Page 2 of 5
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Mon June 24, 2013 6:45 pm
by Norah
Kevin Davis wrote:I don't mean wear and tear in the sense of physical ravage, i.e. Bob Dylan's current voice, which is natural for most singers and useful to the extent the artist allows it to be. Some of the songs on "Uke Songs" are great examples of how Ed's current limitations could be really affecting. His problem now is mainly that all the songs his fans want to hear are completely unsuited to his current limitations.
But yes, I definitely think that a lot of his present-day tics are very similar to the "hurr-durr"--in short, they're shortcuts he's using to keep from just flying off-key. That multi-syllable thing he does now ("Nothing as it see-heems...") is absolutely an attempt at retaining vocal control. And, again, as it always is, the price is articulation.
We don't disagree, friend.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Mon June 24, 2013 6:51 pm
by epilogue
Kevin Davis wrote:Some of the songs on "Uke Songs" are great examples of how Ed's current limitations could be really affecting. His problem now is mainly that all the songs his fans want to hear are completely unsuited to his current limitations.
Yes. Completely, yes.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Mon June 24, 2013 7:23 pm
by mkay0
I think the brilliance of PJ is how the music changes so drastically through the albums. There is a place for Ten/Vs. just like there is a place for No Code/Yield. How different they are, yet still great is one of my favorite aspects of the band. I also really like to hear how the older songs are interpreted by the band as the years go on. I personally like Why Go from 2007 onward more than when it was new.
Eddie's approach to singing is just one of the ways this is manifested.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Mon June 24, 2013 7:50 pm
by Norah
mkay0 wrote:I also really like to hear how the older songs are interpreted by the band as the years go on.
You mean...faster...drunker...and sloppier?
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 3:26 am
by yofismom
cutuphalfdead wrote:mkay0 wrote:I also really like to hear how the older songs are interpreted by the band as the years go on.
You mean...faster...drunker...and sloppier?
No, he means the band's glorious maturity.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 3:55 am
by yofismom
stip wrote: A little more abrasive, a little less velvet in the screams.
Can you give an example? To me he sounds pretty abrasive in the Ten/Vs. period. I think I get what "hurr-durr" refers to and it's pretty abrasive, not very velvet to my ears. Gimme a couple of velvet screams to listen to?
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 5:02 am
by dkfan9
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 11:04 am
by dimejinky99
He was my hero at the time, but looking back on it, I don't think I'd like him at the time.
That said I do think the hurr-durr was inexperience more than anything. He had a huge raw talent and didn't know how best to shape and use it.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 1:07 pm
by stip
yofismom wrote:stip wrote: A little more abrasive, a little less velvet in the screams.
Can you give an example? To me he sounds pretty abrasive in the Ten/Vs. period. I think I get what "hurr-durr" refers to and it's pretty abrasive, not very velvet to my ears. Gimme a couple of velvet screams to listen to?
Compare Why Go (the chorus) or the outro of Porch to Go (or even better, STBC or Not For You). there is a slight softness and smoothness to them--less sandpaper.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 9:15 pm
by bodysnatcher
stip wrote:yofismom wrote:stip wrote: A little more abrasive, a little less velvet in the screams.
Can you give an example? To me he sounds pretty abrasive in the Ten/Vs. period. I think I get what "hurr-durr" refers to and it's pretty abrasive, not very velvet to my ears. Gimme a couple of velvet screams to listen to?
Compare Why Go (the chorus) or the outro of Porch to Go (or even better, STBC or Not For You). there is a slight softness and smoothness to them--less sandpaper.
There's definitely a difference in delivery. More angry, reactionary, or whatever. But at the same time, notice must be taken that those songs were recorded after 2-3 years of relentless touring and singing those songs off of Ten and Vs in live settings, with the intensity Ed gave in his vocals. That's gotta eventually rub the vocal chords raw, covering up some of the "smoothness" to his earlier soaring vocals
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 9:17 pm
by Jorge
Can I just say how much I love that we are actually calling it "the hurr-durr" now.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 9:20 pm
by bodysnatcher
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 11:46 pm
by epilogue
theplatypus wrote:Can I just say how much I love that we are actually calling it "the hurr-durr" now.
Sure. Go for it.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 11:48 pm
by McParadigm
I keep reading this thread title as Eddie Vedder was born in 1991 and passed away two years later.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 11:50 pm
by LetMeSleep
Wow, Vitalogy is the toddler phase with Corduroy about teething.
The waiting drove me mad... you're finally here and I'm a mess
I take your entrance back... can't let you roam inside my head
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 11:51 pm
by epilogue
McParadigm wrote:I keep reading this thread title as Eddie Vedder was born in 1991 and passed away two years later.
For many on this board, that's exactly right.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 11:57 pm
by BurtReynolds
we hardly knew him.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Wed June 26, 2013 11:59 pm
by epilogue
Here lies Eddie Vedder. Hurr-durr.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Thu June 27, 2013 1:27 am
by stip
bodysnatcher wrote:stip wrote:yofismom wrote:stip wrote: A little more abrasive, a little less velvet in the screams.
Can you give an example? To me he sounds pretty abrasive in the Ten/Vs. period. I think I get what "hurr-durr" refers to and it's pretty abrasive, not very velvet to my ears. Gimme a couple of velvet screams to listen to?
Compare Why Go (the chorus) or the outro of Porch to Go (or even better, STBC or Not For You). there is a slight softness and smoothness to them--less sandpaper.
There's definitely a difference in delivery. More angry, reactionary, or whatever. But at the same time, notice must be taken that those songs were recorded after 2-3 years of relentless touring and singing those songs off of Ten and Vs in live settings, with the intensity Ed gave in his vocals. That's gotta eventually rub the vocal chords raw, covering up some of the "smoothness" to his earlier soaring vocals
oh sure, but it persists after that. Brain of J, DTE, Habit, Lukin, Breakerfall. Unless your point was that this was a permanent change due to that tour experience.
Re: in praise of eddie vedder 1991-1993
Posted: Thu June 27, 2013 12:02 pm
by PlayC3
People have to realize nearly every singers voice changes inevitably over time. I think Ed had to adjust over time, with some hiccups circa 2000, but I honestly think he has done well with his new vocal style over the past 3 records. The man can still sing the shit outta ballads too.
Singers like John Lennon exhibit the same vocal maturation.
I feel like PJ one of the few here that appreciates his vocal evolution.
