2006-07-14 17:23:31 · 18 answers · asked by strictly_maggie 3 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music
Yea thats because alot of music is made to sound better in the sound studio.
2006-07-14 17:26:19 · answer #1 · answered by LilMikey 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unless they're lip synching, no band is going to sound the same live as they do on CD. There's so much production on CDs, and it's impossible to have that live.
Generally, if a band sucks live, the only reason they sound good on the CD is because of the production on it. Everyone has an off night...you can't judge a live band by one show, but if they sound bad at every show, chances are, they weren't very good to begin with.
There are a lot of great live bands....those are the ones with real talent. Anybody can sing in a studio, have a producer touch it up, and have it sound good. But to sing live, with nothing helping you out....that takes true talent.
2006-07-15 04:37:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Some do, some don't The good ones tend to be good, seeing as that's what makes them good. Bands that suck live are just not very good bands. The whole point of rock music is live performance. The album is surely just an advert to get people to go and see them. If you can't hack it live, then you suck. But my favourite bands are way better live than they are on record.
2006-07-15 00:28:13 · answer #3 · answered by Entwined 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are many studio bands out there these days who have no idea how to play a real gig. However there are some bands and singers who sound BETTER live. I've found: Smashing Pumpkins, Aerosmith, The Spin Doctors, Collective Soul, Josh Groban and The Goo Goo Dolls all are amazing live.
I was a Bon Jovi fan for years until I saw them live. He can play but his songs just lacked substance or real feeling. I was so disappointed.
2006-07-15 00:29:49 · answer #4 · answered by Sara 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Really depends on who you see. Pink Floyd was amazing, The Grateful Dead rocked, Dave Mathews Band has had a couple good shows, Guns N' Roses brought the house down. I have seen my fair share of bad concerts, but those listed above were some of the best nights of my life.
2006-07-15 00:54:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, a studio is a controlled environment where they can get the best sound. The most obvious thing to me is that I cannot understand the vocalist one bit in a live show. But if I hear the album once or twice before the show, I can sing along.
2006-07-15 00:27:48 · answer #6 · answered by Pepe LePeu 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
some good live bands Ive seen are Fishbone, P-funk (George Clinton's band,) Ani DiFranco, and of course Phish. If the band is good the excitement of seeing them live, the improvisation, and the talking into the microphone kinda make up for the less polished sound, I think.
2006-07-15 00:30:42 · answer #7 · answered by Chi 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
not all bands....but a large amount if them...there are some bands that are really good live...and then some like really really suck
but thats because there are editing programs in the studio that make them sound better, plus in studio they have to do it right and
try it multiple times....and if its a rock band, they have to move around a lot, and have to contain stage presence , so its more work...but mainly its the fact they just make them sound better in studio
2006-07-15 00:44:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only bands that suck. Anybody can sound good in a studio, have you heard Paris Hilton's music? I bet my life she could not sound decent live. I prefer real music that is not cleaned in the studio.
2006-07-15 00:28:59 · answer #9 · answered by mockingbirdkiller 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's because studio enhanced music is what we hear when we hear taped music. This used to annoy me when I was younger, but as I've gotten older...I've learned to appreciate live music. However, it does depend on the band.
2006-07-15 00:27:45 · answer #10 · answered by andreahud 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋