How damaged is Perry's voice really?
I've been reading this forum for a few weeks now and slowly getting more and more into Journey. One question I have is how damaged Steve Perry's voice actually "is". Not trying to turn this into a "vs" thread ... I dig Arnel, I liked Augeri and I liked Soto. The way some tell the story, you'd get the sense that Perry sings like the little girl in the Exorcist.
I'm sitting here listening to "TRIAL BY FIRE" for the first time. Herbie Herbert called it "monotone" but I'm not finding that. It isn't Steve Perry doing vocal acrobatics (ala Don't Stop Believing) or ungodly high notes (ala Wheel In The Sky around the guitar solo) from his prime but I'm still hearing what sounds like a way above average vocal range.
Likewise, I heard horror stories of the "For The Love Of Strange Medicine" tour and Perry sounding terrible on it. Yet, when I've watched videos of it on YouTube, I didn't find that. Some songs seemed a little lower, but he still hit some pretty damn high notes and had a really above average vocal range as far as male singers go. Did he lose his voice partway through the tour or something?
In all seriousness, I wonder if the claims that he "can't sing" anymore are a bit exaggerated. If "Trial By Fire" is any indication, it seems more like a case of he's getting older and would have to lower the keys of punishingly high song but still has an above average range compared to most male singers.
And really? Is that a bad thing? Very few singers with above average ranges sustain them later in life. It's natural.
Don Henley, IMO, still sounds great. He also avoids that high note on ONE OF THESE NIGHTS in concert.
Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins lowered their songs in concert.
Peter Cetera has all his Chicago-era songs down slightly.
Bobby Kimball from Toto sings his ass off, but his voice gets really hoarse really quickly.
I mean, it's natural with age.
I'm just not sure I buy the "can't sing" argument. I think it's "can't sing songs in original key for a sustained tour".
Then again, I haven't had Steve Perry singing scales to know how high he can go these days.
I'm sitting here listening to "TRIAL BY FIRE" for the first time. Herbie Herbert called it "monotone" but I'm not finding that. It isn't Steve Perry doing vocal acrobatics (ala Don't Stop Believing) or ungodly high notes (ala Wheel In The Sky around the guitar solo) from his prime but I'm still hearing what sounds like a way above average vocal range.
Likewise, I heard horror stories of the "For The Love Of Strange Medicine" tour and Perry sounding terrible on it. Yet, when I've watched videos of it on YouTube, I didn't find that. Some songs seemed a little lower, but he still hit some pretty damn high notes and had a really above average vocal range as far as male singers go. Did he lose his voice partway through the tour or something?
In all seriousness, I wonder if the claims that he "can't sing" anymore are a bit exaggerated. If "Trial By Fire" is any indication, it seems more like a case of he's getting older and would have to lower the keys of punishingly high song but still has an above average range compared to most male singers.
And really? Is that a bad thing? Very few singers with above average ranges sustain them later in life. It's natural.
Don Henley, IMO, still sounds great. He also avoids that high note on ONE OF THESE NIGHTS in concert.
Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins lowered their songs in concert.
Peter Cetera has all his Chicago-era songs down slightly.
Bobby Kimball from Toto sings his ass off, but his voice gets really hoarse really quickly.
I mean, it's natural with age.
I'm just not sure I buy the "can't sing" argument. I think it's "can't sing songs in original key for a sustained tour".
Then again, I haven't had Steve Perry singing scales to know how high he can go these days.