Faith No More - Epic descargar videos gratis

Michael Colby

Well were all entitled to our opinions

Pablo García

No, sorry I explained myself badly. Nonsense = commenting this video with you while listening to this: sCNrK-n68CM I can easily recognize Mike's voice through his different projects (varying the vocal style, I mean), aside from the fact that he's very unique. I think that THAT is his signature style.

Michael Colby

Nonsense? How is what I am saying wrong? I mean seriously? Please explain! All you have done is call me a dumb ass and say I'm wrong but you cant explain how I am wrong. Mike does not have a signature style, if you disagree at least explain why before you call my comments nonsense. The thing about Mike is.....he creeps me out. He is weird, and I honestly cant stand his music. I like 4 faith no more songs, and I hate Mr Bungle with a passion.

Pablo García

I am reading comments about signature style while listening to "10 hour- Trololo" and this is beginning to be extremely funny. Aside from nonsense things, I'm happy that Patton is growing on you. I would say the same about Dickinson, but I hardly listen to Iron Maiden nowadays.

Michael Colby

I agree, but just for a moment lets drop the whole Samson thing and just stick with his work with Iron Maiden and his solo work. He has always stuck with his signature operatic singing style, all I'm saying is Mike sings in so many different ways on different albums in different bands that its impossible to say what is singing style is. Anyways, Mike has grown on me a bit, but he is still no Bruce

Pablo García

I know it's not an insult (even if it was, I don't care, he's a musician, not a relative of mine). Voice changes with age and Dickinson in Samson compared with Dickinson in SSOASS clearly sings in a different way. He does not vary THAT much because he hasn't explored different paths. I personally love how his voice has developed in the last decade: his lower tone his superb.

Michael Colby

Dude I already told you I have heard this already and I agree that he was trying to sound more like Paul, but that does not count. Lets just count all the albums they have sang on. Bruce (with the exception of No prayer for the dying and Fear of the dark both of which he was trying to change his style) has always kept his signature style on every album. Compare Mike's singing on The real thing to Angel dust, he does not have a signature style. Once again, its not an insult

Pablo García

It's like saying Bruce sounded like every clean NWOBHM singer back in Samson days. Here he sounds like Di Anno: wPCiP4ar27k

Michael Colby

I like it to, I never said it was bad. All I saying is that Mike does not have a signature style, that's all. You cant tell me he tends to sing a certain way because he doesn't! And once again that is not an insult, he is just INCREDIBLE versatile. Anyway I agree Patton is amazing, I am just saying he is not on the same level as Dickinson or some other rock singers. Also Bruce still sounded like Bruce at his audition, I could still tell it was him. Mike just sounds like someone else on TRT

Pablo García

Well, the studio version of Epic is very different because voice CHANGES. Listen too The Real Thing (album) and Angel Dust - King for a Day. The Real Thing's register is more nasal, in order to sound closer to former FNM's singer. If you check Dickinson's first demo with Iron Maiden, in 1981, he tries to sound like Di' Anno. Anything strange at all. He's very random live. It's called improvisation, and coming from someone who loves Jazz music, I like it.

Michael Colby

You just need to think it through a little better. Bruce style-operatic, incredible use of range especially upper register, and smooth voice Mike style-well what? He does everything at random moments! That's not a bad thing, but he does not have a signature way of singing, even his voice and range as you named. He uses like 4 different voices, even listen to this live version of Epic then compare it to the studio version, also his range goes all over the place. No signature style.

Pablo García

It's the worst excuse talking about musicians I have ever read in the Internet, and I have read a lot. Define "signature style" first. Personal voice? Both have personal and unique voices.

Michael Colby

No he is not more "complete" he is just different as you said. Bruce is every bit as "complete" but he has a signature style that he does not want to betray. Mike does not have a signature style, which is not a bad thing. When you are as versatile as Mike you don't really have a signature style. Bruce is better man, Mike is still a great singer. But its Bruce Dickinson we are talking about, he is the voice.

Pablo García

He is more complete. I mean, "better" or "worse" are very unreliable terms, they can't be compared. Different epochs. Pavarotti was an Opera god but failed miserably outside Opera, IMHO.

Michael Colby

So I have been doing a little research and I am kind of seeing where you are coming from with Mike. I mean holy fuck he is just unrealistically versatile. That does not make him as good a singer as Bruce or Rob or some of those other rock gods, but he is pretty outstanding.

Michael Colby

hang on a second, you think Bruce Dickinson, one of the top 5 most skilled vocalist in rock history would not be capable of things like Rap, pop, and growling?! He could do that stuff in his sleep! He chooses not to because he is a rock singer with actual pride and morals, unlike Patton. look I do respect Patton for trying such crazy and unique things, it takes balls to do it. But even Patton would admit Bruce is better than him in every way.

Pablo García

With powerful, do you mean reaching high notes? He isn't as good in it as Dickinson. But then, try to name one song where Bruce can: rap, growl, do harsh vocals, sing traditional Pop songs (Mondo Cane) /crooner vocals, or even using his voice as a rhythmic instrument (check Mr. Bungle). You mistake the skill of hitting high notes with having THE voice.

Michael Colby

Name me one song that Patton sings on where his voice is JUST as good and powerful as Bruce Dickinson's on Hallowed be thy name or Flight of Icarus? I dare you, I DOUBLE dog dare you! You wont be able to do it without lying. The simple fact is Bruce is better. That does not mean Patton is bad by any means, but even he would admit he has NOTHING on Bruce

Michael Colby

Bruce is the better singer, that's a fact not an opinion. Mike does not have any real talent. That's why he is neither an influential or well regarded singer. Bruce on the other hand is considered one of the best singers of all time.

Pablo García

I have listened to both bands' discography on and on so you are not telling anything new. Bruce is much better at hitting higher notes. Both voices are unique. But the vocal range is determined by every note the vocalist can hit, not only higher and lower ones. And in that case, Patton is much more complete. Compare Il Cielo Una Stanza, The Real Thing and anything in Fantômas. Bruce has never done anything similar. He's still very good, anyway.