do u think eddie vedder has good vocals than kurt..?

India
January 10, 2007 3:39pm CST
this topic has been very controversial frm years..but i just wanna know ur opinion
1 person likes this
9 responses
nischalvasant
@nischalvasant (44)
• United States
10 Jan 07
That is an unfair question. Both of their vocals fitted in brilliantly with the style of music their bands played and that is what makes the BAND great: as a whole!
1 person likes this
brightsparke
@brightsparke (1)
• Australia
10 Jan 07
I was never a big Nirvana fan, so I would have to say Eddie is better. In my oppinion WAY better. But in saying that they are both different, so shouldn't really compare. I'm bias though as I'm a huge PJ fan :)
1 person likes this
zeloguy
@zeloguy (4911)
• United States
15 Jan 07
Neither had a huge vocal range. It depends on the style of music which is very close and the sound of their voice. When Nirvana did MTV Unplugged and did . . . what band was its songs you could really hear him struggling with the lyrics.
1 person likes this
WWallace
@WWallace (6)
• United States
15 Jan 07
eddie has an incredible voice...Just listen to Footsteps and you'll understand
1 person likes this
chuggs
@chuggs (314)
• United States
15 Jan 07
Right on! Footsteps is a wonderfull song. but then again, PJ has so many. :)
amish2222
@amish2222 (235)
• United States
11 Jan 07
It is a difficult question but being a bigger PJ fan than Nirvana's I would say that it is Ed is far far better. Kurt have a more 'shreiky' noise. However, Ed loses out to the bigger God Chris Cornell from Soundgarden. There is no better voice for the song ' Burden in my head'
1 person likes this
chuggs
@chuggs (314)
• United States
15 Jan 07
Cornell is very good. Vedder and Cornel's voices mixed wonderfully in Temple of the Dog's Hunger Strike.
isavedlatintwice
@isavedlatintwice (72)
• United States
12 Jan 07
Yeah, I agree with amish2222, I like cornell more than vedder, vedder more than nirvana. but i wasn't crazy about nirvana's music either, so maybe if i liked the songs more i'd like his vocals more.
1 person likes this
layney
@layney (1053)
• Italy
15 Jan 07
Eddie has better vocals, he has much more expressivity
1 person likes this
rosking
@rosking (39)
• Australia
31 Mar 07
I have never understood why everyone compared Nirvana to Pearl Jam or vice versa. In my opinion they are two total different bands. Also the music is not the same even though both is called 'grunge'. Nirvana back then was way more raw than Pearl Jam. Same for your question, who has better vocals. I think that when it comes down to their music they both had the best vocals for their band.
tikensoup
@tikensoup (227)
• Mauritius
27 Jun 07
I completely agree. Nirvana wouldn't be Nirvana without Kurt and pearl jam wouldn't be pearl jam without Eddy. Both are the souls behind their respective bands. The same can be said about Chris cornell and soundgarden. they are all behind the original grunge movement but they all excel in what they do and are therefor not comparable.
janegosford
@janegosford (196)
• United States
16 Mar 07
I liked Nirvana (and Kurt's voice for that manner) but comparing the two vocally is just...well it's just no contest. Kurt had a passionate voice but wasn't very gifted vocally in the traditional sense. He had passion more than power. Eddie Vedder has both. He has a plethora of both. Not only can his interpretation give you chills but so can his powerful voice.
commodore
@signum (545)
• Australia
28 Feb 07
Ed. It's obvious which one out of the two could actually sing.
sjprice_23
@sjprice_23 (7)
• United States
18 Jan 07
I would have to bend to the Eddie Vedder side, not because Pearl Jam is my favorite band, but because he has more range, and understanding than Kurt ever did in each of their vocals. Eddie's writing is also more meaningful, and the music to back up his vocals is layered and symphonic in many more ways than Nirvana ever was. P.S. I was a Nirvana fan before Pearl Jam, and will always be partial to their music as well and PJ's.