Metal Sludge Gossip Board

Two awesome singers, which do you prefer and why?

Neither honestly. Both are grating.

Superunknown redeemed Chris at least.

Cornell in his prime had the pipes

Bach has always come across as whiny to me.

Bach

I admit Chris technically was a great singer, but I HATE his voice on the SG stuff. I like his voice when he does more mellow stuff.

Bach is a weenie, but he had a kick-ass voice for the pussy music his band played.

HottKarl777 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 31, 2025 9:40 pm Neither honestly. Both are grating.

Superunknown redeemed Chris at least.

This

Bach > fingernails on chalkboard > Cornell

How the fuck can anyone choose Bach over Cornell?!

sunshinehead wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 11:47 am How the fuck can anyone choose Bach over Cornell?!

Because this isn't Grunge Sludge.

Fat_Elvis wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 11:51 am

sunshinehead wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 11:47 am How the fuck can anyone choose Bach over Cornell?!

Because this isn't Grunge Sludge.

By that logic Lita Ford had a better voice than Karen Carpenter.

Fat_Elvis wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 11:51 am

sunshinehead wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 11:47 am How the fuck can anyone choose Bach over Cornell?!

Because this isn't Grunge Sludge.

Winner

Both

Cornell was talented yet very grating. Bach in his day was the complete package.

This isn't even a contest. For crying out loud, Bach is still ripping in 2025. His most recent album rules.

Tyketto Meniketti wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 3:38 pm This isn't even a contest. For crying out loud, Bach is still ripping in 2025. His most recent album rules.

""""""""""""""Bach is still ripping in 2025."""""""""""""

He is? Ripping what?

I understand that Bach has a lot of singing ability, power, (some) range (but nothing like he used to have), and he's still making music.

However, it's 2025 not 1989... so my question is this, for all of the Bach nut swingers.

Let's just say Bach was a near perfect frontman for the era, 1989-1992, voice, look, attitude, etc..

If Bach was a 9 or 10 then... what is he today?

Taking into consideration ALL of the essential skills, qualities, voice, image, attitude, and everything across the board...

What is his number today?

$tEvil

MetalSludgeCEO wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 3:45 pm
If Bach was a 9 or 10 then... what is he today?

Taking into consideration ALL of the essential skills, qualities, voice, image, attitude, and everything across the board...

What is his number today?

$tEvil

I mean....the guy is a douchebag deluxe....but he's sounding a lot better than a lot of other guys from the same era. The ones still bothering to put out new music, that is. Do you sound as good as you did in 1991? I mean, I am not asking that to insult you, I genuinely don't know the answer to the question, I haven't heard you do anything in ages.

Fat_Elvis wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 11:51 am

sunshinehead wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 11:47 am How the fuck can anyone choose Bach over Cornell?!

Because this isn't Grunge Sludge.

I like both Skid Row and Soundgarden, but vocally I prefer Bach.

I'd say he's still around 7 if you're factoring everything in. Last album was solid, still sounds decent live, but he obviously doesn't look that great these days.

MetalSludgeCEO wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 3:45 pm

Tyketto Meniketti wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 3:38 pm This isn't even a contest. For crying out loud, Bach is still ripping in 2025. His most recent album rules.

""""""""""""""Bach is still ripping in 2025."""""""""""""

He is? Ripping what?

I understand that Bach has a lot of singing ability, power, (some) range (but nothing like he used to have), and he's still making music.

However, it's 2025 not 1989... so my question is this, for all of the Bach nut swingers.

Let's just say Bach was a near perfect frontman for the era, 1989-1992, voice, look, attitude, etc..

If Bach was a 9 or 10 then... what is he today?

Taking into consideration ALL of the essential skills, qualities, voice, image, attitude, and everything across the board...

What is his number today?

$tEvil

sunshinehead wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 12:04 pm

Fat_Elvis wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 11:51 am

sunshinehead wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 11:47 am How the fuck can anyone choose Bach over Cornell?!

Because this isn't Grunge Sludge.

By that logic Lita Ford had a better voice than Karen Carpenter.

On this message board, correct.

Deege wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 3:57 pm

MetalSludgeCEO wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 3:45 pm
If Bach was a 9 or 10 then... what is he today?

Taking into consideration ALL of the essential skills, qualities, voice, image, attitude, and everything across the board...

What is his number today?

$tEvil

I mean....the guy is a douchebag deluxe....but he's sounding a lot better than a lot of other guys from the same era. The ones still bothering to put out new music, that is. Do you sound as good as you did in 1991? I mean, I am not asking that to insult you, I genuinely don't know the answer to the question, I haven't heard you do anything in ages.

That wasn't the question but... if you wanna know... ask people who have seen me live in the last 5-10 or 15 years compared to 30-35 years ago!

As to this... "but he's sounding a lot better than a lot of other guys from the same era."

So... sounding better than Don Dokken or Vince Neil is accomplishment?

As for this part "I haven't heard you do anything in ages."

What does that mean? New studio recordings? Live? Other?

And how long is "Ages"


$tEvil

Cornell. His vocals were more unique, and, as an added bonus, he could write songs and play guitar.

MetalSludgeCEO wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 5:02 pm

Deege wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 3:57 pm

MetalSludgeCEO wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 3:45 pm
If Bach was a 9 or 10 then... what is he today?

Taking into consideration ALL of the essential skills, qualities, voice, image, attitude, and everything across the board...

What is his number today?

$tEvil

I mean....the guy is a douchebag deluxe....but he's sounding a lot better than a lot of other guys from the same era. The ones still bothering to put out new music, that is. Do you sound as good as you did in 1991? I mean, I am not asking that to insult you, I genuinely don't know the answer to the question, I haven't heard you do anything in ages.

That wasn't the question but... if you wanna know... ask people who have seen me live in the last 5-10 or 15 years compared to 30-35 years ago!

As to this... "but he's sounding a lot better than a lot of other guys from the same era."

So... sounding better than Don Dokken or Vince Neil is accomplishment?

As for this part "I haven't heard you do anything in ages."

What does that mean? New studio recordings? Live? Other?

And how long is "Ages"


$tEvil

Quite honestly, I've only heard tidbits of your stuff over the years, I was more being polite. I do think you have pipes and can sing, I just never really got into Tuff.
An accomplishment sounding better than Don or Vince? Hell no lol Don at least used to be able to sing, Vince...not so much. He gets a pass because the first 2 records were awesome and they were huge in starting an entire genre. But yeah, compared to his heyday, no, Bach has lost a lot...but he can still sing a lot better than plenty of other singers, considering the fact that in his genre, you don't exactly have to be american idol vocal talent. I do think his new album is pretty awesome too, I like it a lot better than anything Skid Row has done since he was gone.

With that said, as far as the original topic at hand, I chose Cornell. Yes, during the Audioslave years (and towards the end of Soundgarden) he had a lot of vocal issues and his voice was really gravelly and raspier at times, but in the years following that, I think he got a lot better again, or at the very least, got really good at knowing his own limitations and changing things up from night to night. I noticed on some of his acoustic material, he didn't sing things exactly the same night to night...if he knew his pipes were in good shape that day, he'd hit a high note one way, but if he felt they weren't as up to par, he was capable of delivering it completely different and it still sounding awesome. Awesome variety too, his low singing and his high wailing...he did some generation defining stuff for sure.

MetalSludgeCEO wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 3:45 pm
If Bach was a 9 or 10 then... what is he today?

Taking into consideration ALL of the essential skills, qualities, voice, image, attitude, and everything across the board...

What is his number today?

$tEvil

He was an 10+ back in the day.

Today, he does not sound good, he is a solid 2.0

I don’t know about back in the day, but Bach definitely sings better than Cornell now.

I’m not choosing, but just realized and going to put it out there that if you imagine one singing the other’s material, either way, it totally works.

Cornell doing “Slave To The Grind”

Bach doing “Slaves & Bulldozers”

Etc.

All Bach does is enjoy his life
Cornell ended his life

Bach would have made Soundgarden music better
Cornell would have made Skidrow music worse