ARGH!!!

I dont care if mike can;t do the highs, peter isn;t nearly as brutal and "thick" and "sludgy" as mikael. I like Peter alot, but he's better in hypocrisy. Mike is the man for bloodbath
 
bullshit.(sorry)
peter's performance on nmf was cl/n early the best he ever did.

peter's growles sound more brutal in my opinion btw.

i saw mike in wacken, great voice, no doubt, but i was kinda disappointed to watch him singing the songs from nmf, cause somehow it didn't fit.
 
so range is all that matters?
well mje

i like both their voices, different qualities

and about peters highs.... nobody else can do them?.... come on
 
Cerulean said:
Yeah!
The thing is, Peter can do Mikael's range, but not vice versa, easy choice if you ask me...

Mike's 70's porno moustache makes up for his lack of range.

And I do agree.. Mike's completely fucking lost his growl... just listen to Ghost Reveries... there's no range anymore.
 
Jinn said:
Mike's 70's porno moustache makes up for his lack of range.

And I do agree.. Mike's completely fucking lost his growl... just listen to Ghost Reveries... there's no range anymore.

Hmm, I'm not sure about that. When listening to the songs, I didn't find that they really called for a big range. I mean, he can still do his "high" screams ("keeper of holy whores", scream five and half minutes into Grand Conjuration) and his lows (beginning of Beneath the Mire/most of Baying of the Hounds)...and that is about all the range Mike ever used (unless you are counting the word "presence" in In Mist She Was Standing where his voice went up pretty damn high)

But anyways, the porno moustache does make up for not having Peter's higher range
 
okay, stop these peter vs. mikael competition right now.
just horrible.

they're both great, in their own kinda way.