Jump to content

Who would you go see?


Earthshine
 Share

Who would you go see live?  

70 members have voted

  1. 1. Who would you go see live?

    • The Beatles
      20
    • Led Zeppelin
      16
    • The Who
      8
    • The Nice
      1
    • The Jimi Hendrix Experience
      2
    • Pink Floyd(with Syd)
      1
    • Pink Floyd (with Dave and Rick)
      13
    • Frank Zappa (any band)
      6
    • Elvis Presley
      2
    • Buddy Holly
      1
    • Rick Nelson
      0


Recommended Posts

I said Zappa <3

 

you couldnt pay me to sit thru a Zeppelin concert lmao. Now, a show with John Bonham by himself? totally. for me he was the only great thing about that band.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Earthshine @ Jul 22 2011, 02:11 PM)
QUOTE (ColdFireYYZ @ Jul 22 2011, 12:48 PM)
If ELP were on the list, I'd pick them.

Everyone in ELP is alive. Bands in this poll have at least one dead member.

oops.gif I should have read your original post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I never understood about The Beatles is why they only used 2 mikes when 3 of them were out front. Certainly they could afford 3. Also, it is easier to mix vocals when each vocalist is using a seperate mike; even if doing harmonies as they were usually doing. They would have also gotten more volume that way.

 

The Beatles always said that one of the reasons they quit playing live was because they could not hear themselves on stage from all the screaming kids. And the audiences could not hear them either because of the screaming kids. Sounds like an excuse.

 

Well, that is no excuse for not playing live.

 

I don't know why they continued to use those little Vox amps which could hardly be heard. And Ringo used 7A sticks which are not big enough for rock, especially arena rock. Ringo also muffled his drums whiich greatly made them harder to hear. He was never miked up enough. Don't know if that was on purpose or not.

 

Not sure why if they had this supposed volume problem that they did not go out and get some Marshall 100 watt amps. Or Hiwatt 100 watt amps. Were these too loud for John? rofl3.gif Hendrix and Townshend played at 10 and could always be heard. rofl3.gif

 

 

Ringo could have gotten bigger sticks and used bigger size drums and gotten overhead microphones. However, Mitch and Keith could always be heard no matter who loud the kids were screaming. rofl3.gif

 

Maybe they quit playing live was because of those uncomfortable looking coats and ties. rofl3.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order:

 

Zeppelin

Hendrix

The Who

Pink Floyd (Animals tour if I can be choosy)

 

 

Others not on the list that would be big for me:

Grateful Dead in the 68-69 time frame

Allman Brothers with Duane.

Derek And The Dominos with Duane

Cream

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (CMWriter @ Jul 22 2011, 01:18 PM)
The Beatles.
Not necessarily because I'm crazy about them (which I'm not) but just because it would be great to see the legends before they were legends... They helped give birth to modern music, and whatever my feelings about them personally, it would be such an honour to see them perform live.

That pic linked to in your sig is really funny! laugh.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Earthshine @ Jul 22 2011, 02:21 PM)
What I never understood about The Beatles is why they only used 2 mikes when 3 of them were out front. Certainly they could afford 3. Also, it is easier to mix vocals when each vocalist is using a seperate mike; even if doing harmonies as they were usually doing. They would have also gotten more volume that way.

The Beatles always said that one of the reasons they quit playing live was because they could not hear themselves on stage from all the screaming kids. And the audiences could not hear them either because of the screaming kids. Sounds like an excuse.

Well, that is no excuse for not playing live.

I don't know why they continued to use those little Vox amps which could hardly be heard. And Ringo used 7A sticks which are not big enough for rock, especially arena rock. Ringo also muffled his drums whiich greatly made them harder to hear. He was never miked up enough. Don't know if that was on purpose or not.

Not sure why if they had this supposed volume problem that they did not go out and get some Marshall 100 watt amps. Or Hiwatt 100 watt amps. Were these too loud for John? rofl3.gif Hendrix and Townshend played at 10 and could always be heard. rofl3.gif


Ringo could have gotten bigger sticks and used bigger size drums and gotten overhead microphones. However, Mitch and Keith could always be heard no matter who loud the kids were screaming. rofl3.gif

Maybe they quit playing live was because of those uncomfortable looking coats and ties. rofl3.gif

Ignorant? confused13.gif Naive? confused13.gif Stupid? confused13.gif Spiteful? confused13.gif

 

There's so much wrong with this post, seriously. I think you're not as informed as you think you are.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Xanadude69 @ Jul 22 2011, 04:18 PM)
The Who would blow every band on this list off the stage!!

Hell yeah they would!!! 1022.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jul 22 2011, 05:34 PM)
QUOTE (Xanadude69 @ Jul 22 2011, 04:18 PM)
The Who would blow every band on this list off the stage!!

Hell yeah they would!!! 1022.gif

I find The Who to be highly overrated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Ancient Ways @ Jul 22 2011, 04:36 PM)
QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jul 22 2011, 05:34 PM)
QUOTE (Xanadude69 @ Jul 22 2011, 04:18 PM)
The Who would blow every band on this list off the stage!!

Hell yeah they would!!! 1022.gif

I find The Who to be highly overrated.

http://bigfourza.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/sheila-broflovski-what-what.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jul 22 2011, 06:51 PM)
QUOTE (Ancient Ways @ Jul 22 2011, 04:36 PM)
QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jul 22 2011, 05:34 PM)
QUOTE (Xanadude69 @ Jul 22 2011, 04:18 PM)
The Who would blow every band on this list off the stage!!

Hell yeah they would!!! 1022.gif

I find The Who to be highly overrated.

http://bigfourza.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/sheila-broflovski-what-what.jpg

not my cup of tea, never have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Ancient Ways @ Jul 22 2011, 11:46 PM)
QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jul 22 2011, 06:51 PM)
QUOTE (Ancient Ways @ Jul 22 2011, 04:36 PM)
QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jul 22 2011, 05:34 PM)
QUOTE (Xanadude69 @ Jul 22 2011, 04:18 PM)
The Who would blow every band on this list off the stage!!

Hell yeah they would!!! 1022.gif

I find The Who to be highly overrated.

http://bigfourza.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/sheila-broflovski-what-what.jpg

not my cup of tea, never have been.

I like The Who very much, but I too think they are overrated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Earthshine @ Jul 22 2011, 01:21 PM)
What I never understood about The Beatles is why they only used 2 mikes when 3 of them were out front. Certainly they could afford 3. Also, it is easier to mix vocals when each vocalist is using a seperate mike; even if doing harmonies as they were usually doing. They would have also gotten more volume that way.

The Beatles always said that one of the reasons they quit playing live was because they could not hear themselves on stage from all the screaming kids. And the audiences could not hear them either because of the screaming kids. Sounds like an excuse.

Well, that is no excuse for not playing live.

I don't know why they continued to use those little Vox amps which could hardly be heard. And Ringo used 7A sticks which are not big enough for rock, especially arena rock. Ringo also muffled his drums whiich greatly made them harder to hear. He was never miked up enough. Don't know if that was on purpose or not.

Not sure why if they had this supposed volume problem that they did not go out and get some Marshall 100 watt amps. Or Hiwatt 100 watt amps. Were these too loud for John?  rofl3.gif  Hendrix and Townshend played at 10 and could always be heard.  rofl3.gif


Ringo could have gotten bigger sticks and used bigger size drums and gotten overhead microphones. However, Mitch and Keith could always be heard no matter who loud the kids were screaming.  rofl3.gif

Maybe they quit playing live was because of those uncomfortable looking coats and ties.  rofl3.gif

While I agree somewhat that the screaming audiences was kind of their excuse they used, I think it went a little deeper than that. You have to realize that for the better part of 4 years of touring they never had a moment's peace and were pretty much the most pestered people on earth with everyone wanting a piece of them (sometimes literally) or of their time. Eventually they felt it was getting out of control and even a bit dangerous particularly after the incident they experienced in the Philippines. So I think the real reason they made that decision to quit touring was just to have some peace and to escape from that intense mania.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

probably the Beatles either in 1965 or'66 or the Rooftop recordings of 1969. Rush circa 1976 to 1979 (or any 70's Rush) would be my second choice. Floyd '72-'75 would be awesome or even up to '77. Zeppelin 1969-'72 would be epic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...