Ray Alder? James LaBrie? Geoff Tate?
Erik van der Grinten
No!
The best vocalist is (IMHO) Damian Wilson (Landmarq, Threshold).
Yesterday I was at a Threshold-gig in the Noorderligt, Tilburg
(Netherlands), and Damian was just awsome! From the very first minute
until the very last minute, his voice was perfect. Damian kicks ass!!!!
--
Erik homepage: http://www.iaehv.nl/users/erikvdg
--------
"Try to hold some faith in the goodness of humanity"
(Neil Peart, 1993)
Matthew Jonathan Harper
Yeah, Damien's quite great. I'd like to make a point that
singers, especially in rock/metal, can pretty well be divided into
three categories: Operatic (Tate, Alder, Kiske), Expressive (Dio,
Di'Anno, Hetfield), or Gimic (King Diamond, Jon Oliva). All three
overflow a bit, but most singers are mostly one only. My all-time
fave is Dio, but my favorite operatic vocalist is Tate.
Any suggestions/revisions to my idea?
Now and Forever,
lmjh
Mindcrimer
> >The best vocalist is (IMHO) Damian Wilson (Landmarq, Threshold).
> >
> >Yesterday I was at a Threshold-gig in the Noorderligt, Tilburg
> >(Netherlands), and Damian was just awsome! From the very first minute
> >until the very last minute, his voice was perfect. Damian kicks ass!!!!
Oh yeah? Well, how old is he compared to Geoff Tate, and how does he
compare to Tate at that age? That's how you measure it.
--
_________________________________________________________________Mindcrimer________________________________
Bury the past in the sand of today.
Mindcrimer's Ryche World http://w3.one.net/~qryche
Email: ans...@email.uc.edu
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Erik van der Grinten
Mindcrimer wrote:
>
> > >The best vocalist is (IMHO) Damian Wilson (Landmarq, Threshold).
> > >
> > >Yesterday I was at a Threshold-gig in the Noorderligt, Tilburg
> > >(Netherlands), and Damian was just awsome! From the very first minute
> > >until the very last minute, his voice was perfect. Damian kicks ass!!!!
>
> Oh yeah? Well, how old is he compared to Geoff Tate, and how does he
> compare to Tate at that age? That's how you measure it.
>
Maybe we also should compare their shoe-size, their weight, the length
of their hair, the color of their eyes and their girlfriends/wives
names!
Just listen to Damian Wilson, and compare his voice with Geoff's on any
recording you want. Damian still kicks ass!!!!!
Mike Z
In article <336b8427...@news.mindspring.com>, llor...@mindspring.com
wrote:
>>The best vocalist is (IMHO) Damian Wilson (Landmarq, Threshold).
>>
>>Yesterday I was at a Threshold-gig in the Noorderligt, Tilburg
>>(Netherlands), and Damian was just awsome! From the very first minute
>>until the very last minute, his voice was perfect. Damian kicks ass!!!!
>>--
>>Erik homepage: http://www.iaehv.nl/users/erikvdg
>>--------
>>"Try to hold some faith in the goodness of humanity"
>>(Neil Peart, 1993)
>
> Yeah, Damien's quite great. I'd like to make a point that
>singers, especially in rock/metal, can pretty well be divided into
>three categories: Operatic (Tate, Alder, Kiske), Expressive (Dio,
>Di'Anno, Hetfield), or Gimic (King Diamond, Jon Oliva). All three
>overflow a bit, but most singers are mostly one only. My all-time
>fave is Dio, but my favorite operatic vocalist is Tate.
> Any suggestions/revisions to my idea?
I have a couple of questions about your idea. What is Operatic in your
opinion. I've heard a lot of people say that Tate is "singing that opera
stuff." I just don't get it. As a fan of opera I see few similarities and can
*easily pick out an opera singer next to Tate or any of those guys. Not that
it's better or worse, just different. I also would like to know why only
the expressive
guys get to be called expressive. All art is expression and all singers
are (to some
extent) expressive. Why that term. BTW, I think that Dio has an
incredible voice, too!
Yours,
Mike
--
*************************************************************
MIRROR Check out the lastest MIRROR release,
PO Box 430 "Reflections"
Thiells, NY 10984 Available on Eroica Records
Http://www.tco.com/MIRROR
*************************************************************
Matthew Jonathan Harper
<snip-snip-hey, I even cut my OWN message!)
>
>I have a couple of questions about your idea. What is Operatic in your
>opinion. I've heard a lot of people say that Tate is "singing that opera
>stuff." I just don't get it. As a fan of opera I see few similarities and can
>*easily pick out an opera singer next to Tate or any of those guys. Not that
>it's better or worse, just different. I also would like to know why only
Of course there is a significant difference between the
normally affected style of an opera singer, who, like a classical
musician, sings mostly with technical focus instead of from the heart,
and a rock vocalist, whose intention is almost always to impart
emotion (this is a generalization OF COURSE).
However, within the field of rock/metal, there are singers
with opera /quality/ voices, like Tate or Eric Adams, who, while
singing quite differently than a diva or one of the three tenors ;).
still uses quite a lot of soaring tones and some technical tricks.
These singers are so easy to differentiate from the more mundane
(though I find nothing mundane about Dio!!!) rock vocalists that their
qualities are pointedly more operatic.
>the expressive
>guys get to be called expressive. All art is expression and all singers
>are (to some
>extent) expressive. Why that term. BTW, I think that Dio has an
>incredible voice, too!
>
All art is some parts expressive, some parts technical, some
parts just art. I'm so tired of this idea that art and expression are
interchangable...it leads to calling things like battlefields art, or
a couple of lines on canvas, etc. Please excuse my bitching ;). As I
said before, the expressive guys are SOMEWHAT separate from the
operatic guys cuz they don't do that high-pitched, sustained stuff.
I'd hesistantly label you as an hybrid operatic/expressive vocalist,
based on what I've heard of yer stuff, Mike. I'm simply trying to
kinda make a distinction between guys who focus on diction and
expression (epressive singers like Dio or Hetfield) and those who sing
so high and do so many tone tricks that they can sometimes get away
with murdering their diction (LaBrie on Images and Words is a perfect
example). I'm REAL picky about diction, as I'm a singer too (a hybrid
operatic-expressive, I admit). Cheers.
Now and Forever,
lmjh
Mike Z
In article <336de996...@news.mindspring.com>, llor...@mindspring.com
wrote:
Listen, I don't mean to bust your balls, I just want to understand your point
of view. Let me say that at the outset. Here we go.
>>
>>I have a couple of questions about your idea. What is Operatic in your
>>opinion. I've heard a lot of people say that Tate is "singing that opera
>>stuff." I just don't get it. As a fan of opera I see few similarities
and can
>>*easily pick out an opera singer next to Tate or any of those guys. Not that
>>it's better or worse, just different. I also would like to know why only
>
> Of course there is a significant difference between the
>normally affected style of an opera singer, who, like a classical
>musician, sings mostly with technical focus instead of from the heart,
>and a rock vocalist, whose intention is almost always to impart
>emotion
You're killing me here you know that don't you :^)! I disagree in the
strongest
terms. The job of an operatically trained singer is to sing
expressively! When
you're actually performing it's all about expression. The technique is the
vehicle that you use to put forth that expression. I sing both rock and
opera. I've
sung opera's and oratorio's, Lieder and Led Zeppelin, art songs and Queensryche
songs, and it's all about the same thing... get the emotion of the text
across with the
music. Simple as that. I don't think, "Boy, I'm singing opera now, I'd
better think
more about my technique. I don't have to worry as much about the
expression now."
It's all about expression. Thought the technique between the styles is
significantly
different, the point of it isn't.
>(this is a generalization OF COURSE).
A huge generalization and one that makes no sense to me.
> However, within the field of rock/metal, there are singers
>with opera /quality/ voices, like Tate or Eric Adams, who, while
>singing quite differently than a diva or one of the three tenors ;).
>still uses quite a lot of soaring tones and some technical tricks.
By soaring I suppose that you mean high. None of those three tenors
hit a note on a recording higher than a C#5. Tate on the other hand has
hit an F#5 above that. The soaring tones that you're talking about have
nothing at all to do with opera. They aren't even part of operatic technique.
Halford even hit a G#5. What "technical tricks" are you talking about
that both the "opreratic" rock singer and the actual opera singer have in
common?
>These singers are so easy to differentiate from the more mundane
>(though I find nothing mundane about Dio!!!) rock vocalists that their
>qualities are pointedly more operatic.
>
How so?
>>the expressive
>>guys get to be called expressive. All art is expression and all singers
>>are (to some
>>extent) expressive. Why that term. BTW, I think that Dio has an
>>incredible voice, too!
>>
>
> All art is some parts expressive, some parts technical, some
>parts just art.
You know, I'm gonna start a big fuss with this one; but I really disagree.
*All* art is expression, technique is used to facilitate that expression. The
fact that art is expression in and of itself refutes the statement that "some
parts are just art." Just to make myself clear on the technical thing,
technique
doesn't mean that someone has to be astounding. Technique is merely the way
the painter holds the brush, the way the guitarist moves there hand about the
instrument, the way the poet chooses words. Think about it. *All* art is
expression.
>I'm so tired of this idea that art and expression are
>interchangable...it leads to calling things like battlefields art, or
>a couple of lines on canvas, etc. Please excuse my bitching ;).
How do you figure that a couple of lines on a canvas are not expression? I
think that a couple of lines on a canvas can be qute expressive. Perhaps we
don't always understand the artists meaning, but it's always expression. You
may find a very minimalist painting to be absurd, but that doesn't mean
that the
artist wasn't trying to express an idea to you. Just because you don't
like the
idea expressed doesn't make it an invalid expression.
>As I
>said before, the expressive guys are SOMEWHAT separate from the
>operatic guys cuz they don't do that high-pitched, sustained stuff.
I've heard Dio sustain notes for days. Doesn't that mean that he's an
operatic guy? I guess that since he tops off at a C5 (the top note for most
professional opera singers) that he's not in the operatic category. As you
can probably tell by now, I don't really like the choice of words that you've
used. I think that the point of singing is to be expressive, no matter how
long you hold or don't hold notes and no matter how high or low you sing.
>I'd hesistantly label you as an hybrid operatic/expressive vocalist,
>based on what I've heard of yer stuff, Mike.
Call me what you will, I still don't like the labels. Do you have the CD?
You know one of my pet peaves lately has become those damn .wav files.
.Wav files are so short that you really don't get any idea of what's going on.
I hated the .wav of SOTT, but when I heard the song I immediately love it.
Well, that's another rant. Sorry...
>I'm simply trying to
>kinda make a distinction between guys who focus on diction and
>expression (epressive singers like Dio or Hetfield)
I think that any singerworth spit pays attention to diction. If you don't you
won't be understood.
>and those who sing
>so high and do so many tone tricks that they can sometimes get away
>with murdering their diction (LaBrie on Images and Words is a perfect
>example).
I agree. That's why I don't particularly care for Mr.Labrie. It is
harder to say
certain vowel sounds when you're *way* up high, but you have to to be
intelligible.
The great ones like Halford and Tate do have good diction up that high.
Not diction
like Fritz Wunderlich, but really great for what they're doing.
>I'm REAL picky about diction, as I'm a singer too (a hybrid
>operatic-expressive, I admit).
Well, I'd like to hear some of your stuff. You sound like the kind of
rock singer that
I like.
Anders "Skywalker" Hindrum
I don't think, for example, someone like Alder would fit in, in Dream
Theater....
I mean, all of them have their own charm, their own way to sing.
And I think it has something to do with what kind of music the band
plays. I don't think you can compare DT with FW. They don't sound the
same and they ARE not the same.
What we have got here is just wonderful singers.
They can really sing, but they do it in their own way.
-Adde
Andreas
It's me again, sorry, but I hit the "send" button before I managed
to type in the link to my Threshold pages. I'm sorry for the
inconvenience - one shouldn't post so late in the evening.
Here it is:
http://www.uni-mainz.de/~kasper/Threshold.html
Have fun!
- Andreas -
Matthew Jonathan Harper
mir...@tco.com (Mike Z) wrote:
>In article <336de996...@news.mindspring.com>, llor...@mindspring.com
>wrote:
>
>Listen, I don't mean to bust your balls, I just want to understand your point
>of view. Let me say that at the outset. Here we go.
Tis kewl. I like this sort of intellectual discussion, as if
informs us (any of us) of certain ignorances (mostly mine) that we
might have. I'm no big fan of opera, I'm just passingly familiar with
it so anything I might generally say about it is prolly wholly
misinformed...rock/metal is another matter...at least we don't bitch
like the Genesis and Dio ngs do ;)! I'm gonna snip this up to shorten
it...
>> Of course there is a significant difference between the
>>normally affected style of an opera singer, who, like a classical
>>musician, sings mostly with technical focus instead of from the heart,
>>and a rock vocalist, whose intention is almost always to impart
>>emotion
>
>You're killing me here you know that don't you :^)! I disagree in the
>strongest
>terms. The job of an operatically trained singer is to sing
>expressively! When
>you're actually performing it's all about expression. The technique is the
>vehicle that you use to put forth that expression. I sing both rock and
>opera. I've
>sung opera's and oratorio's, Lieder and Led Zeppelin, art songs and Queensryche
>songs, and it's all about the same thing... get the emotion of the text
>across with the
>music. Simple as that. I don't think, "Boy, I'm singing opera now, I'd
>better think
>more about my technique. I don't have to worry as much about the
>expression now."
>It's all about expression. Thought the technique between the styles is
>significantly
>different, the point of it isn't.
OK. You did strike at a gross generality there. My intention
was that the operatic vocalist has the distraction of trills, big
tone-shifts, and other technical tricks that are as far as I know part
of the oratio...correct me if I'm wrong, and if that's the singer's
choice...Part of my point is that opera vocalists DO NOT create their
own material. There is a wealth of classic performances behind them,
some technically and artistically perfect, and they must attempt for
their reputation (being an actor I know how important reputation
is...) to match or excell those past singers. In rock the only case
similar to that is cover bands, who usually work similarly. Normally
rock singers CREATE their own melody lines, and often their own
lyrics. They are entirely in control of what they express, and there
isn't that weight of past singers of the same material on their backs.
The reputation of the GROUP is much more the focus in rock,rather than
individual singers. I think the idea is that the culture considers
what Rossini or Berg to have written to be masterworks of technical
direction AND expression (I think of it as being damned hard to do
both as a singer, from personal experience...if yer fuckin around in
the technical trix you sometimes miss the expression entirely...),
whereas the rock musician is no poet laureaute, but writes simply to
express himself. More sweeping generalizations to try to cover a very
broad topic ;P.
>>(this is a generalization OF COURSE).
>
>A huge generalization and one that makes no sense to me.
Through discussion we come to see more eye to eye. One or
both of us will change viewpoints, hopefully, and we will come to
concurr. That's the point of arguement, in my eyes.
>
>> However, within the field of rock/metal, there are singers
>>with opera /quality/ voices, like Tate or Eric Adams, who, while
>>singing quite differently than a diva or one of the three tenors ;).
>>still uses quite a lot of soaring tones and some technical tricks.
>
>By soaring I suppose that you mean high. None of those three tenors
>hit a note on a recording higher than a C#5. Tate on the other hand has
>hit an F#5 above that. The soaring tones that you're talking about have
>nothing at all to do with opera. They aren't even part of operatic technique.
>Halford even hit a G#5. What "technical tricks" are you talking about
>that both the "opreratic" rock singer and the actual opera singer have in
>common?
Actually, I think those rock singers I've been calling
operatic have more in common with the sopranos and altos than with the
tenors and basses. The ranges for an alto are more like those of say
LaBrie, as far as I know altos (it ain't far, really). The tricks are
vibratto and trills, and the operatic rock singers like Halford pull
off some remarkable tone shifts (he's actually going falsetto, of
course), which I usually attribute to the alto.
>
>>These singers are so easy to differentiate from the more mundane
>>(though I find nothing mundane about Dio!!!) rock vocalists that their
>>qualities are pointedly more operatic.
>>
>How so?
Think about the vocalist singing alone, without the group's
accompaniment. Who would attract more attention: Dio's mellow notes
or Tates soaring tone. Both have rich tones, more so than almost any
other vocalists in rock/metal, but that essential difference exists (I
didn't make it...rock/metal vocalists did!) that Dio sings within a
limited tone range and Tate takes up much more. While Tate is
doodling with the clouds in that stratosphere of tone he's in, Dio
must work with a smaller range, spending more time on expression.
Tate COULD be doing the same thing. The major point is that vocalists
with superior range (called operatic in context only) play with it a
lot, while the smaller range vocalist must focus on
emotional-expression with SUBTLETY. I suppose most of that "doodling"
in the supersonics can be seen as expressive, and I think it is, but
no so much as subtle work of the Dios and DiAnnos.
>> All art is some parts expressive, some parts technical, some
>>parts just art.
<etc>
This is a BIG argument that has existed for longer than either
of us have been alive...I think it's a bit off topic...if you wanna
discuss it (I love this topic), email me with yer thoughts.
>
>>I'd hesistantly label you as an hybrid operatic/expressive vocalist,
>>based on what I've heard of yer stuff, Mike.
>
>Call me what you will, I still don't like the labels. Do you have the CD?
>You know one of my pet peaves lately has become those damn .wav files.
>.Wav files are so short that you really don't get any idea of what's going on.
>I hated the .wav of SOTT, but when I heard the song I immediately love it.
>Well, that's another rant. Sorry...
I hate the labels too. Sometimes comparisons with other
singers is better. But people need some basis to talk about
rock/metal vocals, so they have created labels. It's a very human
thing...unfortunately. Most of us are simply not trained to be as
descriptive with our ears as we are with our eyes...Nope, don't have
the disc. I have the DREGS compilation, and you guys are one of the
better groups on that. We seem to go off topic a lot...if you wanna
start up an email conversation, I love to talk to singers and
artists...
>I think that any singerworth spit pays attention to diction. If you don't you
>won't be understood.
That's why those "operatic" guys sometimes get on my nerves.
Kiske may sound glorious in those "dog-fetching" ranges, but I can
hardly make out a word he's saying...LaBrie is worse...The focus on
diction and expression by these "expressive" singers comes about
because they don't have the playground that the "operatic"s do, so
they have to do more with what they have (or more to the point, they
BOTHER to do more with less range, instead of less with more range...)
>>I'm REAL picky about diction, as I'm a singer too (a hybrid
>>operatic-expressive, I admit).
>
>Well, I'd like to hear some of your stuff. You sound like the kind of
>rock singer that
>I like.
>
>Yours,
>
>Mike
>
This is a great discussion, Mike. I'm currently studying
Biochemistry, and my academics have always come before my arts
(unfortunately). I really don't have any recent recordings, and my
style is still in full development. I don't have incredible range,
and most of my range is low, but I think I know how to use it ;). My
background vocally is backed by a family who made sure my diction was
perfect...my vocal idol is Dio, and I think I can almost match him
almost note for note...I have to fudge the lines or try another path
when I try to mach Adams, Halford, or Tate. Cheers!
Now and Forever,
lmjh
Andreas
Erik van der Grinten and Matthew Jonathan Harper wrote:
> >The best vocalist is (IMHO) Damian Wilson (Landmarq, Threshold).
> >
> >Yesterday I was at a Threshold-gig in the Noorderligt, Tilburg
> >(Netherlands), and Damian was just awsome! From the very first minute
> >until the very last minute, his voice was perfect. Damian kicks > ass!!!!
> Yeah, Damien's quite great.
I agree with you guys.
Unfortunately, today is the last day of the recent Threshold tour.
In case you like to read a little more about the band Threshold,
check out my Threshold web-site with album reviews (of course my
personal humble opinion), tour dates and a few links (no pictures yet,
just written info so far).
Enjoy!
- Andreas -
Mike Z
In article <336fa6d3...@news.mindspring.com>, llor...@mindspring.com
wrote:
>mir...@tco.com (Mike Z) wrote:
>
>>In article <336de996...@news.mindspring.com>, llor...@mindspring.com
>>wrote:
>>
>>Listen, I don't mean to bust your balls, I just want to understand your point
>>of view. Let me say that at the outset. Here we go.
>
> Tis kewl. I like this sort of intellectual discussion, as if
>informs us (any of us) of certain ignorances (mostly mine) that we
>might have.
Yeah, I like this type of discussion as well. I'd be happy to take
whatever parts
(or the whole damn thing) to e-mail. I will reply to your post now though.
>I'm no big fan of opera, I'm just passingly familiar with
>it so anything I might generally say about it is prolly wholly
>misinformed...
I love opera. I just got back from the Metropolitan Opera. I saw Die Walkure
from Wagner's Ring Cycle. God that guy could write! The opera started at
6pm and ended at 11pm. Now that's a lot of opera! It was so engrossing that
the time passed incredibly quickly. Well, that's neither here nor there.
Just had
a good time and thought I'd mention it.
>rock/metal is another matter...
That's my first love.
>at least we don't bitch
>like the Genesis and Dio ngs do ;)!
I subscribe to the Dio newsgroup but I haven't seen much action over there.
This is my home. I may be a little biased, but there doesn't seem to be
any good
activity going on over there. The discussions seem stale or
non-existent. What
do they bitch about?
>I'm gonna snip this up to shorten
>it...
Good idea!
^^^^^^^^
I don't know why you used the word distraction. It makes it seem like
the use of these techniques is taking away from the music or the expression
or something. I don't think that you meant that (I hope not). I think that
those "distractions" add to the music.
>tone-shifts, and other technical tricks that are as far as I know part
^^^^
"Tricks," like distraction has a negative connotation. Again, I hope that
none was meant to be implied because I feel that these things add to music
played on *any* instrument.
>of the oratio...
Umm... I don't know if I can answer that. I'm afraid that I don't know what
an oratio is. I do agree that a good singer has those techniques at his
disposal.
>correct me if I'm wrong, and if that's the singer's
>choice...Part of my point is that opera vocalists DO NOT create their
>own material.
Yes, that's true, but interpretation is a very complex art. Most actors don't
create their own material either, but they must interpret what the writer
(composer)
meant to say. There are endless ways to sing a song, a good singer is one who
choses from the ways that sound good. You know, after a song is written, just
because I've written the song doesn't mean much anymore. I'm really back
in that
mode of interpreter. True, I'm interpreting my own material, but I'm
still only
interpreting while I'm singing. You know, you could even say that an
artist who
is painting from a model is not creating there own material either, they
are interpreting
what is physically in front of them.
>There is a wealth of classic performances behind them,
>some technically and artistically perfect, and they must attempt for
>their reputation (being an actor I know how important reputation
>is...) to match or excell those past singers.
Well, yeah. You have to match or surpass the singers that have come
before; but
your interpretation will not be the same as theirs. It will be much
different. It can still
be just as good. A singer may even change their interpretation from night
to night. It's
really impossible to sing a song exactly the same way twice.
>In rock the only case
>similar to that is cover bands, who usually work similarly. Normally
>rock singers CREATE their own melody lines, and often their own
>lyrics.
True. But look at QR for example. Chris wrote a lot of the material
himself. That puts
Geoff in the role of interpreter. There is no shame in being an interpreter
>They are entirely in control of what they express, and there
>isn't that weight of past singers of the same material on their backs.
>The reputation of the GROUP is much more the focus in rock,rather than
>individual singers. I think the idea is that the culture considers
>what Rossini or Berg to have written to be masterworks of technical
>direction AND expression (I think of it as being damned hard to do
>both as a singer, from personal experience...if yer fuckin around in
>the technical trix you sometimes miss the expression entirely...),
Anyone who is lost in the technique of a piece and is not able to think about
the expressiveness of the piece is simply not at the technical level that
they need
to be to perform that piece. I don't think that professional opera
singers are thinking
technique when they're performing. It's all about expression then.
>>>(this is a generalization OF COURSE).
>>
>>A huge generalization and one that makes no sense to me.
>
> Through discussion we come to see more eye to eye. One or
>both of us will change viewpoints, hopefully, and we will come to
>concurr. That's the point of arguement, in my eyes.
Well, I hope that you intend on changing your viewpoints because I'm sure as
hell not going to :^)! Actually, in most cases I don't think that one of
us necessarily
needs to change our viewpoint, we just need to clarify our viewpoints and
agree on
some discriptive terms.
>>
>>By soaring I suppose that you mean high. None of those three tenors
>>hit a note on a recording higher than a C#5. Tate on the other hand has
>>hit an F#5 above that. The soaring tones that you're talking about have
>>nothing at all to do with opera. They aren't even part of operatic technique.
>>Halford even hit a G#5. What "technical tricks" are you talking about
>>that both the "opreratic" rock singer and the actual opera singer have in
>>common?
>
> Actually, I think those rock singers I've been calling
>operatic have more in common with the sopranos and altos than with the
>tenors and basses.
yeah, many of the rock vocalists will creep into the alto register. A good alto
will tend to be able to hit a G5.
>The ranges for an alto are more like those of say
>LaBrie, as far as I know altos (it ain't far, really). The tricks are
>vibratto and trills, and the operatic rock singers like Halford pull
>off some remarkable tone shifts (he's actually going falsetto, of
>course), which I usually attribute to the alto.
Yeah, he's going falsetto, but there's so much support behind the notes that
it sounds like it's full voice. That's what's cool about these guys!
>>
>>>These singers are so easy to differentiate from the more mundane
>>>(though I find nothing mundane about Dio!!!) rock vocalists that their
>>>qualities are pointedly more operatic.
>>>
>>How so?
>
> Think about the vocalist singing alone, without the group's
>accompaniment. Who would attract more attention: Dio's mellow notes
>or Tates soaring tone. Both have rich tones, more so than almost any
>other vocalists in rock/metal, but that essential difference exists (I
>didn't make it...rock/metal vocalists did!) that Dio sings within a
>limited tone range and Tate takes up much more.
Do you realize that Dio is singing in the two octave operatic tenor (highest
male voice) range? Perhaps he should be called operatic. Of course, he's
not using operatic technique, but his range is more similar to opera than
Tate's (who's range in the old days exceeded operatic range by an augmented
fourth). I don't disagree that there is a difference in the range of Tate
and Dio
(although they grow closer everyday it seems), I question the use of your
terminology. I just don't understand why opera is brought into it. I never
did and you're not the first one to say that Geoff sounds operatic. I
agree that
Geoff sounds operatic on some occasions in that he's using vibrato and has a
deep tone that is well supported, but so does Dio. I've heard the statement
sometimes that the really high notes make Tate (and others who hit those notes)
sound operatic. I assure you that no one at the opera is hitting those
notes but the
women. It is not an operatic technique, so I think that it doesn't make
sense to
include that type of range in your description of an operatic singer. As
far as the
other stuff goes, many singer that can't hit G5's can do trills, add
vibrato, and are
able to leap tall intervals in a single bound, so why aren't they operatic?
>While Tate is
>doodling with the clouds in that stratosphere of tone he's in, Dio
>must work with a smaller range, spending more time on expression.
>Tate COULD be doing the same thing. The major point is that vocalists
>with superior range (called operatic in context only) play with it a
>lot, while the smaller range vocalist must focus on
>emotional-expression with SUBTLETY. I suppose most of that "doodling"
>in the supersonics can be seen as expressive, and I think it is, but
>no so much as subtle work of the Dios and DiAnnos.
>
I think that you're getting into a very subjective area here. There are many
people who whould argue that Tate is many times as subtle as Dio (and Dio
ain't always subtle). I think that often it is quite expressive to nail a
really high
note, but it's all relative. When Dio hits a high C5 it's awesome because
you hear
that he's written the song in a way that works up so dramatically to that
note, in the
same way when Tate might have blasted out a high E5 then that was really
dramatic
becaus it was his high note. I think that you're saying that Tate has an edge
expression wise in that he has three octave to work with whereas Dio only
has two.
I get it, but I think that two is plenty of range to write incrediblely
expressive music
without even having to wish for another octave. I certainly don't think
that Dio feels
limited. You learn to use what you've got. It's not how big your range
is, it's the
motion of the melody :^)! I've heard some increadibly expressive songs
using just an
octave and a half. I don't think that range means all that much. Sure it
gives you a bigger
palate to work with, and that's cool, but it's not the be all and the end all.
>>> All art is some parts expressive, some parts technical, some
>>>parts just art.
><etc>
>
Well, I would have liked to see you respond to what I said. I think that
it would be cool
to give everyone a chance to jump in. Maybe some of the bible scholars
would like to take
a break and join us :^)!
> This is a BIG argument that has existed for longer than either
>of us have been alive...I think it's a bit off topic...if you wanna
>discuss it (I love this topic), email me with yer thoughts.
>
I will. Actually, you e-mail me with yours. It's your move :^)!
>>
>>>I'd hesistantly label you as an hybrid operatic/expressive vocalist,
>>>based on what I've heard of yer stuff, Mike.
>>
>>Call me what you will, I still don't like the labels. Do you have the CD?
>>You know one of my pet peaves lately has become those damn .wav files.
>>.Wav files are so short that you really don't get any idea of what's
going on.
>>I hated the .wav of SOTT, but when I heard the song I immediately love it.
>>Well, that's another rant. Sorry...
>
> I hate the labels too. Sometimes comparisons with other
>singers is better. But people need some basis to talk about
>rock/metal vocals, so they have created labels. It's a very human
>thing...unfortunately.
Oh, I understand that. I'm not arguing against lables, I'm arguing
against *your*
lables :^)! I think that the terms that you used to describe different
categories of singer
actually either don't apply very well to the singers or apply to many
singers in categories
that you wouldn't have put them in.
>Most of us are simply not trained to be as
>descriptive with our ears as we are with our eyes...Nope, don't have
>the disc. I have the DREGS compilation, and you guys are one of the
>better groups on that.
Thanks!
>We seem to go off topic a lot...if you wanna
>start up an email conversation, I love to talk to singers and
>artists...
>
Sure. Include whatever you want to discuss in your mail about the
art/expression thing.
>>I think that any singerworth spit pays attention to diction. If you
don't you
>>won't be understood.
>
> That's why those "operatic" guys sometimes get on my nerves.
>Kiske may sound glorious in those "dog-fetching" ranges, but I can
>hardly make out a word he's saying...LaBrie is worse...The focus on
>diction and expression by these "expressive" singers comes about
>because they don't have the playground that the "operatic"s do, so
>they have to do more with what they have (or more to the point, they
>BOTHER to do more with less range, instead of less with more range...)
>
You see, again there's a thing that doesn't make sense about using the
term operatic to descricribe the singers that you mentioned. Why not call the
other guys operatic (not that that would really make much sense either)?
Operatic singer are very concerned with their diction. Why call a singer who
doesn't display that (in fact displayes the antithesis of that) operatic?
>
> This is a great discussion, Mike.
Yeah, it's fun!
>I'm currently studying
>Biochemistry, and my academics have always come before my arts
>(unfortunately). I really don't have any recent recordings, and my
>style is still in full development. I don't have incredible range,
>and most of my range is low, but I think I know how to use it ;). My
>background vocally is backed by a family who made sure my diction was
>perfect...my vocal idol is Dio, and I think I can almost match him
>almost note for note...I have to fudge the lines or try another path
>when I try to mach Adams, Halford, or Tate.
Well, you've certainly mentioned some great singer! I hope to hear some
of you on tape at one point!
Speak to you soon!
Jim Gordon
>> Yeah, Damien's quite great. I'd like to make a point that
>>singers, especially in rock/metal, can pretty well be divided into
>>three categories: Operatic (Tate, Alder, Kiske), Expressive (Dio,
>>Di'Anno, Hetfield), or Gimic (King Diamond, Jon Oliva). All three
>>overflow a bit, but most singers are mostly one only. My all-time
>>fave is Dio, but my favorite operatic vocalist is Tate.
>> Any suggestions/revisions to my idea?
Jon Oliva- gimic?!? Thou speakest blasphemy, dude! I would put him in
the expressive category....but I guess King Diamond is sort of gimmicky.
-Jim
Matthew Jonathan Harper
> Jon Oliva- gimic?!? Thou speakest blasphemy, dude! I would put him in
>the expressive category....but I guess King Diamond is sort of gimmicky.
>
>-Jim
>
him. In fact, if there is, I'd like to join it. He's one of my
absolute fave vocalists ever, and I was quite unhappily suprised when
I bought _Edge of Thorns_, put it on, and heard Zak's hard rock vocals
:(!
As far as him having a "gimic," he does have a bit...that
rough stuff is from his well-smoked voice-box...as anyone who's
listened extensively to _Streets_ or _Gutter Ballet_ will prolly
admit, Jon has a GREAT voice straight, w/o the growl. Too bad the Dr.
Butcher album was SOOO heavy that his straight voice wasn't altogether
useful except during "The Chair." I may see the growls and high
pitched howls as "gimics," but that does NOT mean I do not appreciate
them...King Diamond, as much as I like him, doesn't _hold a candle_ to
Jon!!! You see, I have this shirt, it says "Savatage LEGION" on the
front, and "Still the Orchestra Plays" on the back. _Sirens_, _Hall
of the Mountain King_, _Gutter Ballet_, _Streets_: All masterpieces
of their times! Long live the 'Tage!
Now and Forever,
lmjh
Eric H. Raeside
> >>three categories: Operatic (Tate, Alder, Kiske), Expressive (Dio,
> >>Di'Anno, Hetfield), or Gimic (King Diamond, Jon Oliva). All three
Jon Oliva certainly does not fall within the "gimmick" category. I suggest
you pick up Streets: A Rock Opera, Gutter Ballet or even Power of the
Night.
With regard to Geoff Tate. In the beginning(QR, The Warning) his vocals
could be considered as being expressive(like John Arch on ATG & TSW). The
opera style originated on RAGE FOR ORDER.
Eric
Cypher
>What we have got here is just wonderful singers.
>They can really sing, but they do it in their own way.
Very well said! However, I think Geoff Tate is ruining his voice by
smoking! You can really hear it on their last album.
-Cypher
Bill Murphy
Frankly, I think LaBrie is one of the worst vocalists of all time. He
never quite seems to hit the note he's straining for and, instead,
sounds like he's either screaming like a banshee or affecting the
"breathy" vocals of a rank amateur.
I think Geoff Tate is very good, although on their latest album his
vocals are as subdued as Geddy Lee's of late. No operatic for Geoff any
more.
Alder never really impressed me -- especially in concert -- but on A
Pleasant Shade of Gray, his delivers the goods with precision and
professional restraint.
So, in order, I vote Tate, Alder and, far last, LaBrie.
Dietrick Hardwick
Hello All...
Okay, You've got yer Tate, an incredible singer in all the ranges, yet a bit pretentious here
and there. Although he delivers each and every QR song well, he is still singing almost in
"third person". I mean his performance sounds like a dramatization or portrayal rather than
an earnest heartfelt piece of work that was a natural and organic response to something
that moved him. Tooo pre mediTATEd. Don't get me wrong.. I love the guy's vox.
Then you got yer Alder... who brings across a melancholy vibe that truly touches us, yet
we know it is Matheos who is the brilliant wordsmith behind his eloquent and heartfelt
performance. So we ask ourselves... was it genuine...was it him?? Or just a convincing
recital of Matheos' poignant lyrics? Do we care? I don't. I vote Alder. He hits something
inside that is moving regardless of his role in the band as a creative force beyong singering.
LaBrie? Are we talking cheese?? No... cool it.. I'm only kidding. The same deal here, a
singer who is working with some one elses lyrics/music for the most part. Nothing wrong
with it. It just brings questions of sincerity to mind when you actively ponder it. What
would this guy be doing under his own creative direction? The best voice I have ever heard
in the prog/power metal arena is Ralf Scheepers, ex-Gamma Ray, who delivered the most
incredible , impassioned performances on all the Gamma Ray stuff!! BUT the guy, who I'd
have believed in and followed anywhere, instantly de-mystified himself by doing other
projects that were quite hokey. How could he not recognize how special the music was
with GammaRay? How could he sing cornball stuff after that and think it was good? I'm
baffled. He still is my favorite. Just another case of Halford syndrome. How can you be so
great and then just turn around and cheeeesssee?? But then again, I work with a singer who
does whatever the creative songsmithing demands, and delivers no prob. He considers it
part of his role as a singer and well rounded musician to meet this as a challenge, so I'm
probably waaay off base. Okay, I'm done. Anyone agree? disagree? LaBrie? Alder is my
choice. Check the link below for a cool board to discuss this stuff on.
_TheD.
--
=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-
The MindPage:
Progressive & Power Metal Music Conferencing, The Ultimate Link Matrix, Independent
Music tips and resources, MINDCAGE sounds, news, and pix, and much more!
http://www.mindcage.com/contents.html
" It is my constant goal to assimilate the idiom of peasant music and employ it as my
mother tongue."-Bela Bartok
--
=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-=|=-
The MindPage:
Progressive & Power Metal Music Conferencing, The Ultimate Link Matrix, Independent
Music tips and resources, MINDCAGE sounds, news, and pix, and much more!
http://www.mindcage.com/contents.html
" It is my constant goal to assimilate the idiom of peasant music and employ it as my
mother tongue."-Bela Bartok
Matthew Jonathan Harper
Bill Murphy <bmu...@execpc.com> wrote:
>Frankly, I think LaBrie is one of the worst vocalists of all time. He
>never quite seems to hit the note he's straining for and, instead,
>sounds like he's either screaming like a banshee or affecting the
>"breathy" vocals of a rank amateur.
Yeah, he can get on my nerves too, mostly in that he (esp. on
_I&W_) considers diction to be secondary to hitting those really high
notes. He must think "I'm in the company of virtuosos, so I gotta
sing virtuoso too." What he fails to understand is that part of his
job is to sing LYRICS that are COMPREHENSABLE to anyone other than
dogs.
>
>I think Geoff Tate is very good, although on their latest album his
>vocals are as subdued as Geddy Lee's of late. No operatic for Geoff any
>more.
Hey, I like Geddy's voice, whether he's screaming or being
mild. Geddy has a beautiful voice. Geoff prolly ruined his voice by
approaching his high notes wrong...but if you look at his past works,
he shines like few have EVER shone...
>
>Alder never really impressed me -- especially in concert -- but on A
>Pleasant Shade of Gray, his delivers the goods with precision and
>professional restraint.
My opinion of Alder fluctuates wildly per *song*...sometimes
I'm thinking "is this guy a genius?" and other times I'm thinking "is
this guy trying to call cats in heat?" Somtimes his transitions are
weird, and his melody lines can get even weirder, but he's got quite a
good and rich set of pipes there.
>
>So, in order, I vote Tate, Alder and, far last, LaBrie.
Same here. And Ronnie James Dio before ALL of 'em ;)!
Now and Forever,
lmjh
M...@mail.utexas.edu
Dietrick Hardwick wrote:
> Hello All...
> Okay, You've got yer Tate, an incredible singer in all the ranges, yet a bit pretentious here
> and there. Although he delivers each and every QR song well, he is still singing almost in
> "third person". I mean his performance sounds like a dramatization or portrayal rather than
> an earnest heartfelt piece of work that was a natural and organic response to something
> that moved him. Tooo pre mediTATEd. Don't get me wrong.. I love the guy's vox.
>
THAT is emotion.
-"Q"
M...@mail.utexas.edu
Matthew Jonathan Harper wrote:
> >
> >So, in order, I vote Tate, Alder and, far last, LaBrie.
>
> Same here. And Ronnie James Dio before ALL of 'em ;)!
> Now and Forever,
> lmjh
Dio? You're joking right?
-"Q"
Mike Z
>Matthew Jonathan Harper wrote:
>> >
>> >So, in order, I vote Tate, Alder and, far last, LaBrie.
>>
>> Same here. And Ronnie James Dio before ALL of 'em ;)!
>> Now and Forever,
>> lmjh
>
> Dio? You're joking right?
>
Hey, Ronnie sings great! He's still got every ounce of it at 50, too!
Joost Winter
Well... my vote goes vore Michael Kiske (ex-Helloween). On the first
albums, he did that extremely high pitched thing, which he did very
well, but sometimes annoyed me a bit. On Chameleon and the later stuff
however, he didn't lose his voice and began to sound raspy, like Bruce
Dickinson did, but he sings hardly in falsetto anymore, but uses his
normal high voice, which, I think is even better than the stuff on
Keepers. I think his vocals on Chameleon made it the best sung album
ever, and on his solo album Instant Clarity, he is almost as good, the
only problem is that I don't like the music too much.
No-one can beat Mike Kiske's vocals!
----- Unofficial Stratovarius Site:
Jooft http://www.dra.nl/~jooft/stratovarius/
Erik van der Grinten
Joost Winter wrote:
>
> No-one can beat Mike Kiske's vocals!
>
Well, I was the one who started this thread and it was my intention to
say to all of you that Damian Wilson (Threshold and Landmarq) was the
better vocalist. See what happens when you start something like this!
Bill Murphy
M...@mail.utexas.edu wrote:
>
> Dietrick Hardwick wrote:
> > Hello All...
> > Okay, You've got yer Tate, an incredible singer in all the ranges, yet a bit pretentious here
> > and there. Although he delivers each and every QR song well, he is still singing almost in
> > "third person". I mean his performance sounds like a dramatization or portrayal rather than
> > an earnest heartfelt piece of work that was a natural and organic response to something
> > that moved him. Tooo pre mediTATEd. Don't get me wrong.. I love the guy's vox.
> >
> THAT is emotion.
Actually, I think I agree with the comment concerning Tate singing in
"third person." I've always thought that. He seems somehow detached
from the music. On the first two 'ryche albums (okay, right up until
Mindcrime), I thought his piercing vocal style (hitting all those high
notes) was perfect. He seemed to be singing with heart and soul. As
the band got older, and his register dropped, so did a lot of emotional
interaction. Empire has a lot of low vocals. So does Promised Land.
Ditto for Hear in the Now Frontier.
I don't know why that is, but when a singer drops down a few octaves it
seems to offer less gut-wrenching power. Geddy Lee is that way. I
LOVED his piercing wail. Everything since the late '80s/early '90s
sounds to me like the guy is sleep walking through songs.
Matthew Jonathan Harper
mir...@tco.com (Mike Z) wrote:
>In article <33758E...@mail.utexas.edu>, M...@mail.utexas.edu wrote:
>
>>Matthew Jonathan Harper wrote:
>>> >
>>> >So, in order, I vote Tate, Alder and, far last, LaBrie.
>>>
>>> Same here. And Ronnie James Dio before ALL of 'em ;)!
>>> Now and Forever,
>>> lmjh
>>
>> Dio? You're joking right?
>>
>Hey, Ronnie sings great! He's still got every ounce of it at 50, too!
>
Thanks for the support Mike. Dio may not have the oh-so high
range that Kiske/Tate/etc. have, but he is just soooo monstrously
expressive, and the tone of his voice just gives me goose bumps. His
voice has changed _very little_ since the 70s (or 60s, or 50s... ;) ).
Just listen to "Rainbow Eyes" off of Rainbow's
_Long_Live_Rock_and_Roll_ and you'll see just what a genius he is!
Now and Forever,
lmjh
LFulk33
<< If Someone Else? isn't a heart felt singing performance then what
is?
THAT is emotion. >>
can someone say "Promised Land" the song? if Someone Else is his most
emotional piece, then PL is easily second place.. how about that line "And
the question 'WHY AM I?'" - THAT is pure emotion as well
or even "So many times I tried and failed, to gather my courage reach
again for that nail.. life's been like draggin feet through sand, and
never FINDing promised land" .. i can almost feel like I'm nikki in that
song..
and saved? yeah, no emotion there..
- Larry (Long Island Revolution)
"Read between the lines, criticize the words they're selling
Think for yourself and feel the walls become sand beneath your feet."
Mike Z
In article <3376959e...@news.mindspring.com>, llor...@mindspring.com
wrote:
>mir...@tco.com (Mike Z) wrote:
>
>>In article <33758E...@mail.utexas.edu>, M...@mail.utexas.edu wrote:
>>
>>>Matthew Jonathan Harper wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >So, in order, I vote Tate, Alder and, far last, LaBrie.
>>>>
>>>> Same here. And Ronnie James Dio before ALL of 'em ;)!
>>>> Now and Forever,
>>>> lmjh
>>>
>>> Dio? You're joking right?
>>>
>>Hey, Ronnie sings great! He's still got every ounce of it at 50, too!
>>
> Thanks for the support Mike. Dio may not have the oh-so high
>range that Kiske/Tate/etc. have, but he is just soooo monstrously
>expressive, and the tone of his voice just gives me goose bumps. His
>voice has changed _very little_ since the 70s (or 60s, or 50s... ;) ).
Very true!
>Just listen to "Rainbow Eyes" off of Rainbow's
>_Long_Live_Rock_and_Roll_ and you'll see just what a genius he is!
A beautiful song, beautifully sung!
Yours,
Mike
Chris Dare
King Diamond is the most unique singer who ever lived. Nobody else
compares to the King. Long live the KING!
My website:
Shabba2
King Diamond? Good joke, buddy. -Colin
SBrook
LFulk33 wrote in article <19970513012...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
><<aaaaaaaahhhhhhhh! Egypt! -Colin >>
>
Hey uh..Colin...no relation to colon I am sure...That idiocy you spew is
neither GT, LaBrie, or Adler...try King Diamond/Mercyful Fate...
Shabba2
aaaaaaaahhhhhhhh! Egypt! -Colin
LFulk33
<<aaaaaaaahhhhhhhh! Egypt! -Colin >>
hey Colin, did you forget how to quote? =) what exactly is this in
reference to?
- Larry
Mark Derricutt
In article <3376959e...@news.mindspring.com>,
llor...@mindspring.com says...
> Thanks for the support Mike. Dio may not have the oh-so high
> range that Kiske/Tate/etc. have, but he is just soooo monstrously
> expressive, and the tone of his voice just gives me goose bumps. His
You will probably kill me - but what do you guys think of Burton
C Bell's vocals (Fear Factory), on their last CD "Demanufacture"
Burton displays some awesome singing...
--
------------+ http://www.chalice.gen.nz +------------
- Prayer Requests @ http:/www.chalice.gen.nz/prayer -
-----------------------------------------------------
-+ E-Mail: ma...@chalice.gen.nz Undernet: Naked +-
-+ NZ Christian Music & Home of the Dark Christian +-
Diana Gilbert/Jerry Cohen
I actually like Burton C. Bell--he's perfect for the music. He
can sing in a good death-style voice, and his voice sounds great
when he switches to the more processed vocals in the choruses.
If you liked "Demanufacture", check out G//Z/R, it's got Burton
on vocals with a band that's much more talented than Fear Factory
backing him up. Other strong singers--Maynard Keenan from Tool and
Matthew Barlow from Iced Earth.
-=Jordan=-
covellid
Come on Larry - This is the great King singing with Mercyful Fate! :))
I'm also a big fan...
--
"Behind the disguise of a man with a cause, there's a child screaming
with nothing left to say." - Fates Warning
Dante L. Covelli
Mark Tiplady
Nice thread this. I'd like to add a couple of my favourites into the melting
pot. These two may not have "classic hard rock" voices but the emotion and
power they can convey is, at times, simply stunning.
Who are these people? Well, there's Steve Perry (who everyone should know)
and Steve Hogarth of Marillion (who will probably be less familiar).
H, as he's known, is one of those singers who's improving with age. His
vocals on the new album, This Strange Engine have to be heard to be believed,
especially on the ending of the title track - simply spine-tingling. I'm
happy to say he can also pull it all off live too.
Mark.
Shabba2
Hey lfulk, sorry for being an idiot there :(. Anyone who claims to have
knowledge about King diamond or Mercyful fate will know what that was. It
is the moronic opening to the "classic" MF song, Egypt.King diamond
screams "aaaahhhh" and then says Egypt. After almost 22 years of listening
to music, I have never heard anything so STUPID in my life as that line.
You seem to like them, so who's the idiot now? By the way, you seem to
like to make fun of my name (pronounced call-in, not colon you putz), but
I seem to recall you never putting your real name on this NG. At least I
have the balls to do so. Not to sound like such an asshole, but you had no
right to call me an idiot or make fun of my name. I stand by my opinion
and the name given to me at birth. Watch your mouth, please.-Colin
LFulk33
woah! are you talking to me? that wasn't me that wrote that Colon post.. i
know your name, and i always write mine at the end, its Larry.. and i
certainly never called you an idiot.. hmm, somebody else responded to a
message that I never sent also.. i think AOL screwed something up.. so
just so you know, it was not I that was insulting you..
- Larry
Shabba2
O, so larry didn't say that, it's ok. But whoever did is coward for not
admitting to it. I know Larry from here and I know he posts his name and
he is a very agreeable person, so don't anyone get offended. It was only
my name. :) -Colin
covellid
Shabba2 wrote:
>
> Hey lfulk, sorry for being an idiot there :(. Anyone who claims to have
> knowledge about King diamond or Mercyful fate will know what that was. It
> is the moronic opening to the "classic" MF song, Egypt.King diamond
> screams "aaaahhhh" and then says Egypt. After almost 22 years of listening
> to music, I have never heard anything so STUPID in my life as that line.
Just curious what you find so stupid about that line... I know that the
King can annoy many people (probably most...) but is it the lyrics to
the song? or his voice? or just that particular line? The lyrics are
actually pretty cool...
> You seem to like them, so who's the idiot now? By the way, you seem to
> like to make fun of my name (pronounced call-in, not colon you putz), but
> I seem to recall you never putting your real name on this NG. At least I
> have the balls to do so. Not to sound like such an asshole, but you had no
> right to call me an idiot or make fun of my name. I stand by my opinion
> and the name given to me at birth. Watch your mouth, please.-Colin
Hey Colin, don't worry about the name-calling, I'm 6'2", 210 and I had a
teacher in high school who thought it was hilarious to mispronounce my
name "Dainty." It bothered me then, but I've figured out since then
that anyone who needs to put down something your parents (presumably)
picked out for you, possibly passed down from generations - is probably
a bottom-feeder...
Later,
Dante (pronounced Don'-tay)
John Wood
Mark Tiplady wrote:
>
> Nice thread this. I'd like to add a couple of my favourites into the melting
> pot. These two may not have "classic hard rock" voices but the emotion and
> power they can convey is, at times, simply stunning.
>
> Who are these people? Well, there's Steve Perry (who everyone should know)
> and Steve Hogarth of Marillion (who will probably be less familiar).
I'll agree here! Perry is certainly one of the premier male vocalists
in popular music, there is no denying that. Please, please let Journey
tour...
John
Ben Lauter
On 14 May 1997, Shabba2 wrote:
> Hey lfulk, sorry for being an idiot there :(. Anyone who claims to have
> knowledge about King diamond or Mercyful fate will know what that was. It
> is the moronic opening to the "classic" MF song, Egypt.King diamond
> screams "aaaahhhh" and then says Egypt. After almost 22 years of listening
> to music, I have never heard anything so STUPID in my life as that line.
> You seem to like them, so who's the idiot now? By the way, you seem to
> like to make fun of my name (pronounced call-in, not colon you putz), but
> I seem to recall you never putting your real name on this NG. At least I
> have the balls to do so. Not to sound like such an asshole, but you had no
> right to call me an idiot or make fun of my name. I stand by my opinion
> and the name given to me at birth. Watch your mouth, please.-Colin
>
Dude, It's only the introduction to the song. And what gives you the
right to call anyone who likes King Diamond/Mercyful Fate an idiot?! King
hasn't lost a thing, not even his voice, whereas most of your other boys
from QR, DT, have already blown their cords.
You're pretty judgmental of others' tastes, Colin (pronounced Call-in) and
tell others to watch their mouth then use phrases like "having balls" and
calling people idiots at will. You're a hypocrite on a soapbox. People
can enjoy what they want and shouldn't have to be belittled for thie
musical tastes.
Buh-bye
Ben
Bill Murphy
Now you guys are talking! Steve Perry has one of the best voices in all
of rock. He's my all-time favorite vocalist. Smooth as silk, yet able
to hit sky-high notes. A phenomenal tenor. I saw Thin Lizzy open for
Journey in 1979. I was in the front row. I'll never forget that tour.
I saw Steve Perry in St. Louis in 1994 (in the same club I saw Dream
Theater and Fates Warning in). His voice is still just as clear and
strong.
Steve Hogarth, on the other hand, is one of the crappiest vocalists I've
ever heard. I loved Marillion when Fish was in the band. Now THAT was
a unique line-up with chemistry up the yin-yang. But Marillion has been
going downhill ever since Hogarth joined them. Talk about a nasal,
whiny, wimpy voice!
I know this thread has taken a non-Fates turn, and I ask everyone to
please forgive me for getting off-subject. But I just had to vent a
bit. I still think Tate is great. Alder has got some pipes on him.
LaBrie sucks donkey dick.
But when we're talking about vocalists, there are vocalists and then
there are legends. Long after LaBrie has become worm food, people will
still remember Steve Perry and those absolutely gorgeous Journey songs.
That, my friends, is true talent.
I'm off my soapbox now. Please don't flame me too badly.
Mike Z
>Mark Tiplady wrote:
>>
>> Nice thread this. I'd like to add a couple of my favourites into the melting
>> pot. These two may not have "classic hard rock" voices but the emotion and
>> power they can convey is, at times, simply stunning.
>>
>> Who are these people? Well, there's Steve Perry (who everyone should know)
>> and Steve Hogarth of Marillion (who will probably be less familiar).
>
>I'll agree here! Perry is certainly one of the premier male vocalists
>in popular music, there is no denying that. Please, please let Journey
>tour...
>
At the risk of being called a wuss for listening to a "girls band" I'll
second that
emotion!! Come on Steve, fix up that injury!
Shabba2
Fear Factory is a band everyone should check out. They are absolutely
killer live. -Colin
Shabba2
Thank you Ben. for the kind words. I am hypocritical because I have an
opinion, right? Do you care to re-read my message and notice that I never
said KD fans are idiots. I said the person who likes them, yet doesn't
know what I was quoting is the idiot. When I say I have balls to put my
name on the post and that dude is making fun of my NAME, then I can say
all day to watch his mouth. Making fun of someones name is petty. Like I
had choice in the matter. Besides, I like my name as not many people have
it. Ben, Diamond is not almost 40 like Tate, Labrie is young and has not
"blown" his chords yet. Also notice, boy wonder, I never one time made fun
of anyone for liking the band. I merely laughed at a lyric that most
people would find funny as I did. Ben, don't take aim unless you have the
talent to hit. -Colin
Ben Lauter
Quoth Colin:
It is the moronic opening to the "classic" MF song, Egypt.King diamond
> screams "aaaahhhh" and then says Egypt. After almost 22 years of
listening
> to music, I have never heard anything so STUPID in my life as that line.
> You seem to like them, so who's the idiot now?
Unless the thread is really garbled, your name appears as the author of
this comment, and you didn't laugh at the lyric. It's one word, not a
line, and you called the person an idiot for liking the band. It's right
there.
Bullseye
Shabba2
Ben, you have misinterpreted what I said. I called the author an idiot
because he claimed to like the band, therefore he should have known what
the quote was from. "Who's the idiot now?" refers to the person who is an
idiot for trying to make me look silly when in fact he never knew what he
was talking about in the first place.I never said ANYWHERE that people who
like KD or MF are idiots and stand by that. What you might want to do is
take English 101 again at your high school. Bullseyes are reserved for
those of us who know what in hell we are talking about. -Colin
van Leeuwen
My two cents:
Ray Alder rules supreme!
But: what do you people think of Buddy Lackey from Psychotic Waltz? He
don't think he should be left out of this discussion.
-Marco van Leeuwen.
HCullen13
All I have to say is the following...
I've been listening to music for 26 years and everyone has different
tastes. Geoff Tate has NOT lost his voice whatsoever but then again
Mercyful Fate sounds the same as 5 years ago. I just think people need to
understand different music and appreciate it. Listen to Zeppelin 15 years
ago and listen to Robert Plant on Manic Nirvana you'll understand. You
may like Zeppelin but you may not like Plant after 20 years either.
synthuser
Appreciate Mercyful Fate? With King Diamond on vocals...LOL What a bunch
of crap. A friend gave me a couple of cd's to check out. I still
laugh just thinking about it. Although the neighbors dogs didn't
appreciate the King's wonderful excursions into falsetto land.
Today I was in blockbuster and I checked out some 1996 MF cd
(title? who cares it sucked)thinking maybe.... What a joke. It started
off with the "Our Father..." but it was the satanic version. oooooooooo
I was sooooo scared.
covellid
Please don't try to judge King by the apparent limited knowledge you
have of him. There is no one else in the music industry that has more
fun making music than KD. He is a Satanist and occasional still writes
about it (which I don't especially like, but it doesn't bother me), but
for the most part he is playing for reactions. I'm sure he'd love to
know that you're laughing - I laugh half the time, not at him, but
because it is intended.
KD is easily the best concept CD writer in the music biz. I love O:M,
the music is amazing, the lyrics (song for song) are spectacular, but
IMHO the story isn't tight enough, it meanders and loses direction in
some points (it can be good to have people guessing about the conclusion
of a story, but because you've given the clues and people can't figure
it out - not because you haven't given enough info...)
Abigail, Them, The Conspiracy, and The Graveyard, are some of the best
horror stories ever told (The Graveyard is actually the story of a child
molester getting what's coming to him, so horror in a different way).
Obviously he doesn't have a classically trained voice, and I'm not sure
I would have ever gotten into him if I hadn't read the lyrics to Them.
But if you take him for what he is - a great horror writer who can do a
million things with his voice (whether you like what he does or not,
he's able to create male/female, young/old, spirits/human characters
that are believable) - then it's easy to like what he does.
I can't believe I just wrote 3 serious paragraphs about KD (and one of
them comparing O:M to his works). Listen, I love listening to KD when
I'm in the mood for what he brings - but I just hate it when people hear
his falsetto and blatantly dismiss him.
See ya,
Dante
p.s. I was just re-reading my above sacrilege! I have said a bad word
about Operation:Mindcrime. Death to Dante!
synthuser
3 paragraphs on the merits of KD? LOL
synthuser
covellid wrote:
> I can't believe I just wrote 3 serious paragraphs about KD (and one of
> them comparing O:M to his works). Listen, I love listening to KD when
> I'm in the mood for what he brings - but I just hate it when people hear
> his falsetto and blatantly dismiss him.
>
> See ya,
>
> Dante
>
I can't believe it either. Maybe this an issue your therapist can help
you with?
As far as Blatantly dismissing KD, because of his love for falsetto? How
about
blatantly dismissing KD because its crap, bullshit, garbage, etc.
BTW, forget about the lame semi-outa-tune falsetto,
the moronic halloween lyrics, the total lack of musical credibility,
the upside-down double cross(LOL again), the "real" original face
makeup,
....who cares?
I do agree that KD does make me laugh, just thinking about the
Grandmother
video makes me chuckle(HBB actually used to play KD).
As far as my limited knowledge of KD...I have heard (unfortunately)3 KD
offerings
and 3 MF efforts. Thats enough punishment for me...
"Our father who art in Hell..." LOL LOL LOL
King Diamond - the first comedic satanist
PS We did use that tune about the little girl in one
of our productions, can't remember the title -it was the
witchcraft one (oooops they are all about witchcraft, lol)
I remember everyone in the control room was ROTFL. I guess
if it doesn't scare you its supposed to be funny.
covellid
synthuser wrote:
>
> covellid wrote:
>
> > I can't believe I just wrote 3 serious paragraphs about KD (and one of
> > them comparing O:M to his works). Listen, I love listening to KD when
> > I'm in the mood for what he brings - but I just hate it when people hear
> > his falsetto and blatantly dismiss him.
> >
> > See ya,
> >
> > Dante
> >
>
> I can't believe it either. Maybe this an issue your therapist can help
> you with?
Personal attacks because we have different opinions - Oh yeah,
Definitely cool...
>
> As far as Blatantly dismissing KD, because of his love for falsetto? How
> about
> blatantly dismissing KD because its crap, bullshit, garbage, etc.
>
> BTW, forget about the lame semi-outa-tune falsetto,
> the moronic halloween lyrics, the total lack of musical credibility,
> the upside-down double cross(LOL again), the "real" original face
> makeup,
> ....who cares?
>
> I do agree that KD does make me laugh, just thinking about the
> Grandmother
> video makes me chuckle(HBB actually used to play KD).
That's funny - that video makes me laugh, too, see how much we have in
common? BTW, if you'd turn off your f**king sarcasm mode for a second
we might actually be able to argue this, but that's cool, I think we've
all found out a long time ago that arguing opinion is pointless.
Parallel lives... and all that.
> As far as my limited knowledge of KD...I have heard (unfortunately)3 KD
> offerings
> and 3 MF efforts. Thats enough punishment for me...
>
> "Our father who art in Hell..." LOL LOL LOL
> King Diamond - the first comedic satanist
Yeah, that is pretty funny, so is the song "Deadtime," where he sings
(in lullaby voice): "Lie down in your dead little baby... Listen to
this deadtime story..." I think I'm making your argument for you...
Point is - if I took that stuff seriously I would think it was stupid
too, Relax!
> PS We did use that tune about the little girl in one
> of our productions, can't remember the title -it was the
> witchcraft one (oooops they are all about witchcraft, lol)
> I remember everyone in the control room was ROTFL. I guess
> if it doesn't scare you its supposed to be funny.
Kinda funny that just a few weeks ago we were agreeing on "A Pleasant
Shade of Gray"... Well, funny to me :)
Later,
Dante
synthuser
covellid wrote:
> Kinda funny that just a few weeks ago we were agreeing on "A Pleasant
> Shade of Gray"... Well, funny to me :)
>
> Later,
>
> Dante
>
<fucking sarcasm mode turned off>
Look Dante, you like KD or Mercyful Fate.... thats fine. I am
not dissing you, the comment about your therapist was a joke.
You posted how you couldn't believe that you were defending
or whatever, and I simply responded...
In my post though I did not diss you personally.
You are the one that posted I was "blatantly dismissing" KD because
of his falsetto. So I responded. I don't like KD or Mercyful Fate,
you do thats fine.
But its not just because of his falsetto. But please don't tell me
that I am blatantly dissing KD because I haven't listened to it
enough. I gave you my reasons. If you don't like them or disagree
thats cool. APSOG is very good and if thats something we agree
on then that is cool too.
