis Joplin.
Beyond The Wheel was recorded in 1988 so I assume Cornell had not even met Vedder then.
I probably enjoy listening to Vedder more than Cornell, but 'technically' Cornell takes the cake. He doesn't "just scream" and his songs aren't just how-high-can-I-make-my-voice-go wankathons.
Why do they even need to be pitted together? Both amazing singers and we're lucky that they collaborated on something as brilliant as Temple of the Dog. I don't see how if Vedder uses 3 octaves or whatever then Cornell is automatically a bad singer.
This is true. But Ed actually has better skills and a wider range than the average rock or pop singer. Not to mention resonance. With that instrument of his he could have had a career in opera if he wanted to.
A career in opera? Okay, now that's a bit of a reach ..
'I want to hurry home to you
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
Beyond The Wheel was recorded in 1988 so I assume Cornell had not even met Vedder then.
I probably enjoy listening to Vedder more than Cornell, but 'technically' Cornell takes the cake. He doesn't "just scream" and his songs aren't just how-high-can-I-make-my-voice-go wankathons.
Why do they even need to be pitted together? Both amazing singers and we're lucky that they collaborated on something as brilliant as Temple of the Dog. I don't see how if Vedder uses 3 octaves or whatever then Cornell is automatically a bad singer.
A version from '93 was pointed out.
The thread tittle invokes comparisons. 3 octaves is range (baritone, tenor,...). That's a quantitative measure not qualitative. I'm just saying Eddie has all the range he needs and above for his job.
I knew who I was before other people started telling me who I was. J.Joplin
'Mine' I'm not gonna quote every little thing you said because I don't want my response to take up pages! But I will comment on some of the points you made.
Eddie was a better singer how? Even he admits that his performances were OTT back in the Ten days, he was just as guilty of over-singing as Cornell back then, just not in the upper register.
Cornell was similar to Plant, but not the same. Check out a song like Mailman or Hypnotize ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=JkJCXPYcjlk ) he doesn't rely solely on his upper register, he just uses it for dramatic effect to match the intensity of the music at certain points. Cornell may not be able to sing as comfortably in his lower register as Vedder, but then Vedder can't touch the higher notes with Cornell's power either. Check out Cornell's Euphoria Morning album, no screaming to be heard there, yet some great vocal highs (and lows) - key song to check out is When I'm Down.
The Vedder soundalikes may not be as good to your ears (or mine) but that is becasue I way prefer Vedder's tone - which is a subjective thing.
Yes I own ITW, and I love the song The Wolf, but the high notes are falsetto so not really comparable to Cornell's upper register.
If a 'tenor' can reach bass or baritone, they are not a tenor, like I said, the classification comes from the lowest not the highest note.
At no point have I said I think Cornell is a better singer than Vedder, in any other way than his range. Like you've pointed out, Vedder has many other strings to his bow in the vocals department.
You might not see Cornell's vocal skill as impressive, and might just see it as screaming, but if you strip it down to what it is, it is essentially just the art of making a sound. It requires good breath control and, and control of the vocal chords - without these you will not be able to hit higher notes - that's why a lot of singers will crap out when they go for big notes. TOTD and Euphoria Morning show Cornell is an incredibly capable singer, with a great control over his voice, which in my view makes him a great singer.
With proper training. His voice was appropriate for it.
I'm not going to pretend like I know shit about opera but I have heard a few fat gals and guys sing opera and though Ed is very talented vocally, I don't think he would make it as an elite opera singer. Smoking just about killed that idea a few years into his career anyway..
'I want to hurry home to you
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
Ok.... I eat OFFICIALLY my words. That's incredible. I still prefer Eddie's voice, it's warmer, more passionate, more realistic and more intense. But this performance is certainly right up there with the studio version. He must have found his voice again because he couldn't do this for about 8 long years.
'Mine' I'm not gonna quote every little thing you said because I don't want my response to take up pages! But I will comment on some of the points you made.
Eddie was a better singer how? Even he admits that his performances were OTT back in the Ten days, he was just as guilty of over-singing as Cornell back then, just not in the upper register.
Cornell was similar to Plant, but not the same. Check out a song like Mailman or Hypnotize ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=JkJCXPYcjlk ) he doesn't rely solely on his upper register, he just uses it for dramatic effect to match the intensity of the music at certain points. Cornell may not be able to sing as comfortably in his lower register as Vedder, but then Vedder can't touch the higher notes with Cornell's power either. Check out Cornell's Euphoria Morning album, no screaming to be heard there, yet some great vocal highs (and lows) - key song to check out is When I'm Down.
I agree. But this doesn't mean Cornell has a considerably higher range.
Cornell still fits tenor with all his range.
The Vedder soundalikes may not be as good to your ears (or mine) but that is becasue I way prefer Vedder's tone - which is a subjective thing.
It's not if you consider Eddie can use his voice in many ways not just the stereotyped 10 and VS. style that was copied. As a matter of fact he sounds completely different on No Code and even Vitalogy already.
If a 'tenor' can reach bass or baritone, they are not a tenor, like I said, the classification comes from the lowest not the highest note..
This classification have sense in opera and other dramatic singing. Singers are categorized by the roles they are singing, or want to sing, regardless of the top and bottom note they can reach. They just need the range the role demands.
Maria Callas singed everything from contralto to coloratura soprano. She was the later.
Placido Domingo started out as baritone and than became a tenor by training. He is a tenor for the wide world.
At no point have I said I think Cornell is a better singer than Vedder, in any other way than his range. Like you've pointed out, Vedder has many other strings to his bow in the vocals department.
You might not see Cornell's vocal skill as impressive, and might just see it as screaming, but if you strip it down to what it is, it is essentially just the art of making a sound. It requires good breath control and, and control of the vocal chords - without these you will not be able to hit higher notes - that's why a lot of singers will crap out when they go for big notes. TOTD and Euphoria Morning show Cornell is an incredibly capable singer, with a great control over his voice, which in my view makes him a great singer.
I'm not saying he is bad at all. I just don't see his absolute supremacy in any department above Vedder unless for a couple of notes. I'm almost sure that Eddie top to bottom has at least the same range as Cornell and his skills are better. The qawali think is beyond difficult to nail and he did it even live.
I knew who I was before other people started telling me who I was. J.Joplin
A version from '93 was pointed out.
The thread tittle invokes comparisons. 3 octaves is range (baritone, tenor,...). That's a quantitative measure not qualitative. I'm just saying Eddie has all the range he needs and above for his job.
Yeah but he sings it pretty much the same way he did on record...
Sorry, it's a trivial thing to argue over . I'm just enjoying yours and facepollutions discussion.
Cornell's is falsetto too it's just a different timbre.
Alright, this entire thread is chock full of people trying to talk technically about singing that clearly don't know what they're talking about, but this one really takes the cake. You can't go from saying that Cornell just "screams" and then say it's a falsetto. Using words like "timbre" doesn't automatically make you an expert. "Falsetto" is a very specific term, it literally means "false" singing, or singing out of your natural register. When you're a kid, it's referred to as using you're "head voice". To use a very specific instance, Eddie goes from a falsetto voice to a naturally high voice at the end of Oceans, when he goes from "Oooooh" to "Whoaaa". While Cornell does, very rarely, use a falsetto sometimes, his "screaming" or "wailing" vocals remain within his natural register. That's what's so fucking amazing about it. You said earlier that screaming is the easy way to sing high, which is the exact opposite of what is true. Falsetto is the easy way, it does little damage to your voice and requires little control. To be able to hit those same notes using your actualy vocal range is difficult, which is why there are so few who do the Cornell style (outside of 80s metal bands, that is).
Seriously, it seems like this whole thing comes down to personal preference. Quit trying to back it up opinions by using technical terms you don't even know the meaning of. They're both "technically" good singers with different styles that appeal to different people (or, in a lot of cases, the same people, i.e. me.)
Alright, this entire thread is chock full of people trying to talk technically about singing that clearly don't know what they're talking about, but this one really takes the cake. You can't go from saying that Cornell just "screams" and then say it's a falsetto. Using words like "timbre" doesn't automatically make you an expert. "Falsetto" is a very specific term, it literally means "false" singing, or singing out of your natural register. When you're a kid, it's referred to as using you're "head voice". To use a very specific instance, Eddie goes from a falsetto voice to a naturally high voice at the end of Oceans, when he goes from "Oooooh" to "Whoaaa". While Cornell does, very rarely, use a falsetto sometimes, his "screaming" or "wailing" vocals remain within his natural register. That's what's so fucking amazing about it. You said earlier that screaming is the easy way to sing high, which is the exact opposite of what is true. Falsetto is the easy way, it does little damage to your voice and requires little control. To be able to hit those same notes using your actualy vocal range is difficult, which is why there are so few who do the Cornell style (outside of 80s metal bands, that is).
Seriously, it seems like this whole thing comes down to personal preference. Quit trying to back it up opinions by using technical terms you don't even know the meaning of. They're both "technically" good singers with different styles that appeal to different people (or, in a lot of cases, the same people, i.e. me.)
I've come across different definitions of falsetto and head voice for male voices, sometimes even arguing they are the same thing with male singers.
Cornell does sound like screaming out of his natural range quite often. Screaming is the easy way to hit a high note, the Oceans alike falsetto barely counts in this department.
I knew who I was before other people started telling me who I was. J.Joplin
Cornell's is falsetto too it's just a different timbre
Not true, Cornell uses a lot of falsetto, but it's distinctly different from his
chest voice etc, I just found this which basically describes what I'm trying to say:
"His ability to soar into falsetto and through head voice effortlessly often defies many a normal singer's natural timbre, giving him a high harmonic overtone or timbre to his voice. Indeed, his ability to "belt" a note, almost screaming it is also well utilised, giving his Baritonal range an often much louder, or "higher" sound than is actually tonally present. This is shown to much effect on Ultramega OK's "Beyond the Wheel" and Badmotorfinger's "Slaves & Bulldozers"
I've read other things which reiterate this point. I've always felt that his voice has a certain quality to it even in his upper register, and I think it is the fact he is a baritone. There just seems to be more depth and grit to his voice.
This classification have sense in opera and other dramatic singing. Singers are categorized by the roles they are singing, or want to sing, regardless of the top and bottom note they can reach. They just need the range the role demands.
Maria Callas singed everything from contralto to coloratura soprano. She was the later.
Placido Domingo started out as baritone and than became a tenor by training. He is a tenor for the wide world.
Well then technically if he could still hit the lower notes he was still a baritone. Yeah it's a technicallity, and not really important, but like I said, I think there is a noticable difference between a baritone and a tenor hitting the same note.
I'm not saying he is bad at all. I just don't see his absolute supremacy in any department above Vedder unless for a couple of notes. I'm almost sure that Eddie top to bottom has at least the same range as Cornell and his skills are better. The qawali think is beyond difficult to nail and he did it even live.
I don't want to insult you, but have you actually heard the sort of stuff I'm talking about? Compare Cornell's two contributions to the Singles soundtrack. Seasons shows the real depth and richness of his voice, not a million miles away from what Vedder does (this is actually my favourite Cornell song - and doesn't really feature much of the high end stuff). While Soundgarden's Birth Ritual showcases the absolute extremes he could push his voice to, and there is no way Vedder would ever have scaled those highs, his voice just isn't built that way.
If I was pushed, I would probably say I prefer Ed as a singer, there really isn't much in it, but I do love his tone. I also much prefer his voice on later records to his style on Ten (although I can sometimes be in the mood for it!). He really does need to be careful though, his smoking is doing nothing for his consistencey live.
I've come across different definitions of falsetto and head voice for male voices, sometimes even arguing they are the same thing with male singers.
Cornell does sound like screaming out of his natural range quite often. Screaming is the easy way to hit a high note, the Oceans alike falsetto barely counts in this department.
Continuing to repeat something that isn't true doesn't make it true. As for the head voice thing, I was just using the more "layman" term. Falsetto is not necessarily always a "head voice" but head voice is always falsetto. And for the sake of this particular argument, we are using the "head voice" definition of falsetto.
Once again-
A)When he is "screaming," it's clearly still with his "modal" voice. That's what gives it its power. It would be pretty much humanly impossible to go above your natural range that high with that much power and actually stay in tune. Basically it would sound like a girl's scream in a horror movie.
B)Screaming is not the easier way!! At least not in the context of staying in a certain tune or key. Sure, most people would scream to hit a generic high note, but to hit a specific note would be difficult for most people.
This is all really silly. There's a difference between not liking someone's style and saying that it's easy when it's actually incredibly diffilcult.
um I dont disagree with your sentiment - but dude the TONE is WAY off...it's a band. so it isn't "Eddie and the Vedders" if you meant JUST Ed Vedder, you should have said that.
BTB: Cornell has an AWE inspiring voice...hmmn, that reminds me...*puts on Cornell playlist*
IF YOU WANT A PLATE OF MY BEEF SWELLINGTON, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THE COVERCHARGE.
Ok.... I eat OFFICIALLY my words. That's incredible. I still prefer Eddie's voice, it's warmer, more passionate, more realistic and more intense. But this performance is certainly right up there with the studio version. He must have found his voice again because he couldn't do this for about 8 long years.
Oh yeah that is easily the best live version of Hunger Strike. I would love for him to perform it again with PJ since his voice has returned to its former glory.
WAIT....hold on. I think I just shit myself......you mean Eddie and Chris have different voices?
First Santa isnt real, then Celine isnt a woman and now Eddie and Chris sound different? WTF!! What next? Bush isnt a good president? I think you are just busting our balls now.....
If I was at the first concert I would make my way out of there as soon as possible. Sounds like an old lady farting into the microphone. And it looks like an old lady trying out for Argentinian Idol.
I love the guy, but I think you just made me hate him a little bit too.
I love CC so much, but what's with all the Ed bashing. His voice turns this woman on no matter what octave. Sure it has changed over the years: but I can remember in 92 every band wanted a singer like Ed. I say he is great and always will be.
Thank you
Vedderfan1 has left the room.
:cool:
If I was at the first concert I would make my way out of there as soon as possible. Sounds like an old lady farting into the microphone. And it looks like an old lady trying out for Argentinian Idol.
I love the guy, but I think you just made me hate him a little bit too.
Well aside from what he looks like, the vocals on Hunger Strike are as close to the original recording as he has got live, the high notes are a lot smoother than they are on many live recordings. The tv studio version of Say Hello 2 Heaven, again shows him reaching the really high notes at the end with great ease. Perhaps you have crappy computer speakers I don't know, but if you like the original recordings at all then I fail to see whay those performances wouldn't impress you, but whatever....
Oh no he doesn't...
In my opinion, Chris' lower register opening Hunger Strike just doesn't have the same richness, the same grit it once had. He still hits those power highs, which in it's self is weird because it's almost like he is more comfortable living in that register. Chris is an incredible vocalist but I've found that in recent years his vocals can be a little hit or miss live...
Things were different then. All is different now.
I tried to explain...
Well aside from what he looks like, the vocals on Hunger Strike are as close to the original recording as he has got live, the high notes are a lot smoother than they are on many live recordings. The tv studio version of Say Hello 2 Heaven, again shows him reaching the really high notes at the end with great ease. Perhaps you have crappy computer speakers I don't know, but if you like the original recordings at all then I fail to see whay those performances wouldn't impress you, but whatever....
NO, I have imported M-134YYT computer speakers from Japan that cost 1700.00 bucks a piece. They are designed to hear pitch of aging rockstars so that I can jump into a thread like this and offer a professional opinion.
NO, I have imported M-134YYT computer speakers from Japan that cost 1700.00 bucks a piece. They are designed to hear pitch of aging rockstars so that I can jump into a thread like this and offer a professional opinion.
Nice rebuttal!
Things were different then. All is different now.
I tried to explain...
Chris is an incredible vocalist but I've found that in recent years his vocals can be a little hit or miss live...
I've seen him live three times not all that long ago. His vocals were spot on, I was quite blown away. He is in full form.
Eddie's vocals are just a moving as Chris'. I wouldn't be able to say which I prefer. I first heard Eddie on Hunger Strike and his voice made my heart skip a beat - I was already used to Chris' then.
Also, one cannot expect either Chris or Eddie to sing like they did 15 years ago. Age takes it's toll on people!
**sorry I can't do all this 'technical' speak, all this 'better' voice thing is just subjective. Does one really know what Chris' or Ed's ranges are? Have they even tested them?**
Comments
Beyond The Wheel was recorded in 1988 so I assume Cornell had not even met Vedder then.
I probably enjoy listening to Vedder more than Cornell, but 'technically' Cornell takes the cake. He doesn't "just scream" and his songs aren't just how-high-can-I-make-my-voice-go wankathons.
Why do they even need to be pitted together? Both amazing singers and we're lucky that they collaborated on something as brilliant as Temple of the Dog. I don't see how if Vedder uses 3 octaves or whatever then Cornell is automatically a bad singer.
A career in opera? Okay, now that's a bit of a reach
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
The thread tittle invokes comparisons. 3 octaves is range (baritone, tenor,...). That's a quantitative measure not qualitative. I'm just saying Eddie has all the range he needs and above for his job.
Eddie was a better singer how? Even he admits that his performances were OTT back in the Ten days, he was just as guilty of over-singing as Cornell back then, just not in the upper register.
Cornell was similar to Plant, but not the same. Check out a song like Mailman or Hypnotize ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=JkJCXPYcjlk ) he doesn't rely solely on his upper register, he just uses it for dramatic effect to match the intensity of the music at certain points. Cornell may not be able to sing as comfortably in his lower register as Vedder, but then Vedder can't touch the higher notes with Cornell's power either. Check out Cornell's Euphoria Morning album, no screaming to be heard there, yet some great vocal highs (and lows) - key song to check out is When I'm Down.
The Vedder soundalikes may not be as good to your ears (or mine) but that is becasue I way prefer Vedder's tone - which is a subjective thing.
Yes I own ITW, and I love the song The Wolf, but the high notes are falsetto so not really comparable to Cornell's upper register.
If a 'tenor' can reach bass or baritone, they are not a tenor, like I said, the classification comes from the lowest not the highest note.
At no point have I said I think Cornell is a better singer than Vedder, in any other way than his range. Like you've pointed out, Vedder has many other strings to his bow in the vocals department.
You might not see Cornell's vocal skill as impressive, and might just see it as screaming, but if you strip it down to what it is, it is essentially just the art of making a sound. It requires good breath control and, and control of the vocal chords - without these you will not be able to hit higher notes - that's why a lot of singers will crap out when they go for big notes. TOTD and Euphoria Morning show Cornell is an incredibly capable singer, with a great control over his voice, which in my view makes him a great singer.
I'm not going to pretend like I know shit about opera but I have heard a few fat gals and guys sing opera and though Ed is very talented vocally, I don't think he would make it as an elite opera singer. Smoking just about killed that idea a few years into his career anyway..
put on a slow, dumb show for you
and crack you up
so you can put a blue ribbon on my brain
god I'm very, very frightening
and I'll overdo it'
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yEBwrtjusiM&feature=related
Ok.... I eat OFFICIALLY my words. That's incredible. I still prefer Eddie's voice, it's warmer, more passionate, more realistic and more intense. But this performance is certainly right up there with the studio version. He must have found his voice again because he couldn't do this for about 8 long years.
I agree. But this doesn't mean Cornell has a considerably higher range.
Cornell still fits tenor with all his range.
It's not if you consider Eddie can use his voice in many ways not just the stereotyped 10 and VS. style that was copied. As a matter of fact he sounds completely different on No Code and even Vitalogy already.
Cornell's is falsetto too it's just a different timbre.
This classification have sense in opera and other dramatic singing. Singers are categorized by the roles they are singing, or want to sing, regardless of the top and bottom note they can reach. They just need the range the role demands.
Maria Callas singed everything from contralto to coloratura soprano. She was the later.
Placido Domingo started out as baritone and than became a tenor by training. He is a tenor for the wide world.
I'm not saying he is bad at all. I just don't see his absolute supremacy in any department above Vedder unless for a couple of notes. I'm almost sure that Eddie top to bottom has at least the same range as Cornell and his skills are better. The qawali think is beyond difficult to nail and he did it even live.
Yeah but he sings it pretty much the same way he did on record...
Sorry, it's a trivial thing to argue over
That remark came to my mind because of a radio interview about TOTD.
Alright, this entire thread is chock full of people trying to talk technically about singing that clearly don't know what they're talking about, but this one really takes the cake. You can't go from saying that Cornell just "screams" and then say it's a falsetto. Using words like "timbre" doesn't automatically make you an expert. "Falsetto" is a very specific term, it literally means "false" singing, or singing out of your natural register. When you're a kid, it's referred to as using you're "head voice". To use a very specific instance, Eddie goes from a falsetto voice to a naturally high voice at the end of Oceans, when he goes from "Oooooh" to "Whoaaa". While Cornell does, very rarely, use a falsetto sometimes, his "screaming" or "wailing" vocals remain within his natural register. That's what's so fucking amazing about it. You said earlier that screaming is the easy way to sing high, which is the exact opposite of what is true. Falsetto is the easy way, it does little damage to your voice and requires little control. To be able to hit those same notes using your actualy vocal range is difficult, which is why there are so few who do the Cornell style (outside of 80s metal bands, that is).
Seriously, it seems like this whole thing comes down to personal preference. Quit trying to back it up opinions by using technical terms you don't even know the meaning of. They're both "technically" good singers with different styles that appeal to different people (or, in a lot of cases, the same people, i.e. me.)
Cornell does sound like screaming out of his natural range quite often. Screaming is the easy way to hit a high note, the Oceans alike falsetto barely counts in this department.
Not true, Cornell uses a lot of falsetto, but it's distinctly different from his
chest voice etc, I just found this which basically describes what I'm trying to say:
"His ability to soar into falsetto and through head voice effortlessly often defies many a normal singer's natural timbre, giving him a high harmonic overtone or timbre to his voice. Indeed, his ability to "belt" a note, almost screaming it is also well utilised, giving his Baritonal range an often much louder, or "higher" sound than is actually tonally present. This is shown to much effect on Ultramega OK's "Beyond the Wheel" and Badmotorfinger's "Slaves & Bulldozers"
I've read other things which reiterate this point. I've always felt that his voice has a certain quality to it even in his upper register, and I think it is the fact he is a baritone. There just seems to be more depth and grit to his voice.
Well then technically if he could still hit the lower notes he was still a baritone. Yeah it's a technicallity, and not really important, but like I said, I think there is a noticable difference between a baritone and a tenor hitting the same note.
I don't want to insult you, but have you actually heard the sort of stuff I'm talking about? Compare Cornell's two contributions to the Singles soundtrack. Seasons shows the real depth and richness of his voice, not a million miles away from what Vedder does (this is actually my favourite Cornell song - and doesn't really feature much of the high end stuff). While Soundgarden's Birth Ritual showcases the absolute extremes he could push his voice to, and there is no way Vedder would ever have scaled those highs, his voice just isn't built that way.
If I was pushed, I would probably say I prefer Ed as a singer, there really isn't much in it, but I do love his tone. I also much prefer his voice on later records to his style on Ten (although I can sometimes be in the mood for it!). He really does need to be careful though, his smoking is doing nothing for his consistencey live.
Once again-
A)When he is "screaming," it's clearly still with his "modal" voice. That's what gives it its power. It would be pretty much humanly impossible to go above your natural range that high with that much power and actually stay in tune. Basically it would sound like a girl's scream in a horror movie.
B)Screaming is not the easier way!! At least not in the context of staying in a certain tune or key. Sure, most people would scream to hit a generic high note, but to hit a specific note would be difficult for most people.
This is all really silly. There's a difference between not liking someone's style and saying that it's easy when it's actually incredibly diffilcult.
Everybody had a one line.....
Everybody misses Andy....
We'll be seeing him in no time.... Oh Yeah.....
We are Red, we are White, we are Danish Dynamite!
um I dont disagree with your sentiment - but dude the TONE is WAY off...it's a band. so it isn't "Eddie and the Vedders" if you meant JUST Ed Vedder, you should have said that.
BTB: Cornell has an AWE inspiring voice...hmmn, that reminds me...*puts on Cornell playlist*
Chris Cornell doesn't even have Chris Cornell's range anymore...
I tried to explain...
http://www.facebook.com/theendlessproof
Oh yeah that is easily the best live version of Hunger Strike. I would love for him to perform it again with PJ since his voice has returned to its former glory.
Oh yes he does!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yEBwrtjusiM&feature=related
Oh and check out the end of this: http://youtube.com/watch?v=gAyLdBWDiYI
soundgarden was ok.
but they/he ain't shit to PJ
FUCK Chris Cornell!!!!!!!bitch ass wanna be fashion model.
WAIT....hold on. I think I just shit myself......you mean Eddie and Chris have different voices?
First Santa isnt real, then Celine isnt a woman and now Eddie and Chris sound different? WTF!! What next? Bush isnt a good president? I think you are just busting our balls now.....
If I was at the first concert I would make my way out of there as soon as possible. Sounds like an old lady farting into the microphone. And it looks like an old lady trying out for Argentinian Idol.
I love the guy, but I think you just made me hate him a little bit too.
Thank you
Vedderfan1 has left the room.
:cool:
Well aside from what he looks like, the vocals on Hunger Strike are as close to the original recording as he has got live, the high notes are a lot smoother than they are on many live recordings. The tv studio version of Say Hello 2 Heaven, again shows him reaching the really high notes at the end with great ease. Perhaps you have crappy computer speakers I don't know, but if you like the original recordings at all then I fail to see whay those performances wouldn't impress you, but whatever....
Oh no he doesn't...
In my opinion, Chris' lower register opening Hunger Strike just doesn't have the same richness, the same grit it once had. He still hits those power highs, which in it's self is weird because it's almost like he is more comfortable living in that register. Chris is an incredible vocalist but I've found that in recent years his vocals can be a little hit or miss live...
I tried to explain...
http://www.facebook.com/theendlessproof
NO, I have imported M-134YYT computer speakers from Japan that cost 1700.00 bucks a piece. They are designed to hear pitch of aging rockstars so that I can jump into a thread like this and offer a professional opinion.
I tried to explain...
http://www.facebook.com/theendlessproof
Eddie's vocals are just a moving as Chris'. I wouldn't be able to say which I prefer. I first heard Eddie on Hunger Strike and his voice made my heart skip a beat - I was already used to Chris' then.
Also, one cannot expect either Chris or Eddie to sing like they did 15 years ago. Age takes it's toll on people!
**sorry I can't do all this 'technical' speak, all this 'better' voice thing is just subjective. Does one really know what Chris' or Ed's ranges are? Have they even tested them?**