| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
memowakeman 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 19 2005
Location: Mexico City
Status: Offline
Points: 13033
|
 Posted: June 23 2006 at 16:31 |
I prefer Fish`voice, more emotional, and for my ears is a great voice, also he will be touring to Mexico un august!!!
|
|
Follow me on twitter @memowakeman
|
 |
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 29285
|
Posted: June 23 2006 at 17:37 |
|
Always thought Hogarth a better singer by far..but much of the inspiration left the band after Fish left... sadly.
|
|
Third_Guard
Forum Groupie
Joined: May 14 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 98
|
Posted: June 23 2006 at 17:48 |
|
My favourite is Fish, but Hogarth, as a singer, is better than the first one. I feel that Fish give me more emotions than Hogarth.
|
|
salmacis
Forum Senior Member
Content Addition
Joined: April 10 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 3928
|
Posted: June 23 2006 at 17:51 |
|
Love Fish's voice- one of the great voices of the whole genre from any era (although cues are taken from Peters Hammill and Gabriel). He has a flair for the dramatic and has great power, spitting out the lyrics at times yet is also capable of a more subtle approach. Hogarth's voice or that era of the band in general, I'm less enthusiastic towards. It's a technically fine vocal but I just don't feel he stands out from a crowd like Fish did. I really ought to give the later Marillion another whirl but for me they lost something with Fish.
|
|
Masque
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 01 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 808
|
Posted: June 23 2006 at 23:47 |
 E-Dub wrote:
He does tend to mumble during some of the slower moments (especially at the beginning of "Fantastic Place"); however, I've never really had a problem understanding him. That could come with hearing Marbles many o' times, though.
That said, the brilliance of Marbles never ceases to amaze me.
E |
I found marbles to be boring and stagnant much like most of Hogarths work 
|
|
rupert
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2006
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 610
|
Posted: June 30 2006 at 15:29 |
Marbles is subtle and heartfelt though it doesn't have the power of its 2 pre-decessors ( Anoraknophobia & .Com ), stagnant is something Marillion with Hogie never were...
|
|
...I'm a musician/singer/songwriter, visit me on www.reverbnation.com/rupertlenz and there you can choose from 125 recordings you can listen to ( for free ) if you're not limited to prog-rock !
|
|
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: June 30 2006 at 16:17 |
No contest - Mr Dick wins hands down.
His taming of Peter Hammill's style and blending it into his own, combined with perfect dramatic and melodic expression of his supreme lyrics make him almost untouchable in terms of technical quality, despite the obvious fact that he's not a technical singer: The techniques he uses are necessary for expression, whereas Hogarth skips technique on the whole for a less lucid approach to his less lucid lyrics.
But it's the fact I like Fish's style more than Hogarth's that really cements my vote. 
|
|
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|
Sacred 22
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1509
|
Posted: July 04 2006 at 23:22 |
BePinkTheater wrote:
I kind of prefer it to Fish. But I know I'm a minority by that... |
I tend to agree 
|
|
mgallard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 27 2005
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 155
|
Posted: July 04 2006 at 23:45 |
|
Prefer Fish of the early 80's. I gather he no longer has much of a voice. Saw Marillion during the Clutching at Straws tour and he couldn't reach any high notes by then (had some backing vocalists for that)... has quite a bit of character as a singer and that makes up for much of what he lacks technically (should have stopped smoking a long time ago, that migt have helped). Hogarth's good and recognizable, I like his singing, but...
Mogens
|
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
|
Posted: July 05 2006 at 00:30 |
Both let it fly sometimes, but the difference is in that when Fish wails it's very resonating and bombastic, while Hogarth is a bit fragile and can't pound it out like Fish. Though he did make AMAZING progress in the time between Anorak and Marbles. 
|
|
|
|
Flip_Stone
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 388
|
Posted: July 05 2006 at 12:45 |
Here we go again with the eternal Fish-Hogarth Marillion vocalist debate. Oh well, might as well throw in my two-cents worth.
I personally prefer Fish over Hogarth. Fish has a much fuller voice, and can get more intense. Hogarth is a decent singer, but he often sings too feminine, as though he's part woman. A guy can sing with depth and emotion without sounding like he's wearing perfume and vogueing around on the floor. Further evidence of this is on the sometimes-embarrassing moves and actions that Hogarth resorts to on video (check out the Six of One - Half Dozen of the Other video collection). I rest my case.
Edited by Flip_Stone - July 05 2006 at 12:48
|
|
dralan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 29 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 339
|
Posted: July 05 2006 at 14:51 |
|
Hogarth has a decent enough voice, but Fish was the heart and soul of Marillion before he left and there is really no comparison. I think they should have changed the name of the group myself. I know Genesis changed frontmen mid-career and were able to pull it off, but Marillion just dont have a strong enough musical identity.
|
|
rupert
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2006
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 610
|
Posted: July 07 2006 at 12:38 |
|
[QUOTE:. I think they should have changed the name of the group ] RIGHT, but that's far too late now, and... well, they're strong as ever with H, if you like his coice, too... I don't want the past back, not for a minute !
|
|
...I'm a musician/singer/songwriter, visit me on www.reverbnation.com/rupertlenz and there you can choose from 125 recordings you can listen to ( for free ) if you're not limited to prog-rock !
|
|
progadicto
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 19 2005
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 4316
|
Posted: July 07 2006 at 14:16 |
|
I don't have any problem with SH voice...My only problem with SH voice is when he sings old-stuff songs... that's almost a crime...
|
|
... E N E L B U N K E R...
|
|
prog4evr
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 22 2005
Location: Wuhan, China
Status: Offline
Points: 1455
|
Posted: July 07 2006 at 16:55 |
|
Hogarth redeems himself on a song such a 'Interior Lulu' from the Marillion.com release, but otherwise Fish's grittier vocals captivate the listener as Gabriel did for the first albums of Genesis (compared to the wimpier, pop sound of Collins).
|
|
mgallard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 27 2005
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 155
|
Posted: July 07 2006 at 17:32 |
|
Collins: Wimpier... not at all. Actually when I started listening to Genesis, I knew nothing about the vocalist change and I never really noticed any difference :-) not too trained an ear at that time too (early teens), but it just serves to show that the change wasn't all that obvious for a normal listener.
I enjoy Collins' vocals very much up until Duke, after that something changed and he lost the magic I enjoyed, I think it's his way of singing, more than his voice, that changed, could be the mixing process, the mics, could also be that time has something to do with it too (nothing lasts forever).
Mogens
|
|
rupert
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2006
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 610
|
Posted: July 14 2006 at 14:36 |
progadicto wrote:
I don't have any problem with SH voice...My only problem with SH voice is when he sings old-stuff songs... that's almost a crime... |
Not always, but in the "Kayleigh"-case I'm keen to agree, that's a crime to my ears... but what about Sugar Mice, Script, Slainthe Mhath and Garden Party ???? I think it really fits, even on Lavender, but nonetheless when I'm going to a Marillion-show with H I don't wanna hear the old stuff cause I prefer the "new", starting with the "Season's end"-album
|
|
...I'm a musician/singer/songwriter, visit me on www.reverbnation.com/rupertlenz and there you can choose from 125 recordings you can listen to ( for free ) if you're not limited to prog-rock !
|
|
Cristi
Special Collaborator
Crossover / Prog Metal Teams
Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Offline
Points: 45548
|
Posted: August 01 2006 at 12:47 |
|
I consider myself a Marillion fan, I love all their albums ( now I am a minority). I love both Fish and Steve Hogarth, two awesome vocalists as far as I'm concerned. I also think people shouldn't compare singers, albums, musicians, bands so much. Excessive comparison leads to narrow-mindedness...Sorry.
Edited by Cristi - August 01 2006 at 12:48
|
|
E-Dub
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 24 2006
Location: Elkhorn, WI
Status: Offline
Points: 7910
|
Posted: August 06 2006 at 11:41 |
|
Marillion aren't doing any Fish material these days. Slowly started to weed out that era around .Com, and by the time they toured for Anoraknophobia, it was all Hogarth era material. Fine by me.
They will pull out the occasional Fish classic at the conventions, however.
E
|
|
|
|
verslibre
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 18449
|
Posted: August 06 2006 at 17:58 |
|
It's all about Fugazi and Clutching At Straws for me, these days. The title track from This Strange Engine is very cool but that's honestly all the Marillion I need. I wouldn't mind having Reel To Real (or is it Real To Reel?), though.
Edited by verslibre - August 06 2006 at 17:58
|
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Marillion Vocalists
