A friend of mine introduced me to the band Pure Bathing Culture. I enjoyed their first record quite a bit, but until I saw them live, I was pretty on the fence about them. But they totally slayed it live. And now I'm a pretty hardcore fan of theirs. Almost every smaller local band has this issue (can't afford a good studio / producer / et cetera), but even with a great producer on their last album, their live set is better than anything they do in the studio by a mile. Of course, they're ridiculously good live, so there's that.
There are a lot of bands like this though, right? And a lot that are great in the studio but trite on a stage (singer songwriter types tend to fall in this category too often). _________________ follow me on the bandcamp.
Saw Dan Deacon again for the first time in years, and he definitely fits the profile of artists who are on a different level live than on record. And as much as I love Sigur Ros' records, they're just incomparable live. _________________ http://jonnyleather.com
The Cure are terrific live and I am sure Pink Floyd are better live though I have never seen them and now am very unlikely to. Like never. But I have seen the Australian Pink Floyd Show and they are ace. I am just getting into the Grateful Dead and I think I prefer their rambling live albums (they did have a load) to their studio work. But that is fine too. Peter Frampton is better live too.
Their albums ar kinda mehhh and they sound nothing like their live sound!
See their performance at Glastonbury as example, with the song 'Satisfied' as a high point.
and of course the holy grail of live bands who are better live than in the studio:
Grateful Dead
The Who is fantastic live - if one hasn't heard Live at Leeds, they should do so right now.
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.
Also, if you're one who isn't into Dream Theater but like prog rock/metal, see them live, they are brilliant so long as they aren't playing that horrendous Astonishing record. Fucking bore. However their 2012 show was one of the best I've ever seen and it was brilliant. _________________ Attention all planets of the solar federation: We have assumed control.
I feel like any artist that adds a huge visual element to their live performances gets a big plus in my eyes. A sort of insight into what the album represents visually for the artist and I dig that. Daft Punk are a good example. _________________ overall / 2017 / spotify
The Cure are terrific live and I am sure Pink Floyd are better live though I have never seen them and now am very unlikely to. Like never. But I have seen the Australian Pink Floyd Show and they are ace. I am just getting into the Grateful Dead and I think I prefer their rambling live albums (they did have a load) to their studio work. But that is fine too. Peter Frampton is better live too.
Pink Floyd are brilliant live. But they're much better in the studio.
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
craola
meccalecca
CharlieBarley
JOSweetHeart
AAL2014
Sometype
Daydreamer
