VOCAL COACH reacts to DISTURBED vs SIMON & GARFUNKEL singing SOUND OF SILENCE
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 лис 2018
- My analysis and side-by-side comparison of Simon and Garfunkel and Disturbed performing The Sound of Silence Live. There are some major differences in their approaches to the song that one can learn a lot from.
Buy my singing courses - www.amvocalstudios.com/online...
Website: amvocalstudios.com
Support this channel: / amvocalstudios
Link to intro music: • Lost Boy - Ruth B | Ad...
Instagram: / amvocalstudios
Facebook: / amvocalstudios
To get your voice critiqued: www.fiverr.com/s2/cfadf34690
~-~~-~~~-~~-~
Please watch: "Was the 2019 HALFTIME SHOW really that BAD?!?!"
• Was the 2019 HALFTIME ...
~-~~-~~~-~~-~
Disturbed not only lowered the range, they slowed the tempo. This was always a favorite of mine, but Disturbed's version is so much more powerful and emotive.
The slower tempo is key, I think. It gives you time to take in the full meaning of the words being sung.
I love both but it's only Disturbed's version that gives me chills up and down my spine. Especially that final verse.
David Draiman's voice shakes me to the core. I love it.
He is one of my favorite singers, which says a lot, since I usually don't like heavy metal.
His voice absolutely melts me...sexy as hell!!
@@debbowen2011 I hate it. I would rather listen to someone scraping a fork across a plate.
You HEAR Simon and Garfunkel's version.
You FEEL Disturbed's version...
@Lucas Molessani As you get older you move beyond the over-statement of one basic emotion, which is easy and rather crass; and you learn to appreciate subtlety.
TheSimon and Garfunkel version, which I have loved since it came out when I was still in high school, sounds like it’s being sung to an audience, like an anthem or a rallying cry. Draiman’s version sounds like he’s speaking to me personally and is telling me I didn’t listen the first time. Simon and Garfunkel’s version made me hopeful, Draiman’s makes me weep.
Excellent point. Hopeful vs weeping…. Exactly. ❤
With Simon and Garfunkel you get to hear a very nice and melodic song but with Disturbed you get to feel the emotions of the the song.
I've seen comments before that Simon & Garfunkel's version was like a warning, and Disturbed's version is condemning/angry for not listening to the warning that was given years ago.... and that is the best description I've seen comparing the two. ❤
I strongly feel that this song was meant to be sung as disturbed performs it. ❤
The Simon and Garfunkel original version is nice to listen to. The Disturbed version however stirs emotions and brings tears to my eyes every single time I hear it.
Same here. i love both version for different reasons.
8.00 says it all !!!! Disturbed is power and emotion .
That is actually one of things that got me to listen to metal. Lots and lots of emotion in there if you have even half an ear to listen.
Disturbed's version gives me chills every time I hear it.
I feel emotion and power in my vein. exactly feels like coke.
David Draiman can go from Baritone to tenor, to clear as a bell to rasp ON A DIME and back! He has a timber and velvety fullness to his voice that I've never heard before! Unbelievable control !!
His vocal control is absolutely amazing! This was so unexpected to come from the singer who is known for heavy metal... like listening to Down with the Sickness and then the Sound of Silence... you wouldn't think they came from the same singer... but honestly, the type of singing he does normally with Disturbed requires a huge amount of vocal control as well... people think that it's just uncontrolled screaming but to be able to sing that way without damaging your vocal cords, especially when you're going out on tour and singing like that for 2-3 hrs nightly for months on end... it actually requires a huge amount of vocal control, which we get to see on beautiful display with The Sound of Silence. ❤
@@captsparrowslady You are so correct! From what I understand, he has the ability to use the vestibular or false vocal cords when he uses distortion...which he actually uses on top of the true vocal cords so that the tone is still present. Using the false cords has always prevented him from damaging his voice with the distortion. This is NOT an easy thing to do! Amazing singer! I can't even use my true vocal cords...lol...noone would ever want to hear me! 😂🤣
Both versions are Beautiful but for me Disturbed is the one that touches me emotionally. It's stunning and powerful and I can't go a day without listening at least once. I love how David's fans think the world of him and want people to appreciate and understand what he's about.
David Draiman has vocal range few possess. It's amazing--even in the "Ooh ah ah ah ah."
Yessssss!!! David has an AMAZING voice & vocal range, skill and talent.
Simon an Garfunkel .....A whispered warning. David Draiman is a battle cry.
trish thompson I saw a comment elsewhere that said something along the lines of:
Simon and Garfunkel: a warning
Disturbed: anger that the warning was ignored
very well put.
Even this comment made me cry . This songs leaves me a mess every single time XD
I've heard it said that S&G's version is a warning. Disturbed version is rage that you didn't heed the warning.
WELL SAID!!
Heard Disturbed's version many times. I still cry every time.
David was classically trained as a Cantor. P.s. he had the flu during this performance and still killed it...
I believe the term is hazzan, FYI.
Wings of Pegasus showed that Disturbed performance was auto-tuned as well. He didn't understand why because he is such a fantastic vocalist,
@@diamondmask7704 The people on the conan show put auto tune on because they thought he needed it since he was sick. I heard somewhere that David was not happy when he found out they did it.
I like your approach of comparing the two versions of the song by playing sections back to back. It is different than other reaction videos and I think it provides nice contexts. I am familiar with the original, having listened to it as a child and even spinning it on vinyl a few times in my teens, but it's probably been 20 years since I intentionally listened to the original. Heating the two versions back to back in this way was nice.
The original was sung as a warning of what is to come where as disturbeds cover is an angry prostest that the warning was never heeded. In my opinion disturbed gave the lyrics the proper tone and feeling it deserved
The tempo always seemed to give it a false cheerfulness that masked the words. I’ve noticed it in other songs, songs that aren’t happy but sound happy. People don’t think of them as being sad and I think, “Are you SERIOUS? Have you listened to the lyrics, really listened?”
I think they both give the tone the lyrics deserve. The first is from the perspective of someone who still has hope that the world can be saved, the second is someone who has lost hope. Both are accurate interpretations of the lyrics:)
Ella, best comparison of the two that I have heard. I so agree.
I agree that it is vocally more powerful- but that's not what the original was going for. I find both to be equally emotional- they just play on different emotions. Anyone can take a song that's already established and elevate it in some way, and Disturbed did a very good job of making the subtle depressing undertones of the original obvious. Kudos to them. But I think the original pulled off the effect that it was going for very nicely. It makes it sound like the world is ending but nobody can find it in themselves to care. I feel like Disturbed took a song which society was meant to relate to and take notice of and made it into a personal song. Both are awesome, and both, in my opinion, achieved the effect they were going for.
maccajoe could you do break down on the lyrics. I have never understood its meaning.
Davids version just hits me everywhere & gives me chills, that not a lot of songs do. I feel so many different emotions with it.
No, Paul Simon never said that "He thought Disturbed's version was better" or that "It was their song now". Please stop saying things that are not true. Paul Simon emailed David and said exactly "Really powerful performance on Conan the other day. First time I’d seen you do it live. Nice. Thanks." to which David replied "Mr. Simon, I am honored beyond words. We only hoped to pay homage and honor to the brilliance of one of the greatest songwriters of all time. Your compliment means the world to me/ us and we are eternally grateful." That is it, nothing more. You can go to David's Facebook and see both quotes published there as well. Both versions are amazing in their own ways.
I believe it was actually Trent Reznor from Nine Inch Nails who made that quote about the song, "Hurt," now belonging to Johnny Cash. Another amazing cover.
@@chopstyx1 Yep, I didn't want to type a gigantic paragraph explaining everything. I just saw so many people commenting about what Paul said about the song, which was not true.
Exactly you have to of lived during the 70s to know the progression of their view than because we lived it take you almost 50yrs later the summation of what evolved into this century it's like they saw the future we didn't pay attention so these word and sound of Disturbs is sad than angry than seeing the despair today watching this video is very gooddddddddd
JuanHughJorgan people like to joke around don’t take it so seriously. Most of the time it’s exaggeration. I highly doubt anyone believes he even said that.
@@maxs.3224 Why are you even commenting? It's literally on almost every disturbed reaction video / performance and yes lots of people believe that he said that, because of comments and disinformation like that (which my OP was about the people leaving those comments and not the video). So there is no hurt in putting out what was actually exchanged between the 2 musicians about this song.
I really liked Simon and Garfunkel but I am in love with Disturbed. I have listened to it a million times and don't get tired of it
Hearing Disturbed perform this in person made the hair on my arms stand up. It literally gave me chills.
I would *love* to hear this in person... to hear that deep resonating rasp to come out of concert speakers and have the sound just move thru your entire body.... *swoon* Just wearing headphones while listening to this song makes my brain go brrrr (in a good way... like ASMR)... to experience it Live, in person... I would melt. 🥰
@@captsparrowsladyIt is A-MAZING live. I have heard it at least 3 times live.
I am a huge fan of Simon and Garfunkel. This is a perfect cover for the song. His voice was perfect for the retelling.
I saw S&G perform this live in 1968. Now that I have heard the Disturbed version it should have been done this way. The lyrics demand this performance.
I want to say you have done a wonderful comparison between the two versions of this song. In all the reaction videos I have seen, you have been the first to actually compare both songs side by side. While both reach out to emotions, Simon and Garfunkel bring about a sense of "what have we been doing as people?" and Disturbed offers up the emotions of "why haven't you done anything yet? What is taking you so long to realize the pain present today."
I thought the same. I really appreciated the side by side comparison. It helped me to clarify my own feelings.
Saw Disturbed in concert AWESOME. He sounds exactly like this he’s so passionate about his songs.
It's like Simon and Garfunkel are singing a nursery rhyme to babies and Disturbed is singing earth-shattering message that people need to hear. It grabs your soul and picks you up and it opens your eyes to everything you did not see or hear. Its crazy emotional and unforgettable.
I think Simon and Garfunkel were ahead of their time w this song and I absolutely love their version
However the Disturbed version literally gives me the chills and takes my breathe away! It is literally the best cover I have ever heard, and I think that for 2 reasons, you have a heavy metal singer that was able to use his classical training and bring that all together w a song that builds and builds and builds and then is just over! Making u not able to get enough, Also, I believe if your going to do a cover you have to do something very different than the original and he certainly did that
You nailed it on this comparison! Well done! Simon & Garfunkel brilliantly and harmoniously created a beautiful song. Years later Disturbed created a powerful masculine sound that truly echoed in the sound of silence current afflictions many people today. Lyrically epic, Disturbed's sound on this = Legendary.
Really enjoyed this reaction. It was very interesting to see the Simon & Garfunkel version at the same time. You ability to discern the vocal differences was really interesting. Plus it was fun watching your face during Disturbed's performance.
One thing I think Disturbed did really well that S&G failed to draw me in on was the slowed down tempo. With Draiman's vocal performance, the slower tempo is bone chilling
TheSaxAppeal Yeah, the original sounds... cheerier almost, because of the tempo. It’s like a psychic wink that it’s a faster more upbeat tempo so it’s not... that serious, is it? But I do feel like Disturb’s might have swung just a bit too far in the other direction as well. It felt a little.... ponderous, maybe too self-serious. It’s closer to what I expected. It’s like, for example, Vida la Vida from Coldplay or Chandelier by Sia. Those are NOT happy songs! But people sort of don’t pay attention to the message because the tempo and presentation is so... chipper. So I love covers that display the spirit of the text. I did miss the harmonies in Disturb’s cover to a degree, though. They did some very interesting things with it. I’m happy that the instrumentation became more involved and added to the interest of the song, because the beginning was just a bit too simple for being that slow. At least if they gave us more to dissect and inspect and chew on it wouldn’t have *felt* so slow. I really love the cover. But... I guess... with really good songs I maybe notice things I’d let slide more on a song I like less. Those few things that keep a song a 4/5 are in many ways more important than those that keep songs a 3/5. I’m happy they breathed new life into it and got it introduced to more people. I’ve loved it for a long time but many people my age didn’t know it, and that’s a shame.
@@SunflowerSpotlight I don't get how you could think it sounds cheerful. The song starts low and slow, and builds to a crescendo the same as the cover. It's very melancholy at the start. Looking out at an apathetic world full of people talking, but no one listening to each other. Building to a desperate pleading for people to stop and listen.
The only difference is that the Disturbed added more instruments, was angry at the end instead of pleading, and the album versions is WAY too fucking overproduced. If anything the Disturbed version is more contrived, and calculated. Engineered to sound more emotional, without really having anything behind it. Which is fucking ironic considering the message of the lyrics.
@@RyanAcidhedzMurphy It sounds cheerful because of the overall sound. Their voices sound beautiful with a lovely tone, the harmonies are pleasant, the guitar part is high and bright. Even when the band kicks in, the tempo is quite fast and the instrument parts are bright. Both are amazing versions of the songs.
@@PhillipGregoryMusic Well you have a strange ear for music, because the song is in D minor. The song is melancholy to start with, and transitions to a pleading tone. With Garfunkel's higher vocals being overtaking by Simon's lower as the song progresses. The instruments add impact. The song plays at roughly 108 beats per minute, which is a slower tempo. Not upbeat at all.
You clearly aren't paying any fucking attention when you listen. Apropos considering the message of the song.
@@RyanAcidhedzMurphy yes, my masters degree in music gives me a strange ear for music. I don't know whether you know anything about music theory, but being in a minor key doesn't mean that the song is not cheerful, especially as the majority of the song is based around the I, IV and V chords of the relative major scale. 108 beats per minute is definitely NOT slow and the instrumentation is quite forward driving. Their voices sound beautiful together and their hormones are very close and pleasant hardly ever using dissonance. Very pleasant. I don't want to go into technical music theory and how it functions because I fear it may be lost on you.
I'm 55 years old and absolutely love Simon & Garfunkel. Always have. Now, I, after watching Disturbed do Sounds of Silence, absolutely love David Draiman's version. To me, oddly enough, they feel like two completely different songs. S&G, very sweet, melodic and soft voices. Disturbed, very touching, bone chilling and meaningful. Not knocking S&G at all. Just loving Disturbed as well.
It's nice to see a comparison between the two, with analysis of both.
So many people are busy debating which is the "better" version, when the truth is that they're both PHENOMENAL songs... One isn't better or worse than the other, they're just two very, VERY different approaches to the same end goal. Very reflective of the drastically differing eras and styles that they both come from, as well.
THANK YOU! I totally agree.
You can only sing it within your range. It's as simple as that. Both versions are great and before anyone shits on the original; it had to be written first before there could be a cover.
I still remember my elementary school music teacher instructing us never to hold a note on a consonant so it always stands out to me. Occasionally it really makes a good difference and this is one of those times. Glad to hear someone else who is more fond of the cover than the original
I always get goosebumps when I hear the disturbeds version... Draiman can do magical things to an already amazing, beautiful song
S&G get the credit for creating such an amazing lyrical and meaningful song that is even more relevant today than it was then.
But...Disturbed brings this song to another haunting level! It’s seared into your soul!
The Disturbed version definitely draws you in, stirs emotions and goose bumps, I have been playing it over and over since I first found it. With Disturbed version I actually pay attention to the words.
Me too. Back in the sixties you just fell into listening to their harmonies but the first time i heard disturbed was actually the first time the words and the meaning of the song hit me. Appreciate both versions but disturbed is on repeat and hits me everytime
Both are incredible. I love the Disturbed version ... I think it's genius and one of the best covers ever done. It really shows off David's amazing vocals in a whole new way.
My dad used to break out S&G after too many wines and the cigars had come out (yeah, it's a progression thing) but I always had a soft spot for them. Their version always felt like a lament for the future or something like that. Hope mixed with caution, the first outing of the protest generation kinda thing.
Whereas when I first heard Disturbed's rendition I was gobsmacked. The building rage that this is what society had become spoke volumes to me. And even now, having listened to their version dozens of times if not more, flicking between Disturbed and S&G remastered, David brings chills and tears every. Single. Time. And I love that this rendition has that effect.
I can listen to S&G many times because it is more laid back. I mean you can listen and sing to it and do your chores. But Disturbed's version really draws attention. It stresses more emotion.
Still can listen to it over and over because of how perfect it is. What a gifted performers disterbed was on this song. The voice and awesome orchestra.
I was looking for this...a comparison between the two songs and you did it very well. Thank you! I cannot stop listening to the Disturbed version. It reminds me of when Heart sang Stairway to Heaven in honor of Led Zeppelin and the men were crying. I thought it was much better than the original!
I found it really interesting that, as a vocal coach, you found so much to dive into with the disturbed version where as with the original there didn't seem that much to dissect
I really really wish you had used the original version of Simon and Garfunkle because you are listening to them perform this 15 or so years after Art Garfunkle gave up singing, he came back as an old man in his 70's after years of not singing so really you need to listen to them at their best to do a proper judging I think.
I memorized the Simon and Garfunkel song when I was a kid because it meant a lot to me. Disturbed made me feel it in an entirely different way and I love it so much. He clenched his fist towards the end and didn't let it go. I feel that. Also, I feel like we should refer to the singer by his name - David Draiman.
You still cannot remove the orchestra/rest of disturbed because they also built the song tempo and atmosphere.
David Draiman is a classically trained Cantor singer
He did receive some Cantor training but never completed the training.
From what I understand, he has some operatic training as well. This is almost definitively where he shines, with this kind of singing; he shines brightly at rock, but I think this shows his true potential as a vocalist.
He shouldn't have used autotune then.
@@psychedelicpiper999 He didn't; he has no control over what post-production does.
He's born with it. You can't train that. It's a gift.
Great break down of both versions. I loved Simon and Garfunkel and was blown away with Disturbed version! Paul's yrics always takes you on a journey.
Simon and Garfunkel demonstrate a youthful innocence while disturbed is a passionate man. Watch out ladies.
I am 56 year old and grew up listening to Simon & Garfunkel. Listening to them sing Sound of Silence stirs up a sense of nostalgia and loss for times gone by. Listening to Disturbed stirs something even deeper beyond feelings. David Draiman's singing grabs me at every note and phrase. It haunts me.
Simon and GArfunkle played the song upbeat and airy, fun, where Disturbed does it with a lot of deep emotions.
He brings us on a journey and makes you think of the depression that people deal with everyday. with the sound of silence and reminds us of it as a old friend.
Have you ever thought of checking out Myles Kennedy? He sang this song with Disturbed live. It was pretty incredible.
Myles has some pipes so yeah good choice
Both Garfunkel and Draiman have such clear, beautiful voices. The Simon and Garfukel song has been one of my favorites since it was first released. However, I actually prefer Draiman's version because of the building power. Also, I love a baritone voice. Art Garfunkel's voice made Simon's songs beautiful but David's voice gives me goose bumps.
I love the smile that was on your face from around 8:02- 8:07... It just shows how powerful David's voice really is, and can make somebody feel some REAL emotions.
Not that Simon and Garfunkel didn't do it GREAT. Bendier they did... I just think that Disturbed's version has a lot more feeling, and power behind it.
I'm glad you picked up on his little vocal nuances that a lot of others seem to miss. Eg: "like in the naked light I saw" the notes used in the word light. It's very characteristic of his vocal style and you're the only one I've seen mimic/address that. Well done.
When you listen to S&G's original it sounds like a campfire song with some meaning but most of the song gets lost in translation. When you listen to Disturbed's version it's like an angry freight train ripping through your soul and the lyrics all of the sudden mean something more, this is why I prefer Disturbed's version it just resonates with me where as S&G's original just does not have the same effect.
I suppose fans of the original would call me "culture-less" or some other derogatory name for saying such, but I could care less, they would just be talking without speaking, and apparently hearing without listening.
I love both versions. S and G a different time, a different place. We were not losing our world to socialism and Satanism.
@@cathyknott9062 Yes it was a different time, a different place. We were losing our world to a war ("conflict"). No one would listen. We took to the streets to protest Vietnam, no one listened. We were losing our young men and women to a conflict that no one could explain why. It wasn't a war. War was never declared. Our Service Men were spit on as the walked thru the airports when they came home. There was never a welcome home! No one told them Thank You for Your Service. It was like they did something wrong, that they didn't belong in this country. Maybe it was different, but the same as today's world. During WWII and the Concentration Camps, they said if we forgot those times we would be doomed to repeat them. Maybe that's what's happening now. In the early 60's when this song was written, it was during a time when we were talking actually screaming but no one listened. There was just a sound of silence. Very much like today. Our country is so divided, we should be listening to each other. We should be working together to show this world we are a great Nation! To hell with Republican's, to hell with Democrats! We are American's. But it doesn't matter what we say. Because the only thing that we hear is The Sound of Silence! Sorry for going on and on. But I was a teenager in the 60's, Simon and Garfunkel's song had its place and meaning for the time. Vietnam was raging. Disturbed's has a place in today. The Middle East is raging! I love both songs, different place, different time.
So true
I never thought the Simon and Garfunkel version was "happy". It always felt like the lyrics came from the perspective of someone who is looking for hope and not finding it. Almost like a wail for help, to get someone to listen- and the way it was performed matched that sentiment perfectly. Maybe it's just because I heard it when I was kid, but this song always made me cry. It made me feel like the world was trying to push itself farther away from heaven. I know that's a really weird thing to say- but that's the feeling it gave me. It's a different emotion from Disturbed's cover- but it is still an emotion. Both versions are beautiful interpretations of the lyrics, and both are correct- they're just different.
@maccajoe so how smart are you you think you could do better either group they're both good but disturbs version is God's with us what we did wrong you just put up a red flag for someone so shallow these words will come back to haunt you I bet you won't silent maybe boring Karma is not good trust me on that
You nailed it :). S&G's original delivery of TSOS always struck me as mournful, haunting, and brooding. My dad played their albums during my childhood, and I recall clearly feeling a sense of melancholy, esp. listening to TSOS, and Bridge Over Troubled Waters.
I feel the fact that David Dramain is a Trained Cantor helps dramatically with how he sings now. Lessons never lost.
Late to this reaction, but, in my opinion, this is one of the best reactions/break-downs I've seen. Been down this rabbit hole of watching ALL videos of Disturbed's reactions. Bravo! (I ❤ Disturbed's version!)
Its quite amazing really. I've listened to the original growing up throughout my life as my mother loved it and although I knew what the lyrics were, I never truly ''heard'' them until Disturbed covered the song
Hamster Munchies like when Chris Cornell sang Michael Jackson’s Billie jeans he made the lyrics come to life
💯
Oh, that beautiful close harmony in the original!!
I've never found the Simon and Garfunkel version quite suitable for the darkness of the lyrics. Disturbed got it spot on.
You are absolutely right
Bro....I wonder how people with this kind of perception of music would cover a band like Radiohead....I don't think everything in music has to be very straightforward, Simon and Garfunkel definitely capture the eeriness and it's less busy compared to Disturbed's which leaves space for the listener to resonate with the song imo
Your take on both songs are spot on ! Both great at the time they was made, but like you said Disturbed capitalized on it so good. Well done👍
Certainly one of the better reviews I have ever seen; thank you & great job!
I love your facial expression at 8:05. Dave's singing is astounding!
Both different perfect interpretations of the same song. I am a huge Paul Simon fan and Disturbed blew me away. Thought it was better, but watching this...I lean more toward the original. In the end apples and oranges. I love hearing different ideas!!
donna stoner I agree very different. A concerned friend or parent telling a loved one, look, we’re worried for you, let me help you, let me reach you. But the cover is more jaded and frustrated. I do like how the tempo seems to reflect the tone of the lyrics more (just in my opinion). There are several songs people think of as happy songs that really aren’t if you look at the lyrics. In that past ten years several examples spring to mind.
We still do it! But it pains me, because people think of the song based more on how it’s presented and less on the story of the words. As a writer that kills me! I don’t understand how people, even casual listeners are like, “Oh I love that song,” and tend to think it’s upbeat when I ask them; I’m always curious about these things. But if you look at the story the lyrics tell, it’s not a happy song in any way. It’s a weird way to package meaning, so I always appreciate a cover making the intent of the lyrics apparent from the start. People tend to pay more attention and take it more seriously. I adore several things about the original and the cover isn’t really able to recover what it loses by not having that harmony line. I’d have liked maybe more of a nod to that, always have the piano or guitar circling in the harmony line. Or at least at the start, where it feels a bit ponderous. But in the end, different times, different intent, different artists, so of course there’s a different delivery. I’m just glad it brought more attention to the song; too many people my age hadn’t heard it. You can’t heed a message you don’t hear.
Excellent! I have been waiting for someone to compare both versions together. Thank you.
I really like what you did here,comparing each version side by side.S & G's version was nice but I love Davids one,the increase in feeling and power and also the rawness and grit that comes through in his voice in the latter part of the song.
One of the things that struck me about David's cover is the range he uses and the effect it has on me as the audience. When he hit that higher note in "song", it was impactful due to how he started the song so low. With S&G's original, it doesn't hit nearly as hard for me.
I feel like Dreyer's interpretation brings out the tragedy, sense of loss and regret in the lyrics as well as the sense of injustice there*, which Simon and Garfunkel's rendition diminishes, because it's such a bright and cheerful register throughout. And it makes sense that it would be a metal performer who would find and bring out those themes, because anger, pain and outrage are what metal is for, really. With a lot of older music forms, there arises that conflict between sonic form and lyrical function, between sound and sentiment, wherever for example folk or country singers are remaining in a form and a range of chords and tempo which is cheerful and/or danceable, while singing about tragedies and injustices.
* Because there is a villain being identified: the "neon god" of commerce and entertainment, of capitalist commodification and alienation which seperates people from one another, and from their own and each other's voices.
''Because anger, pain and outage are what metal is for, really''
Sabaton: Am I a joke to you?
Love your reactions to these songs and artist! Thank you so much!
I love that you contrasted these two wonderful sounds. Please do more of that.
I feel like Disturbed did the song the way it was meant to be done all along and leant it the beautiful intensity it deserves. But Simon and Garfunkel provided the amazing lyrics. Absolutely stunning!
I'm not going to request anything I just a something to say....You sir have such a beautiful voice!!!
That was great side by side loved it !
Wow Adam what an insightful analysis of these performances, makes me appreciate both versions even more. Thanks for your expertise sir.
Hey it's the 75 year old grandma, you are too young to understand some of the things about these two versions that are so wonderful. When Paul Simon wrote this song it was back in the 1960's during the Viet Nam war, most protest songs of which this is one were written in a passive aggressive style, Check out "Where have all the Flowers gone" as a perfect example. In those days we called this Folk Music. As you said disturbed did this in a very aggressive in your face manner which goes along with how things are presented in protests of the present day. Also The lead singer of Disturbed was trained in opera, and has a much stronger voice and control than did Simon and Garfunkel, who were famous more for their harmonies. After hearing The Disturbed version, Paul Simon said the song was no longer his.
I'm a 70 year old Grandpa and I know exactly what you men. Both versions are Great but I different ways.
It’s interesting, because songs are still using that implied cheerfulness mainly because of the tempo and people never think of them as serious or sad songs because of it. I’m surprised because I’m always so focused on the lyrics so the meaning is apparent. But casual listeners miss it completely. I’m happy the cover gave it the gravitas the lyrics demanded. Although as you say, times and the context have changed. “Hear my words that I might teach, take my arms that I might reach you,” can be a heartfelt plea from a mother or a frustrated demand.
I grew up hearing covers of this song.
When I found the original, I was shocked. Shocked. It was so... cheerful I guess? Compared to what I thought was normal. So I was very underwhelmed. But I grew to love relistening on the strength of the harmonies. Intricate and in places, they do things that aren’t expected, even note switching, which is awesome! But... it just felt lacking something. This cover gave it that gravity, but in the instrumentation, it did lack some of the intricacy of the harmony. At the slow and ponderous beginning it could have maybe used a quiet harmony line to make it more interesting, I think. I know the awesomeness is coming but I can’t help but feel it’s a bit too slow. Which I know is silly since I thought S&G were way too fast! I think if it was a bit faster or a bit more complex, the brain would have more inspection to do and be less left to its own devices wondering when the next part is coming.
Many people my age didn’t know this song though, which just hurts me! So I’m thrilled they breathed new life into it and introduced it to so many people, rekindled the love of long time fans. It’s quite a feat. I feel I’m probably only as hard on it as I am because it’s one of the best covers I’ve ever heard, and when something is SO good, the one or two things separating it from perfection kind of stand out more to me. It’s such a shame that I know and can put a finger on the things that would have made it my perfect favorite all time cover. It’s quite a job though, and I’m so so glad it happened.
I'm just a 35 year old mom, but I was raised on folk music. Listening to it and singing it with my dad. I sang this in a talent show when I was 12. My little sister sang Where Have All the Flowers Gone in another talent show. Simon and Garfunkel, Arlo Guthrie, Jim Croce, The Mamas & the Papas, Peter Paul and Mary... it was a magical time for music.
One small correction from a fellow Gran...
He wasn't trained in Opera, but as a Cantor for his father's Synagogue. The rest is Spot On. 😄
@@thecelticcrone7927 Wow that makes it even more interesting, Since christian beliefs are rooted, in the Hebrew teachings, I really find this awesome, I use this music for intercession, thanks for correcting me I don't like to post the wrong information, so thanks again.
have you noticed if you merge Simon and Garfunkel in one person you get Teller (from Penn & Teller)
i do noticed it too. lol
😂 😂 😂 😂
😂
😂😂😂😂😂
Hello left field. 😄
David Draiman traveled the US and Israel the first couple of decades of his life training to be a cantor, like his father and world-famous grandfather. Paul Simon (who wrote the song) liked it so much he has the live version link on his website. A member of Disturbed suggested they do a stripped-down version. When David heard his own recording in the studio, he said he fell and cried for over an hour because it brought out all the cantor training that he had forgotten about. David has a 4a+ octave range naturally.
I love both versions. Disturbed has depth. It builds with every layer. Very well produced.
Music Lovers: Simon and Garfunkels Sound of Silence could NEVER be redone.
Disturbed: Hold my beer.
Well, it was redone and done better. So much better
Way better IMHO. Paul Simon actually heard this he linked it to his official website and said Disturbed officially OWNED this now.
Love the disturbed cover 🤘🏾 thanks
Great video. Times are quite different. This song lives on.
you expression-less (not to say B.R.) face was such a delight throughout all of the video. so rich.
Simon and garfunkel original version was a prayer of warning.... David Draimon and Disturbed is a sermon because we didn't heed the warning years ago...and we arw living it now
People talking without speaking= social media.
People hearing without listening= isolation & division
People writing song that voices never share... We are unable to accept others views
sad and true at the same time... and those of us who understand and want to fix things are the one who get "SILENCED"....
STOP COPY PASTING THIS COMMENT EVERYONE HAS SEEN IT
I hadn't. It's a good comment.
Mike Whitaker you hit the nail in the had. Those of us still fighting have to be louder. Unfortunately all that’s likely lost on most people.
S&G gave a warning... Disturbed is anger it wasn't heeded..
This is probably one the best and most informative (if ot *the* best and most informative) reaction video among all I've seen for Disturbed's version (and I've been obsessing over it for a couple of days, haha... can I say "déformation professionelle" if I'm still a learner?). It's also the first time I hear the original and I'm so glad you included it.
Enjoyed your professional explanation very much!
Hes a classically trained singer and Canter...you need to listen to his official video. It's not really about comparing them, it's about the delivery. David Draiman is speaking to you, us our souls.
Disturbed's version operates more on the 80's power ballad style adding layer after layer until it can barely hold itself together. The original relies more on the lyrics themselves and the massive stadium sized ballads were yet to be standardised.
So what's your point since I was a teenager than we were in love with soft flowing music folk music Dylan's music from different artists it was a magical time than but the world changed we became adults while we sang&danced with flowers in our hair Disturbs new album showed us the sad reality
@@rainabosworthf393 I just put out my opinion on the song and the differences that I feel to be there. You describe how the interpretation of the world changes along the age and how the meaning of the song can be changing along the process, underlined by the arrangement.
@@onsesejoo2605 wow your good I have been a music lover my whole life &being a teenager than we were into playing Beatles song's backwards I love to analyze song's you probably do that too
@@rainabosworthf393 Thanks...I try not to analyse too much but it has to have something into it..However I don't like some songs because they rely too much on lyrics that often are very personal which makes them difficult to relate to. You have to be in there to get what they are about. A good writer can take the message to more general level to give things to grab onto without losing the feel or sacrificing the music under the lyrics.
I absolutely love your commentary. It was spot on from a professional level. I myself see it as a poppy vs serious version, but you taught me a lot about this song. subscribing for sure. You know what you"re talking about. Thank you
Really love that you compared the two. First reaction I saw do this.
Many people reacted to this cover. I watched several of those videos, and I found this one to be among the best (if not THE best).
IMO, the song is beautifully covered. 'Disturbed' did a very good job with the video too, but I waited for a live version to pop up somewhere on UA-cam to hear how it really sounds, and it's awesome.
They did change it, but it does full justice to the original.
Cool video, buddy - keep it up!
There's a live version that Disturbed did with Myles Kennedy that's even better :)
The performance on Conan was live. Draiman doesn't lip sync.
@@Ingolenuru I know, I'm saying there's another live show that sounds better
Didn't David have the flu during the Conan live performance?
meestabeck and arthur had (and still has if I’m not mistaken) problems with his larynx
Yes
Yes, so imagine if he was 100%
Yes he did. I saw him do this live when he was 100% and it gave me chills.
@@tammybritton4623 yeah that makes a lot of sense, it sounded off to me when I saw it because I saw the studio version which for disturbed is barely different than their live work
Why do people have to criticize a comparison or a reaction video for how the person does their video?
The person doing the comparison or reaction video needs to add their content to it and it is up to them when and where they add it.
If you want to hear it uncut, play the original video or audio track.
That being said, I wish it would have been a comparison between the original 1964 version with just Simon & Garfunkel with only Simon on the guitar and Disturbed's official studio version.
It could have been a four way comparison between the original version, the version their label put together, using the original version and studio musicians, this is the version that became a hit in 1966, the official studio version by Disturbed and the version the performed on Conan O'Brian's show. All four of these versions are available here on UA-cam.
There are other versions of the song by others, including Nouela that I also like.
Appreciate your analysis. Well done.
I think in their time S&G were magnificent. Their harmony was perfect. I think Garfunkle does not get e enough credit for a spectacular voice, better than Simon's
It's hauntingly beautiful when David sings it. I love the video. He looks right through your soul.
It does feel as though he is looking right into you!
Simple One can sing and the other can’t. It is that simple. Disturb’s is just what the name suggests, it is just evil, while Simon and Garfunkel version is a masterpiece.
@@kevinbalsdon4705 blocked lol
Dude, I don't know who you are, but when you smiled it looked like a reaction to an emotion of pure joy. Your smile was lovely.
A beautiful song done both ways..love it
Paul Simon told David, this is what we wanted the song to be
Paul is a polite man when it comes to other artists
Such a beautiful song...in both versions! PLZZZZZZZ.....on my begging knees: would you be so kind to reacted to Dimash's : "Sinfull Passion" and "The songs of tired swans"! Would love to see your responds to whose to awsome songs and I do som much respect your view point on the things you react to! You would make a woman very happy if you do :)
This is a great video! Great perspective. Shalome. :)
I loved this song then and love it now...excellent review of both!