Question....

[shunammite]

Now Iced, that's the trouble with a really thoughtful post - you leave others at a loss for words. Whereas if you come in and say SOMETHING REALLY LAME then everyone has a chance to jump on your case and voila "fellowship" - I didn't post like a maniac on message boards for years without learning a thing or two!

I agree about problems in the past being worse than now - I think it was a tv performance of Weathered (I love that song btw) - I'm the one who made the lame comment about his confidence level perhaps not the same - he will always "perform" but I remember just writhing watching him do that performance, he seemed so uncomfortable. Whereas now, although it's a "performance", he does seem to believe in what he's doing - and to help share that conviction with anyone who shares his space.

I wish I had gone to see them in Atlanta. I could have - I should have - but I didn't. sigh. I'll be first in line for the cds/dvds though. And I'll say it again - the "old" stuff (it's not Old to me, it's more like Classic - things that are good and touch you don't go away) means more to me now than it did in the past and now that they have made friends with each other again, I can enjoy it with no shadows.

[shunammite]

lol - while I was laboring over my post two more people got ahead of me - way to go - I agree that Thousand Faces sounds like Stapp, he's the one who's always trying to See God. But I think they bring out the best in each other so you never know. I always heard that Torn was written by Tremonti - the lyrics - and I would certainly have thought it was Stapp.

[Icedmofo]

If stapp wrote it, then he wrote it about himself obviously, but if that's the case i think he wrote it as his apology to mark.

The bridge to me speaks of their friendship. Scott being torn up over it, Mark telling him to let it out until Stapp listens and lets the shit die.

Either way, the song is really well written and is a commisseration between friend, which really makes it very touching to me since i've been there.

[creediscool17]

lol i love how you guys act like scott stapp is 60 years old now or something. hes 36 years old....


thom yorke
maynard james keenan
bono
eddie vedder
chris cornell


those are all singers who are 40+ years of age and their voices still sound good. the only one who doesn't have the same range as he used to is cornell but he still sounds awesome. age is no reason to lose your voice, not taking care of it is the only reason. bruce dickinson from iron maiden still hits the high notes in concert and hes like pushing 60...

[Icedmofo]

Eddie Vedder: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbhsYC4gKy4 (early)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5UEkumxNCs (later)

Doesn't sound the same, he has to reach for the higher notes and the songs are all down tuned. Don't get me wrong, i'm a huge fan of eddie vedder, but age has changed his voice.

In point of what you just said, your voice does indeed change when you sing in your 20s vs. your 30s vs. your 40s, espcially when you sing for a living, healthy or not, it wears down. And everyone's voice is different, in vedder he lost some of the control of his vibrato as well as his upper register and rasp control, scott's voice dropped about a 5th in his register and he is fully a baritone and no longer a baritenor. David Draiman had to have vocal reconstructive surgery, Rod Stewart did as well, James Hetfields voice is nowhere near the same. Not saying these are all the same situation, but all voices change over time for various reasons.

Not diminishing healthy vs. unhealthy technique expediting the change, but eddie vedder doesn't sing healthily either, nor does james hetfield he also drinks and smokes heavily same as stapp. Granted scott's technique is FAR worse than eddie's, but 10 years does a lot to a voice.

James hetfield sound nothing like he used to and he's somewhere in his forties as well.

Age is just as much a factor in the quality of your voice as poor singing technique and unhealthy living habits, period.

[Chase]

Quote: (Originally Posted by creediscool17)

lol i love how you guys act like scott stapp is 60 years old now or something. hes 36 years old....


thom yorke
maynard james keenan
bono
eddie vedder
chris cornell


those are all singers who are 40+ years of age and their voices still sound good. the only one who doesn't have the same range as he used to is cornell but he still sounds awesome. age is no reason to lose your voice, not taking care of it is the only reason. bruce dickinson from iron maiden still hits the high notes in concert and hes like pushing 60...

Have you heard Chris Cornell recently?

[josha31042]

Quote: (Originally Posted by CreedJeff)

I am really tired of all of the B.S. about Scott's voice.

If you have not been to a show on this tour, you have absolutely no idea what you are taking about.

I have been to 3 shows on the tour with tonight in Phoenix being the 3rd and the progress that Scott has made in each show with his voice is tremendous.

Faceless Man was almost done completely like the original version that I know and love tonight, which shows tremendous progress in where he is at with his voice.

This is 7 years after the last time the band performed live, I am not sure that any of us would have the same voice.

It takes time and a lot of vocal exercises for you to regain the vocal strength to perform at a level that most of us know and love.

I am not telling you that Scott will ever be the vocalist that we remember from 7 years ago, but to say he is not trying is a asinine statement.

I don't think anyone is complaining about his voice to bash him in any way, they're just stating a very real concern for him.

This is the first time that Creed has performed live, for a while.
But Scott has been singing ever since they broke up, in case you've forgotten. I'm pretty sure his voice is just strained.

Like I said, he sounded great in December during his show in Delray.
He got back together with Mark in December as well.

[BSC]

People seem to forget that Scott has been recording Full Circle for 5 months or so before the tour...

Remember those videos back in 2008 of Scott in his solo tour? He was awesome... 2008 wasn't that long ago. I'm sure he's just strained his voice in the studio.

[Icedmofo]

Quote: (Originally Posted by BSC)

People seem to forget that Scott has been recording Full Circle for 5 months or so before the tour...

Remember those videos back in 2008 of Scott in his solo tour? He was awesome... 2008 wasn't that long ago. I'm sure he's just strained his voice in the studio.

I'm no sure it's quite that simple an explanation.

The times that i've strained my voice, and i mean like REALLY fucked up my voice doing something unhealthy, the longest it's ever taken me to recover was 2 days.

I think there is something significantly more permanent happening to his voice, i wish i had more information and knew more about him to be able to say what, but this is definitely not from straining his voice in recording sessions.

[shunammite]

Iced - kind of off topic but take my time anywhere redefine anywhere I don't think Het sounds in any way inferior to what he was like when he was young. Maybe it's a matter of taste - when he was young maybe he sounded angrier, more distraught, more confounded and chaotic - kind of just steady high pitched screaming. Whereas he started actually singing as time went by. (I am very fond of the ground he walks on btw.)

Now, if you want to mention someone who could sound good when he wanted to when he was young but sounds like HECK now, that's Bob Dylan. Age took a toll on him -some it doesn't affect - Willie Nelson for example just mellows like fine wine - another one that went to pot with age (ok I'm showing my age again) is Leon Russell - nothing but a high pitched WHINE now...Paul McCartney, as old as the rest, hardly sounds different than 40 years ago.

I just think that full tilt boogie screaming Stapp does probably takes a hard toll on this voice - Chris Cornell does it too but he seems to have a much larger range naturally. I'm just waiting for the cd. But I know nowadays they have to put out in concert because in this day and age that's the only way to make money. Well with Stapp - no one can say he's boring to watch - always but always the showman.

[alitea]

I wonder if AB does play apart of the Scott hate as well. However I also wonder if Creed fans are just too demanding sometimes. Not all but some. The way I see it I am a fan of Creed. Scott's voice is obviously different but still I enjoy hearing him sing. To me it is all about being a fan. You either support the band as a whole or you dont. The Scott bashing has gotten so ridiculous. It is hard to even be on a Creed board because all some want to do is bash him. Scott has been through a lot. So has his vocals. We all are different. We all heal differently. Also age is important too. At the end of the day I love Creed. I am just happy to hear them together again. I also think that Scott sounds great, different but great. Whether his voice chages or not I a fan plain and simple.

[My Sacrifice]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Icedmofo)

Truth is his voice was starting to go a long while ago, as in towards the end of the weathered tour.

He'd lost much of his range at that point, the problem really wasn't even a matter of singing technique, the guy was under a lot of pressure.

Do you have any idea how bad for business it is to cancel a tour date? Even a band as prominent as creed at the time would hesitate before doing this. So stapp kept singing even when he was sick.

Think about it, they set these things up MONTHS in advance and there is a LOT of money for a venue to host bands like creed, you cancel that and money goes away = very angry owners, perhaps even angry enough to not allow them back on a return tour.

Stapp sang through a lot of vocal problems he was having during the weathered tour. I guaruntee he had vocal nodes going on and kept singing anyway.

How quickly everyone forgets that to even be able to sing the concert they did at Alcatraz, scott had to have 3 shots of prednizone steroids DIRECTLY INTO HIS NECK. And he sang through that.

Are you really that surprised?

I've said my good and bad things about stapp, but seeing them perform in houston has really changed my attitude toward him and the whole idea of the creed reunion. The guys look like they are actually ENJOYING not only playing the new stuff, but even the old stuff in ways i've never seen even when they first wrote it and hadn't been jaded by concert performance, as well as performing specifically with eachother.

You can tell the the predominant lyrical writing of thousand faces came from Mark, and if you watch the houston concert, stapp downright acknowledges it and actually makes a human connection with Mark during the bridge and especially the ending. The part at the end where scott basically sings the reprise of the first verse to mark and they each patted eachother on the back was just heartbreaking.


So is his voice what it was? No. Why? Poor vocal health and technique. Should it influence your listening? No.

Scott has a lot of guts to get back up there and keep doing this after all the shit that he went through and stirred up not only with the band, but with his personal life and the music world in general. I respect the hell out of a guy who can get up and do it again.

Is he an egotistical prick? Maybe, maybe not. Is he sincere when he says some of the stuff he says? Is he pretentious? Sure. But guess what? Sometimes it's easier to look at the negative aspects of a person specifically in a narrow minded view because you can pidgeon hole them and make them easy to understand.

It's far harder to accept that egotism and pretentiousness may only be one facet of a person. That a person can be egotistical, pretentious, arrogant, and yet still a good person? Heaven forbid that people are three dimensional, they clearly CAN ONLY BE A DICK AND NOTHING MORE!!! ZOMG


I gotta tell you, to be a successful performer of any type, there is a certain amount of narcisism and egotism involved. Period. No performer is 100% devoid of that characteristic. Some people express it in an active way verbally (scott), some express it in performance (mark), but it's all stemming from the same root. It's what gives them the confidence to get up there and play music they've written themselves at the risk of being rejected, and not only do that but do it well and in an exciting manner, in mark it manifests into amazing showmanship, in scott it does the same but filters a bit into his normal personality. So what? Doesn't that make him more interesting? For someone so hated, there is an awful lot of buzz about him, and as they say in showbiz: The only bad press is no press.

I say give the guy a break, i respect everyone who says his singing is crap's opinion, but you try singing 8 shows a week, let alone a rock concert, and come to me unhoarse after just 1. Considering how long the man has been at it, it's a surprise his voice is there at all.


If you look at major rock bands that have come and gone, especially the ones with long careers, there is not a single vocalist who sounds the same now as when he started. Singing the way you do as a rock vocalist by nature changes musculature and sound, especially as you age. We tend to compare vocalists to other "great" ones, but the ones whose voices never changed typically have overdosed or shot themselves before there was ever a chance for that to occur.

Scott Stapp, Eddie Vedder, Robert Plant, James Hetfield, Aaron Lewis, Rod Stewart, David Draiman, Steven Tyler, you name it. Not a single one of them sounds the same now as when they first started their careers. People just find stapp an easy target, the only difference is he's more pretentious, but that is again jsut one part of his personality, and doesn't make him a bad person.


Scott and Mark wrote a lot of stuff in Human Clay and Weathered that trashed scott's voice because he could never sing that high to begin with and he did so by pushing and basically ripping up his vocal chords. At least respect the fact that stapp isn't trying to sing anything in the original keys because he has ADMITTED to himself that he CANT, and even in the lower keys he's admitted there are still notes he can't sing so he's changed the melody.

That directly counteracts any ego and pretentiousness he has developed. Do any of you have any idea how hard it is as a performer to admit when you CANT do something? Especially when you USED TO BE ABLE TO? and were FAMOUS for it?


Personally i'm excited to see where this goes, some of the material i've heard off full circle gives me chills. Are the lyrics/music the same? No, but neither are the people who wrote it or the people who listen to it. The world is a different place than it was in 1997 if you haven't noticed, so it stands to reason that the band will be different as well.


Resistance to change is just a narrow minded way to live. You might find that by waiting and accepting things for what they are rather than what they are not or what you wish they were yields a less aggravating listening experience.



Just my buck fifty. (i'd say two cents, but i talk too much)

That was a great post! One of the best I have seen.

[Jacqueline]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Icedmofo)

I'm no sure it's quite that simple an explanation.

The times that i've strained my voice, and i mean like REALLY fucked up my voice doing something unhealthy, the longest it's ever taken me to recover was 2 days.

I think there is something significantly more permanent happening to his voice, i wish i had more information and knew more about him to be able to say what, but this is definitely not from straining his voice in recording sessions.

Iced, that was a very thoughtful post on pg1, and I agree, I also think there is something more permanent happening with scott's vocal chords. I remember at the end of the Weathered Tour, how sick he got and the crazy schedule they had him on , it is no wonder someone's voice will start to give and get weak.

I don't know what he does these days in terms of vocal exercises but as I recall he wasn't very disciplined in that area.

For me I remember years ago when I heard My Own Prison on the radio, and I thought "who is THAT!" that voice and I was hooked. I am hooked on the whole band and I just wish that something could be done about preserving that voice of his...

[Icedmofo]

One thing i think that could come out of a creed/alter bridge coexistance is that if they stagger the tours right, stapp will get some time off to (hopefully) heal between the tours, as opposed to touring nonstop all year round.

What i'm hoping is that they release the album, finish this tour, then go back into the studio for AB/do an AB tour, then come back and actually tour off the full circle album and just keep a rotating schedule.

Granted that'd be a shit ton of work for tremo and the rest of the guys, but as far as scott is concerned that's probably the best option.

[Redeemer]

Damn, I have been on-and-off this board for seven years and I swear that has got to be the longest post I have ever seen. And not full of bullshit, either. Kudos.

I am no musician, My singing is just a hobby, so My opinion really is worth about two cents -- but I will say that whatever is going on voice-wise, if it is not a repairable thing, then I hope he does not just run his voice into the ground. Because there are some singers that do that -- think they can just forge onward despite the warning signs they are being given, and end up blowing their shiz out permanently. I would always rather have a singer take a much-needed break even if it means canceling a tour or two. Sometimes, you just have to be selfish if you want to keep yourself in one piece.