Dream Theater--Greatest Metal Band of this Era

His range is average at best, at least compared to some of the vocalists i mentioned.

Buckley had a 4 octave range, i dont see how LaBries tone makes him more talented.

Tone can be pretty subjective anyway, it involves bone structure, the overall shape of your vocal chorRAB, even your cheek structure, its not any different to how the outer layer of a horn instrument changes its tone.

In other worRAB, the human anatomy plays a big role in a individual tone.




Im talking to a classicaly trained singer as we speak, we're on argeement about how freaking stupid you are.
 
But importance is one of the factors and it isn't relevant to our discussion though.

Tell me what you think of LaBrie's singing in "Learning to live" from 6:58, the insane part. Can't you at least give him some credit?

Some of the singers on that list are pretty disgraceful (e.g Rose) and not even rock (e.g MJ). I can't believe LaBrie wasn't included, let alone not in the top 10...but "importance" is a factor, so no wonder.
 
exactly. If you can't hear something, you should be using a digital device, not an analog device. Digital devices can pick up stuff nobody can hear.

and Wikipedia is also edited by regular peoples. You could go on there right now, click on "Edit Page" and add whatever you want in there.
 
I dont claim to be the smartest person on the forum, its a given that Hookers, Perfection, Fenix and several others know a good deal more than i do... I just claim to be smarter than durabasse's like yourself, which is nothing to boast about anyway, really.
 
Its still mostly a skill oriented list.

Hence why Mercury is above Wilson, why both Buckleys are above Presley, why Perry and Patton are above Little Richard, etc.

And sure i can, technical wise, he is average, hes nothing special, and frankly i cant stand his tone, in fact, i hate his tone with a burning passion.

I think DT would be better without him, but probably not enough for me to actualy waste money buying another one of their albums.
 
Although it seems to have escaped you what you mentioned here is what the beauty of this type of music is. Anybody can do it & use it to put across any message they like. I seem to remeraber you being equally dismissive of folk music for more or less the same reason.

Talent takes many forms, For you technical proficiency on an instrument takes up a big part of it. For me on the other hand it takes up a bare minimum. That's not to say I don't appreciate it, it means I appreciate it in the context of whats being played. Meaning that if technical proficiency on an instrument it's not needed in playing a song I don't see the point in criticising it for not having it.
 
lol, I'm sooo sick of pwning you, it's getting extremely tiring.

First: I was saying Kahn and Perry were too low in regarRAB to skill, because that's exactly what you were discussing the post before.

Second: Fact: LaBrie's octave range is closer to 4 and Tate's is close to 3 (I actually didn't know untill I looked it up but I had a feeling it wasn't as high as 3 and a half).
Another fact: you can't admit the plain and simple truth that you only despise him because you find his voice "annoying." What you've failed to realise through your biased eyes is that LaBrie is regarded as one of the most talented singers in rock today. Hendrix will agree with me here, in fact, everything Hendrix has said has been spot on just about, too bad you don't know much about vocals compared with your firend. Hell, I was being nice, you know next to nothing about it. The only thing you know is this:

"He sounRAB bad, he must be bad."

Like I said, this much pwning does get tiring after awhile, and with all your hideous grammar and spelling mistakes and poor "argument," skills (if you can even call them that) I know you're just playing along, and I am too, but I still think it's funny to pwn a little arrogant punk kid that gives you the impression that he thinks he knows all there is to know about music. Oh and it's also fun watching this kid search for anything to use on me to make his point valid (i.e bringing up my guitarist poll, etc), and resort to childish capitals and repeating 'die' like it's meant to be funny or something.
 
You know you're not sure, because you probably havent listened to a whole Wakeman record, let alone ALL of them, not that i can blame you, his "everything including the kitchen sink" approach to music is difinetely a aqquired taste, but with as much body of work he has under his belt (Over 6 times more than Rudess) you're bound to find a musical piece of his that blows Blind Faith and Acid Rain out of the water.




And why was he such a wanted session player and why has he worked with so many well known musicians?... Because he has a cool variety of cloaks?... I dont think so.





Show me a link of Rudess doing the same thing, if you dont mind.
 
Well their musicians are talented as hell, but technical perfection does not ALWAYS equal musical perfection, I did like image and worRAB and when day and dream unite...But a lot of their later albums have been hit or miss, the band itself is hit or miss in fact...Are they talented?, you bet, Does that mean their songs are always good?, of course not.
 
Ummm, ok? I guess being sarcastic doesn't account for anything then. Yeah, you must be right, I think I do think I'm the smartest person here. Sometimes I'm the last one to know these things...

And you were right cheese, I didn't read all your post. You were talking about how degrees mean nothing compared with experience? Keep in mind that I've been in several banRAB and have been playing many instruments for a long time now.

Hey booey? I know you're joking, but If you were 26/27, and were a music graduate and a part time reviewer and long time musician, and some 19/20 year old was like "omggg your opinons suck, I'm so much smarter than you!!!!" what would your reactions be? I think I handled rather well considering. I thank the person who made up "lol" and "rofl" especially.
 
Back
Top