Bon Scott or Brian Johnson?
 

Which AC/DC vocalist do you prefer?

brian who?????

I prefer Bon Scott as well. More character in his voice. 'Highway to Hell' is my favourite AC/DC album as well.

bon for me. johnsons voice annoys me.

bon scott, of course! i've heard brian johnson sing songs from bon scott-era ACDC....it just doesn't sound right.

exactly what i would have said.

true i do think that bon was better...but if you think about it thye both had something to contribute to the band.......who better to replace bon than johnson... i cant think of anyone else that could follow in his tracks

Brian Johnson

Bon Scott wrote about his life , the people he met , his lifestyle ,his desire to play rock music & there was a sense of knowing this man had experienced these things when he sang about them.

Brian Johnson writes lyrics that wouldn`t be out of place on a Spinal Tap album & once wrote a song called Bedlam In Belgium.

No contest

ahh urban u make me laugh....

I think they were both pretty good.

I find that Brian Johnson does well to keep Acdc's sound alive, and in all honesty there aren't too many people who could keep that sound alive. He may not be any Bon Scott but he sure as well picked up the reigns without entirely ****ing up their sound. I say clap clap for BJ.

Bon Scott was a better singer and frontman, even though Back In Black is still the best AC/DC album in my opinion.

THATS WHAT I WAS THINKING ,,SCARY

I love Scott, but he stands like Plant, and to me, thats a mark against them.

What in the hell does standing still at concerts have to do with the music?

What he said.

look. i am the most fanatic ac/dc fan.brian is the best he has got nicer voice and more style .but bon was good too.rest in peace,bon

Nah, bon had a better tone, at least in my opinion.

im not sure why this question would even be asked...

i hate ac/dc's music with a passion
but Bon's vocals were great
and johnson just sucks balls

Not even close, Bon Scott.

I think its extremely harsh to claim that Brian Johnson has nothing to contribute to AC/DC or that he doesnt suit them. Most bands would fold when they lose their singer or make one or two records with a new singer before calling it a day and I respect AC/DC for carrying on and achieving so much success with it. To have your first album with a new singer be Back In Black is a huge achievement.

How AC/DC managed to find someone so perfect to front the band after Bon died is beyond me BUT of course Bon Scott was the better singer and the better front man. AC/DC made better music with Bon Scott than they have without him.

Bon Scott but they both sound the same to me.

I used to prefer Johnson's voice, when Back In Black was the freshest album. I even liked it through Who Made Who, but it progressively became worse over the years. Now, it's a gravelly, croak filled mess. So, when all is said and done, I much prefer Bon's voice.

Bon Scott, no question in my mind. I find it quite strange that some people prefer that other bloke

Nothing against Brian Johnson, but I voted and prefer Bon Scott.

I prefer Bon Scott. He was more charismatic, more ironic, and just all around cooler. He wrote better lyrics and he had an irresistible charm that Johnson was never able to emulate. However, that being said, I think that Brian Johnson, for roughly his first four years with AC/DC, was a better singer. His breathtaking highs on Back In Black are just astonishing, and something Bon Scott was never able to do. I mean, good God. To be able to go that high on your range on songs like "Hell's Bells" and "Shoot To Thrill" and still stay ON KEY?! Jesus Christ, that's amazing.

So, much respect to Brian Johnson, but Bon Scott still gets my vote.

As much as I respect and like Bon Scott, I have to say Brian Johnson, simply because I like more AC/DC that features Johnson. Although the material with Scott is timeless and will always be classic stuff.

Bon Scott, he was a far better front man. AC/DC with Bon Scott produced better albums. And his vocal's are superior than Johson's.

I like both, Scott is AC/DC 70s era. Johnson is 80s AC/DC.
Bon Scott replaced Dave Evans as the lead singer of AC/DC in 1974.

Can't even cut it, Bon Scott. He had the natural squeal of a voice that Brian Johnson tried to copy for the band.

No Contest.

You are right. It's like as if they changed with the decade. You can tell a difference in how they made music after Scott died.

Bon Scott was way better.

As an Australian this is a huge topic, best export we ever had musically :P

Personally I do think Bon Scott has to take it, he was the original and AC/DC would never have happened without him but in saying that I quite like Brian. AC/DC wouldnt have existed or become the phenominon they are today without them

What about Daevid Allen? AC/DC is cool and all, but nowhere near as cool as the mind behind Gong, and started Soft Machine.

Bon Scott just for that whole grunty voice going "Done Dirt Cheap" is one of the most awesome noises ever created with human voice.

That's the whole aspect/riff of the song itself. Phil Rudd on drums and Scott = "Dirty Deed's, And They're Done Dirt Cheap!". :drummer:."Dirty Deeds, And They're Done Dirt Cheap!". :drummer:. :yeah:

For me I just bring up the two albums that I think define both eras.

For Bon: T.N.T.

For BJ: Back in Black.

For me there is no contest. I prefer T.N.T over Back in Black. Also Bon always sounded passionate about what he was doing and could put on a way better show. Bon Scott it is.

"Back in Black" almost sounds like a joke because of the vocals, which are just awful. It's Bon Scott without even the slightest hint of doubt.

This is one of those sucky comparisons because Scott had the better voice but Johnson sang on the better material (imo). I couldn't ever choose.