darthvedder81 wrote:I thought both performances were good but LB definitely was the better of the two.
I thought Ed was a bit awkward in the interview. I rolled my eyes every time he tried to steer it into environmental soapboxing territory. C'mon Ed, it's a late night comedy show—lighten up for 5 minutes. It was pretty funny how Fallon and Javier Bardem just ignored him and went back to making ball jokes too so not all his fault. Fallon could've asked some better questions though. I think when Ed feels awkward he just goes on social/political issue auto-pilot.
No way, ed steered that story to the bigger ball and small ball joke....
Man, what a performance, and with a song everyone (even me) initially hated.
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
The band were fine but Ed was really struggling, even moreso than on Sirens. The performance at Wrigley which everyone seemed to hate was so much better than this from a vocal perspective.
Release_Me wrote:The band were fine but Ed was really struggling, even moreso than on Sirens. The performance at Wrigley which everyone seemed to hate was so much better than this from a vocal perspective.
Sirens was much worse. Sometimes I really wonder what planet you're living on
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
harmless wrote:Also, at Wrigley he forgot an entire verse.
I don't care about flubbed lyrics. I care about bad vocals.
Yeah that's the kind of thing I don't understand; it's not an either or. But never mind, it takes all sorts!
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
Release_Me wrote:The band were fine but Ed was really struggling, even moreso than on Sirens. The performance at Wrigley which everyone seemed to hate was so much better than this from a vocal perspective.
Sirens was much worse. Sometimes I really wonder what planet you're living on
I said he was struggling more on Lightning Bolt. That doesn't mean it couldn't sound better. A lot of LB is gritty growls and screams. Even when he's struggling, he can still sound gritty. The cleaner parts were the worst sounding. Most of Sirens is clean, so most of it sounded bad.
harmless wrote:Also, at Wrigley he forgot an entire verse.
I don't care about flubbed lyrics. I care about bad vocals.
Yeah that's the kind of thing I don't understand; it's not an either or. But never mind, it takes all sorts!
I listen to a lot of Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan. Most of his best singing doesn't have any real words, just random vocalizations. I couldn't care less if Ed flubbed lyrics live, as long as he sings well.
Remembering lyrics is an inherent part of sounding good vocally, in my book. When the band is singing in English, and when the lyrics are meant to be a crucial part of the song...
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
harmless wrote:Remembering lyrics is an inherent part of sounding good vocally, in my book. When the band is singing in English, and when the lyrics are meant to be a crucial part of the song...
Flubbing lyrics doesn't really affect how the vocals sound, but they do have a lot to do with the overall appreciation of the song. Since I know the song, I don't care if he repeats the same verses second time around as he did in Wrigley. If you hadn't heard the studio, as we hadn't then, it really didn't affect the appreciation of the song even.
harmless wrote:Remembering lyrics is an inherent part of sounding good vocally, in my book. When the band is singing in English, and when the lyrics are meant to be a crucial part of the song...
Flubbing lyrics doesn't really affect how the vocals sound, but they do have a lot to do with the overall appreciation of the song. Since I know the song, I don't care if he repeats the same verses second time around as he did in Wrigley. If you hadn't heard the studio, as we hadn't then, it really didn't affect the appreciation of the song even.
Well, it did for me, if only because I thought it was pretty bad that he repeats a verse twice, in quick succession. That took what I already thought was a dodgy performance and sunk it.
RisingTides wrote:There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.
I'd take Wrigley over this any day. They do have songs where the same verse/chorus is repeated later on so that didn't make me like the performance any less. It was jarring when I heard the studio version for the first time because I'm not a fan of the verse he used to replace it.
