My initial reaction to this Thread was as expected. I was shocked to see so many posts until I read back a bit and found that a large portion of them were just some regulars being silly, which is FAR more preferable than any real discussion that would lend credibility to yet another mindless Thread asking one stupid question or (god forbid) another "versus" Thread!! Having prefaced my comments;

Dime, I have to agree with you. When I hear the music of the "Ripper Era", I tend to think that Priest were attempting to take their sound in a new direction. A more "modern" sound, if you will. The very essence of what they were was gone, for me. Priest music uses a huge amount of melody. This is not really part of the more modern Metal sound. Additionally, Ripper began to get edgier in his vocal style and was using profanity in the lyrics, which I found distasteful. Priest music has always been so much more about the lyrical "high road", if you will. The lyrics remain so much more symbolic and open to interpretation. That is an attractive quality, to me. Obscene language has always been a part of Heavy Metal and, indeed, I have heard Rob curse onstage more than once but, thankfully, the Band has eschewed this nonsense when writing songs.

The melody of a Priest song is what makes it a Priest song, for me. Pick any you like and you can hear that distinctive Priest sound in the background, behind the dual guitars and the screaming vocals. Behind the pounding beat and the driving bass. It is the signature of Judas Priest. During Ripper's time, I think the Band attempted to appeal to a younger audience, perhaps because they felt it was time to move in a new direction? To recapture something they had lost? I cannot say with certainty. Clearly the music was different. No doubt. Was it better? That is a subject that can be debated and quite likely will be for some time to come. 

I think Tim Owens is a wonderful vocalist. And, he has guts. He did something very few people could have, or would have done when he joined Priest. He took a professional risk and was somewhat successful in spite of the daunting task. He tried to emulate Rob then, when the Band felt the time was right, he made the move towards being more himself. I don't think it is fair to "compare" Owens to Rob. Rob Halford is a Rock and Roll Icon. A legend. It is completely unfair to make a comparision. There simply is none.

		Dime/UNDER BLOOD RED SKIES!!!! wrote:
		Ok I couldnt really have an opinion about Owens, only really heard Burn in Hell and i thought it was pretty decent. I just downloaded a few songs from Jugulator, i can't believe that its really Judas Priest. The music itself  is pretty good but sounds....well not priest, like they were trying to hard to be something else. The lyrics are so unbelievably bad(almost as bad as my spelling) I still stick with the belief that they should have changed the name of the band, just like maiden should have. Its like the argument about GNR. I'll stick by the fact that owens can sing, but being a clone though (even if he's slightly modified his voice) is not worth listening to.Halford was and always will be irreplaceable.

My initial reaction to this Thread was as expected. I was shocked to see so many posts until I read back a bit and found that a large portion of them were just some regulars being silly, which is FAR more preferable than any real discussion that would lend credibility to yet another mindless Thread asking one stupid question or (god forbid) another "versus" Thread!! Having prefaced my comments;

Dime, I have to agree with you. When I hear the music of the "Ripper Era", I tend to think that Priest were attempting to take their sound in a new direction. A more "modern" sound, if you will. The very essence of what they were was gone, for me. Priest music uses a huge amount of melody. This is not really part of the more modern Metal sound. Additionally, Ripper began to get edgier in his vocal style and was using profanity in the lyrics, which I found distasteful. Priest music has always been so much more about the lyrical "high road", if you will. The lyrics remain so much more symbolic and open to interpretation. That is an attractive quality, to me. Obscene language has always been a part of Heavy Metal and, indeed, I have heard Rob curse onstage more than once but, thankfully, the Band has eschewed this nonsense when writing songs.

The melody of a Priest song is what makes it a Priest song, for me. Pick any you like and you can hear that distinctive Priest sound in the background, behind the dual guitars and the screaming vocals. Behind the pounding beat and the driving bass. It is the signature of Judas Priest. During Ripper's time, I think the Band attempted to appeal to a younger audience, perhaps because they felt it was time to move in a new direction? To recapture something they had lost? I cannot say with certainty. Clearly the music was different. No doubt. Was it better? That is a subject that can be debated and quite likely will be for some time to come. 

I think Tim Owens is a wonderful vocalist. And, he has guts. He did something very few people could have, or would have done when he joined Priest. He took a professional risk and was somewhat successful in spite of the daunting task. He tried to emulate Rob then, when the Band felt the time was right, he made the move towards being more himself. I don't think it is fair to "compare" Owens to Rob. Rob Halford is a Rock and Roll Icon. A legend. It is completely unfair to make a comparision. There simply is none.

		Dime/UNDER BLOOD RED SKIES!!!! wrote:
		Ok I couldnt really have an opinion about Owens, only really heard Burn in Hell and i thought it was pretty decent. I just downloaded a few songs from Jugulator, i can't believe that its really Judas Priest. The music itself  is pretty good but sounds....well not priest, like they were trying to hard to be something else. The lyrics are so unbelievably bad(almost as bad as my spelling) I still stick with the belief that they should have changed the name of the band, just like maiden should have. Its like the argument about GNR. I'll stick by the fact that owens can sing, but being a clone though (even if he's slightly modified his voice) is not worth listening to.Halford was and always will be irreplaceable.

My initial reaction to this Thread was as expected. I was shocked to see so many posts until I read back a bit and found that a large portion of them were just some regulars being silly, which is FAR more preferable than any real discussion that would lend credibility to yet another mindless Thread asking one stupid question or (god forbid) another "versus" Thread!! Having prefaced my comments;

Dime, I have to agree with you. When I hear the music of the "Ripper Era", I tend to think that Priest were attempting to take their sound in a new direction. A more "modern" sound, if you will. The very essence of what they were was gone, for me. Priest music uses a huge amount of melody. This is not really part of the more modern Metal sound. Additionally, Ripper began to get edgier in his vocal style and was using profanity in the lyrics, which I found distasteful. Priest music has always been so much more about the lyrical "high road", if you will. The lyrics remain so much more symbolic and open to interpretation. That is an attractive quality, to me. Obscene language has always been a part of Heavy Metal and, indeed, I have heard Rob curse onstage more than once but, thankfully, the Band has eschewed this nonsense when writing songs.

The melody of a Priest song is what makes it a Priest song, for me. Pick any you like and you can hear that distinctive Priest sound in the background, behind the dual guitars and the screaming vocals. Behind the pounding beat and the driving bass. It is the signature of Judas Priest. During Ripper's time, I think the Band attempted to appeal to a younger audience, perhaps because they felt it was time to move in a new direction? To recapture something they had lost? I cannot say with certainty. Clearly the music was different. No doubt. Was it better? That is a subject that can be debated and quite likely will be for some time to come. 

I think Tim Owens is a wonderful vocalist. And, he has guts. He did something very few people could have, or would have done when he joined Priest. He took a professional risk and was somewhat successful in spite of the daunting task. He tried to emulate Rob then, when the Band felt the time was right, he made the move towards being more himself. I don't think it is fair to "compare" Owens to Rob. Rob Halford is a Rock and Roll Icon. A legend. It is completely unfair to make a comparision. There simply is none.

		Dime/UNDER BLOOD RED SKIES!!!! wrote:
		Ok I couldnt really have an opinion about Owens, only really heard Burn in Hell and i thought it was pretty decent. I just downloaded a few songs from Jugulator, i can't believe that its really Judas Priest. The music itself  is pretty good but sounds....well not priest, like they were trying to hard to be something else. The lyrics are so unbelievably bad(almost as bad as my spelling) I still stick with the belief that they should have changed the name of the band, just like maiden should have. Its like the argument about GNR. I'll stick by the fact that owens can sing, but being a clone though (even if he's slightly modified his voice) is not worth listening to.Halford was and always will be irreplaceable.

Hi all, I am new here and a very long time fan of the Metal Godz.
The thing I want to ask is, how could any self-respecting Priest head even ask this question?
Without Mr.Halford, Ripper would not exist in our minds.
Don't get me wrong, the Ripper does have a strong voice, but he in no way compares to the control or sweetness of the voice of Rob.

That's my $.02.