Is Thom Yorke (Radiohead) a better singer than Bono

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Yok-boy may have better voice than the B-man, but bono has more soul. i've tried and tried and tried, very haard to listen to Radiohead, but to me there's nothing i can even begin to relate too. they absolutley don't touch my soul. i'm a pretty closed/narrow minded guy, for music to affect me it has to "reach" me.
 
Copy said:
Matt Bellamy is a poor man's Thom Yorke. Just like Muse is a poor man's Radiohead.

Thom is not even close to having the power and warmth of Bono's voice.

But really, Thom's voice is so special that comparing it to any other voice (other than voices that belong to people like Matt Bellamy that try to sound like him) is rather silly.

It's totally apples and oranges here.

What's next? Michael Stipe vs. Frank Sinatra?

I said it before, and I will say it again.

Muse is an amalgam of OK Computer-Era Radiohead, Late '70s-Queen, and Rage Against the Machine.

Add spacey rock sounds and there you go.
 
kingofsorrow said:
Yok-boy may have better voice than the B-man, but bono has more soul. i've tried and tried and tried, very haard to listen to Radiohead, but to me there's nothing i can even begin to relate too. they absolutley don't touch my soul. i'm a pretty closed/narrow minded guy, for music to affect me it has to "reach" me.

did you tell the judge when your soul was touched?
 
Zoomerang96 said:
i'm sure on this forum the clear majority would also say bono's got a better voice than jeck buckley ever did.

why do you think that's so "out there"? I love Buckley. I've heard almost everythign he's ever done and get off on most of it. But he burned out so fast he never spread his talent range. Yes, he had a high falsetto. But he died before he ever really spread his wings. With Boner we've got 25 years worth of a palette to pull from. I can think of alot of singers who would rank higher than Buckley.
 
MrBrau1 said:


why do you think that's so "out there"? I love Buckley. I've heard almost everythign he's ever done and get off on most of it. But he burned out so fast he never spread his talent range. Yes, he had a high falsetto. But he died before he ever really spread his wings. With Boner we've got 25 years worth of a palette to pull from. I can think of alot of singers who would rank higher than Buckley.

ha, you said boner.

again, it's a matter of personal preference. i happen to prefer "boner's" voice over buckley's as well, but to say it's "better" is kind of ridiculous.

i dunno... i just find comparisons, generally speaking, to be kind of lame. apples to oranges, really.
 
and anyway, i would much rather discuss the fact that ed doesnt sing enough in radiohead (just like edge doesnt sing enough in u2) and i want more ed-poppy-little guitar tunes aka knives out. back off just a little, thom. give ed's ideas a chance.
 
MrBrau1 said:


why do you think that's so "out there"? I love Buckley. I've heard almost everythign he's ever done and get off on most of it. But he burned out so fast he never spread his talent range. Yes, he had a high falsetto. But he died before he ever really spread his wings. With Boner we've got 25 years worth of a palette to pull from. I can think of alot of singers who would rank higher than Buckley.
I would have to say that Buckley's voice seemed to cover about 2 states of emotion

he did have a great voice but we'll indeed never find out whether he was a turly amazing singer
 
I'm totally clueless about technical side of singing so it's obviously down to personal preference and I vastly prefer Bono as a singer, surprise surprise, :wink: Thom Yorke has got a gorgeous-sounding voice but to me he doesn't have Bono's warmth and intimacy and I find Bono's singing more dynamic and, I don't know, more alive and less sleepy.

I'm extremely fond of Matt Bellamy's banshee-on-speed wail and think he's got an awesome set of pipes but as a singer he doesn't come close to Bono, either.

Plus - and I guess it's an unfair advantage because Bono is older than both of the above - I think that Bono's got a nicely textured, "lived-in" voice nowadays. I actually prefer his singing as it is now to the days of, say, JT, even though his voice was undoubtedly more powerful back then.
 
Last edited:
LemonMelon said:


:eyebrow: Maybe if we were comparing Bends or OK Computer era Thom Yorke to Popmart Sarajevo Bono, you might have something there.

But give me a break.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8M-Moo4imQ

Good example.

Coldplay, who are clearly a blend of U2 and Radiohead, are very boring in concert. Watching the Radiohead clip above, I see that Coldplay emulates Radiohead more live than U2 (perhaps a big mistake on Coldplay's part). I am ill today and that clip put me right to sleep - as does most of Radiohead.

I can appreciate them if I'm in that odd mood where I want to listen to the Smiths, some old Cure, and maybe Radiohead - that kind of solemn, quiet, reflective mood. But as I'm not in my 20's, time for such moods is gone - and I want to be more upbeat. Hence, I'm not a huge fan.

Yorke's voice is one of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of Radiohead, just as Corgan's voice was a reason I could never really get into The Smashing Pumpkins. I loved their music and lyrics, but then Corgan would sing and I'd cringe. It's like Bob Dylan - great songwriter, but singer? No.

One could argue that Yorke, Corgan and clearly Dylan are better songwriters. Over the years, Bono has some masterpieces filled with illusions, allusions, and wondeful poetry. He's also written some very simplistic songs. Unlike many hear, I don't mind the simplicity - after all, that's what rock is about. One couldn't have a "Sgt. Pepper's" without a "I Want to Hold Your Hand". :) For every "I Am the Walrus" there's an "All You Need Is Love". It doesn't make the song less powerful just because the lyrics aren't "deep". Poetry is key and Bono has it in all forms. Still, one could argue for other lyricists being more talented.

But it's tough for me to find a singer that has consistently delivered over the past 20 decades. Due to age, his range has slipped some. This is true for ALL singers - all people. Our voices change with time for many reasons. But the reason we sometimes criticize Bono's vocals is because we were used to this HUGE range and OVERLY soaring voice. Now that he's come down a notch or two, and is a tad more human, suddenly we attack him, completely ignoring the fact that in concert, night after night, he belts out songs far more powerfully than just about any rock singer out there, including new artists!

In other words, while Yorke's vocals may fit Radiohead's more melancholy themes, vocally he isn't even close to Bono. His voice irritates me, while Bono's soothes. It is Bono's lyrics and vocals that first made me a fan and they've kept me one for 20+ years.
 
doctorwho said:


Good example.

Coldplay, who are clearly a blend of U2 and Radiohead, are very boring in concert. Watching the Radiohead clip above, I see that Coldplay emulates Radiohead more live than U2 (perhaps a big mistake on Coldplay's part). I am ill today and that clip put me right to sleep - as does most of Radiohead.

I can appreciate them if I'm in that odd mood where I want to listen to the Smiths, some old Cure, and maybe Radiohead - that kind of solemn, quiet, reflective mood. But as I'm not in my 20's, time for such moods is gone - and I want to be more upbeat. Hence, I'm not a huge fan.

Yorke's voice is one of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of Radiohead, just as Corgan's voice was a reason I could never really get into The Smashing Pumpkins. I loved their music and lyrics, but then Corgan would sing and I'd cringe. It's like Bob Dylan - great songwriter, but singer? No.

One could argue that Yorke, Corgan and clearly Dylan are better songwriters. Over the years, Bono has some masterpieces filled with illusions, allusions, and wondeful poetry. He's also written some very simplistic songs. Unlike many hear, I don't mind the simplicity - after all, that's what rock is about. One couldn't have a "Sgt. Pepper's" without a "I Want to Hold Your Hand". :) For every "I Am the Walrus" there's an "All You Need Is Love". It doesn't make the song less powerful just because the lyrics aren't "deep". Poetry is key and Bono has it in all forms. Still, one could argue for other lyricists being more talented.

But it's tough for me to find a singer that has consistently delivered over the past 20 decades. Due to age, his range has slipped some. This is true for ALL singers - all people. Our voices change with time for many reasons. But the reason we sometimes criticize Bono's vocals is because we were used to this HUGE range and OVERLY soaring voice. Now that he's come down a notch or two, and is a tad more human, suddenly we attack him, completely ignoring the fact that in concert, night after night, he belts out songs far more powerfully than just about any rock singer out there, including new artists!

In other words, while Yorke's vocals may fit Radiohead's more melancholy themes, vocally he isn't even close to Bono. His voice irritates me, while Bono's soothes. It is Bono's lyrics and vocals that first made me a fan and they've kept me one for 20+ years.

:up: :up: :up: :sad: :sad: :sad: i love you man.:up: :up: :up:
 
homer is da man

Originally posted by doctorwho
In other words, while Yorke's vocals may fit Radiohead's more melancholy themes, vocally he isn't even close to Bono. His voice irritates me, while Bono's soothes. It is Bono's lyrics and vocals that first made me a fan and they've kept me one for 20+ years.
wise post, doctorwho
Bono > Thom
in the immortal words of Homer... D'oh!!
 
Bono would blow Thom Yorke off the stage....not to mension U2 would blow Radiohead off the stage.

Freddy Mercury would blow Thom Yorke off the stage as well.
 
Back
Top Bottom