• 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.

Queen in concert...

DangerAardvark

DangerAardvark

Diamond Member
I was watching a recording of Queen in concert on Ovation. One thing that really stood out to me about the performance was how different the songs sounded when performed live. Now, I understand that sometimes artists like to inject some variance into their songs during performances, which is fine. But, not only did he do this, but he regularly sung some of the high parts lower. That kinda sucked. Also, I think they spliced in the middle part of Bohemian Rhapsody with a studio recording. I've always wondered: did Queen actually do the whole song on stage?

Anyway, this thread's supposed to be about dissappointing concert performances...
 
Originally posted by: DangerAardvark
I was watching a recording of Queen in concert on Ovation. One thing that really stood out to me about the performance was how different the songs sounded when performed live. Now, I understand that sometimes artists like to inject some variance into their songs during performances, which is fine. But, not only did he do this, but he regularly sung some of the high parts lower. That kinda sucked. Also, I think they spliced in the middle part of Bohemian Rhapsody with a studio recording. I've always wondered: did Queen actually do the whole song on stage?

Anyway, this thread's supposed to be about dissappointing concert performances...
Click to expand...

dissappointing concert performances:

Radiohead a few years back when they played only their arty farty stuff :thumbsdown:

they used to rock and then they went euro chic and f*cked it up

 
in nearly every concert I've been to, the singers stink live. the only one I can remember being good is Huey Lewis. a lot of the live recordings I've heard are pretty bad too, although I heard a live version of Hotel California by the Eagles which I actually like even better than the recorded version.

I hate it when performers try to add stuff, the variations like you said, into their live songs and it ends up sounding like trash. I was listening to Trapt (I think it was them) on the tv or the radio a couple months ago and it sounded decent until he started adding the variations. yech 😛
 
Well, I imagine it can get boring to just rehash your hits night after night. But, you DO have a duty to the fans. Luckily, Freddie Mercury was so dynamic onstage he could probably have sung the songs in Spanish.
 
Originally posted by: Kaido
in nearly every concert I've been to, the singers stink live.
Click to expand...

Tip: Apprecitate bands with more talent. 😉

Worst concert ever: NIN's Downward Spiral. It wasn't Trent Reznor's fault either. He sounded great. The problem was the "back-up-band-for-hire" that sounded like each member was playing a different song.

Thank God Pop Will Eat Itself and Jim Rose Circus were the opening acts! 😀

 
Originally posted by: DangerAardvark
Well, I imagine it can get boring to just rehash your hits night after night. But, you DO have a duty to the fans. Luckily, Freddie Mercury was so dynamic onstage he could probably have sung the songs in Spanish.
Click to expand...


Yep. Queen was first created to be a full LIVE band. So having Freddie Mercury's vocal range was key.

I just wish he was still alive so I could see him/Queen perform.

 
Bohemian Rhapsody vocals on the record or overdubbed like 30 times
so there's no way to recreate that depth and texture live
without a full choir.


Pretty much why the Beatles stopped playing live, they
made their songs int eh studio too hard to recreate




 
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: DangerAardvark
I was watching a recording of Queen in concert on Ovation. One thing that really stood out to me about the performance was how different the songs sounded when performed live. Now, I understand that sometimes artists like to inject some variance into their songs during performances, which is fine. But, not only did he do this, but he regularly sung some of the high parts lower. That kinda sucked. Also, I think they spliced in the middle part of Bohemian Rhapsody with a studio recording. I've always wondered: did Queen actually do the whole song on stage?

Anyway, this thread's supposed to be about dissappointing concert performances...
Click to expand...

dissappointing concert performances:

Radiohead a few years back when they played only their arty farty stuff :thumbsdown:

they used to rock and then they went euro chic and f*cked it up
Click to expand...

what show?
 
Originally posted by: Chraticn
RHCP

Anthony Kiedis sucks really really hard live. You know how his voice is pleasantly strange? Yeah, live it just sucks.


/thread
Click to expand...


Haha, really? On the CD's he's good, but there's a certain amateurish overtone to his singing. I always thought that it was a stylistic thing, and I really dug it. But, are you telling me that it sounds like that because he really does just suck?

Oh well, at least Flea still rocks my box.

Also, what's with the RHCP's early stuff, it's like Give it Away style, crappy rap/rock singing for 60 minutes straight.
 
freddie rarely sang the high parts anyway. the drummer sang the high harmonies and such. and if you watched the concert, you probably saw him singing away, behind his drum kit.

queen did insert a recording for the "operatic" part of bohemian rhapsody. there really wasn't any way to performance a billion vocal parts with only 4 guys (only one of whom could really sing).

and people, please realize that what you hear on a CD is the swiss-cheese result of anywhere from 3-10+ takes of vocals, all edited together syllable by syllable. they are also often doubled or tripled to fill them out, and in many cases these days, they are digitally pitch corrected as well. just accept that NO singer will EVER sound as good live as they do on your CD and get on with your lives.
 
Originally posted by: thomsbrain
freddie rarely sang the high parts anyway. the drummer sang the high harmonies and such. and if you watched the concert, you probably saw him singing away, behind his drum kit.

queen did insert a recording for the "operatic" part of bohemian rhapsody. there really wasn't any way to performance a billion vocal parts with only 4 guys (only one of whom could really sing).

and people, please realize that what you hear on a CD is the swiss-cheese result of anywhere from 3-10+ takes of vocals, all edited together syllable by syllable. they are also often doubled or tripled to fill them out, and in many cases these days, they are digitally pitch corrected as well. just accept that NO singer will EVER sound as good live as they do on your CD and get on with your lives.
Click to expand...


My god man, you're right. I haven't slept in weeks, my cholesterol has sky-rocketed and I've murdered 10-12 immigrants... all because artists don't sound as good live as on a cd. But now I can put it all behind me and get on with my life. Thank you man. You just saved my life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top