Glastonbury - the king is wearing no clothes ..

I'd wanna go to something like Bloodstock. Too few extreme metal festivals and even less clubs that do any sort of hardcore metal. Annoys me having to be stuck with Indie or lame arse new age rock. Worse still is the R N' B crap that pollutes what seems like ALL bars these days. ******* Rihanna.
 
Britboy doesn't seem to get that music is meant to be live. Music started as live music. A sense of location and event is everything, music works much better live, its just the medium of recorded music now exists and means people can experience stuff easier and also know of music so they can then experience it live.

I know plenty of bands that are better live than on CD (Porcupine Tree, TSO, Anathema, I don't want to list loads of bands). Thats how a band should be, if you don't know bands like that you're into the wrong music or genres... some music is suited for studio recordings and is awful live, but thats because its born with the purpose to be sold as a recorded item, a lot of popular music springs to mind.

Some music has to be live, listening to a band like Godspeed You! Black emperor (or many other post rock type bands) on CD can be quite strange, yet live its a powerful thing....

Whackeygrunt said:
I'd wanna go to something like Bloodstock. Too few extreme metal festivals and even less clubs that do any sort of hardcore metal. Annoys me having to be stuck with Indie or lame arse new age rock. Worse still is the R N' B crap that pollutes what seems like ALL bars these days. ******* Rihanna.
Click to expand...

Bloodstock is great. Its like a European metal festival but in England, love it, went last year after going to Wacken in Germany for 3 years previous, it was hard giving up Wacken but Bloodstock was amazing and was almost like a mini Wacken :)
Plus I feel Bloodstock is the right size.. can't remember the figures but maybe under 10,000 people, whereas I felt Wacken would push it too far if they went over 70,000.
 
Last edited:
britboy4321 said:
If live music sounded as good as recorded music, they woudn't bother with studio time they'd just record a gig.

The fact they spend months in the studio and send THAT out rather than a CD of their live performance means that BE DEFINITION even THEY think it sounds better from a studio than the live thing ... otherwise they wouldn't bother with the expensive old studio malarky at all! :)
Click to expand...

Beep Boop I too am a robot
 
gropingmantis said:
You are so wrong, its not better they are totally different, recorded live music sounds like pants THAT is why they spend so much money on post production and recording studios but ACTUAL live music, live in the room being performed, right here and now, is amazing.
Click to expand...

Not true. Often live music can sound rubbish due to rubbish venue, bad sound man, poor atmosphere, bad gear....

So many variables that can cause a gig to sound like complete rubbish and most of the time it's not because the band sound "pants".

Band actually have to be really tight and reasonably talented to get as far as the studio in the first place. There are very few bands who are signed at the moment right now that weren't tight and at least half decent sounding before hitting the studio, no matter what you think of the quality of said band's music. And there are even less bands that are signed to a major label who fall into that category.
 
explicit4u said:
thread needs more pendulum!

Click to expand...

I love Hold Your Colour but Rob Swire's voice is so grating, both with the weird electronic effect on it and when he does his uncharismatic crowd interaction demonstrated perfectly in this vid.

Also, the pendulum vocal melodies are just cheesy and the lyrics are bad.

He just ruins an otherwise enjoyable band :(
 
Woody__ said:
Not true. Often live music can sound rubbish due to rubbish venue, bad sound man, poor atmosphere, bad gear....

So many variables that can cause a gig to sound like complete rubbish and most of the time it's not because the band sound "pants".

Band actually have to be really tight and reasonably talented to get as far as the studio in the first place. There are very few bands who are signed at the moment right now that weren't tight and at least half decent sounding before hitting the studio, no matter what you think of the quality of said band's music. And there are even less bands that are signed to a major label who fall into that category.
Click to expand...

Yes well I suppose thats probably why I prefer live jazz to say...live "indie"-lets-wear-our-sisters-jeans-and-ride-around-on-fixies-whinging-androgynous-rubbish or whatever passes for R&B these days (whatever happened to proper R&B?).
 
gropingmantis said:
Yes well I suppose thats probably why I prefer live jazz to say...live "indie"-lets-wear-our-sisters-jeans-and-ride-around-on-fixies-whinging-androgynous-rubbish or whatever passes for R&B these days (whatever happened to proper R&B?).
Click to expand...

Come on, a jazz solo is never-ever appropriate :D

Generally speaking, I'm allergic to jazz, although OCUK has proved that I like some niche genres. It's weird how you can just not like things.
 
Woody__ said:
So many variables that can cause a gig to sound like complete rubbish and most of the time it's not because the band sound "pants".
Click to expand...

But that's what makes live music so great... the fact it can be lousy, or fall apart at any moment. Recorded music is, for me anyway, sterile. Always exactly the same. Polished and produced to the point where much of the life is sucked out of it somehow.

Having said that, my current favourite track is this...
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B001ESELNY/?tag=lastfmmp3-21
...and I have yet to find a decent live version on YouTube. So there are always going to be exceptions best experienced via the studio.

Obviously I've bought many albums and tracks over the years, but these days I tend to buy them as a way of saying thanks to the performers rather than to listen to repeatedly. (I always have a backlog of podcasts to listen to, so music has very much taken a back seat).

To get back more on topic, I worked my way through Beyonce's set earlier and while I think her work is totally disposable pop music, there's no denying that was a pretty powerful show she put on. And anyone who can sing that well for so long will always get my respect.

I don't think I was quite a star struck as Jo Whiley and Lauren Laverne though. :-)
 
I've been to quite a few gigs and it's something that I enjoy but I have to admit, I don't really like festivals that much. I find it too much of a 'good' thing. What i mean is, the bands start playing about 11:00 but 8 hours later when the bigger bands start to appear, part of me is past caring. When you see the huge crowds on the TV all jumping up and down it looks great but the reality of that is that you either have to stay there for hours on end or leave the crowd and probably never get anywhere near the stage again. The lack of comfort as well. There's only so many hours I can spend in a field without ever being able to sit down properly that I can enjoy myself for.
 
Last edited:
Oh and whoever posted the Mumford and Sons link cheers, they're awesome live.

Also:

T8cwD.jpg


:D
 
The were first used as basecamp locators, "Guys, if you are near the big ground any time stop by our camp, we are the one with the trollface flag".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom