Who was your favorite lead singer for Petra?

[charl]

So what is it that makes Greg's voice unsuited to rock music anyway? Even given that it is so that Greg's voice is more suited to pop, what difference does this make? You are going to have to come up with more than a simple assertion that he didn't have a "rock voice" (whatever this is) to show why his voice didn't fit. I think it did. A song like Graverobber is mediocre at best without the vocal spikes. To not like his voice is to not like any song written with it in mind-which includes most of the songs of this era.

Also the Greatest version of God Gave Rock and Roll To You in the history of the human race was the first song Greg sang with Petra and he sang the hell out of it. Every single other version sucks copiously compared to it.

Please. Nearly every version I have heard of John doing one of Greg's songs shows he did not have the range to pull them off. Kelly's range did not appear to be as broad as Volz' either.

Haha the people I know who disdain keyboards are all old 80's metal fans, not young kids. How many times I heard Metallica doesn't have a keyboard player...

[Preacherman777]

I agree with everything Charl is saying and I think a lot of the rock fans I know are of the same mindset. But in my mind there was a lot of great rock that was done in early Petra. No, not as heavy as later Petra, but certainly hard rock for it's time and Greg did just fine with it.

Sometimes I think that many people around here just love John so much and think he is so great that any suggestion that he is anything short of the greatest singer to ever step foot on the planet and certainly any suggestion that any other Petra singer was anywhere near as good is just completely unacceptable. There is no question that Greg consistently gets sold short around here and I think it's pretty sad. Regardless what you may think of him personally, to sell short his vocal talents is nothing short of complete willing ignorance.

Rather than spending so much time bashing Greg, I would think people around here would be thanking God that he blessed this band with two incredible lead singers, which helped propel them to excellence in two very different eras of music.

[petrafreak2009]

Technically, you CAN'T say Greg didn't have a rocker voice. If that was so, he could never have sang God Gave Rock and Roll to You, Judas Kiss, or in his solo career Dream On. He had the rocker voice of the era, and John has the new Rock/Metal-esque voice. Simple as that. I'm surprised that half of you who've listened to Black Sabbath, AC/DC, and all that other unholy music couldn't make THAT connection. They were both great for Petra, and REGARDLESS what the doubters say, many people were saved during BOTH eras, and that is why we should praise the Lord.

[petrafreak2009]

To those that say Greg didn't have the rock voice, nor the talent to pull it off, check out these solo albums at his site: http://www.gregxvolz.com/

1. The River Is Rising
2. Come Out Fighting
3. No Room In The Middle
4. The Exodus
5. No Greater Love

You will find driving vocal and guitar riffs in all these albums that will surely have you leaping in joy of the work the LORD can do.

[Mountain Man]

I'm not meaning to cut down Greg in this area but I always felt John's stage presence was more believable to me. I felt a connection there that I didn't necessarily feel when Greg was on stage.

I disagree. I think Volz had great stage presence, and he was a pro at working the crowd, as evidenced by Captured in Time and Space (the album, not the video which excised most of his interaction with the audience).

----------

1. Greg clearly does NOT have a rock voice; Never did, never will.

It depends on what you mean by a "rock voice". If you mean "a voice like John Schlitt's" then you're right. But John Schlitt's style of rock isn't the only kind of rock in existence. On the contrary, Greg Volz had the quintessential 80's guitar rock voice similar to bands like Boston, Chicago, Kansas, Queen, etc., and it's no exaggeration to say that he's easily one of the best vocalists to ever front a rock band.

2. I loved that era of Petra music(in fact I've voted many times here and on GuidetoPetra MPTY my favorite all time Petra album) I just didn't like their vocals. Mark Kelly did a great job on Disciple and I and many would have much rathered heard him in the future instead of Greg. I remember alot of people saying hey why don't they use Mark more then Greg?

Well, I think they're nuts. Mark wasn't bad on that song, but there's no way I'd want to hear him for a whole album.

3. John has sung many of those songs live and did not only a great job but improved the rockiest around the arrangments.

I would say that John handled Greg's material competently, but I would disagree that he somehow improved them. He just gave them a different flavor is all.

[BForm]

The downside of this is that the rockers generally rip their vocal chords to shreds and I fear John's is showing a lot of wear in that area

Ah... I beg to differ. Just wait until you hear all of The Grafting! His voice is as smooth as silk, and yet he can really hammer it home on the rockers!

I understand Sue, but this is another studio recording. We all know how that works. And I have heard the promo, and I can hear the wear in it as well. Recent live recordings are showing where he is at this stage in his career.

I'm really not cutting John down. It's just a natural phenomenon. The vocalists that like to put the rasp/gravel in their vox are gonna wear out faster. This is why trained vocalists can often sing into their 70's with perfect pitch. They are singing in a way that subjects them to the least amount of strain. My father-in-law is marrying a woman in her mid 70's and her voice is amazing. But let's be honest. Listen to any of the recent live recordings of John and he is struggling to hold a tune.

As far as Greg's voice not being a rock voice, you really have to look at the era. In the 70's and 80's, Greg's voice fit in very well. John's edgier voice was more typical of the late 80's and 90's. Either one would work well. My only point is that I cannot hear Greg doing some of the songs John did. It would totally change it. But, then again, that's o.k....Just like Double Take was o.k. (And, yes I'm being serious.)

[brent]

The great thing about Rock...crap! The great thing about music and art in generally is that there are no rules. There is no magic formula. The modern rock bands today have almost pre-pub vocals with wall of sound Mesa Boogie Rectifiers blowin.

One of the things that was so great about Petra was that it had many textures with Greg. They were able to pull of 80s techno-rock as a result of Greg. John is not that way. Rightly so.

What drew me to Petra was Bob's writing, and Greg's voice. It gave me hope, as I had a non-gravel voice, could sing first or second tenor part with no falsetto, or change in my voice while transitioning from chest to head. Greg was so freakin unique. He was immediately recognizable. THAT was what put Petra on the map for me.

I was at church today, talking to VP of Midwestern Theological Seminary. We were talking about music, as he made the remark that he was probably the only pastor to have the Gaithers and Skynard on his iPod. We talked about Petra. He said that he didn't know that they had quit, and that he sure missed the doctrine written into the tunes. He mentioned all Greg era tunes, specifically Grave Robber first, from More Power To Ya and Not of This World. He didn't know who John was.

[Schlittism33]

I'm gonna have to agree with Sue on some of the comments about John shredding his voice like a lot of those rockers... One of the main things I've noticed about John's singing is that it is VERY often not different live than on the studio recordings.. His voice is not the result of what they call "studio magic" ... I WILL however agree about "most rockers" yes most of them cant hold a tune these days .. John is NOT one of them... I think if you look somewhere on the Farewell DVD you'll find the lead singer from the Newsboys commenting how John is a "one take" kind of singer... mostly likely this is because he doesnt have to strain to sing how he sings - therefore he is not damaging his voice. I saw him live recently in Minneapolis and was actually blown away by how great he STILL sounds.

To comment about the Schlitt VS. Volz thing ... I think both of them are great singers with excellent tone and range ... To choose one is a matter of opinion and personal taste. Personally, I choose John's - but whoever chooses Greg's has just as much right as I do.

Stephen

[petrafreak2009]

Amen Stephen. When I originally made this topic, I didn't want a Volz vs. Schlitt thing. I love the both of them the same because of their love for God and I believe them both to be men of integrity. I wanted opinions of everyone also, though, who actually LIKED Bob and Greg singing, Rob Frazier, Mark Kelly, or even Pete Orta.

[p-freak]

Actually, when you listen to the show in Argentina from 17-December-2005 (for those who have the DVD of that show), you can hear during the Rock Medley that John wasn't able to hit those high notes anymore. I guess that his voice was just so worn after three months of touring, which he hadn't done in a long time...

[Preacherman777]

As for the other Petra singers. Bobs voice was not great and I think he would be the first to tell you that. But the quality of the songs, even then, was high enough to overcome that. Much in the same way as Bob Dylans voice is not great, but the songs are often so good that it doesn't really matter that much.

Greg Hough was a little better than Bob, but not much.

Mark Kelly and Pete Orta were fine for what they did, but both were really just pinch hitters and can't be considered among those who really sang for Petra.

Rob Frazier was a fine vocalist, but the downside for him is that they had him singing most of the leads with Greg Volz doing back up and Rob was quite frankly playing second fiddle to his back up singer. This was a mistake and they should have done it the other way around. Greg clearly had the stronger voice and most of that album ends up sounding like Greg's vocals anyway, just because the strength of his voice set the vocal tone for the album. It's a mystery to me why they didn't just have Greg be THE lead singer on that album, rather than having him just do a few again and then singing back up for Rob. IMO it made no sense.

[Mountain Man]

It's a mystery to me why they didn't just have Greg be THE lead singer on that album, rather than having him just do a few again and then singing back up for Rob. IMO it made no sense.

I imagine it was down to politics and Bob Hartman not wanting to create additional unrest in an already unsteady band by bluntly telling Fraizer that he was out and Greg was in.

[Preacherman777]

Yeah, that makes sense. I suppose that could have been the case.

By the way, are you the person who used to go by DarrenZ?

[sue d.]

Bform wrote:

Listen to any of the recent live recordings of John and he is struggling to hold a tune

I've listened to live recordings... I've listened to live PERFORMANCES, and I've listened to a 'vocal-only' raw & untouched CD of the live performance at Club 3 Degrees (thank you, Schlittism33!) and I hear no signs of a "struggle."

Does he get rought at times? sure. Can he hit the stratospheric notes like he did 20 years ago? not always.

But "struggle?"

no.

[trodLAN]

Bform can't be serious on this one. "Struggling to hold a tune???"
What!??
I have been at three show with John in 2007, and I can't remember him have problem struggling with the tune. What he struggles with from time to time is remembering the lyrics.
After more than 30 years in hard rock, no one expect his voice wouldn't be rougher. After all these years with screaming, it's a miracle he still can hit those high pitches at all. But he still does! And that's awesome.