I tried to watch Oasis Wembley show last night on MTV, but was bored by Noel and Liam's lack of movement and no connection with the crowd. Noel even had a music stand in front of him! I like some of their music, or I wouldnt have been watching but are there other bands out there who are so dull on stage?

Bob Dylan. But that is another case... :-) I wouldn't call him dull, but I have never seen anyone else trying so hard not to make any other connection with the audience than by the music itself. But that is well known.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-10-17 10:15 by Happy24.

Quote
UGot2Rollme
I tried to watch Oasis Wembley show last night on MTV, but was bored by Noel and Liam's lack of movement and no connection with the crowd. Noel even had a music stand in front of him! I like some of their music, or I wouldnt have been watching but are there other bands out there who are so dull on stage?

you're talking out of your bottom.

I was at the concert last night, a superb show.
Liam connects with the fans, like very few frontman.

Let me preface this by saying that I'm a huge Pink Floyd fan but they fall (or fell) in to this category to a degree BUT the band recognised this early on hence the visuals,strobes,pyrotechnics etc. They were never the type of band who were going to leap about the stage yelping "It's great to be in wherever" or hold the mic towards the crowd to echo a chorus. Roger Waters picked up on the whole artist/fan concept and basically wrote The Wall around it. I mean, a huge White wall between the band and the audience. How much connection do you need?!

The last time I saw Dylan was 2003. You couldn´t really see him (a big hat on and half way turned from the audience), you couldn´t hear him sing (the remains of his voice buried in the extremely bad mix), you couldn´t hear him talk (he didn´t say a word between the songs), you didn´t recognize most of the songs (the arrangements completely different from the originals). I still have the ticket and it says Bob Dylan but I wonder...

Quote
UGot2Rollme
I tried to watch Oasis Wembley show last night on MTV, but was bored by Noel and Liam's lack of movement and no connection with the crowd. Noel even had a music stand in front of him! I like some of their music, or I wouldnt have been watching but are there other bands out there who are so dull on stage?

Frank Sinatra had more stage presence than probably any artist who ever lived, yet he hardly had to move a muscle in order to captivate an audience; ditto Leonard Cohen.

Then again, if you have a penchant for aerobics instructors who prefer to prioritise their out-of-breath movements ahead of their singing, then so be it.

...and it's nice to know that Mick's ridiculous stage antics have been making at least ONE person happy.

edit



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-10-17 13:53 by Baboon Bro.

Mike Oldfield Band 1982 was no Big Connector.......

Radiohead.

Why does 'stage presence' have to be defined solely by running around, wiggling your arse or conversing inanely (eg "you havin a good time??" ) every 5 minutes?

Watched part of that Oasis show on TV last night. The crowd were going nuts (and London crowds arent noted for their exuberance).

Looks like whatever theyre doing it seems to work. Stones crowds (in the US & to some degree in the UK anyway) are morgue-like by comparison. Sometimes its more like being in a shopping mall.

Never felt it a big deal that Dylan doesnt talk much either. Quality over quantity. He can 'communicate' more with a raised eyebrow than many acts can with two hours of tedious patter.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-10-17 14:56 by Gazza.

Quote
Svartmer
The last time I saw Dylan was 2003. You couldn´t really see him (a big hat on and half way turned from the audience), you couldn´t hear him sing (the remains of his voice buried in the extremely bad mix), you couldn´t hear him talk (he didn´t say a word between the songs), you didn´t recognize most of the songs (the arrangements completely different from the originals). I still have the ticket and it says Bob Dylan but I wonder...

Some of us actually like that.

A true performing artist isnt there to replicate the original recordings. Its pretty ludicrous to expect something to sound like it did 30 or 40 years ago. As far as he's concerned, the original recording is merely a template. The song matures and develops over the years through the different interpretations.

Never ceases to amaze me how many different ways he can rework a song. Year-in, year-out the arrangements change radically, sometimes to a degree where it even changes the mood of the song's lyrics (listen to the original of 'I Want You' and then the 1978 live version thats on 'Budokan' for example). Sometimes the arrangements come off brilliantly, sometimes they dont, but it keeps it interesting.

Personally I prefer that option to just attempting to carbon-copy the original or by playing the song the exact same way for years on end.

Genius makes it's own rules.

Dire Straits

The mosty visually boring act to me is Pink Floyd.
Close 2nd : Grateful Dead

Again, nothing to do with music, it's about on-stage charisma.
Everyone can't be Mick Jagger, Freddie Mercury or Steven Tyler

Concerning Bob Dylan, I kinda agree with Gazza, but Dylan is sometimes going a bit too far into rearranging songs, at least for non die-hard fans.

[doctorstonesblog.blogspot.com]

ELP
Peter Frampton
All folk singers

"No Anchovies, Please"

Quote
Doc
The mosty visually boring act to me is Pink Floyd.

Roger Waters actually makes very good connection with his audience. I was very surprised when I saw him - I expected him to be cold and distant, but he was actually quite cool, at least he seemed to be. He put on one of the best concerts I have ever attended both musically and visually. But I understand that you probably speak about the rest of the Floyd, which I have unfortunately never seen. But I don't believe I would be bored.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Svartmer
The last time I saw Dylan was 2003. You couldn´t really see him (a big hat on and half way turned from the audience), you couldn´t hear him sing (the remains of his voice buried in the extremely bad mix), you couldn´t hear him talk (he didn´t say a word between the songs), you didn´t recognize most of the songs (the arrangements completely different from the originals). I still have the ticket and it says Bob Dylan but I wonder...

Some of us actually like that.

A true performing artist isnt there to replicate the original recordings. Its pretty ludicrous to expect something to sound like it did 30 or 40 years ago. As far as he's concerned, the original recording is merely a template. The song matures and develops over the years through the different interpretations.

Never ceases to amaze me how many different ways he can rework a song. Year-in, year-out the arrangements change radically, sometimes to a degree where it even changes the mood of the song's lyrics (listen to the original of 'I Want You' and then the 1978 live version thats on 'Budokan' for example). Sometimes the arrangements come off brilliantly, sometimes they dont, but it keeps it interesting.

Personally I prefer that option to just attempting to carbon-copy the original or by playing the song the exact same way for years on end.

Genius makes it's own rules.

It would be fun to hear your reactions if the Stones would play their great songs with different chords and tempo. Maybe they will, unintentional, the next tour

Quote
Happy24
Bob Dylan. But that is another case... :-) I wouldn't call him dull, but I have never seen anyone else trying so hard not to make any other connection with the audience than by the music itself. But that is well known.

actually there are not many audiences trying harder to make a connection with artist than the ones on Dylan shows! ;-) and, honestly, I love listening to his live CDs and his concert was one of the best days of my life!

<It would be fun to hear your reactions if the Stones would play their great songs with different chords and tempo. Maybe they will, unintentional, the next tour>

They did it with 19th Nervous Breakdown. No huge success though.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<It would be fun to hear your reactions if the Stones would play their great songs with different chords and tempo. Maybe they will, unintentional, the next tour>

They did it with 19th Nervous Breakdown. No huge success though.

They played it, what, 2 or 3 times? I thought it was great, but it wasn't recieved well.

JumpingKentFlash

Quote
Happy24

Quote
Doc
The mosty visually boring act to me is Pink Floyd.

Roger Waters actually makes very good connection with his audience. I was very surprised when I saw him - I expected him to be cold and distant, but he was actually quite cool, at least he seemed to be. He put on one of the best concerts I have ever attended both musically and visually. But I understand that you probably speak about the rest of the Floyd, which I have unfortunately never seen. But I don't believe I would be bored.

Visually boring? Weren't we there for the music?
Then again, as Mr.Waters pointed out "A lot of fans were 'only there for the beer' ".

<They played it, what, 2 or 3 times? I thought it was great, but it wasn't recieved well.>

Sweet Black Angel also comes to mind. Strange version No success at that time either...

Rush

Its almost like they strapped their feet to the stage floor for 2.5 hours.
No presence or show....

Bruce Springsteen

Quote
Svartmer

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Svartmer
The last time I saw Dylan was 2003. You couldn´t really see him (a big hat on and half way turned from the audience), you couldn´t hear him sing (the remains of his voice buried in the extremely bad mix), you couldn´t hear him talk (he didn´t say a word between the songs), you didn´t recognize most of the songs (the arrangements completely different from the originals). I still have the ticket and it says Bob Dylan but I wonder...

Some of us actually like that.

A true performing artist isnt there to replicate the original recordings. Its pretty ludicrous to expect something to sound like it did 30 or 40 years ago. As far as he's concerned, the original recording is merely a template. The song matures and develops over the years through the different interpretations.

Never ceases to amaze me how many different ways he can rework a song. Year-in, year-out the arrangements change radically, sometimes to a degree where it even changes the mood of the song's lyrics (listen to the original of 'I Want You' and then the 1978 live version thats on 'Budokan' for example). Sometimes the arrangements come off brilliantly, sometimes they dont, but it keeps it interesting.

Personally I prefer that option to just attempting to carbon-copy the original or by playing the song the exact same way for years on end.

Genius makes it's own rules.

It would be fun to hear your reactions if the Stones would play their great songs with different chords and tempo. Maybe they will, unintentional, the next tour

I've been wanting them to do that for several years now. Its certainly a better alternative than the same 5 minute long chorus at the end of Brown Sugar thats been the norm for the last 20 years (the brilliant version from Juilliard excepted)

Me, I'd welcome with OPEN ARMS rearrangements to all the Stone stuff. The 19th Nervous Breakdown was freaking cool. The clips I heard from that Toronto club show was smoking. Great guitars and incredible groove. It not being well recieved---pisses me off. It dissapoints me that the fans threw it back at them and said "Eh, no thanks on that one." Maybe it's part the fans fault too? They don't challenge themselves (and us) because we don't let them. But then again, if they persisted and had balls to just do it and make us accept it--fans would have to take the new changes.

Quote
shadooby
Bruce Springsteen

Yeah, a real bore. ><

"No Anchovies, Please"

Quote
Elmo Lewis

Quote
shadooby
Bruce Springsteen

Yeah, a real bore. ><

Hope ya know I was kidding!

"No Anchovies, Please"

Yes is a sensational group but when I saw them in Seattle in 1976 (maybe I was high) it was like watching paint dry w/lasers going off around me.

Joan Armatrading made a point of saying hello once in 1982 and hardly acknowledged the audience after that.

Willie Nelson and Waylon Jennings and Jerry Jeff Walker at The Summit in Houston on New Year's Eve 1977 were great! No inflating peni, just great music and lots and lots of casual conversation from Willie. It was like we were all in his garage at home smoking and drinking beer.

Led Zeppelin St. Patrick's Day 1975 could have been a sound check for all the excitement that was coming from the stage.

Aimee Mann is a dynamic musician and doesn't move around much, but her between song banter is hilarious!

Joan Baez is another singer who is so relaxed and sounds better than her records live.

Queen at Seattle Arena 1977 were great. At Seattle Coliseum December 1978 boring as all get out.

"The wonder of Jimi Hendrix was that he could stand up at all he was so pumped full of drugs." Patsy, Patsy Stone

Quote
The Menace of Mayfair
Aimee Mann is a dynamic musician and doesn't move around much, but her between song banter is hilarious!

correct - she's very dry, her years of living in the UK, influenced her humour,
that's for sure.
Can't wait to see her, again, next friday.

Flat out John Fogerty.

Was poor in CCR "here's another song", followed by "thank you".

Learned to talk and move a little for his last solo tour but comes off as a hick when he talks.

And for Elmo, folks singers are some of the best stage presences, they have to know how to talk to an audience. Check out Arlo, John Prine, a Four Horseman show (Hiatt, Lovet, Guy Clark and Joe Ely)....nothing but personality. Check out song writers, they have something to say.