First off let me start out by saying the RHCP are one of my favorite bands. I mean the musicians in that band, Flea, Chad Smith, and most important John Mother F***ing Frusciante, have to be considered close to the top in the game at what they do. What becomes evident after every time I watch them perform live is that Anthony Kiedis drags them down. With his limited range, lyrics that seem to have a need to mention in California in every song, and the fact he stands next to John Frusciante, who might have one of the top 10 in voices i've ever heard, on stage, his averageness shines through. If anyone has not heard Frusciante's solo stuff immediately go on your computer and dl his free album and buy the rest of his albums. you won't regret it. He can hit some notes a guy after turning 12 should not be able to hit. Frusciante's guitar work on these albums is also amazing, but that should be expected from him. So, it got me thinking can a band be considered legendary or great when your singer is not even the best singer in the band?
Monday, February 12, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think Dave Grohl might have a better singing voice, traditionally speaking, than Kurt Cobain. And of course, he was the drummer... Then again, you mentioned lyrics, too, and I'm pretty sure Foo Fighters songs aren't actually about anything.
"better" meaning "non-offensive and mainstream," maybe. kurt could growl his crypticly written lyrics like none other - let's not play this game!
"'better' meaning 'non-offensive and mainstream,' maybe."
precisely.
Post a Comment