narten@CS-Mordred (Thomas Narten) (02/03/84)
I find that I prefer live music over studio music 95% of the
time. Often, I think that live versions are superior to the studio
versions. Since most groups put out more studio material than live,
I usually resort to taping live broadcasts from programs such as
King Biscuit and The BBC Rock Hour.
I have "discovered" many bands this way. That is, I am not very
familiar with a particular group and tape a concert of theirs and
start liking them. For instance, I have an excellent tape of Phil
Collins in Pasadena that has made me a fan of him. Another band I
discovered this way is The Fixx.
I don't think that I am biased because I listen to the live
material before ever hearing the studio. Many of the bands that I
like, I don't have any live material from. Later, when I do get
some, I find that it is better than the studio I had been listening to.
For instance, I have a tape featuring the Who recorded on a tour after
their Quadrophenia album had just been released. Several concerts
I have tapes of are better than live albums that were put out by
the groups. As an example, The Grateful Dead's Dead Set does not
come close to showing why the group has amassed such a following.
A tape airred 3 years ago on King Biscuit would have done more for
the bands popularity and for Dead Heads as well.
This works the other way as well. Several bands that I used to
like, I no longer listen to because their live material is of poor
quality. If a band can't play their music well without the assistance
of studio equipment (ie. overubbing, etc.) I can't help but think
that the band members are poor musicians.
Are there others out in net land that appreciate live music?
If its not live its jive....
Thomas Narten
...!pur-ee!pucc-i:sqk
tnn@purduetynor@uiucuxc.UUCP (02/05/84)
#R:CS-Mordr:-11500:uiucuxc:30800010:000:762 uiucuxc!tynor Feb 4 10:40:00 1984 Appreciate, yes. Prefer, usually not. One artist that I can actually say that I prefer live is Chuck Mangione (Live at the Hollywood Bowl). I very much enjoy listening to Kansas (Two for the Show), but can't say that I prefer it to the studio cuts. By the way, what does the musician's on-stage ability have to do with the quality of their music? If keyboardist A can play virtuoso scales and such live, whereas keyboardist B must rely on overdubbing and sequencers etc., do you really dismiss the latter out of hand? Isn't it, instead, the final product that you listen to? If keyboardist B manages to sound more original/lyrical/cleaner etc. by using the multitrack studio to its fullest- more power to him. Steve Tynor ihnp4!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!tynor
dya@unc-c.UUCP (02/06/84)
References: CS-Mordr.115
Absolutely. But we don't get any decent live music here in Charlotte,
N.C. ( Big venue this month: Van Halen. ) Every arena we have within
reasonable driving distance has the acoustical quality of an Archer
AM Flavoradio.
Whilst at John Melancamp / Heart in Greensboro last year, I couldn't
help but notice that both RTA (real time spectrum analysers) were displaying
a frequency response of 120-13000 Hz. Needless to say, the concert
sucked because it sounded so bad.....
But live music at a small hall is excellent. I also like recordings of
live music ( Mobile Fidelity " Waiting for Columbus " and Bob Seger "Live
Bullet" ) don't have the damn audience mixed up front, and some of the
stereo image is preserved. " Shadows and Light " by Joni Mitchell isn't
bad...
But, alas, couldn't get tickets for Little Feat at Norfolk Scope,
have a job, couldn't line up 3 days in advance for Bob Seger (have a job),
and Joni hasn't toured N.C. since 1975.
I have a problem: A friend in Charlottesville, VA and myself want to
hear some ** REAL ** live music. Could anyone reccommend a venue within,
say, 100 miles of a line starting at DC and ending at Atlanta ?
-- David " Last of the analog " ....
( akgua!mcnc!(urp,unc-c)!dya )woods@hao.UUCP (Greg Woods) (02/06/84)
I certainly do. In fact, the relatively easy availability of bootleg live
Grateful Dead tapes is one of the reasons I am such a DeadHead. I sort of make
collecting these live tapes (and from other bands too, when I can get them)
my hobby. I really do prefer the live versions, even when Jerry forgets the
words or Bobby plays the wrong chord. Studio albums these days sound too
"slick" for my taste, and that even includes albums like "Dead Set". It may
be live, but it was mixed in a studio, and I like my bootleg tapes of the
15th Anniversary shows (around the same time-frame) a whole lot better.
Of course, I apply these same arguments to other bands that I like as well,
such as the Stones (maybe especially them!), Little Feat, Jethro Tull and
Dire Straits, to name a few.
I feel the live bootlegs are the way the music is really played, and these
over-produced studio albums are, in a sense, fakes. I'm glad to see someone
else agrees with me about *something* in this newsgroup! :-)
GREG
--
{ucbvax!hplabs | allegra!nbires | decvax!stcvax | harpo!seismo | ihnp4!stcvax}
!hao!woodshenthorn@uiucdcs.UUCP (henthorn ) (02/07/84)
#R:CS-Mordr:-11500:uiucdcs:10800023:000:999
uiucdcs!henthorn Feb 6 21:03:00 1984
I've got both Phil Collins LPs and have seen him in concert.
No kidding, Collins is a super performer (I've also witnessed
two GENESIS concerts), and I can understand someone becoming
a fan of his simply by listening to the BBC rock hour. However,
the studio versions are extremely well engineered and mixed, and
I strongly urge you to get a recording of the albums, especially
FACE VALUE. You may soon see that, with PC at least, the live
version is very much like the studio version without the often
bothersome noise of the crowd (if it is indeed bothersome to you).
Live performances can also be limited in the amount of material
presented to the audience, songs are often cut short (but also
extended at times), and the recording environment is not as
favorable to the subtle nuances evident on studio cuts --- ESPECIALLY
ON ALBUMS BY COLLINS, PETER GABRIEL, AND GENESIS.
Long Live the Lamb, the Squonk, DODO/LURKER, etc. !!
- Rich H. (uiucdcs!henthorn)