Bands you like better live

tylerdrummer · Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:10 pm Post subject:

a good show is someone who can entertain by playing good, adding maybe a few things, and can get the crowd going and throw a show

gav · Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:02 am Post subject:

a good show is one where the band can actually play well, but the best shows (from an audience perspective) are the ones where the band plays the songs i like best, have entertaining things to say and do in and between songs (i´ll never forget the aquabats live) and perhaps throw in an entertaining cover (wheatus covering 99 problems for example). also, the longer the better, i heard manowar are planning to beat their own record 5 hour set soon, i´d love to be at that show...
_________________
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can’t be taken on its own merits

styles2281 · Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:18 am Post subject:

Longer is not always better. I can't think of any band I want to see for more than 3 hours. Too loud, and there's no one's music I can listen to for more than 3 hours straight (yes, that includes Rush). People can get worn out listening to that. You want to give them JUST enough to want them craving more next time. If you over stuff them, they may not come back next time, because they might still be full.
_________________
"I'm not dumb, I just have a command of thoroughly useless information" - Calvin of Bill Waterson's "Calvin and Hobbes"

nirvanaautopilot · Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:20 am Post subject:

I would have to say my opinion of a good show depends on the place that I'm at. Basically, I judge my concerts on crowd, performance, and overall feeling.

Take, for example, a ballroom or smaller indoor venue. There are quite a few in the NY/NJ area, and I've seen many bands at this kind of venue. The concerts here tend to be made up of much more dedicated fans, and there is usually much less put into the live show (lights, etc.) Either way, these shows feel more personal and tend to be some of my favorite performances.

A medium sized outdoor venue, typically an amphitheater, allows for a completely different crowd. I've seen Rush, Pearl Jam, STP, and a few more at this kind of venue. The live shows tend to be bigger, with more stage production and such, but the crowds can vary. Still, seeing a band like Rush at a place like that is fantastic.

A large arena, like MSG, is where the band really shines. The stage production is great, the crowds are generally good, and the band always plays their heart out.

Festivals are definitely the biggest variable for me. I've only been to three, but they've all been different.

I actually don't have much time to finish this, I'm going to see Bruce Springsteen in a little while hahaha. I'll edit this later. [/b]

tylerdrummer · Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:37 pm Post subject:

the only thing i dont like about long concerts is,
4 hours, 2 1/2 of that is 3 bands and the other is main.
i liked some of the openers and you scream and sing and such, and man by the time the main band starts, you cant talk and screaming makes your thoat feel like its bleeding and such. but it is alot better then like an hour show, id rather not talk for a day, then spend 30-60 bucks for an hour show

gav · Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:49 pm Post subject:

i could listen to quite a few bands for more than 3 hours straight, i was going for a 'value for money' approach there. i also prefer smaller venues where i can better see what's going on, i much prefer it to watching a live band on the projected screen behind them as they perform
_________________
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can’t be taken on its own merits

CAPTORofSIN · Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:01 pm Post subject:

Now that we've established what a "good" show is from an attendee perspective. How about from a musician's point of view.

What would you say promotes a "good" show when you're the performer?
_________________
Candy - taste like chicken, if chicken was a candy.

phantompong · Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:22 pm Post subject:

kuniggety · Lion Joined: 09 Oct 2006 Posts: 906 Location: Okinawa

Re: Openings acts. 4 or 5 years ago I saw Metallica with Godsmack opening for them. Godsmack did a pretty *Holy Censor, Batman* good job as an opening band. They performed with a helluva lot of energy and it was a good performance.

There are bands that I'd want to sit through a 3 hour set for, but I'd have to be there with friends. That isn't someting that I'd want to be packed in with people for right in front of stage but kicking back and chilling and listening.
_________________
AeonScape MySpace Music
AeonScape Official Website
daddy-o to be

tylerdrummer · Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:11 pm Post subject:

my brother went to the godsmak metaalica concert,
the last one i saw was Black Tide, The Confession, and Operator, with Avenged sevenfold main.
they played in a ballroom so it was pretty packed, and i was there with 4 other people, and from 7-12(4-12 if you count standing outside) it was one heck of a show, black tide wasn't good, then the confession came on and could get the crowd going, and then Operator came on and did a cover of walk and were a really good opener.
them and Rise Against have done really good openers for bands

sbowman128675 · Lion King Joined: 16 Dec 2006 Posts: 1072

one band i hope we can all agree on that rock live is FANTOMAS!!
_________________

MY CURRENT SET UP, SONOR FORCE 3007 IN BLACK MIDNIGHT FADE LIMITED EDITION
SABIAn Cymbals- 17,19" aaxplosion crashes
16" AAX stage crash
16" AA medium crash
14" AAX stage hats
22" AAX metal ride

bytor · Admin Joined: 12 Aug 2003 Posts: 5306 Location: Kansas

I could easily sit through a show exceeding 3 hours if it was a legendary band that I really like, such as Rush or Jethro Tull, and they were playing a lot of older, classic material. That would be a treat. In fact, I saw Rush play for 3 hours without an opening act back in 2004, and I could have easily listened for another hour or so.