Bumblefoot vs Axl, who's the better singer?

[Damn_Smooth]

Fucking birdhands flapping in full force there.

[bacardimayne]

To everyone calling my thread pathetic, explain why the poll is so close?

[Bruno P.]

By the way...

How's signing Rob Halford, Bruce Dickinson and Freddie Mercury's high notes not leaving your comfort zone? Axl doesn't attempt Coma, Riad or Oh My God because they're too demanding vocally. He doesn't sing other Chinese songs because he's in a comfort zone and can't leave it. If anyone's in a comfort zone that has to be Axl. Lazy Axl. Mickey Axl.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Bruno Poeys

[Bruno P.]

Not to mention the opera vocals, lol. That's not a comfort zone. Unless you want to say that he's fkn Freddie Mercury, so that'd be a comfort zone to him.

[Lies They Tell]

Ron singing backing vocals and a 16 sec clip of Run To The hills. I'm not really convinced yet. That Running Wild cover is pretty cool but... I would really need to see longer clips where he's actually singing his ass off for hours, like Axl does all the time. Then comparing him to Axl would make a little more sense.

I wouldn't really call that last clip opera cause there's really no power in his voice there, but I do see your point. Guess you could say he left his comfort zone there.

[Bruno P.]

There are many studio clips where he actually sings opera vocals with power but I'm sticking to the live setting

@ 0:45

A personal favorite

Look, I'm not saying that Axl isn't the legendary singer and all of that. He's nowadays simply a good/decent (sometimes really awful) singer since he lost what made him great - the power. Some of the screams are still there, but he can't sing his whole songs properly because the power isn't there anymore. Thing is - many are greater singers than him and that's fine. Most are even unknown. A few accomplished what he did, but he's going through the motions now. He's boring. He sounds decent/good/great in a few songs and then sounds average/bad/awful for the most part.

[Dazey]

Technically Ron is in a different league. Hate to agree with Broski on this but Axl can't even hold a candle to him in that respect. So why is it that his voice bores the tits off me and I still love Axl?

[The Glow Inc.]

Axl has a unique voice...Or..."had" ? I can't really tell and I hope it's the former but yeah, on a good day he has a great unique voice that people either love or hate.

Ron very rarely has bad days vocally and is absolutely above Axl technically but his voice is more common, cleaner.


Still voted for BBF because since 2011 Axl has been a mess more than not ( and because I'm a BBF fanboy ).

[SoulMonster]

Technically Ron is in a different league. Hate to agree with Broski on this but Axl can't even hold a candle to him in that respect. So why is it that his voice bores the tits off me and I still love Axl?

The fact that Axl does what a singer should do with his voice, invoke feelings in the listeners by infusing the voice with passion. Technical ability on vocals or any instrument is completely wasted if it isn't used to convey real feelings. That's why I couldn't care less about Bumble's dog whistle abilities. Give me one raw scream from Axl perfectly executed at the right time in a song, and it is all I need.

[Bruno P.]

Freddie Mercury had an unique voice, not Axl - not in the same league as Freddie at least. Not to me anyway. Shawn Lane had an unique voice, even if he wasn't a singer. Axl's baritone voice (I believe) is not unusual at all.

Dickinson doesn't have an unique voice to me yet what he does with his voice is simply amazing. Both him and Freddie had a lesser range but accomplished ten times plus what Axl could only dream of.

I like cleaner or deeper voices more, but that's me.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Bruno Poeys

[SoulMonster]

Freddie Mercury had an unique voice, not Axl

Now you are just joking, right? Axl has one of the most unique rock voices in history. His extreme range, ability to sing in different voices and comfortably in various registers, and with completely changing tonal characteristics (listen to the Rapidfire demos, listen to early AFD demos, listen to the variation found at UYI, etc) makes his voice extremely unique. One result of this is the fact that almost no one is able to sing GN'R songs the way he does, in the way he does. More people are able to emulate Mercury's clean and conventional voice than Axl's.

[Guest NGOG]

Bumblefoot is technically a better singer. He has a clean, nurtured vocal style. I feel his only downfall sometimes are lyrics.

Axl technically is an appalling singer. His best attempt at being technical is what people refer to as Mickey. His voice itself however is worth all the technical singers in the world. From the first moment I heard it I was hooked, it will never be successfully replicated by anybody ever. Ron is the better singer, I just prefer Axl's singing.

[Dazey]

Technically Ron is in a different league. Hate to agree with Broski on this but Axl can't even hold a candle to him in that respect. So why is it that his voice bores the tits off me and I still love Axl?

The fact that Axl does what a singer should do with his voice, invoke feelings in the listeners by infusing the voice with passion. Technical ability on vocals or any instrument is completely wasted if it isn't used to convey real feelings. That's why I couldn't care less about Bumble's dog whistle abilities. Give me one raw scream from Axl perfectly executed at the right time in a song, and it is all I need.

Exactly my thoughts on the matter. Well said that man!

[ll_tj1]

Bumblefoot is technically a better singer. He has a clean, nurtured vocal style. I feel his only downfall sometimes are lyrics.

Axl technically is an appalling singer. His best attempt at being technical is what people refer to as Mickey. His voice itself however is worth all the technical singers in the world. From the first moment I heard it I was hooked, it will never be successfully replicated by anybody ever. Ron is the better singer, I just prefer Axl's singing.

I completely disagree with the statement that Bumble is "technically" the better singer. Range, pitch, outros, breathing, ect, are all technique, and as much as I do like Ron's vocals, and I think his backing vocals on any upcoming studio tracks would add a lot to the GNR sound, and it would be awesome if he got to do a song on lead vocals with GNR, but he can't touch Axl's range, or his un mistakable unique sound. I'll be the first to admit Axl has completely lost his ability to remain consistent as a live vocalist, but I also believe he is still capable of producing that powerful, unmistakable in pitch vocal that we all are complaining that he does not do enough of. There's a reason why everyone has been arguing and debating back in forth for the last 10-12 years about this. It's because he had consistently produced amazing vocals live. If he didn't, nobody would be even mentioning the topic because it would be a moot point.

[Guest cbgnr666]

Bumblefoot is technically a better singer. He has a clean, nurtured vocal style. I feel his only downfall sometimes are lyrics.

Axl technically is an appalling singer. His best attempt at being technical is what people refer to as Mickey. His voice itself however is worth all the technical singers in the world. From the first moment I heard it I was hooked, it will never be successfully replicated by anybody ever. Ron is the better singer, I just prefer Axl's singing.

I completely disagree with the statement that Bumble is "technically" the better singer. Range, pitch, outros, breathing, ect, are all technique, and as much as I do like Ron's vocals, and I think his backing vocals on any upcoming studio tracks would add a lot to the GNR sound, and it would be awesome if he got to do a song on lead vocals with GNR, but he can't touch Axl's range, or his un mistakable unique sound. I'll be the first to admit Axl has completely lost his ability to remain consistent as a live vocalist, but I also believe he is still capable of producing that powerful, unmistakable in pitch vocal that we all are complaining that he does not do enough of. There's a reason why everyone has been arguing and debating back in forth for the last 10-12 years about this. It's because he had consistently produced amazing vocals live. If he didn't, nobody would be even mentioning the topic because it would be a moot point.

Axl wasn't consistent in the old days at all,but I could care less.

[Dazey]

Axl wasn't consistent in the old days at all,but I could care less.

How much less could you care and under what circumstances?

Edited June 3, 2013 by Dazey

[Bobbo]

One of the very rare times I agree with SoulMonster 100%.

Great points man.

[Bruno P.]

Freddie Mercury had an unique voice, not Axl

Now you are just joking, right? Axl has one of the most unique rock voices in history. His extreme range, ability to sing in different voices and comfortably in various registers, and with completely changing tonal characteristics (listen to the Rapidfire demos, listen to early AFD demos, listen to the variation found at UYI, etc) makes his voice extremely unique. One result of this is the fact that almost no one is able to sing GN'R songs the way he does, in the way he does. More people are able to emulate Mercury's clean and conventional voice than Axl's.

Why do you think that most cant sing like Axl does? That is wrong. There's nothing groundbreaking nor technically challenging in Axl's vocals that great rock singers can't do. You are probably talking about the grit/rasp, which a lot of them don't use because they dont want to sound as awful as Axl does in a not so long future because it'll fuck up their vocal chords at some point. Yes, Axl's range is huge, but he cant hit several high and low notes properly because he lacls technical skill. Don't tell me that he can sing in different registers comfortably because it's a lie. He wouldn't need to use backing tracks on Shackler's if he felt comfortable singing that low. He wouldnt be out of tune singing high. His voice wouldnt crack and he wouldnt struggle to sing Coma. He wouldnt struggle to sing the TWAT verses if he felt comfortable.

Freddie sings comfortably in any range, unlike Axl. He's way more versatile, his vocal range is similar to Axl's, can whistle and sing really low. All of that in a very demanding vocally way that heralded him as the very best singer in rock. Axl's a great frontman, but as a singer he cant hold a candle to the greats.

If anyone is jokingly comparing Axl to Freddie, that's you. What I refer to as unique voice is one's speaking voice, not how many singers can sing clean. Timbre, a thing that you are born with, not tone.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Bruno Poeys

[SoulMonster]

One of the very rare times I agree with SoulMonster 100%.

Great points man.

And I wouldn't be surprised if our agreement would extent to guitar playing as well, e.g. the differences between Bumblefoot and Slash as guitar players, because I think it is quite the same issue.

Freddie Mercury had an unique voice, not Axl

Now you are just joking, right? Axl has one of the most unique rock voices in history. His extreme range, ability to sing in different voices and comfortably in various registers, and with completely changing tonal characteristics (listen to the Rapidfire demos, listen to early AFD demos, listen to the variation found at UYI, etc) makes his voice extremely unique. One result of this is the fact that almost no one is able to sing GN'R songs the way he does, in the way he does. More people are able to emulate Mercury's clean and conventional voice than Axl's.

Why do you think that most cant sing like Axl does? That is wrong.

Because I have never heard anyone do, except that one guy at Youtube.

Edited June 3, 2013 by SoulMonster

[Bruno P.]

Why do you think that most cant sing like Axl does? That is wrong.

Because I have never heard anyone do, except that one guy at Youtube.

You mean timbre? Yes, nobody else in the world has Axl's timbre. In that sense, nobody will ever sound like him. Just like nobody will sound like Justin Bieber. Nobody will sound like me. However, many people around the world (please note that many and many rock singers can do the same) can replicate Axl's vocal tones note for note.

timbre

that attribute of sensation in terms of which a listener can judge that two sounds having the same loudness and pitch are dissimilar

I mean that a lot of people can sing like Axl because they can sing the same notes, using the same technique and all of that. Everyone's got an unique voice - nobody in the world will sound like you. However, Axl's baritone timbre isn't something special or unique. Many and many people have that kind of deep voice, but not too deep. So yes, to me Freddie had an unique voice.

These are unique voices in my books. You don't hear many people sounding like them... they don't have standart male voices.

Freddie...

Shawn (not a singer, but still applies)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=cmy3zKBRsg8#t=755s

Edited June 3, 2013 by Bruno Poeys

[SoulMonster]

Why do you think that most cant sing like Axl does? That is wrong.

Because I have never heard anyone do, except that one guy at Youtube.

You mean timbre? Yes, nobody else in the world has Axl's timbre. In that sense, nobody will ever sound like him. Just like nobody will sound like Justin Bieber. Nobody will sound like me. However, many people around the world (please note that many and many rock singers can do the same) can replicate Axl's vocal tones note for note.

I wasn't talking about hitting the same notes as him (even I could do that to a certain degree). In fact, any technically good singer with a very wide range can do that. I am talking about singing like him, meaning that all the qualities of his voice is replicated including timbre and other characteristics of tonal quality. And sure, no one can completely sing like anyone else, but some voices are simply harder to copy than others and Axl's is VERY HARD to copy, whereas Mercury, who has a much more conventional voice, not so much.

[maynard]

i enjoy both axl's and freddie's voice. but freddie is very VERY overrated.

[The Glow Inc.]

some voices are simply harder to copy than others and Axl's is VERY HARD to copy

Indeed, even Axl can't sound like Axl anymore.

[SoulMonster]

some voices are simply harder to copy than others and Axl's is VERY HARD to copy

Indeed, even Axl can't sound like Axl anymore.

Absolutely. Nor can Chris Cornell sound like himself. In fact, very few people can sing like that did 20 years ago.

[ll_tj1]

Bumblefoot is technically a better singer. He has a clean, nurtured vocal style. I feel his only downfall sometimes are lyrics.

Axl technically is an appalling singer. His best attempt at being technical is what people refer to as Mickey. His voice itself however is worth all the technical singers in the world. From the first moment I heard it I was hooked, it will never be successfully replicated by anybody ever. Ron is the better singer, I just prefer Axl's singing.

I completely disagree with the statement that Bumble is "technically" the better singer. Range, pitch, outros, breathing, ect, are all technique, and as much as I do like Ron's vocals, and I think his backing vocals on any upcoming studio tracks would add a lot to the GNR sound, and it would be awesome if he got to do a song on lead vocals with GNR, but he can't touch Axl's range, or his un mistakable unique sound. I'll be the first to admit Axl has completely lost his ability to remain consistent as a live vocalist, but I also believe he is still capable of producing that powerful, unmistakable in pitch vocal that we all are complaining that he does not do enough of. There's a reason why everyone has been arguing and debating back in forth for the last 10-12 years about this. It's because he had consistently produced amazing vocals live. If he didn't, nobody would be even mentioning the topic because it would be a moot point.

Axl wasn't consistent in the old days at all,but I could care less.

I think he was pretty consistant up until the 90's came. Stuff like Live At The Ritz sounds great to me. I think he had some great moments in the early 90's but you can definatly hear the wear and tear from the non stop touring. Like its been said several times, it isnt easy to sing in the style Axl sings, and I dont think it was able to hold up for all the touring they did once they got huge. Just my opiniun, certainly debatable. Case in point about blowing out his voice is Paradise City on Live Era. I don't know how he could sing like that for 2 hours, 3 or 4 nights a week for a year and a half. Its a wonder it isnt more damaged than it is.

Edited June 3, 2013 by ll_tj1