ed & co just don't have chris cornell's vocal range

Options
135

Comments

  • muppet
    muppet Posts: 980
    Mine wrote:
    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 :p. I'm just enjoying yours and facepollutions discussion.
  • Mine
    Mine Posts: 556
    muppet wrote:
    Yeah but he sings it pretty much the same way he did on record...

    Sorry, it's a trivial thing to argue over :p. I'm just enjoying yours and facepollutions discussion.
    He had a hard time with those low tenor noted anyway :p
    That remark came to my mind because of a radio interview about TOTD.
    I knew who I was before other people started telling me who I was. J.Joplin
  • jwillmo
    jwillmo Posts: 471
    Mine wrote:
    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.)
  • Mine
    Mine Posts: 556
    jwillmo wrote:
    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
  • facepollution
    facepollution Posts: 6,834
    Mine wrote:
    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.

    Mine wrote:
    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.

    Mine wrote:
    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.
  • jwillmo
    jwillmo Posts: 471
    Mine wrote:
    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.
  • GR8Dane
    GR8Dane Posts: 957
    Cornell is incredible.
    Everybody made a movie....
    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!
  • failedpersephone
    failedpersephone Posts: 3,424
    "ed & Co" ????


    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.
  • Edwardlizardhands
    Edwardlizardhands Posts: 144
    suns rival wrote:
    just listen...

    http://www.gremmie.net/bsides/Birdman%20Sessions/Hunger%20Strike.mp3

    Chris Cornell doesn't even have Chris Cornell's range anymore...
    Things were different then. All is different now.
    I tried to explain...

    http://www.facebook.com/theendlessproof
  • facepollution
    facepollution Posts: 6,834
    moho wrote:
    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.


    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.
  • facepollution
    facepollution Posts: 6,834
    Edwardlizardhands wrote:
    Chris Cornell doesn't even have Chris Cornell's range anymore...

    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
  • U R A Crazy Breed
    U R A Crazy Breed Posts: 8,370
    too bad Chris Cornell can't write a song for shit!

    soundgarden was ok.

    but they/he ain't shit to PJ


    FUCK Chris Cornell!!!!!!!bitch ass wanna be fashion model.
  • Anon
    Anon Posts: 11,175
    suns rival wrote:
    just listen...

    http://www.gremmie.net/bsides/Birdman%20Sessions/Hunger%20Strike.mp3


    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.....
  • Anon
    Anon Posts: 11,175
    facepollution wrote:
    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

    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.
  • VEDDERFAN1
    VEDDERFAN1 Posts: 38
    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:
    vedderfan1
  • facepollution
    facepollution Posts: 6,834
    Tackalac wrote:
    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....
  • Edwardlizardhands
    Edwardlizardhands Posts: 144
    facepollution wrote:
    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

    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...

    http://www.facebook.com/theendlessproof
  • Anon
    Anon Posts: 11,175
    facepollution wrote:
    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.
  • Edwardlizardhands
    Edwardlizardhands Posts: 144
    Tackalac wrote:
    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...

    http://www.facebook.com/theendlessproof
  • redrock
    redrock Posts: 18,341
    Edwardlizardhands wrote:
    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?**

Categories