I'm starting to realize Live At Leeds is the best and most exciting thing The Who did in terms of major releases ever. Now that my Who's Next hard on is gone, albeit a great album and important, just not the Who gold standard. Live At Leeds is purely them in their prime hitting hard. I love that shit.
quote]
The Who- Live at Leeds is undeniably a 10/10. I love it as well.
I know you are a big big fan of Tool. Because of that, I believe, you might find Quadrophenia more enjoyable.
For me, on quadrophenia, the band reaches a whole different level of energy and musicianship (that doesn't sound like the 1960's Who music), it may be more matched to Tool. Not in Roger Daltreys vocals but in Townsends guitar licks and Moons drum playing. The leash is removed.
Just over thinking/guessing. I'm not 100% sure.
Just a opinion/suggestion
Quadrophenia is certainly a great album. I suppose you're right that it could be related to Tool in a way. One of the many albums that directly led to Tool's music being possible. It's probably my favorite Who studio album. _________________ Attention all planets of the solar federation: We have assumed control.
Bands whose best work relied on the benefits of studio technology tend to be better in the studio: Beatles, Beach Boys, 70s Pink Floyd, Steely Dan etc.
The Mahavishnu Orchestra was better live. Unfortunately the only official live album, Between Nothingness and Eternity, is unsatisfying, but I have several bootleg shows. As groundbreaking as Inner Mounting Flame was, the band was constrained by the time limitations of the LP format. In their live sets at the time, the tunes were twice as long -- The live versions of "Noonward Race" were as long as 20 minutes, featuring an blistering guitar-drums duet with McLaughlin and drummer Billy Cobham. Supposedly McLaughlin wanted Columbia to release a 1972 Cleveland show that I have, but they refused.
Overall I think Cannonball Adderley's live albums are better than his studio ones, especially after 1962. Somethin' Else, a studio album, is generally considered his best, but Mercy, Mercy, Mercy!: Live at The Club is often ranked second. (Though it was actually recorded live in the studio, there was an audience and libations were served, so I say it counts.) Jazz Workshop Revisited, which has the original version of "Jive Samba," and Live In San Francisco are two of his better records. He's got a lot of live albums, probably not a coincidence.
Sonny Rollins took two hiatuses from his music career; from when he returned from the second one in 1972 till he retired, he put out 23 albums and practically all of the studio ones range from mediocre to bad. Practically all of the best records were live. Though the quality of his concerts were unpredictable, when he was on, his playing was as good as it ever was. I saw him 5 times, and 3 out of the 5, he was incredible, two of the shows playing encores till he wore the audience out.
Bands whose best work relied on the benefits of studio technology tend to be better in the studio: Beatles, Beach Boys, 70s Pink Floyd, Steely Dan etc.
Hehe I was all fired up from listening to kicking television when I wrote that! Not sure what Seth's excuse is though
In principle though I kind of agree with myself. Live music is more organic and I think the rawness, power and spontaneity enhances pretty much every genre.
I know there will be exceptions: bands so precise and nuanced they need recorded versions (Felt,the Magnetic Fields) and studio auteurs (Prefab Sprout, Trevor Horn's stuff) among them.
In general though I think the best thing in the studio is to capture a live feel a la Rick Rubin. I like this thread as I think great live recordings are, in general, underrated
On a related note: how do people feel about live recordings that have been 'touched up'?
I was listening to hear to a recent Beach Boys one. I thought it was great. Then I read there were several studio overdubs. Felt like I'd been lied to
Is it wrong I laughed at that?
Idk... at some level I agree with this completely (for example I sometimes get bothered by "live" music put over a band playing and the music and video aren't from the same performance) and at another level I think studio work is just as much of an art as playing an instrument (especially in the days of the Beach Boys).
(on another note, I had a type of Beach Bots and thought it a kick ass band name ).
On a related note: how do people feel about live recordings that have been 'touched up'?
I was listening to hear to a recent Beach Boys one. I thought it was great. Then I read there were several studio overdubs. Felt like I'd been lied to
Is it wrong I laughed at that?
Idk... at some level I agree with this completely (for example I sometimes get bothered by "live" music put over a band playing and the music and video aren't from the same performance) and at another level I think studio work is just as much of an art as playing an instrument (especially in the days of the Beach Boys).
(on another note, I had a type of Beach Bots and thought it a kick ass band name ).
The Beach Bots must be the Robot version of the Beach Boys in future. Did you ever see the Robot Simon and Garfunkel thing on Futurama? So good. I was going to post it before but forgot.
That comment about a live Beach Boys performance though was nothing to do with studio wizardry though. I think they auto-tuned some vocals that were off in the live show then put them back in the mix. Oh well, I suppose I enjoyed it enough anyway
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
