live version/studio version

[TAUfanatic]

Do you ever listen to song off of an album and think "hey this is awesome!" and then you hear the live version and its not as good?....

AC/DC is my favorite band and one of the songs that got me into them was hells bells,I listen to the studio version and the song is amazing,but whenever I hear it being played live its just not as good,(the intro is played differently and affects the rest of the song)

so do any of you know songs like that? when the studio verson is better then when its played live?

[TheAnimatorGuy]

All the time I saw lady gaga on Jonathan Ross sounded terrible.

[Yrtnej]

Well, it's because in the studio you get it made perfect, and in real life you get it made... not perfect?

And to answer your second question, practically every song that the band members didn't exploit the ability to have a recording play instead of their instruments.

[Armerad]

I just hate when the crowd cheers in the middle of the song.

[themanthelegend]

Yeah, go see Everlast sometime. He's not that great anyway, but in person- he is absolutely terrible. The only song the crowd still seems to respond to is "Jump" from the House of Pain days.

[TAUfanatic]

At 7/3/09 04:27 PM, Yrtnej wrote: Well, it's because in the studio you get it made perfect, and in real life you get it made... not perfect?

well yes,everyone does studio work.....thing about this song is HOW the song is played,not the sound itself,but that was just my example

And to answer your second question, practically every song that the band members didn't exploit the ability to have a recording play instead of their instruments.

[TheTrooper5]

I prefer live versions, more energy or improvisation.

[Daddy-L-Jackson]

I don't quite understand buying Live singles or live albums, unless it has videos of the performer in concert. Just see them live...

[GiantDouche]

Except for Dragonforce. They are amazing live.

[Stretchysumo]

I saw blue oyster cult last night, and the songs sounded horrible compared to the studio versions.

[AlexCo]

Studio Version = Well Mixed and Mastered to Perfection. The Recordings are done over and over again until they are perfect.

Live Version = Not Mastered and with it being one shot, Theres more room for mistakes and hella more pressure.

[evil-clown-12]

A band will always sound bad on a live recording because the quality is always shite. Try actually seeing them live and you'll find that they will actually sound quite good.

[EgoistXIV]

I think Mr. Brownstone by Guns N' Roses @ the Ritz, '88 is better than the studio version.

[1Tyla1]

Studio albums are toyed about with and rehearsed several times, until you get "perfection" in the eyes of the mixer and the artist.

Live is different, it's a one-shot, everything from the FOH technicians to the communication between band members and the supply technicians is there, meaning that it might not be as "tip-top" as you want it off a sound recording through a piece of equipment for that, but depending on who's on the mechanics, who's playing (as in, how talented is the band) and how well they know each other, you can have a really awesome gig (let's face it, anyone who intends to put volumes as high as you would at a gig will either be deaf because of the room size, would be stopped by the police or wouldnt have the equipment to even touch gig quality talking in studio).

Just your local ignorant teenager's opinion.

[themanthelegend]

At 7/3/09 04:58 PM, Stretchysumo wrote: I saw blue oyster cult last night, and the songs sounded horrible compared to the studio versions.

That's because they aren't the same. BOC used to have amazing live shows. I by far prefer listening to live recordings from the 80's era over their studio tracks.

[1Tyla1]

At 7/3/09 05:11 PM, 1Tyla1 wrote: Snip

Missed out, or you'll get a shit gig because the musicians aren't talented, the communication between engineers and musicians is bad or the engineers aren't up to the job.

[TimeforplanB]

At 7/3/09 04:54 PM, GiantDouche wrote: Except for Dragonforce. They are amazing live.

I hope that's sarcasm.

[yurgenburgen]

There are a number of reasons for this. One is that when something is recorded live, the band have had time to rest beforehand and they can make the song sound perfect. When they're performing live, they've probably played a few songs already and are a bit tired from it.

When we're talking about typical pop shite like Lady Gaga, The Ting Tings, etc. It's inevitable for them to sound shit live because when they're in the studio they have all kinds of effects and whatever put on their voices to make them sound better, and also because since they're not really genuine musicians anyway they don't have the energy to play live.

[CryogenChaos]

Damon Albarn does NOT sound very good live, especially whilst singing Gorillaz songs. Like, Feel Good Inc. live is spectacular except for the singing. It's like his heart isn't even in it.