Everything Live DVD and 2 disc albums reissues - Page 37 - Forever Delayed

sculptureofabloke · #**541** 13-02-2010, 13:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takk

Can't be bothered? The band's never been that hot on dvd releases.

I thought it'd be more to do with the label.

Takk · #**542** 13-02-2010, 13:14

Label/band/management, who knows? Presumably it takes someone to actually want to release the rest for it to get done.

sculptureofabloke · #**543** 13-02-2010, 13:23

Still, it seems such a waste. That's a point, actually.. Any idea what happened to that acoustic Donkeys that was on the site for a bit? Not sayin they should've put that out as a single, but it'd have been good to have it as a b-side or on an official unplugged album or something.

I still think we're due another live dvd. They sound a lot better now than they did when I first saw them in 2001. Just seems a shame for there to be 3 live recordings in 4 years, then nothing..

UEF · #**544** 13-02-2010, 16:39

Allthough it's not quite the same, if you take the time to download them (for free) there are some nice live DVDs in the Sound and Vision part of the forum from some of their best televised/webcasted live gigs of recent years. And some older stuff too.

Donkey · #**545** 13-02-2010, 16:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by sculptureofabloke

They sound a lot better now than they did when I first saw them in 2001.

No, they don't.

sculptureofabloke · #**546** 13-02-2010, 16:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by UEF

Allthough it's not quite the same, if you take the time to download them (for free) there are some nice live DVDs in the Sound and Vision part of the forum from some of their best televised/webcasted live gigs of recent years. And some older stuff too.

Yeah, I should make more use of S&V really... I'll get round to that later, cheers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey

No, they don't.

Haha, how can I argue against that? They've all improved as musicians over the last decade, and since they got a rhythm guitarist James has had a bit more freedom. Alright, they won't have that next week but they didn't have it for my first few years of seeing them. I'll see how they sound anyway.

Takk · #**547** 13-02-2010, 17:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey

No, they don't.

They really do...the backing musicians add more to the sound, james is playing more guitar, his voice is way better.

Donkey · #**548** 13-02-2010, 17:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takk

They really do...the backing musicians add more to the sound, james is playing more guitar, his voice is way better.

They really don't. Backing musicians destroy gigs, James is obviously worse and worse singer, they play shitty playlists. Except the first halves of English JFPL gigs, they were great.

sculptureofabloke · #**549** 13-02-2010, 17:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey

They really don't. Backing musicians destroy gigs, James is obviously worse and worse singer, they play shitty playlists. Except the first halves of English JFPL gigs, they were great.

Do you actually like Manic Street Preachers?

beyondgoodandevil · #**550** 13-02-2010, 17:10

I'm not sure if I agree that James' voice is better. I think, even back in 2001, it had a bit more power on the shouty bits. On the acoustic songs I would probably agree with you. In terms of playing live, I think they sounded better in in 96/97 (from Nynex and other sources) than they did in 99 to around 2001. They have gotten increasingly better since then I'd say, maybe that spell after TIMTTMY they got a little nonplussed.

Flint · #**551** 13-02-2010, 17:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey

Backing musicians destroy gigs

Musicians destroy music concerts, I see.

Takk · #**552** 13-02-2010, 17:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey

They really don't. Backing musicians destroy gigs, James is obviously worse and worse singer, they play shitty playlists. Except the first halves of English JFPL gigs, they were great.

Backing musicians don't destroy gigs. When a song is written for more than one guitar, it's impossible for James to play it properly. Adding extra guitars adds meat to the sound and leaves James free to play what he wants. The backing vocals I don't like, but you can't have everything.

They also had backing musicians, tracks and vocals in 2001 (Naysmith) and they ruin songs like Masses, where an extra guitar is far better. The quality of James' singing has improved since 2001, and also I think Sean's drumming is faster and better, and Wire has improved too.

What have setlists got to do with how they sound? Nothing.

Bad setlists and not liking their backing musicians does not mean they sound bad now.

I don't know they sounded 96-99, but in 2001 they were all a bit fat and lazy, and it seemed a lot like going though the motion. There is no way that was true of 2005+.

Donkey · #**553** 13-02-2010, 19:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint

Musicians destroy music concerts, I see.

Of course, bad musicians do.

And Takk: Thank You for explaining to me how it really is with guitars. I really appreciate it. The thing is that I don't want to hear someone else play guitar, I come to gigs to hear James. I'm too lazy to answer all You wrote.

the "main" opinion here are very simillar to the one that prefer Magic tour to Sheer Heart Attack tour.

Porco · #**554** 13-02-2010, 19:28

lol @ epic thread de-rail.

Backing musicians don't destroy gigs. Gigs destroy gigs! Backing musicians are just weapons, to be used for good or bad. Or something.

Donkey · #**555** 13-02-2010, 19:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Porco

Backing musicians are just weapons, to be used for good or bad. Or something.

I agree

And badly used weapon (= backing musician) can destroy gig.