• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Do you prefer live recordings or studio recordings?

Studio.

The artist is usually off-key in live performances.

Yes, I know studio is all edited and optimized, but I don't give a sh!t. I rather have something fakeish that sounds good than something real that sounds bad.
BTW, I have never heard an artist performing live songs as good as studio recording, a couple comes close, but never as good.
 
Originally posted by: Tylanner
Nirvana and AIC were awesome in MTV unplugged.
Click to expand...

Two great shows. I think it depends on how well the albums are produced. Some are really bad and just thrown on to an album and hope that people buy them.

Pantera: 101 Proof Live is also another good live album.
 
depends really....if they take the song in another direction a'la Counting Crows 12 minute version of Round Here in Paris back in 94. Or if they have a ton of energy, some bands just sound more energetic live. And maybe if i was at the concert i'd like to hear a recording of it
 
Depends on the artist and really depends on the quality on the live recording.

I:heart::heart::heart: Phish soundboards.
 
Studio. Unless engineers sit behind Protools for months and suck every bit of life out of the sound.
 
Usually studio. It gives the musicians time to craft their song to what they intended--or rather, some bands. Unfortunately we've got this spate of jackass producers who insist on sucking the life out of studio recordings. I like being present for live performances, though.
 
i hate hearing crowds in live recordings. theres always some jackass yeliing WOOO HOOO in the middle of the song
 
Rush does an excellent job live and Under a Blood Red Sky was awesome. Some bands only make albums to support them playing live...aka Dave Matthews. All they want to do is jam so their live stuff is always different. OTOH Vince Neil sux live along with Smashing Pumpkins.
 
Originally posted by: Toasthead
i hate hearing crowds in live recordings. theres always some jackass yeliing WOOO HOOO in the middle of the song
Click to expand...

Or worse you always have the idiot yelling Freebird. Man I hate that guy and he is at every show!
 
Originally posted by: ZOOYUKA
Originally posted by: Toasthead
i hate hearing crowds in live recordings. theres always some jackass yeliing WOOO HOOO in the middle of the song
Click to expand...

Or worse you always have the idiot yelling Freebird. Man I hate that guy and he is at every show!
Click to expand...


LOLOL Too true!
I prefer live myself. I record shows and have 1000's of hours of live shows.
j
 
I prefer live shows over studio, more feeling in live performances and i like the improv of lyrics some bands do.
 
Originally posted by: middlehead
Depends on the artist and song
Click to expand...

Same here. For example, Sarah McLachlan butchers "Fallen" in her live performances, but her other live songs are better than studio.
 
Originally posted by: Imdmn04
Studio.

The artist is usually off-key in live performances.

Yes, I know studio is all edited and optimized, but I don't give a sh!t. I rather have something fakeish that sounds good than something real that sounds bad.
BTW, I have never heard an artist performing live songs as good as studio recording, a couple comes close, but never as good.
Click to expand...

I agree with this guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top