Bands that suck at performing live

[Hydrazoic Acid]

Bands that suck at performing live

Van Halen with David Lee Roth - only because of his "singing".

Just listen to it - and this is a professional singer!? He NEVER was an even "not bad" or "tolerably" singer - not in the 70's, nor now. In compare with him, Michael Anthony just a god of vocals.

 

[JimJam]

I know someone elsewhere on the web who would say R.E.M. - I think she went to one of their shows on the Monster tour circa 1994-95 having enjoyed their studio music but said that Michael Stipe came off as arrogant and distant live, reading the lyrics he'd written off a stand and then throwing the sheets into the audience. I don't think she's felt the same way since.

I saw R.E.M. in their early days, after their Murmur and before Reckoning, at a college. They put on a terrific show. But I never saw them again and can't speak to later performances such as the lousy one your friend saw. Perhaps Michael Stipe was less arrogant when he had a full head of hair.

 

[~Banshee~]

It was the late 90's when I last saw Aerosmith, I'd say they improved some from early days.

 

[Aero]

Van Halen with David Lee Roth - only because of his "singing".

Just listen to it - and this is a professional singer!? He NEVER was an even "not bad" or "tolerably" singer - not in the 70's, nor now. In compare with him, Michael Anthony just a god of vocals.

For whatever reason, he just seems uninterested at singing all the lyrics. Maybe he was drunk on both occasions...?

 

[Sharp Dressed Man]

The most disappointing band I've seen live in recent years were The Temperance Movement. Their debut album was excellent so I was really up for the show but they were just awful.

I saw them open for the Stones last summer and thought they were excellent, although they played on a way too big stage and with average sound.

 

[Hydrazoic Acid]

For whatever reason, he just seems uninterested at singing all the lyrics. Maybe he was drunk on both occasions...?

I think, that's a signs of non-professionalism as they are. You know, I purposefully listened tons of Lee Roth's live recordings and made a conclusion: this guy most talentless singer in rock music. Worse than Keith Moon, Roger Waters or Peter Criss. And about to sing Hagar's era hits (like "Dreams", "Why Can't This Be Love" or "Love Walks In") - for him it's not out of the question. And not because these songs was made without him, but simply because Roth couldn't sing even a single note of Sammy's stuff.

 

[tkitna]

Probably not the worst, but I've seen Fleetwood Mac twice and they sucked both times. Sounded bad and ran through the show with absolutely no energy. The 2nd time I saw them, they only played for about 45 minutes and were done. This was in the late 90's.

 

[Khor1255]

Hmmm, I'm a curmudgeon of the lowest order but I honestly can say I've never seen a band who surprised me with how bad they were live. You kind of can tell from what they write how 'authentic' they are.

Bands who floored me with how good they were live are:

UFO in the mid 90s (with Schenker but I still wasn't expecting too much), Screaming Trees, Jethro Tull in the late 90s, Michael Hedges (became a fan on the spot), Talas (Billy Sheehan's early group who played a live version of Crimson's 21st Century Schizoid Man among other marvels).

I like live music much better than recorded stuff though. I saw a few turkeys but I expected little of them.

 

[Aktivator]

I know someone elsewhere on the web who would say R.E.M. - I think she went to one of their shows on the Monster tour circa 1994-95 having enjoyed their studio music but said that Michael Stipe came off as arrogant and distant live, reading the lyrics he'd written off a stand and then throwing the sheets into the audience. I don't think she's felt the same way since.

? What is wrong with that? REM were playing 25 songs a night, Could have been a new or an old song they haven't played in ages or most likely a cover they where doing a cover song every night that tour. Although I did stop seeing REM live after this tour until the last tour which was great. Before the Monster tour I saw every tour going back to when they opened for The Police/Joan Jett and Shea Stadium(83). They were raw in the early days and more polished later on but I thought it worked live both ways especially as the venues got bigger,


As someone who has been to over 1200 concerts I guess I could pick on a new band but I don't expect as much anymore so I am usually impressed or think they are just raw and need time. Same goes for old acts like, Dylan, Yes, CSN.

 

[Jonny Come Lately]

Thanks for the comments about R.E.M. (sorry I didn't reply sooner, I haven't been on here really in the last month or so as I've been very busy), it's quite interesting to hear a different perspective on their live performances. Maybe they just had a bad show that night or were enduring a difficult spell during the tour?