Best Pink Floyd album, plus a bonus question

[PhyloeBedoe]

First off, which Pink Floyd album is the best? The band has so many eras, the answer isn’t simple, and neither is my answer simple. But I’ll give it a crack.

In their early period, I really like Meddle.
In their middle period, I think I’d have to go with Wish You Were Here.
In their later years (which to me, is the time period where Roger left Pink Floyd) I’d say my fave is Roger’s “Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking. I definitely put a lot of time into the Pink Floyd reboot sans Roger, but they never seemed to rise to either Roger’s PACOH or Amused To Death.

Which brings me to my other question: What the **** has happened to the AOTF? And where did everyone go, and why? I saw a few events run together that may be responsible, and while I see them being somewhat relevant, I still fail to understand why everyone ****ed off.

First major event, Andy died. Maybe that was all it took, because it was a major shockwave. Around the same time, some people claimed Peegs started cracking down around here, on anti Crean posts....but then he leaves! He’s long gone. They’re both long gone. So I’m not buying the Peegs excuse. You can’t blame it on the mods. I doubt there are any left. In between all that, there might be two of you still grumbling about Topic View or some dumb shit like that. Then Trump happens. Not sure what to say about that, but if that really caused people to go elsewhere, then all i can say is, “you’re a snowflake”.

This place used to be a helluva laugh and occasionally a good read. I guess wish you were here was my sentimental vote overall.

One extra credit question: What happened to HoosierGrandaddy? He might’ve been the only one who really embodied the spirit of this place. Maybe this is all his fault.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

First off, which Pink Floyd album is the best? The band has so many eras, the answer isn’t simple, and neither is my answer simple. But I’ll give it a crack.

In their early period, I really like Meddle.
In their middle period, I think I’d have to go with Wish You Were Here.
In their later years (which to me, is the time period where Roger left Pink Floyd) I’d say my fave is Roger’s “Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking. I definitely put a lot of time into the Pink Floyd reboot sans Roger, but they never seemed to rise to either Roger’s PACOH or Amused To Death.

Which brings me to my other question: What the **** has happened to the AOTF? And where did everyone go, and why? I saw a few events run together that may be responsible, and while I see them being somewhat relevant, I still fail to understand why everyone ****ed off.

First major event, Andy died. Maybe that was all it took, because it was a major shockwave. Around the same time, some people claimed Peegs started cracking down around here, on anti Crean posts....but then he leaves! He’s long gone. They’re both long gone. So I’m not buying the Peegs excuse. You can’t blame it on the mods. I doubt there are any left. In between all that, there might be two of you still grumbling about Topic View or some dumb shit like that. Then Trump happens. Not sure what to say about that, but if that really caused people to go elsewhere, then all i can say is, “you’re a snowflake”.

This place used to be a helluva laugh and occasionally a good read. I guess wish you were here was my sentimental vote overall.

One extra credit question: What happened to HoosierGrandaddy? He might’ve been the only one who really embodied the spirit of this place. Maybe this is all his fault.

Andy was the only one who keep the regulars from eating each other.

The Crean Thing drove some to another bar, followed by the Peegs Exit, which wrecked the sense of community.

Mostly the Crean thing.

He was really, ummm, “unpopular”

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

It doesn't have any of the best songs, but the very best album is Animals.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Which brings me to my other question: What the **** has happened to the AOTF? And where did everyone go, and why? I saw a few events run together that may be responsible, and while I see them being somewhat relevant, I still fail to understand why everyone ****ed off.

We left because of you.

 

[PhyloeBedoe]

We left because of you.

Oh how I wish that were true.

 

[Hank Reardon]

Animals is the correct answer, though I'd not argue with anyone suggesting Wish You Were Here.

Oddly, I always like listening to The Final Cut, though I'd never suggest that it was a good album.

 

[burnthemallralphie]

Animals is the answer. For me, there are two albums I can listen to over and over again. Physical Graffiti and Animals. I am more of a Gilmour fan than Waters, and Gilmour just makes my ears happy on Animals.

I will try and post here more often, but MTIOTF pretty much summed up why I left, so no need to go on about my lack of involvement.

 

[hookyIU1990]

Animals & Wish You Were Here are too close to call for me.

I have an affinity to Ummagumma too, but not enough to call it their best album.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Animals is the answer. For me, there are two albums I can listen to over and over again. Physical Graffiti and Animals. I am more of a Gilmour fan than Waters, and Gilmour just makes my ears happy on Animals.

I will try and post here more often, but MTIOTF pretty much summed up why I left, so no need to go on about my lack of involvement.

We're pretty sure he wasn't complaining about YOUR absence.

(Read this on Insult Friday - I'm pretty busy and may not be back.)

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Rutgers free football board is a great OT board when not fball season.

many more diversified conversations than here.

by combining with the football traffic, they achieve a critical mass of views and posts that they get a lot of responses on a lot of varied topics.

other than mid August thru Nov, i wouldn't mind seeing this site combine the free football, OT, and Cooler, forums.

football topics would get more views and posts, OT posts would get enough traffic/views to sustain them, and political posts would get somebody besides the party sock puppets weighing in.

as for Pink Floyd, don't love any their studio albums, even though they are one of my all time fav bands.

absolutely love Echos, Us & Them, Comfortably Numb, and like many others though.

 

[T.M.P.]

First off, which Pink Floyd album is the best? The band has so many eras, the answer isn’t simple, and neither is my answer simple. But I’ll give it a crack.

In their early period, I really like Meddle.
In their middle period, I think I’d have to go with Wish You Were Here.
In their later years (which to me, is the time period where Roger left Pink Floyd) I’d say my fave is Roger’s “Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking. I definitely put a lot of time into the Pink Floyd reboot sans Roger, but they never seemed to rise to either Roger’s PACOH or Amused To Death.

Which brings me to my other question: What the **** has happened to the AOTF? And where did everyone go, and why? I saw a few events run together that may be responsible, and while I see them being somewhat relevant, I still fail to understand why everyone ****ed off.

First major event, Andy died. Maybe that was all it took, because it was a major shockwave. Around the same time, some people claimed Peegs started cracking down around here, on anti Crean posts....but then he leaves! He’s long gone. They’re both long gone. So I’m not buying the Peegs excuse. You can’t blame it on the mods. I doubt there are any left. In between all that, there might be two of you still grumbling about Topic View or some dumb shit like that. Then Trump happens. Not sure what to say about that, but if that really caused people to go elsewhere, then all i can say is, “you’re a snowflake”.

This place used to be a helluva laugh and occasionally a good read. I guess wish you were here was my sentimental vote overall.

One extra credit question: What happened to HoosierGrandaddy? He might’ve been the only one who really embodied the spirit of this place. Maybe this is all his fault.

Dark Side of the Moon is a perfect album, technically it's probably the best. Animals is great for background music Meddle is my favorite, and the only one I still listen to, the rest have been overplayed.

Anything pre Gilmour is a totally different band, and anything without Gilmour (ie Roger Waters band) sounds like a really bad Floyd cover band. I can tell Waters' lack of finesse, nuance and professionalism in his arrangements was exactly why him and Gilmour didn't get along. He's a bit of a hack. One time I heard him he had a guy with a hillbilly accent singing backup and off key. It was absolutely horrendous. I've heard better Floyd covers in bars..

 

[T.M.P.]

as for Pink Floyd, don't love any their studio albums.

lol .. Live albums are in a majority cleaned up and/or have parts completely redone in a studio. Many, except for fan made bootlegs, hardly have any live parts at all except the "Hello Cleveland" part and crowd noise and have been slowed down or sped up. Most rock bands are horrible live.

There's a few groups who won't allow studio clean up and record raw, but they are the exception, not the rule. Though not near as bad as Zeppelin, Floyd couldn't replicate many songs live and did simplified versions of them.

Live concerts, especially those in buildings not made for acoustics are notoriously horrible in sound quality. Studio albums capture better than anything but a live performance in a perfect environment.

Floyd's genius was in a studio behind a mixing board. Your post makes me laugh at your general ignorance of musical recording.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

lol .. Live albums are in a majority cleaned up and/or have parts completely redone in a studio. Many, except for fan made bootlegs, hardly have any live parts at all except the "Hello Cleveland" part and crowd noise and have been slowed down or sped up. Most rock bands are horrible live.

There's a few groups who won't allow studio clean up and record raw, but they are the exception, not the rule. Though not near as bad as Zeppelin, Floyd couldn't replicate many songs live and did simplified versions of them.

Live concerts, especially those in buildings not made for acoustics are notoriously horrible in sound quality. Studio albums capture better than anything but a live performance in a perfect environment.

Floyd's genius was in a studio behind a mixing board. Your post makes me laugh at your general ignorance of musical recording.

sorry you never got to attend many live concerts in your day.

 

[T.M.P.]

sorry you never got to attend many live concerts in your day.

lol ........ assuming makes you an ass. I can't believe people still think live albums are recorded live. That's some ignorant shit dude..

Sorry you're tone deaf and don't understand how sound or recording works. Must be a bitch ..

"Live recordings" ... lmao .. if ever an oxymoron existed.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

lol ........ assuming makes you an ass. I can't believe people still think live albums are recorded live. That's some ignorant shit dude..

Sorry you're tone deaf and don't understand how sound or recording works. Must be a bitch ..

"Live recordings" ... lmao .. if ever an oxymoron existed.

Some artists know when to leave well enough alone. Prine, I think, doesn't clean up his live tracks much (although he does mix and match the best takes on each song from an entire tour). Greg Brown, too. IIRC, Paul Butterfield was the same.

But Pink Floyd? Yeah, no such thing as live for them.

 

[T.M.P.]

Some artists know when to leave well enough alone. Prine, I think, doesn't clean up his live tracks much (although he does mix and match the best takes on each song from an entire tour). Greg Brown, too. IIRC, Paul Butterfield was the same.

But Pink Floyd? Yeah, no such thing as live for them.

It is though the exception, not the rule. Also, mixing from different shows is very common as well..

Neither did Dead, after Europe 72 sounding like a chipmunk version of them. A majority of that album was cleaned up and redone in studio, It's more studio than live. Listen to 100 Year Hall, it used some of the same recordings. Major difference.

Most live albums have both the vocals and guitar parts redone in studio. Plus, rock groups are notoriously bad live. Least professional of any genre. They tend to sound like shit. I know no one wants to hear that or admit it, but they do.

Concerts are for performance, not sound quality. Buildings and outdoor arenas have really bad sound characteristics. Exception to that is places built for sound with perfect acoustics.

Live shows from a purely musical perspective are very overrated and live recordings especially. Unless you like your favorite group sounding like hacks playing in a garage.

I saw SRV at Foellinger, his sound man was a pro. Very few speakers. Perfect clarity, no echo, no distortion caused by building structure. They even walled off the drums so they weren't overwhelming.

 

[Hank Reardon]

The Who Live at Leeds is one of the best live albums ever recorded. And I doubt it was cleaned up much, raw as it sounds. Every live recording if the Stones I ever heard was rubbish. Mostly because Jagger sings worse than me.

 

[T.M.P.]

The Who Live at Leeds is one of the best live albums ever recorded. And I doubt it was cleaned up much, raw as it sounds. Every live recording if the Stones I ever heard was rubbish. Mostly because Jagger sings worse than me.

Compare it to the bootleg version and you'll notice all the clean up. IIRC same source. Plus, if on CD, it's probably been digitally remastered.

You can also make a recording sound raw on a mixing board, by how and where it's recorded, or just lower the quality by allowing noise, echo and distorted tones...

The "music is better live" has nothing to do with sound quality. It was a lie and everyone believed it because most people don't know the difference. Live music is fun because it's a social event. There's a few exceptions, where live is better than studio, but they are exceptions. Improv and jam bands being a good example.

Almost as big a lie as digital sounds better than analog. It doesn't.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Compare it to the bootleg version and you'll notice all the clean up.

When I was in college, bootleg DMB were all the rage, because they used to let random people plug into their setup and record when MP3s were just taking off. You could definitely tell the difference between them and a "live" album. Or, for that matter, between the live tracks on Recently and on future albums after they got big. All Along the Watchtower and Warehouse sound like shit on that album, but they are actually two of my favorite tracks, because they are so raw. Pretty much the only thing good about DMB was the live aspect, and that's why every offering after they made it deserves nothing more than a giant wanking motion.

 

[T.M.P.]

When I was in college, bootleg DMB were all the rage, because they used to let random people plug into their setup and record when MP3s were just taking off. You could definitely tell the difference between them and a "live" album. Or, for that matter, between the live tracks on Recently and on future albums after they got big. All Along the Watchtower and Warehouse sound like shit on that album, but they are actually two of my favorite tracks, because they are so raw. Pretty much the only thing good about DMB was the live aspect, and that's why every offering after they made it deserves nothing more than a giant wanking motion.

I'm not a fan of pristine tone and layering and prefer a rawler sound also. Floyd being the exception because they were masters of layering and pristine tone.

fwiw - You can get the same effect by having the drummer play loosey goosey in time and having the performers being recorded in the same room on the same track, and not in isolated booths separately pumping directly to a single track .

Stones recorded parts in a long stone hallway (Exiles) to capture that dynamic. Echo, bad timing, distorted tones, mixing of notes, and brown noise = raw.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I'm not a fan of pristine tone and layering and prefer a rawler sound also. Floyd being the exception because they were masters of layering and pristine tone.

fwiw - You can get the same effect by having the drummer play loosey goosey in time and having the performers being recorded in the same room on the same track, and not in isolated booths separately pumping directly to a single track .

Stones recorded parts in a long stone hallway (Exiles) to capture that dynamic. Echo, bad timing, distorted tones, and brown noise = raw.

You should check out Steve Goodman's The Easter Tapes. It's like a live-studio hybrid in that it was recorded in a radio studio. But in feel, it's very raw. Almost no editing at all. Basically, they just hit "Record" when he started and hit "Stop" when he was done.

 

[T.M.P.]

You should check out Steve Goodman's The Easter Tapes. It's like a live-studio hybrid in that it was recorded in a radio studio. But in feel, it's very raw. Almost no editing at all. Basically, they just hit "Record" when he started and hit "Stop" when he was done.

I'm a Goodman fan. It's been awhile but I've heard it and a revisit sounds good. That style of music, ie real country, and other acoustic folk and country based music is generally recorded in a single room and not in isolation booths and doesn't tend to use many effects or layers. They like the sounds to breathe and meld together, it's warmer and rawer.

Dylan was another that recorded in that method. Everyone in the same room, one take, that's it, done. Gilmour on the other hand would record things 100 times seeking perfection. It shows.. Page was a layer freak. He layered 7 to 9 guitars on Going to Cali, just to get the tone he wanted.. John Paul layered 2 to 3 mando parts. No wonder they sounded like shit live.

On Bron Yr Aur he flipped the tape, listened to it backwards, transcribed it to staff and then played and recorded it note for note backwards, and then flipped it again to match the original recording. So in effect where a note normally starts loud, breathes a bit acoustically and then dies, on that record they basically die in the middle. If that makes sense .... they gain and lose resonance at the same time.

The opposite of that was Hey Hey What Can I Do where he stuck a microphone from a simple tape player inside the guitar to record the guitar part, the rest was added later.

btw - Dylan's timing is atrocious, he speeds up and slows down all the time. Which is also a common thing with my friends who are singers and songwriters more than musicians. They say it's for more emotional emphasis. We say it's because their timing sucks balls .. and they can't sing and count at the same time.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I'm a Goodman fan. It's been awhile but I've heard it and a revisit sounds good. That style of music, ie real country, and other acoustic folk and country based music is generally recorded in a single room and not in isolation booths and doesn't tend to use many effects or layers. They like the sounds to breathe and meld together, it's warmer and rawer.

Dylan was another that recorded in that method. Everyone in the same room, one take, that's it, done. Gilmour on the other hand would record things 100 times seeking perfection. It shows.. Page was a layer freak. He layered 7 to 9 guitars on Going to Cali, just to get the tone he wanted.. John Paul layered 2 to 3 mando parts. No wonder they sounded like shit live.

On Bron Yr Aur he flipped the tape, listened to it backwards, transposed it to staff and then played and recorded it note for note backwards, and then flipped it again to match the original recording. So, in effect where a note normally starts loud, breathes a bit acoustically and then dies, on that record they basically die in the middle. If that makes sense ....

The opposite of that was Hey Hey What Can I Do where he stuck a microphone from a simple tape player inside the guitar to record the guitar part, the rest was added later.

btw - Dylan's timing is atrocious, he speeds up and slows down all the time. Which is also a common thing with my friends who are singers and songwriters more than musicians. They say it's for more emotional emphasis. We say it's because their timing sucks balls ..

Also revisit "No Big Surprise." It's not all live, but the live tracks it has are classic Goodman, and no cleaning up at all. Just a guy and a guitar and a beer.

 

[PhyloeBedoe]

I'm a Goodman fan. It's been awhile but I've heard it and a revisit sounds good. That style of music, ie real country, and other acoustic folk and country based music is generally recorded in a single room and not in isolation booths and doesn't tend to use many effects or layers. They like the sounds to breathe and meld together, it's warmer and rawer.

Dylan was another that recorded in that method. Everyone in the same room, one take, that's it, done. Gilmour on the other hand would record things 100 times seeking perfection. It shows.. Page was a layer freak. He layered 7 to 9 guitars on Going to Cali, just to get the tone he wanted.. John Paul layered 2 to 3 mando parts. No wonder they sounded like shit live.

On Bron Yr Aur he flipped the tape, listened to it backwards, transcribed it to staff and then played and recorded it note for note backwards, and then flipped it again to match the original recording. So in effect where a note normally starts loud, breathes a bit acoustically and then dies, on that record they basically die in the middle. If that makes sense .... they gain and lose resonance at the same time.

The opposite of that was Hey Hey What Can I Do where he stuck a microphone from a simple tape player inside the guitar to record the guitar part, the rest was added later.

btw - Dylan's timing is atrocious, he speeds up and slows down all the time. Which is also a common thing with my friends who are singers and songwriters more than musicians. They say it's for more emotional emphasis. We say it's because their timing sucks balls .. and they can't sing and count at the same time.

I didn't know that about Bron Yr Aur. That is really cool, and no small thing at all to learn and do. You answered a question I didn't know I had there. Now I know why it sounds the way it does.

 

[T.M.P.]

I didn't know that about Bron Yr Aur. That is really cool, and no small thing at all to learn and do. You answered a question I didn't know I had there. Now I know why it sounds the way it does.

Yea most think it's a 12 string with some kind of effect like a univibe or something. It's not, it's just his Martin D28 doubled.

 

[PhyloeBedoe]

Yea most think it's a 12 string with some kind of effect like a univibe or something. It's not, it's just his Martin D28 doubled.

While I would've been guessing, I would've guessed something similar. All the people are right when they say there's no discernible difference between recording to 2" or to digital. But one thing im not sure you can do is record backwards like you can on 2". I don't think anyway.

(And I do believe there are major advantages to using tape still. My opinion...)

 

[T.M.P.]

While I would've been guessing, I would've guessed something similar. All the people are right when they say there's no discernible difference between recording to 2" or to digital. But one thing im not sure you can do is record backwards like you can on 2". I don't think anyway.

(And I do believe there are major advantages to using tape still. My opinion...)

Absolutely, especially for styles of music that are not electronically based. Country, most classic rock, blues, jazz classical, all sound better on tape. I can see why hip hop performers and such like digital better. Tape just sounds more organic and warmer for lack of a better description.

 

[PhyloeBedoe]

Absolutely, especially for styles of music that are not electronically based. Country, most classic rock, blues, jazz classical, all sound better on tape. I can see why hip hop performers and such like digital better. It just sounds more organic and warmer for lack of a better description.

Agreed. It maybe more importantly, it makes players PERFORM as a group, and not piece it together like cowards and fakers. Mistakes are good, but some don't like them. They can't handle them. (Not talking about major mistakes....but even then, not bad.) Tape is good for that kind of art.

Hip hop can have the "in the box" music approach. I like hip hop, but we won't be pining for their process in 30 years, wondering "how did they do it?"

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

“What time is it” versus “how to build a watch”

 

[T.M.P.]

“What time is it” versus “how to build a watch”

Some people feel the rain, others just get wet.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

lol ........ assuming makes you an ass. I can't believe people still think live albums are recorded live. That's some ignorant shit dude..

Sorry you're tone deaf and don't understand how sound or recording works. Must be a bitch ..

"Live recordings" ... lmao .. if ever an oxymoron existed.

your total and complete ignorance regarding music is an embarrassment to you.

many bands were/are flat out absolutely great live, and the idea that many live albums have been enhanced is totally irrelevant to that. (obviously you've either seen very few good bands live, or have some grudge that's eating you up).

for any band to play it so safe as to avoid any mistakes, would do a huge disservice to the music, and never let the artists display their true potential.

that said, one of, if not "the" favorite live album of mine is Dire Straits Alchemy. Knopfler and the entire band play great throughout.

stated in the liner notes of that double album is that all songs are "as recorded live", with no fixes.

that said, they did have a hiccup at a crucial point in one of my favorite songs that i desperately wish they had fixed. (most probably didn't notice or care, i did).

as for Pink Floyd, while production and recording techniques are a huge part of what they do, i have no doubt they are/were great musicians live as well.

if their creative/musical OCD drove them to want to enhance or fix anything and everything they did live for later release, that's doesn't mean they weren't great live as well.

when Napster was "Napster", one of it's great benefits was all the great live bootleg stuff on there, (multiple versions of every song you ever wanted to hear live, of most well known acts), most of which sounded great and reinforced their ability to play live, not the other way around.

as for coloring the sound. coloring the sound is every bit as much of rock music as timing and pitch and creative and technical ability.

sorry bout whatever butt hurt the rock world put on you, but get over it dude, it makes you look ignorant and childish.
-----------------------------------------------------


this video of SOS has been remixed for 5.1, but is "as recorded live", no fixes, as to the musicianship.

these guys aren't the only ones who could play live.

i saw many bands absolutely kill it live back in the day, including many the musical snobbery gestapo might not think of as technical perfectionists.

 

[T.M.P.]

your total and complete ignorance regarding music is an embarrassment to you.

many bands were/are flat out absolutely great live, and the idea that many live albums have been enhanced is totally irrelevant to that. (obviously you've either seen very few good bands live, or have some grudge that's eating you up).

for any band to play it so safe as to avoid any mistakes, would do a huge disservice to the music, and never let the artists display their true potential.

that said, one of, if not "the" favorite live album of mine is Dire Straits Alchemy. Knopfler and the entire band play great throughout.

stated in the liner notes of that double album is that all songs are "as recorded live", with no fixes.

that said, they did have a hiccup at a crucial point in one of my favorite songs that i desperately wish they had fixed. (most probably didn't notice or care, i did).

as for Pink Floyd, while production and recording techniques are a huge part of what they do, i have no doubt they are/were great musicians live as well.

if their creative/musical OCD drove them to want to enhance or fix anything and everything they did live for later release, that's doesn't mean they weren't great live as well.

when Napster was "Napster", one of it's great benefits was all the great live bootleg stuff on there, (multiple versions of every song you ever wanted to hear live, of most well known acts), most of which sounded great and reinforced their ability to play live, not the other way around.

as for coloring the sound. coloring the sound is every bit as much of rock music as timing and pitch and creative and technical ability.

sorry bout whatever butt hurt the rock world put on you, but get over it dude, it makes you look ignorant and childish.
-----------------------------------------------------


this video of SOS has been remixed for 5.1, but is "as recorded live", no fixes, as to the musicianship.

these guys aren't the only ones who could play live.

i saw many bands absolutely kill it live back in the day, including many the musical snobbery gestapo might not think of as technical perfectionists.

View embedded media

I'm not reading your ignorant gibberish, dude. You're a noted compulsive idiot with very little to offer. Sorry to waste the 3 hours it took you to write that word salad, but I couldn't give a flying f*ck what you have to say and I'm not wading through that sh*it filled abomination.

So ..........

Go back to the third grade, learn sentence structure, paragraphs, and do get your ears checked.

Peace ..

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

Some people feel the rain, others just get wet.

 

[T.M.P.]

go dry off...

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

your total and complete ignorance regarding music is an embarrassment to you.

many bands were/are flat out absolutely great live, and the idea that many live albums have been enhanced is totally irrelevant to that. (obviously you've either seen very few good bands live, or have some grudge that's eating you up).

for any band to play it so safe as to avoid any mistakes, would do a huge disservice to the music, and never let the artists display their true potential.

that said, one of, if not "the" favorite live album of mine is Dire Straits Alchemy. Knopfler and the entire band play great throughout.

stated in the liner notes of that double album is that all songs are "as recorded live", with no fixes.

that said, they did have a hiccup at a crucial point in one of my favorite songs that i desperately wish they had fixed. (most probably didn't notice or care, i did).

as for Pink Floyd, while production and recording techniques are a huge part of what they do, i have no doubt they are/were great musicians live as well.

if their creative/musical OCD drove them to want to enhance or fix anything and everything they did live for later release, that's doesn't mean they weren't great live as well.

when Napster was "Napster", one of it's great benefits was all the great live bootleg stuff on there, (multiple versions of every song you ever wanted to hear live, of most well known acts), most of which sounded great and reinforced their ability to play live, not the other way around.

as for coloring the sound. coloring the sound is every bit as much of rock music as timing and pitch and creative and technical ability.

sorry bout whatever butt hurt the rock world put on you, but get over it dude, it makes you look ignorant and childish.
-----------------------------------------------------


this video of SOS has been remixed for 5.1, but is "as recorded live", no fixes, as to the musicianship.

these guys aren't the only ones who could play live.

i saw many bands absolutely kill it live back in the day, including many the musical snobbery gestapo might not think of as technical perfectionists.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

go dry off...

I’m feeling wet

 

[UncleMark]

All the technical stuff aside, what I remember most from back in the day was being astonished at how closely the live performances of my two favorite bands -- Yes and ELP -- hewed to the studio recordings. And I saw both multiple times. YesSongs may be drastically cleaned up or altered, but my memory of the live performances of the same material is little different.

 

[Hank Reardon]

All the technical stuff aside, what I remember most from back in the day was being astonished at how closely the live performances of my two favorite bands -- Yes and ELP -- hewed to the studio recordings. And I saw both multiple times. YesSongs may be drastically cleaned up or altered, but my memory of the live performances of the same material is little different.

I haven';t been to a live show in many years, mostly as I choose to save what's left of may remaining hearing to more important things. But from my youthful recollections I don't think one gets a very good sense of live music quality at an actual concert. At least not a major rock show. When you're there it's all energy, drugs, and chicks. I'd wager to say that a few shows I came out of thinking were awesome would likely sound like shit if I heard a recording later.

But then like I said, I think it's been 30 years since I've been to a true concert. I want to say Alice Cooper sometime in the late 80's, or Guns 'n Roses/Aerosmith during the same period.

And I think Aeorsmith was clean then, so I'm sure they sucked.

 

[burnthemallralphie]

Pearl Jam releases a live album of every single concert, warts and all. And there are a lot of warts. I have recordings of several of their shows, and I have grown to even appreciate the mistakes. Hell, I cannot even listen to the studio version of "Evenflow" anymore. That song has evolved from 1991 to now, and the live version (s) have replaced the studip in my head.

But Pearl Jam is essentially a garage band, it works for them.