-I really like Frank Sinatras voice....
-I don't like Bonos voice...technical it's really weak.
-Altough I don't like the genre or his music I think that Andrea Bocelli has a good voice.
-The singer from electric six has a cool voice too, not a real good one, but it sounds nice.
-Rod Stewart has a cool voice
-The singer from the Killers has a good voice too.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
-I really like Frank Sinatra as a singer, great cool, old fashioned sound.
having said that I don't understand why people on here only mention old rock stars from decades ago...There are some good new singers, but you must not expect a second Freddie Mercury....Too me a singer has to have a cool and good sounding voice which fits with the music his band makes...
It doesn't matter if it's not perfect...it's only rock and roll and it certainly isn't art. otherwise you can only listen to opera, those singers are REALLY good. I think that some people on this board overestimate Queen too much. Queen was a great band with a great singer...But will people listen to it 100 years from now on? Maybe a couple of songs, but that's it.
having said that I don't understand why people on here only mention old rock stars from decades ago...There are some good new singers, but you must not expect a second Freddie Mercury....Too me a singer has to have a cool and good sounding voice which fits with the music his band makes...
It doesn't matter if it's not perfect...it's only rock and roll and it certainly isn't art. otherwise you can only listen to opera, those singers are REALLY good. I think that some people on this board overestimate Queen too much. Queen was a great band with a great singer...But will people listen to it 100 years from now on? Maybe a couple of songs, but that's it.
I don't think Freddie's voice was great live because it didn't need to be. When people want to hear good singing, they buy the album. When they want to be entertained, they see a concert. Freddie still could sing fine in concert. He had an incredible voice, very powerful in the 80's. But when he was in concert, I think his main concern was to entertain the crowd which we all know he did an amazing job of.
i think if you compared todays singers only Chris Cornell(audioslave/soundgarden) and even at times Scott Weiland(velvet revolver) could be mentioned in the same sentence as Freddie.As far as the singers from 70's and 80's only Steve Perry could compare range wise although the kind of music they played(Journey)was built to protect him from live screw ups and also kinda sucked.Freddie's vocal skills are the reason the Band and this site even exist IMHO.
Hmm, he cannot beat Brian Wilson in his early years (the 60's in general.) Later one he found his voice again (due to all his personal problems), especially his solo tours were always great. This is all about Brian Wilson live. He could reach damn high notes in the 60's. In this perspective I like Brian much more then Freddie.
Freddie was good live, especially in the early stage of Queen, because the performance itself (vocally, musically) was the most important by then. Late 70's and 80's Queen were more focusing on entertainment and show too. Freddie wasn't really a singer then (there are exceptions offcourse), but an performer/entertainer. Queen became bombastic, talking about lights, smoke-effects etc.
Freddie was good live, especially in the early stage of Queen, because the performance itself (vocally, musically) was the most important by then. Late 70's and 80's Queen were more focusing on entertainment and show too. Freddie wasn't really a singer then (there are exceptions offcourse), but an performer/entertainer. Queen became bombastic, talking about lights, smoke-effects etc.
I agree with most comments. Freddie's voice wasn't well trained. But I think we have to give him credit for uniquenes and beauty, much more than range!It will always be a difficult discussion because you have to taken so many elements into account. When you love his voice , you will enjoy listening to him more than you do with other artists.That makes that some people are blind for his flaws.
To me he certainly is up there with the best because he is totally unique!!!
To me he certainly is up there with the best because he is totally unique!!!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Bono is a truly lousy vocalist live; he conveys emotion, but technically, he is a walking disaster.
Mick Jagger is not one of the great vocalists, but he scores quite decently live. He is a more consistant singer quality-wise than Freddie, although Freddie out-sings him whenever his voice isn't bad (which means: most of the time, though far from always)
Robert Plant is one of the greatest live performers ever...when in good shape. Take for instance the intro to Immigrant Song, sheer miracle. But Robert Plant was often out of shape, and if he was, the result would be an abysmal vocal performance.
I would also like to mention Ian Gillan (Deep Purple), who scores as good as Plant when in good shape, and was hardly ever out of that great shape. His overal vocal performance was excellent, and he never sank below 'good' vocal-wise.[/QUOTE]
hahahahaha
shut the fuck up, wanker
Mick Jagger is not one of the great vocalists, but he scores quite decently live. He is a more consistant singer quality-wise than Freddie, although Freddie out-sings him whenever his voice isn't bad (which means: most of the time, though far from always)
Robert Plant is one of the greatest live performers ever...when in good shape. Take for instance the intro to Immigrant Song, sheer miracle. But Robert Plant was often out of shape, and if he was, the result would be an abysmal vocal performance.
I would also like to mention Ian Gillan (Deep Purple), who scores as good as Plant when in good shape, and was hardly ever out of that great shape. His overal vocal performance was excellent, and he never sank below 'good' vocal-wise.[/QUOTE]
hahahahaha
shut the fuck up, wanker
Bono extends his vocal abilities beyond it's limits, and that makes him sound fuckin' horrible. He attempts falsettos when he fails miserably at hitting high notes. He literally ruined 'The Sweetest Thing' and other U2 songs for trying too much.
The good thing is that nowdays he does this far less now than he did back in the 90s. Bono is a great singer and performer as long as he stays within what his voice allows him to do.
The other singers that I can think of who might come close to singing as high as Freddie are Jeff Buckley, Marc Anthony, Mick Hucknall (Simply Red), Robert Plant (back in the early Led Zeppelin days), Steve Perry, George Michael, Steven Tyler, and Matt Bellamy.
The good thing is that nowdays he does this far less now than he did back in the 90s. Bono is a great singer and performer as long as he stays within what his voice allows him to do.
The other singers that I can think of who might come close to singing as high as Freddie are Jeff Buckley, Marc Anthony, Mick Hucknall (Simply Red), Robert Plant (back in the early Led Zeppelin days), Steve Perry, George Michael, Steven Tyler, and Matt Bellamy.
My opinion is Ian Gillan is tied in first place with Freddie. Gillan had a extraordinary voice... you can notice in studio and live gigs.
Also Freddie was a showman like Robert Plant, but Freddie was better in that.
My ranking is:
1. Ian Gillan and Freddie Mercury.
2. Robert Plant.
3. Bono.
4. Mick Jagger.
5. Roger Daltrey.
Also Freddie was a showman like Robert Plant, but Freddie was better in that.
My ranking is:
1. Ian Gillan and Freddie Mercury.
2. Robert Plant.
3. Bono.
4. Mick Jagger.
5. Roger Daltrey.
In the post-war popular music genre, Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley and some other 50s music singers&performers are/were naturally technically better than Freddie and can be counted to the greatest voices of all time (note: in the post-war pop music genre). Freddie had an amazing voice and great talents, but he had no vocal training. If he would have been trained, he really could have sounded "like God". Or he would have become an opera singer.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=B22222>daria k. wrote: [/QUOTENAME]In the post-war popular music genre, Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley and some other 50s music singers&performers are/were naturally technically better than Freddie and can be counted to the greatest voices of all time (note: in the post-war pop music genre). Freddie had an amazing voice and great talents, but he had no vocal training. If he would have been trained, he really could have sounded "like God". Or he would have become an opera singer.[/QUOTE]
You're right... i forgot to mention the "non-rock" vocalist... balad singers, such as Dean Martin, Frank Sinatra and Sammy Davis Jr. These three singers were AMAZING... the shows they made were excellent.
Elvis Presley is another case, because he was EXTRAORDINARY... also i like Jerry Lee Lewis.
You're right... i forgot to mention the "non-rock" vocalist... balad singers, such as Dean Martin, Frank Sinatra and Sammy Davis Jr. These three singers were AMAZING... the shows they made were excellent.
Elvis Presley is another case, because he was EXTRAORDINARY... also i like Jerry Lee Lewis.
Live, yes, Freddie was a GOOD singer, however on an album he sounded excellent and almost unequalled by vocal terms. Freddie had a fantastic voice no doubting that, but he was an even better showman. And this shows up live. He needed his showman ship, particularly during his performances at Wembley in 1986, listening to him singing 'I Want to Break Free' in particular sticks out like a sore thumb in my memory. Throughout the 80's (I'm going to exclude Live Aid for now) Freddie's live voice wasn't in the best of shape and he relied pretty heavily on Roger to help out with high notes and so on (it had always been that way but more so during 80's tours) but it didn't matter because his best times as a showman were in the 80s. He wasn't disimilar to Robbie Williams, able to deliver a song fantastically, with or without a good voice and have the audience eating out of the palm of your hand regardless (provided that, in the Robster's case, the song wasn't WATC or WWRY). Mick Jagger, although his voice IMO, isn't as good as Freddie's in studio, can also be compared to Freddie for his supreme showman skills. Those two are possibly THE best frontmen of all time. (I've heard great reviews about Roger Daltrey and Robert Plant, but the only time I've seen them live is on video, from Freddie Mercury's Tribute Concert, all I can gather is that they are great frontmen)
In the 70's Freddie did sound good, and looked great, it makes me jealous of all those who had the chance to see Queen live at the Rainbow, a fantastic concert from the sound of this. Freddie's problem was his vocal nodes, so taking that into consideration he was a VERY good vocalist live and Queen sounded great live, loud, just like a great rock band should! On a good night he sounded no worse than Jagger or David Bowie. It's hard to compare Freddie to others because every frontman has his own unique way of doing things. Just look at an early David Bowie-sorry, Ziggy Stardust- concert.
In the 70's Freddie did sound good, and looked great, it makes me jealous of all those who had the chance to see Queen live at the Rainbow, a fantastic concert from the sound of this. Freddie's problem was his vocal nodes, so taking that into consideration he was a VERY good vocalist live and Queen sounded great live, loud, just like a great rock band should! On a good night he sounded no worse than Jagger or David Bowie. It's hard to compare Freddie to others because every frontman has his own unique way of doing things. Just look at an early David Bowie-sorry, Ziggy Stardust- concert.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=B22222>daria k. wrote: [/QUOTENAME]In the post-war popular music genre, Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley and some other 50s music singers&performers are/were naturally technically better than Freddie and can be counted to the greatest voices of all time (note: in the post-war pop music genre). Freddie had an amazing voice and great talents, but he had no vocal training. If he would have been trained, he really could have sounded "like God". Or he would have become an opera singer.[/QUOTE]no
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]M a t i a s M a y<h6><i>QZ's Rainmaker wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Bono is a truly lousy vocalist live; he conveys emotion, but technically, he is a walking disaster.
Mick Jagger is not one of the great vocalists, but he scores quite decently live. He is a more consistant singer quality-wise than Freddie, although Freddie out-sings him whenever his voice isn't bad (which means: most of the time, though far from always)
Robert Plant is one of the greatest live performers ever...when in good shape. Take for instance the intro to Immigrant Song, sheer miracle. But Robert Plant was often out of shape, and if he was, the result would be an abysmal vocal performance.
I would also like to mention Ian Gillan (Deep Purple), who scores as good as Plant when in good shape, and was hardly ever out of that great shape. His overal vocal performance was excellent, and he never sank below 'good' vocal-wise.[/QUOTE]
hahahahaha
shut the fuck up, wanker[/QUOTE]
No need to be that harsh. He has an opinion, you have one. If you don't agree with him, that's too bad. Calling names is not the solution.
Let's see, did you contribute to this topic? *searches* Nope, you didn't. So in this case you are a wanker, but I don't say it. Just think before you post, please. No hard feelings or whatsoever, just my two cents.
Mick Jagger is not one of the great vocalists, but he scores quite decently live. He is a more consistant singer quality-wise than Freddie, although Freddie out-sings him whenever his voice isn't bad (which means: most of the time, though far from always)
Robert Plant is one of the greatest live performers ever...when in good shape. Take for instance the intro to Immigrant Song, sheer miracle. But Robert Plant was often out of shape, and if he was, the result would be an abysmal vocal performance.
I would also like to mention Ian Gillan (Deep Purple), who scores as good as Plant when in good shape, and was hardly ever out of that great shape. His overal vocal performance was excellent, and he never sank below 'good' vocal-wise.[/QUOTE]
hahahahaha
shut the fuck up, wanker[/QUOTE]
No need to be that harsh. He has an opinion, you have one. If you don't agree with him, that's too bad. Calling names is not the solution.
Let's see, did you contribute to this topic? *searches* Nope, you didn't. So in this case you are a wanker, but I don't say it. Just think before you post, please. No hard feelings or whatsoever, just my two cents.
I really like the voice of Duran Duran lead vocalist Simon le bone (think I'm correct) Technically he sings much better than Freddie. I saw a live show of Duran Duran recently, they played almost all the songs from their last album 'Astonaut' So, I must say that I didn't found a difference in the way he sang the songs.He performed the songs with the same quality of singing like in album. Freddie never took vocal lessons, thats why he couldn't sing good live. Than you learn to sing, than your vocal technics is right, so it doesn't matter how many songs you're going to sing. You can control your voice...