Red Mosquito

stip wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

stip wrote:But guys, this is what Eddie sounds like now.

theplatypus wrote:... anemic, thin, floundering.

Pretty much.

I'm with digster in that part of the problem is that he seems to gravitate towards these melodies at the outer reaches of his current abilities. I'd like to think the potential exists for him to harness whatever richness remains in his lower register and work with that (eg. Man of the Hour, his vocals on some of Riot Act, etc.) but who knows at this point.

The real absence of the lower register since riot act is baffling. there are a few moments where it peaks through on Lighting Bolt, and it was always welcome when it did

I think he feels that he doesn't have anything to prove anymore with his lower register. Been there, done that. Also, he probably feels a bit insulted by all the Eddie Vedder knock-offs who surfaced and resulted in people mocking not only them, but Ed himself as being the originator of that style. He's distanced himself from them and that type of singing even though his own lower register was always wonderful. It surfaces only occasionally these days on PJ albums. On his solo songs, it's much more evident because the songs themselves are of a completely different nature.

Ok. Just listened to the song. I liked it as a sketch of what could turn out to be a really good song. I can hear the UK comparisons with the repetition of 'nothing else/is(?)' which sounds like the 'nothing left' from UK. Other than that, I think it's a different and better song potentially. It's got a much more interesting vocal melody and there were some genuinely hair raising moments in there even though I have no idea what the hell he was singing. Bad sound quality and the good old Ed enunciation.

Release_Me wrote:I can hear the UK comparisons with the repetition of 'nothing else/is(?)' which sounds like the 'nothing left' from UK. Other than that, I think it's a different and better song potentially. It's got a much more interesting vocal melody

I

But how can

I mean it's almost literally an identical vocal melody.

Release_Me wrote:He can pull off great performances in studio or in one-off shows (like that VH1 Rock Honors The Who show where he absolutely killed on LROM and TRM)

Just a quick reminder that this was 6 years ago. I don't think it counts as a "recent performance" anymore.

McParadigm wrote:

Release_Me wrote:I can hear the UK comparisons with the repetition of 'nothing else/is(?)' which sounds like the 'nothing left' from UK. Other than that, I think it's a different and better song potentially. It's got a much more interesting vocal melody

I

But how can

I mean it's almost literally an identical vocal melody.

It could be a follow on. Nothing wrong with that. Bruce and Dylan have done it many times. And possibly Neil.

theplatypus wrote:

Release_Me wrote:He can pull off great performances in studio or in one-off shows (like that VH1 Rock Honors The Who show where he absolutely killed on LROM and TRM)

Just a quick reminder that this was 6 years ago. I don't think it counts as a "recent performance" anymore.

Yes, but there haven't been many more recent shows like that which I could think of. His general performance on the 08 tour itself was nowhere near as good as the one he pulled off on this night where he was obviously rested and primed.

McParadigm wrote:

Release_Me wrote:I can hear the UK comparisons with the repetition of 'nothing else/is(?)' which sounds like the 'nothing left' from UK. Other than that, I think it's a different and better song potentially. It's got a much more interesting vocal melody

I

But how can

I mean it's almost literally an identical vocal melody.

The part I found interesting wasn't. I actually heard a bit of the Let It Ride ending in there.

This rates a "meh" with me, but I'm not really a fan of acoustic Ed. I wouldn't mind catching one of his shows in person, although I think the audience would drive me nuts. But overall, I have almost zero interest in any of the solo records/singles he's made to date. I think his voice here sounds fine for this type of music. For a guy with undeniable charisma, Ed's growing body of unaccompanied acoustic material sure is uninspiring to me. (When he's got a band behind him, it works better.)

I'd be interested in hearing Ed make some solo electric recordings -- play a bunch of instruments and see what happens. Doubt that's gonna happen anytime soon.

You weren't a fan of into the wild?

stip wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

stip wrote:But guys, this is what Eddie sounds like now.

theplatypus wrote:... anemic, thin, floundering.

Pretty much.

I'm with digster in that part of the problem is that he seems to gravitate towards these melodies at the outer reaches of his current abilities. I'd like to think the potential exists for him to harness whatever richness remains in his lower register and work with that (eg. Man of the Hour, his vocals on some of Riot Act, etc.) but who knows at this point.

The real absence of the lower register since riot act is baffling. there are a few moments where it peaks through on Lighting Bolt, and it was always welcome when it did

there were moments on the Uke album where he forcibly went lower with terrible results in my opinion. but that's just my taste. and FWIW, i do prefer his lower register by leaps and bounds (e.g. Pendulum, if that counts?)

Sure, especially compared to a song like getaway

theplatypus wrote:The song is a sketch and should be judged as such. I take issue with his singing. It's just... anemic, thin, floundering. There's no weight to it anymore.

exactly. and it's worse when he tries to force it. whether it's the fake growl or or completely empty attempt to "go big".. it all just misses now.

there's still a range where he can still be effective (it's narrowing, but it's there), but it's just like he refuses to accept that.

Is this song a response to Hold On?

digster wrote:It's always kind of been interesting to me how Ed's voice his aged. I would have assumed that as he got older, he'd gained more grit and sandpaper in his vocals, like Bruce and Tom Waits.

I use this example all the time but ''Dream a Little Dream'' from the ukulele record is what modern Eddie's voice should sound like all the time, for precisely the reason you describe--that performance is about 50% ''Devils and Dust'' Bruce and 50% ''How's it Gonna End'' Waits, and I like it better than just about anything he's done since ''Man of the Hour.''


Edit: maybe this is the song Bodysnatcher was thinking of when he mentioned songs on the uke record where he went ''forcibly lower.'' If so, I don't hear ''force'' in this; I hear a certain push to reach that low register, I suppose, but that's where the color in his voice is now, he just has to dig to find it. No different than a singer having to push to reach the top of his/her range to find the color there.

Heathen wrote:Trying to be more catchy/accessible/dumbed down is pretty much the opposite of taking chances.

Eh. Kinda depends on who you are and who your audience is, doesn't it?

stip wrote:It is way thinner than I'd prefer, but I still like it, even thin, and I really like (and always have, since S/T) the way it sounds when he reaches for something intense. Shaky maybe, but weary, defiant, stubborn--like someone whose just got 12 rounds and is half amazed he is still standing.

I guess this is a testament to how people hear things differently; I think this is everything his voice is missing. There's no grit or weariness that sounds like the years it's earned, particularly live. At it's best, it sounds okay, but more often than not, it's shrill and breathy.

That being said, I'm not a fan of the Dream a Little Dream performance KD posted, which seems to be the opposite of what I'm talking about. It sounds like he's trying to inhabit a character in the way that Waits will do, but I think it just sounds silly instead of compelling. Maybe I'm wrong about it being a question of songwriting and melody choices, and it's more just that his voice hasn't aged in a way that really does much of anything for me.

I'm less concerned with what he's ''trying to do'' in a theatrical sense and more concerned that, to my ears, he manages to find a spot in his range that still gives him a kind of expressive capacity--that song is one of the few things he's done where I feel like he actually finds something in his late-period voice that is unique to it and it alone, achieving a sound he flat out couldn't have achieved in his younger years, rather than simply settling for a less capable version of that voice. He may select the character of his voice beforehand (which Waits does all the time), but I still think there's an offhanded ease to it that allows him to phrase more inventively and actually interpret the material rather than exhaust all his energy simply trying to carry the tune. But I was one of maybe 6 people to like the uke record, so who knows.

Kevin Davis wrote:

Heathen wrote:Trying to be more catchy/accessible/dumbed down is pretty much the opposite of taking chances.

Eh. Kinda depends on who you are and who your audience is, doesn't it?

Not really. I mean, yes, if you focus only on the fanbase that's right, but not if you look at this on a larger scale. If you're the editor of a magazine known for serious and thorough articles and you decide to replace them with WAGs because that sells better, I don't think that counts as taking chances just because that might piss off your original readers.

let's just go listen to voiceless music **cranks Stars of the Lid**