Author Topic: Are concert versions of songs often better than the other?  (Read 1060 times)

Radioactive is totally what provoked this question
because the original song is ok
but this is like an incredible improvement

so is that common or is imagine dragons just unusually cool about their concerts

depends on what kind of song it is and how well the band plays it

what are you talking about

that live performance is absolutely terrible

Foster The People is kind of the same way with a lot of their songs.

what are you talking about
that live performance is absolutely terrible
3:06 to 5:00

and regardless of whether or not you like the song I said it was an improvement

Not always.

Robbie Williams is loving stuff on live versions of his songs.

And not just because of the crowd being too loud. Seemingly because his music just wouldn't sound as good if it wasn't edited in a studio.

3:06 to 5:00 was interesting in different, but kinda poorly executed
still, there is a different energy to a live piece of music than a studio version
The artists take from the crowd and the crowd takes from the artists and it's a feedback loop you don't get otherwise

Mostly from what I've heard, they aren't as good. As a musician I listen for intonation and such, most live performers aren't as good when they hide behind the auto-tune. Most times you don't even notice it.

I almost always prefer studio recordings over live performances. Less annoying clapping and yelling, plus in the studio the musicians can continuously attempt a song until it's of great quality.

I generally prefer studio music, but going to a concert is awesome.

3:06 to 5:00

alright, i must admit, this part was cool and i wish they did this in the actual recording

The live performance is terrible unless they do a spontaneous solo or something.

most live performances that I've seen seem to have a lot more soul than the album recording.


theres definately a difference, but its usually not bad

or is it because i dont go to concerts often