Good vocals vs. Good guitar riffs

Just wanted to get some thoughts from some of you on this topic.

Here is a discussion between me and another person on another message board, just for context:

person on another message board wrote:

I am like a lot of people here...you can have the best, most technical guitar playing in the world, but if the vocals suck, I can't listen to your band. Just the way it is. If your vocalist is THAT terrible...fire him and play instrumentals! LOL

me wrote:

And on the other hand, since you guys don't care about guitar riffs at all, maybe they should just play all-accapella music since you guys don't seem to focus on the music at all.

I'm not saying guitar playing has to be technical to be good. That's neither here nor there.

It needs to be well-written and have some sort of character that separates it from everyone else.

It just boggles my mind how people can ignore everything to focus 100% on the singers. Talk about missing the point of heavy metal music.

Black Sabbath didn't create the foundation of heavy metal music because Ozzy's voice was so earth-shatteringly wonderful.

Open your ears and realize there is more than one musician doing interesting things in metal bands.

Thoughts?

I think everything has to be good (to my ears). But if I don't like the vocalist/singer, then that band doesn't get airtime by me.

Let's turn this around. If everything about a band is to your liking well enough, but they had a terrible guitar player, would you still listen to them?

Rexorcist wrote:

Let's turn this around. If everything about a band is to your liking well enough, but they had a terrible guitar player, would you still listen to them?

The vocals/solos/drumming would have to be even better to compensate for that deficiency.

I like some death metal stuff, but with atonal vocals the riffing/soloing/ and/or drumming has to really be a cut above for it to be as good IMHO. It has to fill that gap left by lack of a vocal melody.

Case in point, I like some of SEVEN WITCHES stuff even though IMHO Frost is one of the worst "name" guitarists in metal. But Rivera's vocal melodies and delivery on stuff like "Metal Messiah" are just awesome.

I'm with Rex, I think it's a mixture of both.

The Black Sabbath example is a good one. Ozzy wasn't the greatest singer, but he sounded good with the music. Tony Iommi wasn't doing anything overly complicated with his guitar riffs, yet they worked well together. It was combination of it all. I suppose you could call it "chemistry". Metallica were never the most technical band, James certainly is not a skilled singer, and even many of their early riffs were basically re-arranged Diamond Head/NWOBHM riffs, yet together they created something that worked.

Vocals for me can ruin an album as well. If the music is spectacular, but the vocals aren't something I like, then chances are I just won't listen to it.

Why would you listen to something that you don't like, no matter how good the music is?

I noticed with the new Once Dead that a lot of people are praising the music, but saying they don't like the vocals. I find this to be true with a lot of the psuedo-goth, female vocalist, metal bands. I just can't get into them because of the vocals. People keep telling me how great the music is, but I can't get past the vocals. I just don't like them.

At the same time, it's all a matter of opinion. Everyone has different tastes, like and dislikes, etc. I've had people tell me that they don't like Ultimatum because of the vocals, yet I've read comments from people who say that the vocals are what gives the band distinction from other bands.

ultmetal wrote:

Why would you listen to something that you don't like, no matter how good the music is?

What?

Because I like good, well-written music?

I must not understand your question.

Temple of Blood wrote:

Rexorcist wrote:

Let's turn this around. If everything about a band is to your liking well enough, but they had a terrible guitar player, would you still listen to them?

The vocals/solos/drumming would have to be even better to compensate for that deficiency.

In my scenario I don't think you'd have good solos cuz the guitar player sucks remember.

Temple of Blood wrote:

I like some death metal stuff, but with atonal vocals the riffing/soloing/ and/or drumming has to really be a cut above for it to be as good IMHO. It has to fill that gap left by lack of a vocal melody.

I can agree with that. I used to like a lot of death metal but not so much any more. There are still a few I'll throw on though.

Temple of Blood wrote:

Case in point, I like some of SEVEN WITCHES stuff even though IMHO Frost is one of the worst "name" guitarists in metal. But Rivera's vocal melodies and delivery on stuff like "Metal Messiah" are just awesome.

That's cool. But even with Jack Frost being one of the worst "name" guitarists, he's still a decent guitar player to the average person and can hold his on decent enough and write a decent tune and stay in key I guess.

I find it hard to listen to a singer who can't stay in tune or is very nasal, it grates on my nerves after a while. It'd be the same as listening to a band where the guitar player constantly warbles in and out of key or hits the wrong notes all the time. Or in the case of being a nasal singer, it'd be similar to listening to a band with a terrible tone to their instruments.

Temple of Blood wrote:

ultmetal wrote:

Why would you listen to something that you don't like, no matter how good the music is?

What?

Because I like good, well-written music?

I must not understand your question.

No matter how good the music behind the vocals are. If the music is spectacular, but you don't like the vocals, why would you listen to something you don't like.

Temple of Blood wrote:

Because I like good, well-written music?

I must not understand your question.

I see it like this, the vocals are part of the music, just another instrument. It doesn't matter how well the music is made, if the performer doesn't cut it to my ears, then I don't want to hear it again. I'm not a person that separates the vocals from the music. The vocals to me are a part of the music. I find it hard to ignore one part of a whole when I'm listening to something as a whole for the enjoyment.

Make sense....I didn't think so.

Let's take the new Temple of Blood for instance. I find the music to be great. However, I do find it distracting that the vocals are so low in the mix. I want to hear the vocals up with the music. Despite that, I still really like this CD. That's my opinion.

At the same time, I read a comment by someone else on the net who didn't mind the vocals being mixed back at all, but this person felt the guitars had "an intonation problem or something". Man, I just don't hear that at all, but then I am not a guitarist.

I've read comments from other people who love everything about the CD just the way it is.

So, it's all about opinions and what you like and dislike. I personally like the new Temple of Blood despite the fact that I wish the vocals were a little more out front. The other person said he didn't like the CD at all due to what he perceived as a problem with intonation.

I can sometimes look past vocals, but to me, it's just not as enjoyable of a listen as something where I enjoy the whole package.

(BTW, did you see my review of the new TOB?)

Why would a band that writes good, well-written music, have a singer that`s either poor or does not fit the music?
A professional band has to have quality performers.

It all has to be there. Bad vocals (or what I would consider bad vocals) = deal killer.

Rexorcist wrote:

Temple of Blood wrote:

Because I like good, well-written music?

I must not understand your question.

I see it like this, the vocals are part of the music, just another instrument.

very well said bro.

ultmetal wrote:

I'm with Rex, I think it's a mixture of both.

Me too.

Oh, and TOB completely jumped the gun and got defensive in the first post...

The guy wasn't saying that he didn't pay attention to the music...he said that no matter how good it is, if the vocals were bad it harms the experience...just his taste.

I think it has to be a mixture of both.Bad vocals can ruin an otherwise stellar album IMO.

Rexorcist wrote:

In my scenario I don't think you'd have good solos cuz the guitar player sucks remember.

I thought you were referring to a rhythm guitarist (or basically whatever the main riffs of the song are, and how well they were performed).

Rexorcist wrote:

I can agree with that. I used to like a lot of death metal but not so much any more. There are still a few I'll throw on though.

I've lost my taste for much of it but some of the stuff really stands above the pack and I can see why it replaced thrash metal in a lot of people's minds back in the early 90s. Nowadays I rarely hear any good "extreme metal" bands who can write a decent riff or song.

Quote :

That's cool. But even with Jack Frost being one of the worst "name" guitarists, he's still a decent guitar player to the average person and can hold his on decent enough and write a decent tune and stay in key I guess. I find it hard to listen to a singer who can't stay in tune or is very nasal, it grates on my nerves after a while. It'd be the same as listening to a band where the guitar player constantly warbles in and out of key or hits the wrong notes all the time.

Yeah, but I think that's a lot easier to do than to be a "decent singer". I mean, the guitar has frets, it's easier to hit a fret with your finger to "be in key" than to hit it just as squarely with your voice. Then try moving that around and staying in key as well as a guitarist can stay in key. Huge difference in difficulty level. Playing basic guitar riffs in key is pretty much child's play. Singers are far rarer, as any band that has tried to find a singer can attest to.

Quote :

Or in the case of being a nasal singer, it'd be similar to listening to a band with a terrible tone to their instruments.

A lot of my favorite albums have terrible tone/production. I think the guitar tone on "Stained Class" sounds like it is powered by a 9 volt battery. I think Halford hits a sour note or two on it as well. But it's a great disc and one of my favorites by my favorite metal band of all-time.

I guess one difference between the way I see things and the way it seems to me that people on the net see things is they say their favorite albums are 100% perfect in every way and "gosh, why would you listen to anything less!!!!!" but I can find things that are lacking in every album I love. Doesn't mean they are not great.

Case in point: I was listening to "Master of Puppets" on the way to work this morning. I haven't listened to it in a long time. I thought METALLICA hung the moon when I was a teenager. Now these songs sound lacking to me in different places. Some of the riff transitions are out of key, some of the solos are bad IMHO, and the vocals are pitchy in places (probably in part because he has to sing over riffs that have odd melodic transitions). But overall I still enjoy it.

I like certain things about certain bands/albums and different ones shine in different ways IMHO. I don't have to like it all to enjoy the album. I'm not gonna say that all of KK Downing's solos were winners even though they are my favorite band of all-time.

ultmetal wrote:

No matter how good the music behind the vocals are. If the music is spectacular, but you don't like the vocals, why would you listen to something you don't like.

I guess, like I tried to explain above, because I may like everything else about it. I don't have to be blown away by every single aspect of a song to enjoy it at all, but there has to be something about the song that is above average in some way to grab me.

I'm no musician, so I don't think it's more of good vs. bad for me, but more of a style I do or don't like. I'm sure there are many (ok, some) great death-metal growlers, but I don't like that style, even if the music is pretty cool. On the other end of the spectrum, I think King Diamond/Mercyful Fate (the man and the band) are very talented at what they do, but his over-the-top falsetto grates on my nerves. Same with that 1st 3 Inches of Blood album. I can't listen to it. That style of vocals hurts my ears.

The vocals can make or break a band. Bad vocalists will ruin and otherwise great band. You can have the best riffs in the word, play the most amazing musical passages, but if you have a bad vocalist singing on top of it, you might as well be playing out of tune. Or not be playing at all. It's just hard to listen to.

Think of the most amazing cake in the world, with dog turd icing. Would you eat it? I mean, once you get past that thin layer of poop, it's great cake, man!

ultmetal wrote:

So, it's all about opinions and what you like and dislike.

So to sum up, it's all about opinions and what you like and dislike.

I don't think anyone is pretending that every band they like is 100% perfect. It's just a matter of "I like this band's music, vocals and all." If the vocals aren't my thing, I won't listen to them just like I won't listen to the band if they are playing music I don't like.

I love Motorhead. Lemmy is hardly the be-all-and-end-all of vocalists. However, what he does with Motorhead works for me. I like the vocals, the music, the whole package.

There are some bands I listen to where the vocals are less important than others. (Some death metal bands come to mind.) However, I don't think in any case that I listen to music where I don't like the vocals at all, no matter how good the musicianship is behind those vocals.

Quote :

I guess one difference between the way I see things and the way it seems to me that people on the net see things is they say their favorite albums are 100% perfect in every way and "gosh, why would you listen to anything less!!!!!" but I can find things that are lacking in every album I love. Doesn't mean they are not great.

Well that`s not how I see it.
An album does not have to be 100% perfect in every way, the point is that I have to like it in every way. And if the vocals are bad I don`t. Pure perfection can be sterile and boring, music is, or should be played with both your heart and fingers.

Another thing that a lot of musicians seems to forget is that the average buyer/fan is not a musician. We just want to hear music we like. And to most of us the vocals are essential.

King Diamond has a bad singer but the music is killer. So that is why I listen to the band, but at the same time I listen to King Diamond very rarely because I don't like the vocals.

Even if the music is great and you like the music from the band, if the singer is bad, then the album will be on the dust and it will rarely be listened.

POWER METAL BANDS have great singers, but the guitarists uses more melodies than great riffs, and there is no attitude on the music. So the singers are great but the music overall sucks to me. So I don't listen to these bands. I am talking to the pop power metal bands, not the original power metal bands.

[quote="powermacho"]King Diamond has a bad singer but the music is killer.

To each their own I guess, but I`m sure there are some that would say that King has (or is) a good singer..........