Bands that sound (or sounded) the most "unchanged" live

We all know that feeling when you hear a recorded song by a band, but when you listen to it live, it sounds like a completley different band. Well, in your oppinion, which bands sound the most "unchanged" live. In my opinion, it's Nirvana. Like them or not, they sound pretty similar live, down to when Kurt's voice screaches to hit some of the high notes.

Just saw 311 and Sublime w/ Rome and they both sounded nasty.

Melechesh was the closes I have seen.

Just saw 311 and Sublime w/ Rome and they both sounded nasty.

Dawq902

nasty as in "dude I just drank a 6 pack and I feel nasty, man" or as in "that rotting bird carcus is nasty"

The Strokes.

Nirvana? Certainly not, or at least not re: Nevermind. Live they were kind of raw back and far from sounding like old Mr Vigs clean production. Songs played off Bleach certainly resembled their original form though, but again that the album was engineerined far less in comparison.

personally I don't care for a band that simply replicates their studio sound - I don't pay to see a gig and listen to what could be an album played through a 50K rig.

Nirvana? Certainly not, or at least not re: Nevermind. Live they were kind of raw back and far from sounding like old Mr Vigs clean production. Songs played off Bleach certainly resembled their original form though, but again that the album was engineerined far less in comparison.

poptart

I think Reading '92 was the closest they were to the studio sound.

Bob Seger perhaps? Heard a live version of a song and it sounded like a studio recording.

Nirvana? Certainly not, or at least not re: Nevermind. Live they were kind of raw back and far from sounding like old Mr Vigs clean production. Songs played off Bleach certainly resembled their original form though, but again that the album was engineerined far less in comparison.

personally I don't care for a band that simply replicates their studio sound - I don't pay to see a gig and listen to what could be an album played through a 50K rig.

poptart

well if a band is close to or better than the album, live, it shows that they actually have talent and that they don't need editing to make them sound good.

[QUOTE="poptart"]

Nirvana? Certainly not, or at least not re: Nevermind. Live they were kind of raw back and far from sounding like old Mr Vigs clean production. Songs played off Bleach certainly resembled their original form though, but again that the album was engineerined far less in comparison.

MarioRPGer

I think Reading '92 was the closest they were to the studio sound.

unplugged as well

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8WP7aOD_9Q

The only logical answer.

[QUOTE="poptart"]

Nirvana? Certainly not, or at least not re: Nevermind. Live they were kind of raw back and far from sounding like old Mr Vigs clean production. Songs played off Bleach certainly resembled their original form though, but again that the album was engineerined far less in comparison.

MarioRPGer

I think Reading '92 was the closest they were to the studio sound.

I was at Reading at 92 and seriously there's an awful lot of post production work that's gone into that DVD. Yes they were good, but that DVD makes them sound far cleaner than they actually were.

Nirvana? Certainly not, or at least not re: Nevermind. Live they were kind of raw back and far from sounding like old Mr Vigs clean production. Songs played off Bleach certainly resembled their original form though, but again that the album was engineerined far less in comparison.

personally I don't care for a band that simply replicates their studio sound - I don't pay to see a gig and listen to what could be an album played through a 50K rig.

poptart

In all the youtube videos I've seen, The Ramones sound pretty much the same live. Only better.

[QUOTE="poptart"]

Nirvana? Certainly not, or at least not re: Nevermind. Live they were kind of raw back and far from sounding like old Mr Vigs clean production. Songs played off Bleach certainly resembled their original form though, but again that the album was engineerined far less in comparison.

personally I don't care for a band that simply replicates their studio sound - I don't pay to see a gig and listen to what could be an album played through a 50K rig.

Reed_Bowie

well if a band is close to or better than the album, live, it shows that they actually have talent and that they don't need editing to make them sound good.

Sorry, it's not talent I was refering too, rather a band should play to the size of a venue and not try and replicate a sound engineered for living room consumption. As the chap above me mentioned, a band trying to do so makes for an uninspiring performance.

And with technology these days sound engineerers are pretty good at masking mistakes occuring in live performances. Depend on the nature of the music I actually prefer a little mistake here or there rather something too clean or tight. Nirvana for example were certainly not the cleanest band live, hence them sounding noticably different to the production on Nevermind...

[QUOTE="Dawq902"]

Just saw 311 and Sublime w/ Rome and they both sounded nasty.

nasty as in "dude I just drank a 6 pack and I feel nasty, man" or as in "that rotting bird carcus is nasty"

Epica and The Agonist are pretty spot on live, which really shows how talented they really are.

Coldplay sounds the exact same. If any of you listened to their live album, the show I went to (Vancouver) sounded almost exactly like the performance they recorded in Liverpool. I don't know if that's a good thing or not. At least they're consistent.

The National sounds way better live. Their arrangements are definitely more upbeat and concert friendly for the songs that deserve it. A lot of the stuff on their albums are very sombre and sullen (which is great too).

I'm gonna go with Fugazi.

I like the live versions of all of Kataklysm's and Six Feet Under's songs more than the studio versions.

daft punk?

[QUOTE="Reed_Bowie"]

[QUOTE="Dawq902"]

Just saw 311 and Sublime w/ Rome and they both sounded nasty.

Dawq902

nasty as in "dude I just drank a 6 pack and I feel nasty, man" or as in "that rotting bird carcus is nasty"

Queen.

I think it's a bad thing when they sound the same live, you go to a concert to have fun and jump around (most of the time) not do the same as you do in your living room

Muse, they sound way better.Darthkaiser

Muse, they sound way better.Darthkaiser

Saw Muse last year April, they sounded amazing, even better live. lonewolf604

Green Day

They sound better live

Minus the bear

I saw U2 last month in Toronto , they should exactly like their cds. Blink 182 and Weezer sound very unchanged also .

Radiohead most definitely and Rage Against the Machine, RATM I know because I saw them live in 2007 Coachela (is that how it's spelled?)