You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
I appreciate the love for Axl's voice, but let's be honest... he's one of the most inconsistent singers in history.
But Monk, you pretty much proved my point. We can't sit back and praise Axl's voice on a STUDIO song, that has been tweaked 50 times over, with 3 or 4 different tracks done in DIFFERENT takes, then go and give him credit for his 'range'.
Yeah I see it as two different issues to be honest.
Like the first issue is the consistancy - and I agree with you there - while I always enjoy seeing Axl live as he's my favourite singer - I think its beyond question that on some occasions he sings better than others. Which is only human I guess. He had good and bad nights vocally since the illusion days, and in 2000-2 for whatever reason he seemed to have a different voice going on entirely. In 2006-2007 I thought his voice was a better mix of his traditional GNR voice and also some of the higher stuff he does now - but I agree some shows it was better than others. So yeah - he is very inconsistant - although when he is "on" he's devistatingly good IMO. So no argument from me there.
But in terms of range. Not sure of the technical defination. But I'm defining range as the number of notes he can hit - like from the lowest note if you found it say on a keyboard, to the highest note he can hit. In
terms of that I think it's a very wide number of notes. Far more than most singers. Like for example there is no way I can sing anywhere near as high or as low as he does - I have a very limited "middle band" number of notes I can hit.
I dont deny that a studio setting can be used to fix the consistancy - we can get every good take - and he's also able to layer his own voice and sing harmony parts with himself - but I don't think he's actually altering his voice pitch via technology (even though it can easily be done) to increase his range.
So in terms of range as in the number of notes - he definately has the goods - delivering a flawless peformance all the time is a different matter.
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
And for range, overall, you're right. Axl is one of the best.
But I was referring to range, as in how many notes can he his, subsequently that go high and low, 'without' sounding pitchy or going flat.
Now, granted he's human, but i've seen people do it before with harder songs.
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
The intro will be easy live. The "ay-oh" is a sample looped throughout the song, Axl only has to do the high wails over the top of that loop during the intro.
He may not pull of the rest of the song exactly as the studio version sounds, but he can do a great job. Those 2 octaves, the high and the nasel-y mid range voice are are a piece of piss for Axl.
(Piece of piss means easy in Scotland, before you tell me that great saying never made it across the Atlantic either)
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
Anyway, you only really notice the wavering voice of a live singer when you listen back on bootlegs or watch videos. Watching a rock band live is fucking loud, raw and always sounds amazing. When you see a human being standing up there belting their lungs out for your pleasure, you just accept and appreciate how they sing it on the night.
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
Anyway, you only really notice the wavering voice of a live singer when you listen back on bootlegs or watch videos. Watching a rock band live is fucking loud, raw and always sounds amazing. When you see a human being standing up there belting their lungs out for your pleasure, you just accept and appreciate how they sing it on the night.
So true. Axl blows me away in real life. I've seen him 3 times and it was insane every night!
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
Axl's pretty bad live. The boots tell the story pretty accurately. Most people will overlook it because either they can't hear him or they are so caught up in the moment that they just don't care. That's how I was when I saw them. Axl wasn't very good, but the show was so awesome it didn't really matter.
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
Axl's pretty bad live. The boots tell the story pretty accurately.
I suggest you get some, here's one of the 2007 shows.
http://www.gnrevolution.com/viewtopic.php?id=6439
Minus "Nightrain" at this show, Axls voice is pretty awesome.
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
Axl's pretty bad live. The boots tell the story pretty accurately. Most people will overlook it because either they can't hear him or they are so caught up in the moment that they just don't care. That's how I was when I saw them. Axl wasn't very good, but the show was so awesome it didn't really matter.
Axl is not pretty bad live, although he has good nights and bad nights. I've seen singers that are bad live.
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
Did he re-record the vocals in live era because they were good? He couldn't find 25 songs that had good vocals all the way through over a 10 year period?
Look, Axl struggles live because he can do things other singers can't, and he brings everything to the studio tracks. The price to pay for that is that he can't replicate it live. Those are facts.
Re: Scraped Introduction Poll
He couldn't find 25 songs that had good vocals all the way through over a 10 year period?
Are you for real? Seriously there is no way you actually believe that.
