Jump to content

Matt's highest note ?


Muse andy
 Share

Recommended Posts

what do you guys think it is i think it is in do we need this not showbiz or micro cuts even plug in baby is higher than showbiz :LOL:

 

No it isn't.

 

Depends whether you mean on record or live. I also assume you mean his falsetto notes as well. On record, I'm pretty sure Showbiz and Micro Cuts are tied at the highest.

 

Also, isn't there already a thread for this? I'm surprised if there isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what do you guys think it is i think it is in do we need this not showbiz or micro cuts even plug in baby is higher than showbiz :LOL:

You know, notes CAN be pitched, so we don't have to guess or think. We can actually tell.

 

His highest in studio is Hyper Music and Dead Star(A5)

 

His highest live is Agitated(C6/C#6)

 

Inb4 Sippe

damnit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think do we need this has to be highest, and i searched and didnt find a thread, and plug in baby seems level or just lower than showbiz actually D:

...dear god.

 

If my memory serves me right, Do we need this is a G5. One step lower than Showbiz. Plug In Baby is an F#5, one step lower than Do we need this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think do we need this has to be highest, and i searched and didnt find a thread, and plug in baby seems level or just lower than showbiz actually D:

 

Well, you're wrong. Again, you do mean his highest falsetto note, right?

 

Also, you don't have to base it on opinion, you can find out for a fact what Matt's highest notes are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C♯6 ("Agitated" live)

C6 ("Hyper Music" live)

B5 ("Time Is Running Out" live)

B♭5 ("Muscle Museum" live)

A5 ("Hyper Music", "Dead Star", "Showbiz" live)

G♯5 ("Showbiz", "Micro Cuts")

G5 ("Knights of Cydonia", "Uprising", "Megalomania")

F♯5 ("Plug In Baby", "United States Of Eurasia")

E5 ("Shrinking Universe", "Knights of Cydonia")

 

You're welcome. (Doesn't have ALL his notes in that area, I know)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

C♯6 ("Agitated" live)

C6 ("Hyper Music" live)

B5 ("Time Is Running Out" live)

B♭5 ("Muscle Museum" live)

A5 ("Hyper Music", "Dead Star", "Showbiz" live)

G♯5 ("Showbiz", "Micro Cuts")

G5 ("Knights of Cydonia", "Uprising", "Megalomania")

F♯5 ("Plug In Baby", "United States Of Eurasia")

E5 ("Shrinking Universe", "Knights of Cydonia")

 

You're welcome. (Doesn't have ALL his notes in that area, I know)

 

You are obsessed with vocalists aren't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone please explain to me why it matters how high a vocalist can sing? I mean, seriously, who gives a fuck? Why does it have to be a "contest"? What matters is if they are a good singer. Not what notes they can hit. Judging a singer on vocal gymnastics is as silly as judging a guitar player on how fast they can play. Extremes don't make either a better musician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone please explain to me why it matters how high a vocalist can sing? I mean, seriously, who gives a fuck? Why does it have to be a "contest"? What matters is if they are a good singer. Not what notes they can hit. Judging a singer on vocal gymnastics is as silly as judging a guitar player on how fast they can play. Extremes don't make either a better musician.

But the myth that Bellamy has an amazing range gives people another reason to praise him. :'(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone please explain to me why it matters how high a vocalist can sing? I mean, seriously, who gives a fuck? Why does it have to be a "contest"? What matters is if they are a good singer. Not what notes they can hit. Judging a singer on vocal gymnastics is as silly as judging a guitar player on how fast they can play. Extremes don't make either a better musician.

 

A higher vocal range means a person has more options with their voice. Tone, range, technique etc also all factor into being a technically 'good' singer. That doesn't mean someone can't still make great music though. Kurt Cobain, for example, wasn't techincally a 'good' singer but still a really unique voice that people loved.

 

So, range factors into showing how technically talented a singer is but doesn't necessarily mean that anyone with less technical talent (or range) can't make great music with their voice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone please explain to me why it matters how high a vocalist can sing? I mean, seriously, who gives a fuck? Why does it have to be a "contest"? What matters is if they are a good singer. Not what notes they can hit. Judging a singer on vocal gymnastics is as silly as judging a guitar player on how fast they can play. Extremes don't make either a better musician.

 

It's one of the factors for being a good singer. Good for discussion purposes, but I agree that I normally don't just judge singers on how high or low they can go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A higher vocal range means a person has more options with their voice. Tone, range, technique etc also all factor into being a technically 'good' singer. That doesn't mean someone can't still make great music though. Kurt Cobain, for example, wasn't techincally a 'good' singer but still a really unique voice that people loved.

 

So, range factors into showing how technically talented a singer is but doesn't necessarily mean that anyone with less technical talent (or range) can't make great music with their voice.

A wider vocal range also means more ground to cover. More things to keep "in shape".

 

I'd say the wider your range is, the harder it is to be a good singer. Kurt Cobain actually had a pretty wide range.

 

David Lee Roth is a good example of a singer with an amazing range, but that sounds completely shit in most of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A wider vocal range also means more ground to cover. More things to keep "in shape".

 

I'd say the wider your range is, the harder it is to be a good singer. Kurt Cobain actually had a pretty wide range.

 

 

That's a good point, means you have to focus more which makes things harder. I know Kurt had a pretty wide range (not sure what it was exactly, I'll have to look it up some time) and, though his low notes are more easy to spot/common, he did hit some pretty high notes (Where Did You Sleep Last Night? and Stay Away off the top of my head) - I was just using him as an example of a technically not-so-great singer whose voice people still loved :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a good point, means you have to focus more which makes things harder. I know Kurt had a pretty wide range (not sure what it was exactly, I'll have to look it up some time) and, though his low notes are more easy to spot/common, he did hit some pretty high notes (Where Did You Sleep Last Night? and Stay Away off the top of my head) - I was just using him as an example of a technically not-so-great singer whose voice people still loved :p

A semitone away from 3 octaves in full voice, Eb2-C6 with falsetto.

 

Scentless Apprentice and Help Me I'm Hungry has the highest full notes if I remember correctly(I could just check, but I'm too lazy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A higher vocal range means a person has more options with their voice. Tone, range, technique etc also all factor into being a technically 'good' singer. That doesn't mean someone can't still make great music though. Kurt Cobain, for example, wasn't techincally a 'good' singer but still a really unique voice that people loved.

 

You know, I've been listening to quite a bit of early Nirvana bootlegs lately (after discovering that the show I saw them at in 1991 had been recorded by a very insightful individual. :)). And one of the things I have noticed is that Kurt really WAS a good singer (in his genre). He was very rarely sharp or flat, and had intense expression. His guitar playing was not quite as technical, but his pitch was fantastic. :) His voice was perfect for his genre of music, and he was able to come up with beautiful melody lines against the chord progressions of the songs.

 

I don't think of Muse being a vocally centered band. Matt is a very good and interesting singer, but I'm not of the opinion that his singing stands out above any other aspect of what makes Muse great. He appropriately accentuates the songs. I really don't care if he happens to hit the world's highest note in the context of a Muse song. That doesn't make a song "better" to do so. Just as a smokin' "way too many notes, way too fast" guitar solo will necessarily make a song "better".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bottom line is, it doesn't really matter how technically brilliant you are, it's what you do with your voice. I would take Leonard Cohen over Chris DeBurgh any day, for example.

 

I don't think of Muse being a vocally centered band. Matt is a very good and interesting singer, but I'm not of the opinion that his singing stands out above any other aspect of what makes Muse great. He appropriately accentuates the songs. I really don't care if he happens to hit the world's highest note in the context of a Muse song. That doesn't make a song "better" to do so. Just as a smokin' "way too many notes, way too fast" guitar solo will necessarily make a song "better".

 

This. I would much rather listen to Matt play guitar then Angel Vivaldi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...