Live Earth on the Mall in D.C.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
GibsonGirl said:


Definitely. Could you imagine one last Floyd tour? Gilmour's musicianship and Waters' love of the audience all rolled into one...would be out of this world.

I can see how you wouldn't like the tour vocal-wise. I'd be lying if I said I sometimes didn't wish I was hearing Gilmour/Wright instead of Carin/Kilminster on something like Breathe, those two times I saw Roger. But again, a live show means different things for different people. For me, the vocals are not a huge issue at all, it's more about enjoying the show and seeing a legend on his (probably) last tour ever.

Question....are the vocals a non-issue for all concerts you attend, or just with Waters, because he means so much to you?
 
No spoken words said:


Question....are the vocals a non-issue for all concerts you attend, or just with Waters, because he means so much to you?

Depends on the performer. If it was some young band in their prime touring with average vocals and lacking in superb production and effects to make up for it, I wouldn't go. With someone like Roger, it's a bit different. Before you even buy the tickets, you know that he's 63 years old and that he's spent most of his younger years screaming into a microphone. Vocal deterioration is to be expected. You accept it, move on, and enjoy the shows while you still can.
 
GibsonGirl said:


Depends on the performer. If it was some young band in their prime touring with average vocals and lacking in superb production and effects to make up for it, I wouldn't go. With someone like Roger, it's a bit different. Before you even buy the tickets, you know that he's 63 years old and that he's spent most of his younger years screaming into a microphone. Vocal deterioration is to be expected. You accept it, move on, and enjoy the shows while you still can.

I'm with you, was just curious to hear your take on it. Same deal for me with Elton John. His voice has really deepened out. To listen to his earlier songs and then listen to them as performed today is like comparing apples and oranges...but, to me, he still sounds good, and, I really enjoy his shows.
 
No spoken words said:


Prince is one of the very few performers I've not seen who I'd still like to see. The Who, despite not quite being the Who anymore, are on that list as well. The Police were, now they're crossed off.


what do you mean THE WHO NOT BEING THE WHO ?!?!?

I mean.. 2 members died... what can they do.. retire and forgetting it all?


besides, Roger and Pete ROCK, still being in their 60s
 
pepokiss said:



what do you mean THE WHO NOT BEING THE WHO ?!?!?

I mean.. 2 members died... what can they do.. retire and forgetting it all?


besides, Roger and Pete ROCK, still being in their 60s

You did read the part where I said they're on my short list of bands I want to see before I die, yes?
 
No spoken words said:


I'm with you, was just curious to hear your take on it. Same deal for me with Elton John. His voice has really deepened out. To listen to his earlier songs and then listen to them as performed today is like comparing apples and oranges...but, to me, he still sounds good, and, I really enjoy his shows.

See, I still love Elton's vocals. To me, he doesn't really try to hit many of the highs anymore, sings lower, but the tone is still rich and satisfying, and very similar to the way it's always been...the upper range is just diminished a bit, and he sounded as great live as he does recorded.


GG, I'm sure you've listened to tons of Roger live from this tour. Does tour fatigue seem to be a factor for him vocally, at all? I first noticed it at Live 8 though, so it wouldn't have had anything to do with that performance.
 
VintagePunk said:


See, I still love Elton's vocals. To me, he doesn't really try to hit many of the highs anymore, sings lower, but the tone is still rich and satisfying, and very similar to the way it's always been...the upper range is just diminished a bit, and he sounded as great live as he does recorded.


GG, I'm sure you've listened to tons of Roger live from this tour. Does tour fatigue seem to be a factor for him vocally, at all? I first noticed it at Live 8 though, so it wouldn't have had anything to do with that performance.

I still like them, too, I thought I said. Is anyone reading my actual posts tonight??? VP, come on. :)
 
U2DMfan said:


Show me a person of respect who would give it up to Bon Jovi.

The cadre of naysayers is huge.

Very simple.

They are the best of a load of crap.

I wouldn't be upset if they make the Hall of Fame, but I think it should be acknowledged that it was the worst era in rock history.

Without question.

They would be the ONLY one

Wow you are a real opinionated :censored: and I am your person of respect who would give it up to Bon Jovi in a heartbeat:happy:
 
No spoken words said:
I'm with you, was just curious to hear your take on it. Same deal for me with Elton John. His voice has really deepened out. To listen to his earlier songs and then listen to them as performed today is like comparing apples and oranges...but, to me, he still sounds good, and, I really enjoy his shows.

:up: You sometimes find that with bands/artists, particularly older ones, some fans will complain that the singers don't sound like they did back in the 70s or whatever. Well, obviously! When humans age, their vocal cords age as well. It upsets me when people forget that. If they sound a bit deep or a bit gravelly, so be it. They might not sound like they did thirty years ago, but they're still the same people who wrote the stuff. That's my way of looking at it.
 
VintagePunk said:


See, I still love Elton's vocals. To me, he doesn't really try to hit many of the highs anymore, sings lower, but the tone is still rich and satisfying, and very similar to the way it's always been...the upper range is just diminished a bit, and he sounded as great live as he does recorded.

:up:
 
GibsonGirl said:


:up: You sometimes find that with bands/artists, particularly older ones, some fans will complain that the singers don't sound like they did back in the 70s or whatever. Well, obviously! When humans age, their vocal cords age as well. It upsets me when people forget that. If they sound a bit deep or a bit gravelly, so be it. They might not sound like they did thirty years ago, but they're still the same people who wrote the stuff. That's my way of looking at it.

I could not agree more.
 
VintagePunk said:

GG, I'm sure you've listened to tons of Roger live from this tour. Does tour fatigue seem to be a factor for him vocally, at all? I first noticed it at Live 8 though, so it wouldn't have had anything to do with that performance.

He's sounding a bit more gravelly these days as the tour draws to a close, yes. It has been a long tour. His voice has been pretty well shot since 1985 though. He really threw it out on the Pros & Cons tour. Didn't help it much either by trying to hit the same notes on subsequent solo albums and tours either. Honestly, there's some shows from '87 where he sounds rather the same as he does today. If it hadn't been for that 1984 leg of Pros & Cons, I think he would sound a lot better these days.
 
No spoken words said:


I still like them, too, I thought I said. Is anyone reading my actual posts tonight??? VP, come on. :)

Oh, no. I was contrasting the way I feel about Elton vs Roger, not commenting on your like or dislike of Elton. I know you like him.

You're paranoid tonight. :cute:
 
I'm not paranoid, just ever vigilant, because you never know who is watching you, or plotting against you....that's not paranoid, that's just being prepared. I have lived near major bodies of water for a few years in a row now, are you telling me it's wrong to have a defense plan against an amphibious assault aimed at me???? No way.

:)
 
VintagePunk said:

The guitar player - again, I was thinking, and she said...well, the way she put it is that it was technically okay, he's hitting all the correct notes, but it sounded wrong. It was technically right, but had no guts, no soul. :sigh:

She was also pissed that the sax parts weren't right. :lol:

I'll have to watch it again, but I didn't pick up on mistakes on the sax and guitar. Maybe the guitarist (David K.) missed one note somewhere, but overall he was spot on.
 
No spoken words said:
I'm not paranoid, just ever vigilant, because you never know who is watching you, or plotting against you....that's not paranoid, that's just being prepared. I have lived near major bodies of water for a few years in a row now, are you telling me it's wrong to have a defense plan against an amphibious assault aimed at me???? No way.

:)

You were inhaling at the Police show, weren't you? :lol:
 
What's better...to be a singing psychic, or a psychic singer? The difference is a subtle one, granted, but nontheless, I present you with the question.
 
ntalwar said:


I'll have to watch it again, but I didn't pick up on mistakes on the sax and guitar. Maybe the guitarist (David K.) missed one note somewhere, but overall he was spot on.

Ian's so awesome, even if he does hit a bum note every now and then. :love: I heard him flub once during Us And Them, that's it. And I think that was down to nerves anyway. He never misses a note.

http://ian-ritchie.com/2007usa/o3.htm

:drool: He does spell Ottawa wrong, though. :lol:
 
VintagePunk said:


You were inhaling at the Police show, weren't you? :lol:

Ha. No, but, the concert was at Wrigley Field, so I was surrounded by....wait for it......grass! Ba-dum-dum.

I do have a friend who loves to pretend to be insane, and when I did move to Redondo Beach a few years ago, his first question was not about the apartment, or neighborhood, it was if I realized that I was leaving myself wide open for a nautical attack. Ah, the company I keep. :)
 
ntalwar said:


I'll have to watch it again, but I didn't pick up on mistakes on the sax and guitar. Maybe the guitarist (David K.) missed one note somewhere, but overall he was spot on.

The comment re: the guitarist, I said he was technically fine playing, but that he lacked the soul and balls of Gilmour, IMO. The sax thing, my daughter plays sax, she's the one who noticed it, and she's absolutely anal about things like that. She can't remember for sure what part it was now (and neither can I), but she thinks it was that a bit of the sax part was left out of Us and Them.
 
Dave K. and Snowy use different guitars than Gilmour, so the tone might be a bit off. A lot of hard core PF fans nickname David Kilminster "David Gilmourinster" - that's how awesome he is.
 
No spoken words said:
What's better...to be a singing psychic, or a psychic singer? The difference is a subtle one, granted, but nontheless, I present you with the question.

I'll contemplate that as I drift off to sleep. A psychic singer would be interesting...he/she could dictate the setlist based on a quick emotional read of the crowd :up:
 
No spoken words said:
What's better...to be a singing psychic, or a psychic singer? The difference is a subtle one, granted, but nontheless, I present you with the question.
I don't know :hmm:
 
Back
Top Bottom