Just saw Billy Joel and Elton John

[Jana]

I'll probably post a longer review tomorrow, I'm wrecked from Frontiers and beers last night and music and beers tonight (3.5 hr show tonight!). But for now I just want to say that these guys are two consummate fuckin professional performers and the (steep) ticket price is worth every penny. Unbelievable. More to come.

Finally, this proves my point. It doesn't matter if the singer has lost some range and can't hit the high notes any longer. When you're a fucking legend, getting up on stage and performing for the fans makes up for those shortcomings.

It's not a karaoke contest.

Looking forward to your review.

If this was an allusion to Steve Perry, I'd have to disagree wholeheartedly. You're making a false analogy; Elton John and Billy Joel were not vocal juggernauts in the same tier as the great Steve Perry; the fact that the two of them have (relative to their prime) diminished vocals and are still able to put on awesome shows is more or less saying that the fact that Eric "Slowhand" Clapton can't shred like Steve Vai is a sign that he's still awesome. In the case of Clapton, he is not known for shredding or speed -- the fact that he can't do it doesn't diminish his legend because he's basically lost that which was irrelevant to his career to begin with. Joel nor John aren't world-class singers; they sound decent, still, but their skills lie more or less in the realm of well written songs and piano skills. That's why it doesn't matter if they can still "hit the high notes."

I personally have enormous respect for Steve Perry and his talents. That's why I won't "settle" for anything less than awesome vocal work. Does that mean I wouldn't listen to his new material or condemn him as a terrible singer? No. I just recognize that he is no longer the best.

The mentality around here seems to be because he is Steve Perry, he is automatically awesome, regardless of whether or not the quality of his work reflects that accolade.

So, yes, when it comes to a legendary SINGER, whether or not he can hit the high notes is very much importand and very much relevant. At least to me.

I agree with what you said. If Perry's vocals are all scratchy and rough, I wouldn't like that. But I'm sure as far as an album his voice would be as good as TBF with studio work, which was great.

As far as Elton John, I consider him to have had a great voice in his prime. I saw him in concert about twelve years ago and he was amazing vocally.

[Gideon]

There's a difference between having a good voice, a great voice, even a "beautiful voice"... and being a vocal juggernaut. A colossus. That is what Steve Perry was. He didn't just sound pleasant; he had phenomenal technical abilities that helped define a generation and an era of music.

Elton John and Billy Joel, in my opinion, have two lovely voices. But Perry's was in a specific tier reserved only for the best; Joel and John are musicians first and vocalists second.

Perry was the best. But my standards are such that in order to maintain that accolade, he must prove it. I accept no less.

[Michigan Girl]

There's a difference between having a good voice, a great voice, even a "beautiful voice"... and being a vocal juggernaut. A colossus. That is what Steve Perry was. He didn't just sound pleasant; he had phenomenal technical abilities that helped define a generation and an era of music.

Elton John and Billy Joel, in my opinion, have two lovely voices. But Perry's was in a specific tier reserved only for the best; Joel and John are musicians first and vocalists second.

Perry was the best.

This was nice, I got rid of the stupid part!!!

[Don]

There's a difference between having a good voice, a great voice, even a "beautiful voice"... and being a vocal juggernaut. A colossus. That is what Steve Perry was. He didn't just sound pleasant; he had phenomenal technical abilities that helped define a generation and an era of music.

Elton John and Billy Joel, in my opinion, have two lovely voices. But Perry's was in a specific tier reserved only for the best; Joel and John are musicians first and vocalists second.

Perry was the best. But my standards are such that in order to maintain that accolade, he must prove it. I accept no less.

Dude, unless you're on good terms with Professor Peabody and can borrow his Wayback machine,, that ain't happening.

[Gideon]

There's a difference between having a good voice, a great voice, even a "beautiful voice"... and being a vocal juggernaut. A colossus. That is what Steve Perry was. He didn't just sound pleasant; he had phenomenal technical abilities that helped define a generation and an era of music.

Elton John and Billy Joel, in my opinion, have two lovely voices. But Perry's was in a specific tier reserved only for the best; Joel and John are musicians first and vocalists second.

Perry was the best. But my standards are such that in order to maintain that accolade, he must prove it. I accept no less.

Dude, unless you're on good terms with Professor Peabody and can borrow his Wayback machine,, that ain't happening.

Then he should, logically, no longer be considered the best. If he sucks, he sucks. His name, his past, nothing changes that. (Not saying that he does or will suck, btw.)

[KDOUBLEU]

There's a difference between having a good voice, a great voice, even a "beautiful voice"... and being a vocal juggernaut. A colossus. That is what Steve Perry was. He didn't just sound pleasant; he had phenomenal technical abilities that helped define a generation and an era of music.

Elton John and Billy Joel, in my opinion, have two lovely voices. But Perry's was in a specific tier reserved only for the best; Joel and John are musicians first and vocalists second.

Perry was the best. But my standards are such that in order to maintain that accolade, he must prove it. I accept no less.

Dude, unless you're on good terms with Professor Peabody and can borrow his Wayback machine,, that ain't happening.

Then he should, logically, no longer be considered the best. If he sucks, he sucks. His name, his past, nothing changes that. (Not saying that he does or will suck, btw.)

Yea but who around hear thinks logically. Not me.

[Gideon]

There's a difference between having a good voice, a great voice, even a "beautiful voice"... and being a vocal juggernaut. A colossus. That is what Steve Perry was. He didn't just sound pleasant; he had phenomenal technical abilities that helped define a generation and an era of music.

Elton John and Billy Joel, in my opinion, have two lovely voices. But Perry's was in a specific tier reserved only for the best; Joel and John are musicians first and vocalists second.

Perry was the best. But my standards are such that in order to maintain that accolade, he must prove it. I accept no less.

Dude, unless you're on good terms with Professor Peabody and can borrow his Wayback machine,, that ain't happening.

Then he should, logically, no longer be considered the best. If he sucks, he sucks. His name, his past, nothing changes that. (Not saying that he does or will suck, btw.)

Yea but who around hear thinks logically. Not me.

[Ehwmatt]

Wow, I somehow missed all of this. Billy and Elton are legends and have a pedigree that puts them in a tier in rock history that Journey will NEVER, EVER be in, regardless of how much more range Steve Perry had than either vocally. Journey's music probably means more to me over all, but it's pretty easy for me to see and admit that neither Journey nor SP himself will be remembered and immortalized like these two.

With that, GB's point for me still stands... people want to SEE a performance from SP. They won't care if it's not quite the same. Not many people sit at a concert and dissects every note of every melody. SP loons certainly wouldn't be doing that if he were just out there singing, interacting, and moving around on stage

[Gideon]

Wow, I somehow missed all of this. Billy and Elton are legends and have a pedigree that puts them in a tier in rock history that Journey will NEVER, EVER be in, regardless of how much more range Steve Perry had than either vocally. Journey's music probably means more to me over all, but it's pretty easy for me to see and admit that neither Journey nor SP himself will be remembered and immortalized like these two.

Eh?

I'm not quite certain what you're trying to prove here. No one compared Journey to Elton John or Billy Joel; no one asserted, contended, suggested, or implied that Journey was on par with them. What I compared was Perry's voice to those of John and Joel. Vocally, he's better than they are, by miles and miles and miles and miles and miles and miles (repeat ad infinitum).

Success and innovation wise? Obviously they're better. But as you well know, success =/= talent aren't the same thing (not to imply that either Elton or Billy lack talent).

With that, GB's point for me still stands... people want to SEE a performance from SP. They won't care if it's not quite the same. Not many people sit at a concert and dissects every note of every melody. SP loons certainly wouldn't be doing that if he were just out there singing, interacting, and moving around on stage

Eh?

Again, I'm not quite certain what you're trying to prove here. No one denied any of this. What I said was that the fact that he is Steve Perry does not mean he's going to still be a monster vocalist. Where Loons and others get it wrong is that they think because he is Steve Perry, he is automatically more talented, more successful, and just better than every other singer who has ever existed, regardless of whether or not the quality of his music and the quality of his voice reflects that.

In his prime, he was the best or at least one of the best. Now? There's no certainty to that. If he sucks, [rational] people will care, and perhaps admire him for giving it one last shot, but objectively conclude that just because he is Steve "Motherfucking" Perry does not mean that the grunts and growls he makes while farting are going to be angelic in nature.

That's where I feel Gunbot's comparison is simply incredible (in the true sense of the word). The fact that Elton John and Billy Joel aren't what they used to be and still are awesome doesn't matter; they weren't vocal heavyweights like Perry was. When your trademark is your vocals, not your songwriting skills or talents with a piano, and they suffer, what do you think you'll be judged by?

Just my $0.02.

[Ehwmatt]

I understood the point you were making (Perry = Vocals = Without good ones, a performance would be weak / Elton+Billy = Piano+Performance+Songwriting+Vocals relatively in that order, so one of those can suffer if the others are strong). But, Perry wouldn't be "grunting and growling" out there, not unless he's had his vocal chords removed!

Perry was a performer as well as a vocalist. He comes out and performs well and has even decent (for his standards) vocals, the fans would EAT IT UP. I still think Perry's artistic perfectionism (common among a lot of musicians) keeps him from goin out there, not an inability to sing at all. So, I disagree with you that GB's point was null comparing it to Perry and I don't think I'd be so quick to assume that SP isn't out there because he literally cannot sing a tune without "grunts and growls" any more. SP is a legend for many fans and they'd see him just to say they've seen him, even if the worst predictions about his vocals proved true. I know I would.

[Don]

I believe what my initial point was about is, if Perry did did a reunion with Journey I don't believe people would be sitting their saying get rid of him, his voice isnt as good as Pineda's.
I'm not talking about solo Perry so much as I was responding to another poster in another thread saying Journey fans might be turned off if his voice wasn't in prime condition. I think the newer fans probably would have a problem but that would be more to do with the person getting replaced, not the quality of the vocals.
In the long run, 70 to 80 percent of the people going to Journey concerts are long time fans and will forgive Steve his lack of vocal fire power as long as they get a chance to se him fronting the band they grew up loving. The people have never stopped going to the shows whether it be SP, SA, JSS or AP. Bringing back the original singer isn't going to kill ticket sales. Any new fans lost will be replaced by older fans who may have just missed seing Perry in the 80's or others who want to see the actual voice behind the song singing DSB on the Sopranos finale.

[Don]

I want to add one more thing. I went to the Greek Theater to see Journey last year. It holds about 5000 people and my seat in the terraces had a commanding view of the whole arena. Despite Los Angeles having one of the largest filipino populations in the world outside of the Phillipines, the crowd was 80 to 90 percent white. The majority of People their were in my age group, 40 to 50. They're not going to pack it in and stop going to shows because a less than pristine Steve Perry is fronting the group.