Those of you chalking his behavior up to anything other than being doped up out of his mind must have never seen anyone in their lives like this. It's the only explanation for how you would ignore what is so clearly obvious. Or it's just serious, chronic denial. This is EXACTLY how someone acts when they've taken too many painkillers or anti-depressants and/or paired them with booze. I'm sorry if it's hard for people to hear but I am absolutely positive this is what's going on. I've seen it too many times.
Just listen to him at the end, when the interviewer, who I will admit is terrible and makes an awkward situation even worse, thanks him for unexpectedly speaking to him... "I'mprooo"
I don't disagree with you but I do think he's completely different in this interview than he was at that Texas show. Yes, the similarity is he looks spaced out at both, but in this interview he is way more with it than he was at that show. Not appearing to be in good shape by any means, but he was at least able to semi-function. In this interview he looks spaced on the outside but you can tell that the gears are actually turning in his mind. He definitely can put sentences together and answers the questions and is smart enough to even stick it to the interviewer with one of his comments.
That Texas performance was very different to me. There he was an absolute zombie. The lights weren't on upstairs, no one was home. He looked empty, like a shell. When the post about that topic came out I watched a few of the clips and came to the conclusion that in my opinion, just from having spent time around people who were in that state, that this man drank alcohol and possibly took a xanax or something else like it. I know what I'm looking at there.
He was way more with it in this interview.
I see some posts here speaking of potential injury. While I suppose it's not out of the realm of possibility, I doubt he'd hide a legit injury cause that would have been the perfect excuse for the Texas performance amongst other things I'm sure.
Instead we got the excuse about in ear monitors which as of this interview he is still running with like a kid with scissors.
Where he's right is that monitors DO help when singing. There definitely is a difference when you have good constant point of reference, which is what monitors provide; a constant point of reference. However a lack of good monitors shouldn't make such a drastic difference as to what we saw in that one particular show.
There are certain notes in your range that when you sing you can really feel in your chest/throat and you kind of lock in and know you're hitting them right whether you can hear yourself or not. I call them "sweet spots". You use those notes to gauge how high or low you have to go to try and hit other notes correctly. If you have ever played a show at a place with a shitty PA system you know this to be true.
In Scott's case, when someone sings certain songs professionally for over 20 years believe me, they definitely have sweet spots in the songs where they can just feel if they're on that they can use to at least semi-gauge how to attempt to hit other notes correctly.
I posted this in another topic the other day to back up my claim and I'll do it again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5XzZCfBLVIThe first few seconds of this video show him taking out his in ear monitor and then you can clearly see it dangling on his shoulder. (you can see it dangling most clearly at about 45 seconds in) He sings a song he'd been singing for 20 years just fine without it. He's a pro.
I'm side tracking now, but my main point is while I do agree with Slither I also think we are witnessing 2 totally different levels of things between Texas and this interview.
