Idaho music Message board

You Are There vs. Endgame...

RE: You Are There vs. Endgame? | from mattJun 24 2000 - 03:31

WOW-
never would have guessed THAT would be the response! everyone i know is so much more into the original version of the song when he's practically screaming- endgame is practically on morphine in comparison! it's still good, but there's no rush like on You are there... have to go with the earlier one!!

RE: You Are There vs. Endgame? | from michelJun 23 2000 - 09:55

same here. although i must say i enjoy both a lot, end game seems to have more profundity. i always thought the vocals on you are there were improvised during the last ten minutes of a studiosession or something.

RE: You Are There vs. Endgame? | from robJun 23 2000 - 09:35

I agree O.
I think "endgame" is a better song.I mean this in the sense that it has alot more structure and dynamic.Due to the vocal performance.It has far more passion and the lyrics seem to have more meaning ( i could be wrong).
When Jeff sings low it really is a beautiful thing.
ENDGAME hands down!

RE: You Are There vs. Endgame? | from oJun 22 2000 - 16:59

The version on the Palms is cheesy with a capital C-H-E-E-S-Y. The other version is top notch though. It's odd how much difference the vocal line makes.

You Are There vs. Endgame... | from jeremyJun 22 2000 - 15:28

just curious out there for old time fans which version you prefer, you are there or endgame? almost the same musically, just a different vocal idea... as much as i love the name Endgame, the rawness of emotion of the earlier You are There still gets to me!