REC
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by Remy:[..]

    Yep you can

    Obviously.

    Thanks dieder, is this premium account stuff or do I need to reupload it?
    I will make MF links in an hour, I just have added the whole thing.


    Premium stuff.
  2. Originally posted by germcevoy:We can forgive the pre-recorded samples for this gig. limited rehearsal, confined space, no room for additional instruments etc.

    Yes, we can forgive that. But we can also notice it and share our opinions about it. Obviously U2 wanted the songs to sound very similar to the studio versions - most likely for album promotion reasons. But I disagree to the idea of attempting to reproduce studio songs accurately live - with the addition af a few "We love BBC, we love this town, we love you"- confessions that would be more credible if they didn't use them everywhere. If you truly believe the studio version is the only and perfect way for a certain song to sound - then why play it live at all? Then you'd be better off playing the studio version through the PA and sit on an armchair with a wide smile on your face and a cold beer in your hand.

    Limited rehearsal time is no excuse for me - because it's just not true. U2 have been delaying the album for years. There was definitely enough time to rehearse everything they intended to play live. If they made different use of that time it's not the time's fault but their own. Sorry.

    Loads of U2's live stuff features backing tracks or loops.

    Yes, and on some occasions it made perfect sense. Neither ZooTV nor PopMart would have worked without semi- playback. But since these days are over I'd prefer them to go back to being a live rock band - and nobody should tell me they aren't good enough to push through a four song gig as a four- piece band. The Beatles didn't use semi- playback on the rooftop either.

    If they really believe they need a bigger sound they could easily hire half a dozen of professional background keyboarders / guitarists / percussionists / scratchers / dancers / singers, etc. A lot of bands do that. Almost anything is better than using pre- recorded samples.

    I repeat it: You want live music? Then let it be live music. Click- tracks and IEM are fine. Rhythm loops may be needed on some songs - but please only use samples when they are absolutely necessary.

    Maybe we should discuss that further in a different thread.

    Alex
  4. Excellent stuff, thanks

    I was there last week on the same spot on Regent Street, one week too early
    Never book a trip too far in advance.....
  5. Originally posted by Alex:I'm kind of disappointed by too obvious prerecorded samples in the playback, especially during the beginning of Magnificient. Or did Eno act live as additional keyboard player?



    That regular keyboard guy was there, tucked out of the way. He was playing on Magnificent for sure, spotted him a few times.


  6. I put all the promo gigs in one album on Itunes, so:



    Yogi could do a better job though.
  7. Originally posted by djrlewis:[..]

    That regular keyboard guy was there, tucked out of the way. He was playing on Magnificent for sure, spotted him a few times.


    Terry? havent't spotted him during any of the Breathe performances mind. . .


  8. Wow-thanls I been making one big promo album also


  9. Saw him on the Jo Whiley performance during Breathe.
  10. Thanks
  11. Originally posted by Alex:[..]
    Yes, we can forgive that. But we can also notice it and share our opinions about it. Obviously U2 wanted the songs to sound very similar to the studio versions - most likely for album promotion reasons. But I disagree to the idea of attempting to reproduce studio songs accurately live - with the addition af a few "We love BBC, we love this town, we love you"- confessions that would be more credible if they didn't use them everywhere. If you truly believe the studio version is the only and perfect way for a certain song to sound - then why play it live at all? Then you'd be better off playing the studio version through the PA and sit on an armchair with a wide smile on your face and a cold beer in your hand.

    Limited rehearsal time is no excuse for me - because it's just not true. U2 have been delaying the album for years. There was definitely enough time to rehearse everything they intended to play live. If they made different use of that time it's not the time's fault but their own. Sorry.

    [..]
    Yes, and on some occasions it made perfect sense. Neither ZooTV nor PopMart would have worked without semi- playback. But since these days are over I'd prefer them to go back to being a live rock band - and nobody should tell me they aren't good enough to push through a four song gig as a four- piece band. The Beatles didn't use semi- playback on the rooftop either.

    If they really believe they need a bigger sound they could easily hire half a dozen of professional background keyboarders / guitarists / percussionists / scratchers / dancers / singers, etc. A lot of bands do that. Almost anything is better than using pre- recorded samples.

    I repeat it: You want live music? Then let it be live music. Click- tracks and IEM are fine. Rhythm loops may be needed on some songs - but please only use samples when they are absolutely necessary.

    Maybe we should discuss that further in a different thread.

    Alex


    they've been doing backing tracks like that since 1984. I dont even notice it anymore......
  12. Originally posted by Alex:[..]
    Yes, we can forgive that. But we can also notice it and share our opinions about it. Obviously U2 wanted the songs to sound very similar to the studio versions - most likely for album promotion reasons. But I disagree to the idea of attempting to reproduce studio songs accurately live - with the addition af a few "We love BBC, we love this town, we love you"- confessions that would be more credible if they didn't use them everywhere. If you truly believe the studio version is the only and perfect way for a certain song to sound - then why play it live at all? Then you'd be better off playing the studio version through the PA and sit on an armchair with a wide smile on your face and a cold beer in your hand.

    Limited rehearsal time is no excuse for me - because it's just not true. U2 have been delaying the album for years. There was definitely enough time to rehearse everything they intended to play live. If they made different use of that time it's not the time's fault but their own. Sorry.

    [..]
    Yes, and on some occasions it made perfect sense. Neither ZooTV nor PopMart would have worked without semi- playback. But since these days are over I'd prefer them to go back to being a live rock band - and nobody should tell me they aren't good enough to push through a four song gig as a four- piece band. The Beatles didn't use semi- playback on the rooftop either.

    If they really believe they need a bigger sound they could easily hire half a dozen of professional background keyboarders / guitarists / percussionists / scratchers / dancers / singers, etc. A lot of bands do that. Almost anything is better than using pre- recorded samples.

    I repeat it: You want live music? Then let it be live music. Click- tracks and IEM are fine. Rhythm loops may be needed on some songs - but please only use samples when they are absolutely necessary.

    Maybe we should discuss that further in a different thread.

    Alex


    I guess it depends what type of music you like. If its all old-school rock,then there's no pre-recorded. However, in the modern age, there are many electronic bands with pre-recorded sounds. I'm alright with pre-recorded, but I still want that live feel.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.