What kind of condition do you think Bono's voice is in?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Sometimes age can do very interesting things to someone's voice. I love Bob Dylan's voice on his last album (Love and Theft). It is extremely cracked and, technically speaking, awful, but I am just transfixed when listening to it. Especially considering how great the lyrics are.

So I am not worried about Bono's voice, it would get boring if his voice was the same on every album.
 
Convoy said:


Could you send me that song, please? CodeOfAHero@aol.com

I'd like to, but I have the whole concert as one file. I've been meaning to edit it so that I can just have The Unforgettable Fire and God Part II by themselves (I feel the concert had the best performances of those two songs), so when I get around to doing that, I'll send you God Part II.
 
Bono's voice... age gets all good singers. What can he do? You got to play with the cards you've been dealt. As long as Bono can age gracefully, there are no problems that I forsee.

Overall, they can always have the studio beef up Bono's voice on the album. Studio trickery has come far these days.

In concerts, there would be nothing wrong with Bono doing some lip synching in order to hit the notes he can't sing consistently or use the lip synching moments to rest his voice. Maybe the one good thing from all this is that we'll finally get to see U2's creative side in terms of expressing themselves through the art of dance.
 
Last edited:
Flying FuManchu said:
In concerts, there would be nothing wrong with Bono doing some lip synching in order to hit the notes he can't sing consistently or use the lip synching moments to rest his voice.

Honestly, I think lip synching doesn't really reflect the level of quality that U2 stands for. I'd rather hear his voice as is then having him "fake" it. I know what you're talking about, but I think it would detract from the experience of seeing them live.
 
U2 would never sink to the level of lip synching. End of story.
 
shaun vox said:
we all know bonos voice is fucked up(now)

listen to R&H live and then listen to (or watch) slane live..

Slane? I thought his voice was GREAT at Slane. I love his voice in the concert. Easily my favorite U2 concert. Just listen to Kite or Streets, it's AWESOME IMO.

Boston didn't impress me as much.
 
Consider how good his voice sounded on Electrical storm or Hands that built... I'd be more concerned how he will handle the tour.
 
Lip synching? You've got to be kidding...I'd rather hear his voice live over some artificial recording. I'm sure they'd never do it, too.
 
They were against sequencers and additional musicians because they love the concept of a 4 piece band. Sequencers help them maintain the 4 piece (Edge can't do everything). I don't see how Bono lip synching would enhance the 4 piece. His voice was fine on the last tour. He'll be fine on this one.
 
Flying FuManchu said:
U2 were against sequencers in live shows but look how they use them now. Never say never....

That may be, but also consider U2's music up to UF was basically really only 4 guys playing (with a bit of piano now and then), and later their studio music got more complex - I think that it would be impossible to re-create without using sequencers.
 
For those that can maybe explain- what exactly do sequencers do? How do they help Edge or Bono? Anybody that could help my understanding?

Thanks!
 
I think sequencers are basically pre-recorded keyboard sounds that help the band play in correct timing. For example Bad starts with a sequencer.
 
gorman said:
From this MSNBC article:

Believe it: His better-with-age vocals snap and crackle on the anthemic first single “Vertigo,” and the band sounds leaner—and louder—than ever.



:D :D :D :D :D :D



Now, please let that description apply to the rest of the album!
 
Hey, let's get some things straight: Bono may sing better on "Atomic Bomb" but he ain't gonna howl like it's 1987 anymore. And yes, drink, smoke and age have taken their tolls, but man he's still more soulful and powerful than any boy band, or disgruntled alt-metal singer, and definitely a better singer than Fred Wurst can ever dream of being.
 
Last edited:
Reggie Thee Dog said:


Man I love G'nR, but that's a joke.....right?
'

That was a joke. Sorry LOL. To make you feel better I'll modify the sentence.

Yeah, Bono's good, but his voice will never he as beautiful as the voice of Avril Lavigne.
 
Last edited:
I don't think he will ever sound like he did in the mid to late '80s either. Part of me is sad about that, but I still love to listen to his current voice. Maybe he lost a little range, but he still has plenty of soul.

If he still sounds like he did on Electrical Storm, which was just two years ago, we have nothing to worry about.
 
My main concern is not if Bono lost a bit of range or richness in his voice - but that he doesn't return to the atrocious singing he had on the first 3 albums. Sorry, but as good as those albums were, Bono's vocals weren't usually the highlight. ;) So if he's singing better than that, who cares? :wink:
 
u2ulysses said:
My main concern is not if Bono lost a bit of range or richness in his voice - but that he doesn't return to the atrocious singing he had on the first 3 albums. Sorry, but as good as those albums were, Bono's vocals weren't usually the highlight. ;) So if he's singing better than that, who cares? :wink:

I agree. Boy and October weren't the highpoints of his vocal career by a longshot. War was a bit better but still left alot to be desired. It's strange how Bono went from bad vocals (War) to spectacular vocals (UF). Interesting indeed.
 
Back
Top Bottom