What are some bands that sound much better LIVE?
And inversely, what bands suck live?
the grateful dead almost always sounded better live than on their studio albums.
i saw led zeppelin in 1975, the sound sucked and they only played 9 pr 10 songs. they may have been having an off night, but i was very disappointed.
Douglas Says: 01.11.09 at 8:47 am
I’ll have to go with The Ramones. They were always louder, faster, and heavier live.
References :
Hannah Says: 01.11.09 at 8:54 am
Muse are better live
References :
Nana Says: 01.11.09 at 9:36 am
Mindless self Indulgence!
References :
Jacob S Says: 01.11.09 at 10:05 am
Phish and Umphrey’s McGee are amazing live (basically any jam band).
Apparently, Hoobastank is awful live.
References :
Rob Says: 01.11.09 at 10:21 am
Four Year Strong and Set Your Goals sound amazing live. New Found Glory is pretty sick live too.
References :
^^(A)^^ Says: 01.11.09 at 10:43 am
i’m not saying Aerosmith isn’t good in the studio, but they are an amazing live band.
and GNR sucks live. They’re strictly a studio band.
References :
chelleb Says: 01.11.09 at 11:09 am
Guns and Roses was awesome live Axl Rose plays the piano and sings pretty.
REM Awesome Live, Aerosmith Awesome live, Black Crowes first time awesome second time sucked.
References :
^ glen ^ portmanteau ^ Says: 01.11.09 at 11:17 am
The Who
The Dead
Pink Floyd
Sting
I wouldn’t say suck but close …… Bob Dylan, Moody Blues
I heard what I just said several times by others.
One to note: have not heard this one: but by people that attended the same concert that I did in about 72 …. The Stones were not as good as studio recordings. Not heard complaints other than that.
References :
sugaree Says: 01.11.09 at 12:01 pm
the grateful dead almost always sounded better live than on their studio albums.
i saw led zeppelin in 1975, the sound sucked and they only played 9 pr 10 songs. they may have been having an off night, but i was very disappointed.
References :