Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Aside from the obvious - the remarkable stage presence, rock n' roll attitude, etc. - Weiland has a true gift for vocal melodies.  Just go and listen to virtually any Sone Temple Pilots song.  His melodies and hooks are, for lack of a better word, perfect.  

Listen to "Plush".  "Lady Picture Show".  "Big Empty".  "Interstate Love Song".  Anything.  Those hooks are unforgettable and more than compensate for sometimes clumsy or pretentious lyrics.  

Thats not even speaking on his versatility.  He can make indelible melodies and hooks for the hardest rock track ("Sex Type Thing") to the softest ballad ("Sour Girl," "Lady Picture Show") to the most innocuous pop song ("Days Of The Week") and everything in between.  To me, this is the the most vital asset a singer/songwriter can posess, right alongside their voice.  Weiland has a great voice, and despite popular belief its quite unique.  Early in his career he recieved a lot of criticism for similarities to Eddie Veddar and Layne Staley, but in fairness a lot of that can be credited to having naturally similar ranges and doing a similar style of music.  But for the most part, Scott has grown out of the sonorous growl of Core and developed a strong individual vocal style.  

His lyrics have also improved, and hes more often hit than miss.  And even when his lyrics do falter, rarely do they venture into dullness.  They might sometimes stumble into pretension or puzzlement, but its that very abstract nature that always keep them interesting at the very least.  And when Weiland does hit, he really hits ("You Got No Right," "Interstate Love Song," "Sour Girl").  In these songs, the words just feel right.  Theyre not just serviceble; they, like his vocals, fit perfectly.

Its for these reasons (and not just these reasons, theyre the tip of the iceberg really) that I find the general disrespect for Stone Temple Pilots among critics and music snobs in general to be almost infuriating.  Between that and Scotts addiction, STP has one of the most unfortunate legacies of the last two decades great rock bands.  Because thats just what they are - one of the best hard rock bands of the last 20 years...but sadly, theyll never get the respect they deserve.  :no:

And neither will Weiland.  Hes arguably one of the best frontmen of the 90s, and easily one of todays best (the best in my opinion).  Hopefully, Velvet Revolver will be his redemption and the critics will come around and finally realize just how good this guy really is.  

Flashback to 1992:

I'm watching the STP video for 'Plush' on MTV in a major store, and some people walk past me and say "Ugh - STP are Pearl Jam wannabes"...
Which was sad b/c 'Plush' is still one of my favorite songs even today!

But you know what?  This time around (assuming he gets his drug problem under control), I think the stage is set for him to get the respect he deserves. He's been through a lot, and VR seems to be a "fucking real band"

From the bootleg audio/video I've heard, it seems Weiland can easily sing a hard rocker like Set Me Free with the right attitude, and easily shift gear into a mellow song like You Got No Right.  His voice is deep and fluid.

- slightly off-topic:

Slash, Duff, and Matt havent gotten too much respect by the media either largely because of the bloated version of GNR.  Heck, RS didnt even put Slash in their Top 500 Guitarists.  So hopefully VR is as good for them as it is for Weiland.

Seems like VR are saving his f*king life

man Weiland is perfect at singing... just listen to acoustic Plush - it's briliant!

I agree, Plush(acoustic) is amazing!

it's ultimately what made me a Scott and stp fan.

I also like 'Creep' - his voice has a lot of emotion in that song.

Take time with a wounded hand cause it likes to heal.

I'm sure it means different things to different people, but the sorrow in his voice really hits home.

What he brings?

How about the drugs in sex, drugs and rock n roll :D

"take time with a wounded hand cause it likes to heal,i like to steal" is from half the man I used to be by Nirvana..I dont know what your talking about lol

No, its not.  Its "Creep" by Stone Temple Pilots.

Top 100 guitarists.

I feel that Weiland's voice is on the rebound in terms of range and the next VR record will definitely show it. 
And yeah his lyircs can be questionable and confusing sometimes, but id rather them than some teenage angst shit thats seemingly everywhere in rock now.

I agree 100% with the original post  :yes:
Stone Temple Pilots are one of the most underated rock bands ever. They aremy fav band and have been for many years, not only for Scott's amazing vocal melodies and hooks but also for the beautiful music by the Deleo brothers (2 very underated musicians). The greatest song they ever recorded in my opinion is 'Atlanta' from their No. 4 album, if you haven't heard it you NEED to, simply beautiful.

I have to disagree with a lot of what you said.  I don't think that Weiland's vocal melodies are "perfect".  I think they're good, especially on Libertad, but not perfect.  His lyrics are not good.  They have never been his strong suit.  What you call abstract, I call non-sensical.  As far as frontmen go, he was one of the better frontmen of the 90's, but I'd put him behind Chris Cornell, Layne Staley and Eddie Vedder.  Vocally, he stands up to Eddie Vedder, but he has nowhere near the vocal prowess of Layne Staley or Chris Cornell.  I have studied singing for a long time, and let me tell you, the kind of of vocal control that Layne Staley had is incomparable.  He's one of the better frontmen now, but the best for me is still Axl Rose.  To me, Axl's vocal melodies are truly perfect for the songs he sings over.  Not only that, he's a far superior lyricist and as far as stage presence, Weiland is great, but still not better than Axl.

What Weiland brings to VR is great stage presence and a finely crafted vocal instrument that is capable of some very appealing tones, along with some quite good melody lines.

Ali

just looked up the lyrics.. I typed in half the man i used to be lyrics n it came up as half the man i used to be by nirvana and creep by stone temple pilots..
  I've heard nirvana sing it..never knew it was an stp song lol

No, you havent.

I googled it.. and I got "Take time with a wounded hand -- Cause it likes to heal" in the nirvana song Half The Man I Used To Be

and "Take time with a wounded hand 'Cause it likes to heal " from the STP song Creep..

weird thing is that they have exactly the same lyrics  :hihi: :confused: someone wikipedia it

Maybe your thinking of Negative Creep


 :peace:

Cos if its in Wikipedia then it will be true!

What Weiland Brings To Velvet Revolver...


"a megaphone"

no ::) but if something was mentioned on wikipedia it could be true.. but i searched through all nirvanas albums and couldn't find a single song called "half the man I used to be "

There is no such thing.  It was written and performed by Stone Temple Pilots on their 1992 album Core.  Nirvana has absolutely nothing to do with it.  Somebody in the band might have commented on it in an interview or two after its release, but thats it.  The attribution to Nirvana has been perpetuated on the internet by people who dont know better. 

First prize for the funniest post of the day!

When I put 'Half the man I used to be lyrics' into Google, I either get the Creep lyrics which people have put as a Nirvana song and called it 'Half the Man I Used To Be' or the lyrics to a real Nirvana song called Hairspray Queen.

Some stupid has just assumed this is a Nirvana song (Scott's voice is a bit kurt-ish on this one) and now Creep is all over the internet disguised as "half the man" by nirvana. That means there are probably people who would believe you if you uploaded "bohemian rhapsody" or "you shook me all night long" and labelled them GNR songs as well.

Seriously though. Anyone with a little knowledge can tell the difference between STP and Nirvana.

On topic: I agree with Ali on Weiland's abilities. When it comes to lyrics, I don't think the meaning of the words is all that important as long as they fit to the music and can help create the right feeling. I mean Axl's lyrics are great and can stand as a piece of art on their own, but that's just a bonus because it's the music that really counts.

He is certainly in my top 10 fav all time frontmen.


There was no other choice for VR.

People throw out all these other names, but seriously, Scott was THE PERFECT choice.

U get Bach and the band doesnt do well, Josh Todd the same.


Scott is very underrated and if there is one thing he lacks, sometimes I guess he comes across in a "Scott Stapp" kind of annoying whiny way.


Thats probably his biggest flaw.  I can absolutely understand how people get turned off by him.

Personally, I think that Josh Todd's voice would compliment Slash's style and tone a little more.

I don't think Scott is necessarily whiny.

He's a damn good frontman, but for me, he doesn't resonate like other guys who emerged in the '90's, like Layne Staley or Chris Cornell.

Ali

I think Scott is better than Cornell and Staley.

I find both of them to be extremely overrated.

What I dont understand is:

Why is Kurt Cobain considered overrated cause he killed himself, but people like Lane Staley, Shannon Hoon etc get overrated but no one says a word?

They were good frontmen but certainly nowhere near the best of the ERA in my opinion.

What's the thought behind that?  Because Josh Todd's last album was released last year on an independent label with next to no promotion and to date has sold 800,000 in the US.  Libertad probably won't sell much more than half that much, even with all their star power and a lot more promotion

Now if Buckcherry can sell with no star power or name recognition and next to no promotion that much you can't tell me that Todd and Nelson of Buckcherry combined with the talent and star power of Slash-Duff and the promotion Contraband received couldn't at least approach doing the numbers that CB did

Layne Staley's rated the same now as he was in the late 90's/early 00's before he died.  Cobain died at the height of Nirvana's fame.  AIC hand't released an album in about 7 years when Staley died so his legacy was already in place before he died

I don't know who would have been better for VR, if they would have gotten Josh Todd we wouldn't have gotten Buckcherry.. Bach wouldn't have fitted and i'm glad he's with axl these days.. It would be cool with something with Iggy Pop, might have been to much punk but rather punk then grunge, it would be cool with mike patton too but that would probably not have worked..

Shannon Hoon's voice are among the greatest ever (probably top-5 alltime all genres)

weiland, staley, cornell and cobain aint on the top 20 (in the rock-genre)

Top 5 ever?


My point made.

If he wasn't friends with Axl and hadn't OD'ed, no one would say that. Please........ Blind Melon in my opinion were a horrible band.

Kurt Cobain at least, Changed Music.

Do u people realize how many times music has actually been changed?

only a handful of people can claim that and Cobain is one of them.

Changing music aint always a good thing ;) i always say that grunge in the 90's is what EMo is to the 00's

Blind Melon was to me an awesome band! if you wanna know what horrible is check out bon jovi :hihi:

I think Weiland brings a huge songwriting sensibility to the band, in terms of melody and composition.  In my opinion, given VR's sound on Libertad, the STP-sound clearly won out over the GnR-sound in terms of who brought more of their previous band into the mix (check out the "we ain't got nothin' to hide" section of "Just Sixteen" for classic STP-sounding guitar). 

Wow, I find that astonishing that anyone would think that Scott Weiland is on the level of Chris Cornell or Layne Staley.  I don't think Weiland is as good a songwriter as either one and he definitely isn't as good a vocalist as either one.  Layne Staley had the kind of control over his voice that few have.  He also had this uncanny ability to strike a chord of either melancholy or menace, depending on the song.

I don't consider Cobain overrated because he killed himself.  He was a great songwriter.  A truly great one.

Ali

What does Scott bring????????????

To be honest , I'm still trying to figure that out

You have got to be fucking shitting me! You must have no sense of music what so ever if you think Blind Melon were a horrible band. Come on man! Sure they never changed music, but bands don't have to change music to be great. Shannon had one of the greatest voices ever, not just talking about rock voices either, I mean literally the guy had one of the most amazing voices of anyone ever in history. He was as good of a singer as Axl or Freddy or Tyler or Plant or Joplin etc. The was amazing at what he did. If you are just judging the band on "No Rain" then you are doing yourself and them a huge injustice, it might be an acquired tasted but I think their greatest album was Soup, some amazing amazing tunes on there.

If Scott wasn't in a band with Slash and Duff would he be in your top 10 all time? 

I don't see how you can say Staley and Cornell are overrated when you have Scott Weiland in your top 10 all time.  Nobody except the most diehard, fanatic STP/VR fans could say with a straight face that Scott is one of the top 10 lead singers of all time

ok i never use "lol", i'm sorry, but NOW

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I think scott is underated, Staley rated just about right, and Cornell overated.

Agreed.

Scott Weiland is a great singer - All personal shit aside.

All this talk of underrated and overrated is annoying - i hate them words. If people are rated highly its with good reason - because lots of people like them.

As for Scott, I think he done really well with Contraband, lyrically and melody wise he done exactly what he needed to do to make it a great album.

As for Libertad, IMO the music is so weak and uninventive on songs like Pills, Demons, etc, Mary Mary and For A Brother. Scott done the best he could with them to make them quite catchy and reasonably good songs. The only parts of them three songs I ever remember are the chorus' Scott wrote. Grave Dancer has the blandest guitar (apart from solos) Slash has ever done, its a bad ripoff of Fall To Pieces. But again, Scott brings it to a whole new level with the anthemic chorus, even if the lyrics are a bit odd. The same with the Last Fight. SBQM is weak overall, but Scott still puts in a good performance. Just Sixteen, my favourite song on the album, has cool music, but the way Scott sings is awesome. Yeah, the lyrics are silly but fuck it they suit the song, especially the "we ain't got nothing to hide" part.

I'm not saying Scott is amazing on Libertad, but I always laugh when people say he is the weak link. The music is so poor, he done the best he could and he easily comes across as the best member on that album, well except for when Slash solos, coz there is still some great ones on there.

he brings a bit of everything, can be a hrd rocker, a soft singer,emeotional deep, etc.. He has a lot of passion on libertad but can be gritty, the excellent choice, and I have always loved his sound n music since core..

Absolutely

STP were an amazing band and by far the best new band that came out in the 90's in my opinion.

Shannon Hoon is good but Top 5 all time is ridiculous.

Chris Cornell bores the shit out of me

Layne Staley is completely overrated.

We had an argument over this shit once before. I checked out some AIC stuff and I don't like it. It does absolutely nothing for me.

Scott is a better frontman than all of those guys.

I went to see VR in concert to see Slash and Duff and the entire concert I couldnt take my eyes off Scott. He absolutely overshadowed the entire band.

Saying I don't know anythinga bout music cause I don't like Shannon Hoon is retarded. Everyone has different opinions and I just don't think he is as good as people say he is.

Like Sebastian Bach

People think cause somebody can fuckin sing high that makes them great; It doesnt.

Scott brings a bit of credibility in a modern sense.

STP thrived in a market place where alternative became the mainstream and excess became passe'.

Scott is an awesome frontman and if he hadn't insulted "GOD" there would be way more people on here supporting and liking him.

Doesn't Scott bring the blow?

I think Scott is damn good frontman, D.  I think his rant towards Axl was pathetically childish, but has nothing to do with my personal feelings on his abilities as a frontman (not that I think you were referring to me).  I was never a huge STP fan because he didn't strike a chord within me like Chris Cornell or Layne Staley did.

Scott has a great voice, but it just doesn't move me like Layne Staley's voice.

Ali

I just think the personal attacks are stupid on here.


If people like Staley and Cornell and Hoon, FINE

I personally don't like any of the three but I'd never insult someone's musical knowledge etc over personal taste.

It comes with the territory I suppose.

When someone like Weiland has had the type off success he's had over an extended period of time coupled with a vast array of very public personal problems, it's gonna happen.

He does deserve a certain amount of credit to go along with the attacks though.? After all, he was first on everyone's celebrity dead pool just over 3 years ago...

I think Scott holds VR back. ?I don't think Slash and Duff are getting used like they should

I have talked to several hard rock fans that like the ALG Snakepit band more than VR.  They actually like Rod Jackson.  These are not big GNR fans either.  They loved the producting on ALG and Slash's Big Brown Les Paul tone he had going.  He didn't hold back on ALG, or IFOS like he does with VR.  I still love VR.... But I don't really know if they are better than Snakepit...  Its actually becoming a tougher call after listening to ALG all day today.

Personally, I don't really care about his personal problems.  I just don't think he's THE best frontman of the 90's.  I just don't see how you can put him ahead of Cornell, Maynard and Layne Staley.  A matter of personal preference, I suppose, but for me, Dirt and Badmotorfinger are two of the best albums of the 90's.

Ali

OMG, the lyrics to Serial Killer are so fucking Corny............. They are truly laughable.

I think Slash is somewhat muted on this record, but I think that's because of the material itself that doesnt' allow for him to just go off and do his thing.  I don't see how you can hold Scott accountable for that.

Ali

For me, although Weiland played a role in the sound of the early 90's he'll never be the guy that defined it. ?Never the voice of the era by any means.

He definitely played a role.  I would never deny that.  "Sex Type Thing" kicked my ass when I first heard it.

Just out of curiousity, who would you say defined it?  Cobain?

Ali

Yes.

He and Nirvana, without question.

Though Weiland has had great success over a long period of time, he's not even in the same sentence
with Cobain in any historical/influential sense.

Depends on personal experience, I think.? Nirvana certainly popularized it moreso than any other band did, but for me it was Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, and Nirvana that really brought it all into focus for me.  STP, in fact, was the first group that seemed to jump on the bandwagon created by those bands, at least to me...

Of course, it all a matter of perspective, all of the above were essential in the movement.

Historically speaking I just think Nirvana was the first man on the moon with STP/Weiland a few light years behind.

ALG sold like, 30 copies...

They're aren't several people who heard that album that you would know first-hand!

I agree to a point.

"Nevermind" was *the* album that killed off hair metal and made alt. rock cool. However, you have to remember that before Cobain killed himself, his band was far less popular than Pearl Jam. Nirvana wasn't even selling out their arena tour in 1993, a fact that some people seem to forget. "In Utero" sold only a million copies when Cobain died, far less than the numbers PJ were pulling in at the time.

Also keep in mind before Nirvana there was Jane's Addiction, Sonic Youth, etc, so the movement was bubbling under and about to explode into the mainstream anyway. If it hadn't have been "Nevermind," it would have been something else.

Martyrdom works wonders for ones legacy.

Not True Richard.


Sure its helped Cobain's legacy some but how come people like Hendrix, Morrison and Joplin don't get the same shit said about them?


Cobain, had he not killed himself, would still be a huge star and would be a Bono like figure in my opinion.

Maybe its coincidence, but how come every person people on this forum hates on just happens to be someone who feuded with Axl at one point or another and the ones people love on here are people Axl has liked or said great things about?


Kind of scary to be honest.

I am frightened to imagine how many of u went out and bought Christina Aguilera albums after Axl's compliment to her.

D and Richard, Appetite had more to do with the death of Hair Metal than Nirvana did. 

If Cobain had lived, he would be like an Eddie Vedder.  If Slash died after Appetite, he would go down as one of the greatest ever. 

I don't ever just put in nevermind to listen to.  Its so dated sounding now in comparison to an album like AFD.  I am not being biased.

Richard, "hard rock" fans like ALG cause its full of shit they like. Blistering solo's, loud drums, good bass, and a singer with balls (doesn't matter so much what he sings, just how he sings it). 

I'm not 'hating" on Kurt Cobain. He was very talented, no doubt about that. All I'm saying is, his suicide propelled him to an iconic, martyr-saint status that he wouldn't have now if he were still alive. It's quite possible that If Billy Corgan had shot himself in the head, right now he'd revered the way Cobain is now and "Siamese Dream" would enjoy that status that "Nevermind" has. It's just as likely that if Cobain was alive his albums wouldn't be selling more than 500k, what PJ can at best hope for. ?


Or maybe he'd be yesterday's news like Billy Corgan, Courtney Love, Eddie Vedder, etc.


Are you nuts? There is a whole cults that worship Jim Morrison and Jimi Hendrix.

Nice way to change the topic.


I would bet not a single member on the forum.

Check out this unbiased review of Ain't Life Grand from a fan of hard rock from a guitar forum.? Not a GNR forum, nor a real big GNR fan.? I thought it was pretty cool.

This is Andy's (Neo Classical Madman, Super Avianti) review, posted 12/13/01, taken from the old forum:

-----------------------------------------------------

Picked this up last weekend and decided to give it some time before posting my view....

Right, if you have the 1st S.S. cd then forget that...this is different, if you own GnR's Use Your Illusion 1+2 then forget those.....if you own GnR's Appettite For Destruction then pay attention...if you own Aerosmith albums from 'Toys...' to 'Rock In A Hard Place' then listen up....if you like classic Alice Cooper take note.

This album is an absolute peach of prime slice classic hard rock, Slash is playing better than he ever has - his vibrato tone and intonation have come on leaps and bounds and his Les Paul sounds superb!

The band is made up of relative unknowns but I can tell you the vocalist sounds like a cross between Axl Pose (in his better moments), some Steve Tyler, some Alice Cooper and even a little Graham Bonnet at times (but one that stays in tune unlike the original? )...obv these are Slash's main influences and that tells me that this album is 100% Slash.

The tracks range from full on rockers to great bluesy rockers, an Alice Cooper-esque track (think Welcome To My Nightmare) and a ballad that Elton John would be proud off - yes I am not embarrased to say thats a good things.

BASICALLY THIS IS THE KIND OF ALBUM AEROSMITH SHOULD BE MAKING NOW.....PURE UNADULTERATED HARD ROCK THAT DOES NOT CARE FOR FASHION BOUNDARIES.

Marvellous, I do not hesitate in giving it....


VVVVV/VVVVV

I'm a hard-rock fan and I don't care for it. Some great work from Slash, but his band was far behind him, stylistically and technically. And Rod Jackson sucks--a reject from the Mick Jagger/David Lee Roth school of cliches.

Let's try to get this back to Weiland guys.

I know I contributed to going off course, apologies.

I respect that.  The music kicked fucking ass though.  At least you are honest. 

Weiland has pretty voice when he sings.  When he screams, he is average.  I like Weiland.  I brings a modern edge to him I guess.  He does not bring a true hard rock voice and that somewhat limits what this band can do.  However, maybe his hooks and melodies are worth the sacrafice. 

Pretty much and without Lollapalooza back then where would half of those "grunge" bands be? Jane's, Sonic, The Pixies.. they were changing the music scene. Nirvana was the first to get the bubblegum production and sell a lot of records. But when Cobain had his way and made albums he wanted "Incesticide" and "In Utero" they weren't doing anything.

weiland contributes his megaphone

Too late, Jim Bob. :hihi:

fuck..

i usually cant' be arsed to read an entire thread on weiland.

Admit it...

You like Scott Weiland! :hihi:

i enjoy some of his music.   interstate love song is a great tune.   i like stone temple pilots but I dont think he is a good fit with Slash.  and i think he has a big mouth.

I'm afraid Scott has lead singer syndrome, sometimes they just don't know when to shut the fuck up.

A lot of people don't know when to shut the fuck up.

i quite enjoy weilands vocals, moreso in STP tho

I actually heard Weiland sing the other day - his vocal range is very limited. He's got some good tone.

You're not THAT Bad. :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi:

I've never got the "limited range" angle, he's never had a high end screech but seems to hit every note he's ever needed to hit.

Agree on the tone, not as rich as a few of his peers although good for the most part.

So you're saying just because he can't hit certain notes, he doesn't have a limited range?

What exactly is a limited range then?





/jarmo

I'm not any kind of expert on vocal notes so my answer isn't exactly educated.

So..

If range was based on a 1-10 scale, 1 being a baritone and 10 being a screech, I think Scott utilizes about 1-9.?

I would characterize "limited" as not being able to go too far out of a vocal comfort zone from low to high.? I think Scott's range covers a vast majority of all points in between so to tag his abilities as limited wouldn't be the fairest judgement.

Weiland being clean n sober has such a presence now, his voice sounds beautiful on these songs, album wise and at times better live.. I think scott was the excellent choice for vr.. Helped become tight with his band and rebuild his life with duff, plus camp freddy.. The planets were lined up for this joining imo..

That great huh?

I'd say he's like 2-6/7......

He just doesn't stick out at all.





/jarmo

yea i have to agree there.   notice the only gnr songs they cover.  can you honestly hear him doing a song like WTTJ or Sweet Child of Mine?  Fuck no, you wouldnt' want to either.   ;D     I'll admit he does the range he has pretty well, his best days were STP's first couple albums.

hmm, 9 is a bit much, that's going into Rob Halford territory, in his prime I mean.  Scott has a pleasant voice and I found his live vocals to be surprisingly good.

What Weiland lacks in range, he more than makes up for in diversity of styles.  Few singers in the past 20 years have managed to sound totally different from song to song, and album to album better than Scott.  Dead and Bloated to Atlanta, Big Bang Baby to Sour Girl, Glide to Don't Drop that Dime...the man does so much more with the range he has than singers who are technically more rangy.

I think his low end to mid range has moments of greatness, extreme high end I'd have to characterize as adequate/serviceable.?

I've never been a huge fan of the "screech" (unless done really well) so his vocal range and capabilities have never been an issue with me.

Compare him to Ian Astbury then.

He's not exactly known as the best singer on the planet, it works for The Cult though.






/jarmo

Although very different stylistically, I think thats a fair comparison.?

Both seem to do what works for their respective bands.

Would you agree?

I would agree with that.  Weiland utilizes his range effectively, and as someone who has studied singing for a while, I've always been taught it's more about the quality of your tone than your range per se.  I think Axl's upper register works so well because it has a Janis Joplin-esque bluesy quality to it.

Ali

Yes, and it limits the kind of songs the band can make.

Trying to cover Van Halen songs that aren't in his style was a mistake.



/jarmo

I've always been drawn to to tone and "richness" if that makes sense, something Astbury and Weiland have an abundance of.

The high end metal stuff like Halford and Bach have just never done it for me.

I see your point although I think diversity can also be found while playing to one's strengths.  As resident Cult fan, only Sonic Temple and Ceremony sound remotely the same to me.  Other's who are die hard STP'ers would probably say there's a vast difference from Core up their last release as a band.


I think Scott could've done a much better job of that on that particular night, no question.

I think it's next to impossible to sing very high, in the upper reaches of your falsetto, and have a really great or appealing tone. ?The thing about singing in that upper part of your range is that it does help create a feeling of anger and intensity that works very well for heavy metal. ?I think Axl is rare in that he has this bluesy quality to his voice that made it work so well with Izzy and Slash's riffs.

Ali

I'll take Ian over Weiland any day of the week. Weiland in a live setting leaves me flat as a pancake...put him in the 2-6 range like Jarmo.

I think Ian's low end is"stronger" so to speak, he's about as leather lunged as you're gonna get.? That said, it doesn't (for me) make him any better or worse than Scott.? I mean c'mon, from all accounts it came down to Ian or Scott to take over for The Doors back in 2000, that's some pretty heady shit to even be considered for.

They've both managed to stay relevent over an extended period of time which is tough to do, credit where credit is due.

It is an honor to be considered for Jim's replacement....but people can be easily fooled by one of the best posers ever. Slash and Duff were. :hihi: You know I don't like Weiland. Outside of a handful of STP songs, I just don't like the guy or the way he sings or the way he acts on stage and off-not my cup of tea. Give me Cornell,  Vedder, Yorke, Tweedy, Staley, Cobain, Maynard James Keenan from the 90's...... :peace:

I get where you're coming from, I'm by no means a blind Weiland supporter.? He's a bit of a goofy bastard quite a bit of the time, annoying to a point.? Front man disease to the n'th degree with a chip on his shoulder the size of a cinder block.

However, letting that cloud my judgement on his talent, overcoming personal demons, success and longevity in a business that doesn't lend itself to any kind of staying power would just be ill informed and short sighted.

exactly that hits the nail on the head right there

Jim Morrison, Ian, Scott, all come from the same tree.  Scott can probably "sing" better than say an Axl Rose or Robert Plant in the sense the has phenomenal control of his voice.  Like singing church choir music or something.  However, its those high to low notes like Plant, Rose, and Cornell pull off that make them who they are.  He is limited in his range, but when he gets in his zone, like on Psycho Killer or The Last Fight, he is pretty damn good. 

The Van Halen Tribute was a mockery.  But, that being said, his range was much better than a DLR.  He could have song that song well, but he chose to be weird.  Whatever. 

I never got how Plush sounded so much like Eddie Vedder.  Whatever.  I think Scott Stapp imitated Scott Weiland.  Scott was also big in making singers of the 90's have the errrr voice in all thier songs.  As was Axl. 

Falcon, I do acknowledge Weiland has his moments and has hung in there when others did not.....Staley and Cobain for example. :-\ As I said though, something about him has always rubbed me the wrong way.

Even back to the STP days?

yes. Although a few of the STP songs are undeniably good, again, overall, I just don't see the "natural" passion in him. I see someone who tries very hard to be a rock star and fill all the cliches of being a rock star. He seems to force things. His lyrics tend to try to be too clever and artsy and end up being shallow. His singing lacks fire and passion. His stage moves all seem well choreographed and morphed from some weird Mick Jagger/Iggy Pop/David Bowie wannabe clone.

I can see why people like him because he has just enough talent and chutzpah to lure people in. I just am not one of them.  :-\  ps this is not a cut down to his fans and is obviously only my opinion. He is a succesful artist and I commend him for that.

Definitely. Just listen to 12 bar blues and you get an idea of where he is coming from and the diversity of styles that he wants to explore/approach and seems to master.

Does this fit in with Velvet Revolver? Depends what the band wants to do. Many Slash and Duff fans would want a more straightforward rock n roll singer with a raspy voice etc., which would limit the band in one way, whereas they now have Scott who, due to among other things his range, cannot do Axl-style songs - which will limit the band in another way.

Also, I suspect that he is the most open minded member when it comes to exploring new territories (don't tell me the hidden track on Libertad was Slash's idea, although it's a bit Stonesy).
This undoubtedly affects the band's choices of direction, which may sometimes be successful, sometimes not. And this is what some fans maybe are a bit uncomfortable with, as they initially saw VR as a monster super hard rock band, but then Libertad came out with signs that this is maybe too boring for the band hence not what they are planning to do in the future (if there is any).

I agree the solo album shows all kinds of things with his voice. "Divider" is one of my favorites of all time.

I'll say this; the guy has a great talent for mimicry.  That's not a slam.  Whether he's singing early nineties style, Bowie or a redneck country singer.  He can change styles very well, and yes he has nice, catchy melodies.  Beyond that.....I don't like him, never have. 

He's beyond pretentious, that's reason enough to hate him.  I think he knows what he would aspire to be, but simply doesn't have the qualities of the people he admires, so he stretches on every level.  Simply put, he tries too hard.  His stage show is too over-the-top, you can almost see him thinking; "must... be... whirling... dervish".  His lyrics suck.  And this crusty, pissed off persona he portrays to the press is weak. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ7unxbCHVQ&mode=related&search=
From that performance, Scott can be quite versatile.

Id love to see the huys jam with Ginger frm the Wildhearts, just think it could be an interesting combination

Nothing from what I can see, judging by the last record......... :'(

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUimElsi8Ag
I love that video, enjoy the trip

I've been training my voice for about 18 years now. I took me about 10 years to fully master my instrument. As my voice developed I was able to access more notes and I finally found my lower register about 10 years ago. When I do the practice and the voice exercises my range spans about 2 1/2 octaves.

I think Scott sings within an octave, that's 8 notes to an octave. When I heard him sing the other week I thought he moved between 5 notes only and there was a downward slide on one of the notes. Of course, I understand that you can only work with the chest and vocal chords that god gave you.........I also can hear that Scott sings right on the note - maybe that's the effect he wanted. Some singers are able to sing the note but also add some colour or shade to that note.

However, as a singer one likes to make the notes "sing" (for want of a better word)! The voice is an instrument and a singer with a trained voice would have more range.? With more training Scott may be able to span more octaves........

But then again, I was clasically trained, so I started singing opera.......That's why it took me so long to find my lower register. For some people, if you have a trained rock voice you can only sing rock or if you have a trained Jazz voice you can only sing jazz. Those who have trained clasically are taught to use the voice as an instument.

Hope that helps shed some light on "range".

     I agree with many posts that Scott brings many different styles in which to sing.  I've made the Bowie reference before and he can cover bands quite well, and hold his own stuff too.  He does have some an odd poetic lyrical arsenal at times but I guess many do.  He does bring a small megaphone like someone posted earlier and he can wear a boa with the best of them; Mick Jagger, Steven Tyler, David Bowie.  He is kind of creepy with the whole leather gear circa Erwin Rommel.  I think Axl pulled the hat off better 20 years ago.  He was great for STP and will be for VR.  He is talented.  I hope he stays clean and does well because he is his own worst enemy.  I hope for the bands sake that a power struggle isn't going on between Scott and Slash, because that would end it.  That is also just rumor though.

I've been training my voice off and on for the last 15 years, and what I've learned is that as you grow older and change physically, your voice can change to, so can you really ever completely master your instrument? ?I don't believe so. ?I also believe that there are always things you can work on and improve on.

Ultimately, it's not how much range you have that defines whether or not your voice has an impact, it's how you use it. ?I think Scott uses what range he has well.

Ali

Yes, as you grow older your voice does change and so does your understanding of how to access different notes.

I also do believe that confidence also grows as you get older too - I'm pretty confident, that's why I say that I have mastered my instrument. Singing now is pretty effortless.