- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 8,048
- Reaction score
- 3,031
I think his voice during the unplugged Set was great.
Paradoxically 'Professional' singers can't compete.He had real emotion. Raw. Sad. Timeless.

I agree. Take someone like Christina Aguilera or Celine Dion - they can hit every note, have incredible range, have a team of people writing and producing their very catchy songs, but that indescribebable human element is missing. It’s just notes on a page sounded out - there’s no feeling coming across, no matter how loud you crank it up.Paradoxically 'Professional' singers can't compete.
based on what criteria? him being a good singer will depend on what you consider good singing.
I guess what you think good singing is.
He wasn't even the best singer in his band.
Grohl could carry a tune better than Cobain. Maybe Cobain's a better a screamer I suppose but Grohl's scream has a higher pitch.You actually think Grohl is a better singer?
The only thing better than Layne Staley was a vocal harmonization between Staley and Cantrell.Good for grunge. I'd take Vedder and Layne way over him though.
lol, from a purely technical stand point... Cornell is better than all of them.Underrated, ppl are still saying Pearl Jam and Soundgarden had the better frontmen which is a joke.
He had tremendous power and emotion in his voice that were far more impressive than the range of Eddie or that other bum.
Layne is a different story but gtfo with Vedder and Cornell.
This is why theywere so flippin great. Thankfully after he died, the new lead was a very similar lead and the harmony carried on.The only thing better than Layne Staley was a vocal harmonization between Staley and Cantrell.
You actually think Grohl is a better singer?