As far as range and technical prowess go:

Peter Hammill

Steve Walsh (in his younger days)

Dan Swano

Fish (in his younger days)

Ross Jennings (lesser known, he's in a band called Haken and has an incredibly diverse range)

Then theres the singers who aren't as technically gifted but can still belt out some tunes with some real intensity:

Fish (in more recent years)

Steve Hogarth

Steve Walsh (more recently)'

Hasse Froberg

Roine Stolt

Nad Sylvan

Rob Sowden

Peter Nichols

Chuck Schuldiner

In many ways I actually prefer the latter singers to the former.

Glad somebody said it 

 

On an emotional level Pete Nicholls (IQ) does it for me. I also like Matt Bellamy for sheer intensity (check out Sing For Absolution)

 

Technically the best imo:

Chris Thompson

Bruce Dickinson

 

The worst:

The guy from Eloy although I love the band

 

How can a screamer be technically the best?

While I agree that Bruce is not technically the best, there's much more to his singing than just screaming.  He used to sing at the top of a tenor's range all the time in the 80s so that is very demanding. Sure, we have so very many of those metal sirens by now but it's still not for everyone. And not just the fact that he hits those notes, he belts them powerfully. And he sings in tune all the time, so it's not screaming in the Tom Araya-sense at all.  Lacked adaptability and favoured an overwrought style of emoting but that's a different story.  

I meant shouter rather than screamer. My mistake. He shouts. 

Well, maybe my objections come across as semantic, but Bruce is simply belting hard at high pitch. It's not shouting because he's very much in tune.  The last lines of Hallowed Be Thy Name, for example, are SUNG.  With a lot of power and fury, yes, but it's still singing. I would not call it shouting or screaming because trying to shout out those notes like that day in day out in concert can wreck the singer's voice. Bruce was absolutely in control and knew what he was doing.

Lets get this clear...to me he is a shouter. Nothing you say will sway that opinion.

Fine, but I raised the objection only because you are questioning another's assessment of Bruce's technical abilities based on what appear to be somewhat inaccurate observations.  You are free to call him what you like, but factually, Bruce is a singer, he's not a typical thrash metal shouter sort at all. 

He shouts. Belting a song throughout is shouting. And of course factually he is a singer. So is mark Knoppfler factually a singer even though he talks. he's a talker. Don't pull this my opinion are true nonsense.

Wrong. Belting is simply maintaining chest resonance even at pitches where you'd normally be required to move to head.  Sounds of the Sea chorus is as much belted as Hallowed...., just used for different purposes.

 

Snow Dog wrote:  And of course factually he is a singer. So is mark Knoppfler factually a singer even though he talks. he's a talker. Don't pull this my facts are true nonsense.

You're wrong ( to use your term)
 

No such thing as that, shouting in tune (which is not what he does, once again) is still singing, I am not going to call it anything else and also the claim that a singer who belts all the time cannot be technically the best is off base.  Once again, what your opinion of Bruce is and what you choose to call him is not my concern, but the conclusions you have drawn are inaccurate.    

And I insist that my description is wholly accurate. 

  These people typically assume a high note produced with a good deal of resonance must have been produced from the chest but of course, that is not the case.  Dio's highest notes on Neon Knights are definitely off the head, that they SOUND chesty doesn't mean they are. 

I am not talking about your description of Bruce, I am saying the conclusion that a screamer (which he's not) cannot be technically the best is wrong.  Bruce is not technically the best in my opinion either but it's the larger inference that that style of singing by itself is not technically demanding that I object to. 

i didn't say he was a screamer. And object all you wish., I'm not saying he has no technical ability.

You asked how can a screamer be technically the best.  Sorry, but adaptability has nothing to do with technical ability. Also, implied in your observation is the suggestion that Bruce cannot sing softly, which is false as well.  What you're saying is a bit like asking how can Petrucci be one of the more technically accomplished rock guitarists if he plays at 11 so much?  No, he is.  

Er, you're missing the point. I simply said belting in a heavy metal song is not shouting. I am not even sure if you understood what I call shouting.  Comparing metal shouting a la Araya to an opera singer is taking it out of context. 

Bruce Dickinson

Heather Findlay

Annie Haslam

James Labrie

Jon Anderson

Tarja Turunnen

Fish

Fine, but this is again not really in context with what the discussion was about.  I was, clearly, making a discussion between shouting as a vocal technique and singing as it is normally understood. Bruce is still very much a singer, we should go by technique and not effect.  

Annie Haslam - Incredibly good voice
Freddie Mercury - Really good voice
Peter Hammill - Lovely good voice

Jon Anderson - Harshly good voice
David Surkamp - Creepy good voice

Daniel Gildenlow and Peter Hammill

 

Mariusz Duda (Riverside)

Rikard Sjöblom (Beardfish)

Ian Kenny (Karnivool)

Sel Balamir (Amplifier)

Mike Vennart (Oceansize)

They simply teach you the mechanics and anatomy of using your diaphragm.  So, people do still use the diaphragm to sing,  at least those who sing 'correctly' like Allen, so I am not sure what you are referring to when you say singing has changed so much.  As I said before, technique matters, and not effect.  Many heavy metal singers can sing with BIG production, volume and power at the high end of a tenor's range, and they are NOT doing anything they aren't supposed to. Dio, for instance, had lost precious little in his voice right till his last years and he sang for nearly 40 years live. 

I don't think so and that is why I cited the example of Dio. He had such a long career and so many shows under his belt but there was barely a dent on his voice through the years.  Bruce Dickinson's voice too held up well over the years.  Halford and Tate ran into problems but that was on account of their lifestyle, particularly excessive drinking.  That is what I have tried to emphasize on this thread. What sounds throaty to the listener may not be so at all, it may be controlled and "safe" singing.  Anyhow, long story short, rock singers going over C5 definitely switch to head voice just like other singers.  What you are suggesting might have applied to Freddie Mercury who apparently contracted some voice problems later on in his career (and again, whether THAT was the cause or something else, I don't know). But high singing in rock/metal from 80s onwards, especially the Allen/Hansi types, is controlled and 'correct'. 

One of my favorites.

I mean, the bloke has to be the most ORIGINAL vocalist in prog, right?

 

Greg Lake

Peter Gabriel

Fish

Annie Haslam

Freddy Mercury (early years)

Bowie  (and by extension Peter Hamill, even the differences between both I can not help thinking they have very similar timbres)

Emila Derkowska from the polish Quidam

 

 

 

Nice to see Francesco mentioned ... he is indeed very special.

 

It's hard to not think that Peter Hammill is probably the best, but his best work is behind him, and I am not sure that he is being as vital today as he was way back, when his use of the "voice" was unreal, and totally had many people wondering ... wow ... how can he do that? ... you can if you "live" your music --- and it's not just a song!

 

I would consider Freddie as well ... even though a lot of Queen's music might not be considered "progressive", but a lot of the work they did was far more progressive than most of the bands we list in the top 100! And not just a repetition either which tells you that they were about a lot more specific on the content and work they did, than most bands ever consider!

 

From the women's side, the best and worst is in one person, that is really hard for many folks to accept. Renate, from AD2 is an acquired taste, as she can be soft and gentle and then you listen to "Mozambique" and all you can say is ... ohhh my gawd ... it is down right vicious and so Peter Hammill like that it is scary ... not to mention that the lyrics are absolutely unreal and with it on top of it. She used her voice in many different ways and did a lot of different things, and you can see her operatic ability in "Yeti" and some other nice addons in other pieces through out. She is a totally non-conventional singer, and the kind of singer that we're likely to say ... gawd ... she's horrible, but that's like saying that the early days of Iggy were any better!

 

Annie Haslam has the range, but is, otherwise a very conventional singer on an excellent band that helped showcase and back her voice. Not sure how progressive that really is, other than ... just excellent musicianship and composition instead.

 

I have a hard time not including Roy Harper in these lists ... he is a fabulous singer and he can drone and groan and scream and shout with the best of them, and like Peter Hammill, he knows how to accentuate what he is saying ... on his later years he is losing that a bit, but he's still an excellent artist and his period from the mid 70's through the 80's is on par with PH's material and then some. We simply do not have the ear for music and poetry ... and we consider Peter progressive and Roy not ... simply because he uses an accoustic guitar instead of a keyboard.

 

Peter Gabriel is ok in my book. I think he got too infatuated with his fame and wanting to doll himself up with some girls here and there, and I hope that he comes back around and worry less about looking fabulous and instead do more music. He has experimented enough and heard enough, that I think that he has not figured out how to work with or use all that stuff ... but he really could use writing something like The Lamb again ... to help explore his insides better ... and get off the pop routines and material.

 

Jim Morrison is probably the best of them all, though ... there never has been as expressive and poetic a voice as his in rock music, and no one could dally from the weirdest to the most beautiful in such a poetic way. His band is not quite listed as "progressive" and it should be one of the bands that we should look at and appreciate the most. That kind of imagery, poetry, lyrics and creativity to color the words, is what "progressive" was all about ... the rest is not worth discussing!

Easy ... just be named Peter Hammill!

 

 

Wait a minute ... you guys making an assumption that "progressice" this or that, actually knows and understands "resonance" ... ??? 

 

And in the 60's and 70's there was a lot of work being done having to do with "voice" and experimentation ... and sounds off the voice also counted.

 

I remember the first time we heard Flora Purim, and someone next to me asked ... is that supposed to be singing? ... and unffortunately that means that this person only knows one thing about vocals ... and of course, they have never heard a lot of Eastern Music, that happens to have a lot of "vocal effects" and "variations" that add to the singing and the lyricsof the work at hand.

 

Again ... we're too dang stuck up on an idea of singing to accept anything else possible ... and for people that the vocal this and that is a limitation, not an expression ... then it would not be called "singing" ... and things like this really show how the mentality of western commercial music is really hurting expression!

 

Expression creates singing ... not the other way around! So something being a scream or other ... so what? ... it's a part of the expression, and if you are upset that Jim Morrison screamed ... you can not petition the lord with prayer ... you are obviously going to miss the best part of the trip!

 

I'm not sure this is necessary ... since in the end, the restrictions and a lot of the defined details tend to restrict expression and say ... "you can't do that" ... and in the end, the fact of the matter is that the 60's was a time when "voice" was explored ... and this was extremelly visible in the theater circles and there is no reason to see that it was not happening in the music circles, because it was ... many of these people and bands were around a lot of these things and explorations ... and it helped music tremendously, when you see someone like Jim Morrison do his l=poetry on many pieces of music with the excellent use of his voice.

 

Other vocal things were also done, with a lot of modern writers involved with more than one artist, and Mr. Nekkid Lunch has more band connections directly than PA will ever list! And it triggered different music being done and created in the same style that he used to discuss ... which was called 52 stentence pick up ... and the order? ... who cares! ... and you know that the emotional content in that sequence is ... messed up and ... how do you interpret it?

 

Now discussing vocalists is an issue when you get into some of the Eastern voices, that have far more range, and depth than ANY rock, or opera singer out there ... to the point that almost NONE of them have the guts to try different things in the other countries. And western music is easy for many of these eastern singers because the scale is simple by comparison to their scales and notes!

 

But let's not get into "preferences" as the dividing line as to what good singing is ... because 95 out of 100 Western singers ... rarely come close!

 

As for some opera singers ... there are some differences. You can catch Renata Tebaldi and Birgit Nilsson duke it out in Turandot ... and Tebaldi is very soft and smooth, and Nilsson is very powerful and not as smooth and I keep thinking that Nilsson's is more Germanic style of singing, specially Wagner, where the ability to make it through and last out a long time is way more important than otherwise ... most opera singers do not do Wagner, and it becomes an endurance test! Tebaldi, like many Italians is very smooth and clean and it is very much in line with the Italian music, which is expressive and romantic and emotional.

 

I had a name for the men opera singers, the version of Tosca that we have in Santa Barbara, and he is extremelly smooth, while Pavarotti is almost all power ... and I always thought that he lacked the subtlety that softness could add to singing. He was good, mind you, but not complete for my tastes? Just an example ... I'll find out the name of that other singer and update this post.

I'm not sure that's fair to him ... it's the only voice he has and he is capable of using it ... but he lacks the spiritual and internal side to bring it across any better ... and to me, that is sad and brings YES down some. From the couple of things I have heard, he is a very good singer ... but I am not sure I would ever place him in the same category as Jon at all! ... EVER!

 

Just a thought.

Yeah, probably not fair to B.D., but I'm still mighty rankled about how all that went down.  I would have preferred for Yes to find a totally different vocalist, rather than someone who quite adroitly mimics Anderson.  

However, their formula isn't to chart new territory, but rather to fill seats of folks anxious to hear the Yes classics & (they hope) some high-quality new material.  It is upon this new material that BD's reputation in this business will be made or broken.   Yes could have selected a young woman and opened up a whole legion of new fans.  Or not. 

If I drop the sarcasm, I'd say that the duet of Gabriel and Collins (singing backing vocals, one octave higher) is especially compelling to my ears.  "Supper's Ready" intro for example....."Walking across the sitting room..."  very nice and subtle, these days it would be done with octave doublers/auto tune etc. 

Bassist Jeff Berlin did some very nice vocals on Bruford's "Gradually Going Tornado," and he is rarely mentioned for his vocals.    I'm also partial to Colin Carter's voice in Flash, although that is something of an acquired taste I guess.   Flash's bassist (now guitarist) Ray Bennett has a very pleasant voice also.  

And, nobody mentioned Gordon Haskell....he of the magnificent scream in KC's "Cirkus" on the LP "Lizard"!!!  

 

Jon Anderson? A tuneful vocalist, with a good range, but an uninteresting and somewhat undefined voice, almost like an ambience rather than a lead vocal. Excellent on harmonies.

 

Geoff tate, no comment.

 

Then again, we all have our opinions!

Of Course.

 

Fair enough ... you could say that for almost 3/4's of all rock band singers ... it became about the fame and whatever else, and in some cases it works, because the band helps it sound better.

 

... The voice is an instrument, and just because someone can talk and shout does not mean that ANYONE can sing, it certainly doesn't mean everyone should be considered a singer. The voice is an instrument that you learn with practice, just like any other instrument. Learning to sing requires an attunement and connection to your mind and body. ...

 

Carefull here when you say this ... because you are saying that just because the voice is an instrument, it is now "limited" and can not do different things ... like screaming, or other sound effects .... which instruments can do, if people want to have fun with them and try different things ... or you can spend 30 minutes watching "Fellini's Orchestra Rehearsal" ... which is more fun, anyway! ...

 

When you say learning to sing, all you are saying is ... using the 12 notes, and adjust to the chords and notes that he/she is supposed to sing ... and "sounds" can not be used .. has to be words, let's say ... and all of a sudden, this limitation hurts.

 

The other part is ... that we place these invisible limitations on these things. Go listen to many Eastern singers and what they do with their voices and how they meld it to the music (only word for it! ... we sing too much and don't meld or grok very well either!) ... and this is not something that we teach in western cultures ... and the ability to be better and more expressive, is sometimes more difficult.

 

There is a place in time, for everything ... and I don't know ... listen to Jim Morrison do some of his screams, and they are in tune and strong ... but again, we decided that we don't like that attitude, but we like other attitudes ... and then it becomes a serious discussion as to what is and isn't.

 

And then ... guess what rock music has been about for the past 50 years ... I don't have to tell you ... it has been about breaking the process and the definitions ... so different things in front of the microphone will be considered ... wether you or I like it or not ... and I think in the end, this is a very good thing ... we need more emotion in music, so we stop the very "classical" stupidity that states these kinds of passages in music mean this and that and this and that ... and rock music kinda told that off at first (progressive music) and then started using lyrics to help you make believe that A Star is Born is still true!

 

You must see the insanity in it all ... and how singing has been busted up ... and a new standard will be set in 50 years ... but to think that Peter Hammill is not a singer because he screams, or Roy Harper ... is really sad, because some of these people are at the forefront of that school of theater, film and the arts that were magnificent in their use of the "voice" in defining and coming across with their work ... which no one is denying its power, strength and beauty all wrapped up into one idea!

 

Times change ... but "western" singers are severely limited in their abilities and I like the idea and freedom that screaming or anything else ... can be done right and has a place in music ... opera and the "conventional" music simply was never able to find a place for true emotion ... it was always an "idea of that emotion" .... and most rock music, for me anyways ... was about telling those conventions and ideas to go to hell ... including singing ... so Roger Chapman is awesome for me, Peter is great, Roy is fabulous, Renate is insane and out of this world, Mani is the ultimate sound effect, no lyrics guru ... and even the early Greg Lake ... was pure poetry in motion and the music colored the words! ... instead of some lame lyrics telling me what I am supposed to be thinking! ... see the difference between the voice being an instrument and just another singer?

 

As an instrument yeah ... scream.

 

As a singer ... nahh ... go back tot he choir you came from ... ciao baby!

 

I mentioned Bruce Dickinson in my earlier post as one of the best 'technicially'. Then followed a prolonged discussion after being challenged by Snow Dog and well argued from my side by Roger That (thanks!). I would just clarify that I regard him as one of the best because to my ears he is pitch perfect. Heavy metal/Heavy rock singers usually grate on me big time but Bruce 'Air Raid Siren' Dickinson even though he supposedly shouts is still spot on.

btw Greg Lake tried the shouting thing on the Emerson,Lake and Powell album.That was horrible!

 

I just think that his band and his work deserve better attention ... they are not 15 minute cuts per se, but the variation and talent and the ability to make sure the music could color Freddie's emotions ... is something that most any band anywhere in the world would die to have ... and the last thing he recorded is enough to make anyone cry ... which is a wonderful anthrm for pretty much everything that the band and him, gave us ... !

 

But because there was a lot of hits, and we don't think that the stadium song is progressive because the masses are in it () ... fits ... and it doesn't the mandatory keyboards to tell us to fly and dream ... in many ways, if you break down the restrictions, all of a sudden you have a band that is much more progressive than a good 75% of the bands listed in our top list ... a lot of which is not even original and just a copy of the same thing done before ... you can't really say that about Queen.

 

I hadn't really thought about it that way but seems fair.

 

Queen were the first band I really liked. Freddie strutting across stage like he owned the world.His massive personality perhaps overtook everything else and made you forget what a brilliant vocalist he always was.

 

 

Another belter was the late, great Ronnie James Dio!!  Again, tangential to prog, but so is Freddie Mercury I suppose.  

All three had rather remarkable range, vibrato, tone and control.  I haven't seen Gillian in many years & don't know how well he's holding up.  

Thank you!

 

It's nice to see this ... outstanding!

 

Now, you're making me go out and get that new album!