Jump to content

Precision versus Improvisation?


kingzoso

Recommended Posts

This topic is really for those of us who listen to a lot of bootlegs. Bootlegs by any of your favorite bands.

As I have stated in the past, I listen to a lot of Led Zeppelin bootlegs. All that I own and more that I have listened to on YouTube. There is a lot of great LZ bootlegs on YouTube. I have also started to listen to a lot of Rush bootlegs that are also out there via the same medium.

My question is: when listening to full live bootlegs by your favorite bands, do you prefer to hear the songs as they are pretty much played note for note (like they are on the album/cd), or would you prefer some improvisation or any slight difference to the songs?

My point is: Led Zeppelin were and are the Masters of Improvisation when it comes to almost all the songs They ever played live in front of an eager audience. For an easy example, "Dazed and Confused", studio version 6.27 in length. I have heard the same "Dazed and Confused" from a bootleg from Los Angeles that almost reaches the 45+ minute mark. If you prefer precision over improv, that means that LZ could have possibly played at least 7 more of Their songs if They did stick to the almost note for note formula that we hear on the albums/cds.

Any comments on which you prefer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is really for those of us who listen to a lot of bootlegs. Bootlegs by any of your favorite bands.

As I have stated in the past, I listen to a lot of Led Zeppelin bootlegs. All that I own and more that I have listened to on YouTube. There is a lot of great LZ bootlegs on YouTube. I have also started to listen to a lot of Rush bootlegs that are also out there via the same medium.

My question is: when listening to full live bootlegs by your favorite bands, do you prefer to hear the songs as they are pretty much played note for note (like they are on the album/cd), or would you prefer some improvisation or any slight difference to the songs?

My point is: Led Zeppelin were and are the Masters of Improvisation when it comes to almost all the songs They ever played live in front of an eager audience. For an easy example, "Dazed and Confused", studio version 6.27 in length. I have heard the same "Dazed and Confused" from a bootleg from Los Angeles that almost reaches the 45+ minute mark. If you prefer precision over improv, that means that LZ could have possibly played at least 7 more of Their songs if They did stick to the almost note for note formula that we hear on the albums/cds.

Any comments on which you prefer?

Improvisation. Anytime. Anyday. Thats why we all love LZ, no? :). And so we like it at any other band too. We? Yes. I am not only speaking for myself here, for sure...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Improvisation all the way. If I want precision I'll listen to a studio album. Watching live music I expect improvisation, what's the point on wasting money watching a live act that plays note for note versions of their studio material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Yep, improv every time. If I want note for note I will go to an Eagles concert...best sleep of my life.

But a band like Rush takes great pride in playing the songs pretty much exact live.

Drummers in the crowd mimic every Neil Peart fill and cymbal crash and that's a good thing as well..

But even they do little things that keep it fresh..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But a band like Rush takes great pride in playing the songs pretty much exact live.

Drummers in the crowd mimic every Neil Peart fill and cymbal crash and that's a good thing as well..

But even they do little things that keep it fresh..

I agree about Rush but the difference between The Eagle & Rush is night and day. The Eagles do country-rock / pop IMO and I do like their music, but when I see them live they always left me cold, just boring and lifeless. The only bright spot was Joe Walsh and whenever he got to "lively" Glenn Frey would shoot him the look and Joe would get back in line so to speak. Rush on the other hand is prog rock to me and have complex arrangements as it is, plus they engage the audience in banter and always seem to be having fun. I have seen Rush more times than any other band and I have never been either bored or disappointed. I love RUSH!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about Rush but the difference between The Eagle & Rush is night and day. The Eagles do country-rock / pop IMO and I do like their music, but when I see them live they always left me cold, just boring and lifeless. The only bright spot was Joe Walsh and whenever he got to "lively" Glenn Frey would shoot him the look and Joe would get back in line so to speak. Rush on the other hand is prog rock to me and have complex arrangements as it is, plus they engage the audience in banter and always seem to be having fun. I have seen Rush more times than any other band and I have never been either bored or disappointed. I love RUSH!!!

I completely agree with you on this. When Led Zeppelin play(ed) their long sets and solos, it was a showcase to show their respective talents. Sure a lot of people would accuse them of being self-indulgent and whatever else, however, I like to see or hear the virtuosity and improvisation of Jimmy, Jonesy and Bonzo and between Jimmy, Jonesy and Bonzo.

Rush, on the other hand, do pretty much stick to their original composition of their songs when playing live. With that format by Rush, it enables the audience to see or hear more of their songs (and I like that about Rush). In a 2-3 hour show, Rush can play up to 25 or 30 different songs. Geddy Lee, Alex Lifeson and Neil Peart are also some of the most-talented musicians on the planet. (My opinion of course).

Edited by kingzoso
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about Rush but the difference between The Eagle & Rush is night and day. The Eagles do country-rock / pop IMO and I do like their music, but when I see them live they always left me cold, just boring and lifeless. The only bright spot was Joe Walsh and whenever he got to "lively" Glenn Frey would shoot him the look and Joe would get back in line so to speak. Rush on the other hand is prog rock to me and have complex arrangements as it is, plus they engage the audience in banter and always seem to be having fun. I have seen Rush more times than any other band and I have never been either bored or disappointed. I love RUSH!!!

I agree with you.. I wasn't really comparing the 2 bands.

The Eagles are an amazing vocal band, but I can't say I'd be too excited to see them either..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 years later...
On 7/31/2013 at 9:42 PM, Catherine Warr said:

While improvisation is good, sometimes it can get boring. Moby Dick is an example, there's only so much you can do in a drum solo.

live versions of moby dick are my favourite songs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...