Page 2 of 10
Bands that would have been-would be better w- no singing
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 9:06 am
by floog_Archive
LAD wrote:I agree with each band in this thread (excepting shagboy's little joke). And what I'm about to say will probably offend you, but I'll add, the Jesus Lizard [etc.]
i always thought the vocals, and the mood they set, were intrinsic to the jesus lizard, but you've articulated an excellent point well enough to make me reconsider...i even slapped on the goat LP to test the theory. apart from occasional terrifying screams that really work (monkey trick), i could easily be won over here.
from the way you've described the argument, do you think part of your idea may rely on separating "vocals" from "vocalist"?
scrap the vocals: the jimi hendrix experience.
Bands that would have been-would be better w- no singing
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 11:15 am
by sack of smashed assholes_Archive
van halen, I fucking can't stand there vocals. I still don't know if that would do them any justice.
tomahawk. patton sucks.
black sabbath
90 day men, I don't know if it's two vocalists or one? but the one that sings like a weiner ruins all the songs he sings in, panda park would've been alot better minus the weiner. The one who sings with the deeper voice has got a good voice. If it's the same guy then he should drop that crap.
Bands that would have been-would be better w- no singing
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 11:24 am
by Lambeth_Archive
"apart from occasional terrifying screams that really work (monkey trick),"
I would have to concur with this thread. As a matter of fact, the scream you're talking about in Monkey Trick isn't even Yow. It's Santiago Durango.
A band is only as good as it's weekest link.[/quote]
Bands that would have been-would be better w- no singing
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 11:47 am
by gcbv_Archive
LAD wrote:I agree with each band in this thread (excepting shagboy's little joke). And what I'm about to say will probably offend you, but I'll add, the Jesus Lizard.
Yow trivialized their music with his hokey clown act. He blustered his way through every song with the same meaningless schtick and as a consequence all their songs 'feel' vey similar.
It's not that he couldn't sing. 'All my favorite singers can't sing.' It's that every song sets the same mood because of him. And it's not a mood that runs very deep. It's superficial and already sounds dated. This band hasn't aged well for me because of the vocals.
I would listen to this band much more, and take much more from the music if it weren't for the groggy-voiced 'crazy guy' shrieking about nothing all the time.
I'm not offended, but I think you wrong.
Mr. Yow, on his worst night, was an inspiration and a breath of joyful unpredictability.
and fun. He was alot of fun.
Bands that would have been-would be better w- no singing
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 11:50 am
by Angry_Dragon_Archive
Any band with an Eddie Vedder knock-off for a singer.
Bands that would have been-would be better w- no singing
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 11:56 am
by ogami itto_Archive
pink floyd
Bands that would have been-would be better w- no singing
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 2:31 pm
by stephensolo_Archive
rolling stones. for sure. i'd kill to get vocal-less mixes of beggar's banquet or exile.
Bands that would have been-would be better w- no singing
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 2:33 pm
by resident_Archive
ac/dc
Bands that would have been-would be better w- no singing
Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:18 pm
by shagboy_Archive
stephensolo wrote:rolling stones. for sure. i'd kill to get vocal-less mixes of beggar's banquet or exile.
i'd have to disagree there.... i think the vocals are great on that album! what would replace the melody, anyway?