Here Today... Gone To Hell!

this is NOT a old band vs. new band topic - i know how some people are touchy here

after cd.com, i wanted you guys opinion on that:

 :confused:I was watching an old show today, and something felt wierd.
I couldnt put my finger on it. It was like " man, this is so clear .... "

And then i understood  :D

in the 2001+ shows there is too much light !
too much light, too much fog and too much flashes.
That is why the old shows feels so clear.

It's not only the over use of back lights on the new set (2006), it's also the fact that the different members of the band are not under a clear spotlight.

The Tokyo 92 show (even if it has flaws) is a good example of a show where you can see everything. Each member is lighten the right way. well separated, by a neutral white light.

Do you find the use of too much ligjhting effect and colors in the 2006 shows kinda annoying ? too dramatic ?

that is also why some of the 2006 shows looks so good: day light.

what's your opinion on that? if you don"t care do not respond, you'll just look like a fool  ;D

thanks

Showbusiness has become more professional.

it has disturbed me on many occasions that the stage from the 2006 tour was so dark. even between songs, it was dark like hell. it seemed to me that only axl had a spotlight following him.

i can see how they have technology now: crazy lights, colored smoke, powerful effect.

but i find something very "real" when i watch a daylight show.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GYIaQwSZBbU
it's even more impressive than a very dramatically lighten stage
even if it renders good for videos and all


during the old days
the fact that they didnt abuse of smoke and colored light made it very interesting to watch
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BoeVVEh8Yco

you can clearly see axl's facial expression and every slash's fingers movement.

but seing that axl played day light shows in '06, it's cool.




Edit: No links to leaked tracks unless it's a live version. /jarmo

i think there's too much light on the stage like wat-ever said.

to give an example: when robin starts sweet child there should be only one light on the stage and that should be focused on him. i ain't seen that happening. i mean, just for that effect so people know where to look.

there's too much focus on the pyro and stage effects, the lights, the smoke... the focus should be on the band members i think.

but it seems that is the new trend and gnr is going with that.

it's good , it's impressive

i was more talking about the use of colored light instead of neutral white.

in the end it's still good music :)

I have only noticed this on bootlegged videos. However, when i was actually at a show, which is what really matters anyway, the fog, lights were not over done, and everyone was clear as day

I thought the lights were kinda muddy this time out. - Too many blues/reds.


I'd quite like to see them with a lightshow like Radiohead's.  There's is amazing, it's clear yet ridiculously colourful.

this kinda stuff?

(http://www.bluejake.com/images03/misc/2003_10_radiohead1.jpg)

Yeah.  It looks way better when you're actually watching it than on photos/tv.

And as they go with what seems like one solid colour it looks a lot less muddy.

Yeah i can imagine that.

The smoke could have made the GNR shows muddy looking with the new band.
rio 2001 is a good example of over use of light and smoke.

I hope they go back to more sober / neutral lights for the 2007 shows.
Something very realistic, and let the drama speaks for the music videos.

i don't know much about lights and shit, but i do agree that the old shows like tokyo are clearer. what i think tokyo is best at tho is catching the right member at the right time and it does seem like the there were more cameras in the old days. This time around there seem to be alot more going on onstage like colored lightening and strobes and the tv back screen and side screens, pyro, smoke etc.

i think the problem tho is that the pro shot shows we have with the new band are shot by festival crews and not by gn's own camera crew, thats my guess at least. If we'd ever get a proshot bootleg from one of the gn'r shows meaning not festival, i think the quality will be significally better, both production wise and lightening wise...

That's for sure
the crew knows the songs and all.

but if you look at Rock am ring, you can still tell there is too much light / smoke.
but it's not GNR' fault. the show was filmed "? la" MTV with wierd zooms and travelling like the love to do usually for crappy band to give the impression of power and energy ...

GNR doesnt need that :)

I went to a 2006 show. I had no problem seeing anything. Bootleg video may be different though.

yeah, it's not a problem in the absolute

i just find it better when stage are under neutral sober lights and with less smoke as possible.

dramatic ambiance can be used for intros (i.e. the begining of wttj) tho.

At both Gibson Amp shows last month I was close to the stage...one thing I really noticed was how much the smoke machines were in use. They fired off every 2 minutes or so a dozen times before the lights first went out...and then between songs when it became 'dark as hell' and the crowd was roaring, the smoke machines were going off. I actually thought the light show was rather conservative/bare bones compared to what I've seen lately at other big arena rock shows, but I can't compare to the 92 shows since I never went..having a ton of video doesn't count for me.

well, the lighting is very different....different band, different lighting...

I've seen only bootlegs from the UYI-tour, but I love the shape/structure of the stages. Also the lights. During the '91 to early '93 -era, the stage was absolutely brilliant, and the lights were perfectly designed for it. You can see it better if you look at the bootlegs shot from far back. As WAT-EVER, i'm totally buggin (cool nickname huh? ;D) said, it looks so much clearer compared to the newer shows. And brighter too. On Skin n' Bones -tour the stage/lights were changed to make them fit that kind of shows better.. or that's at least how I see it. But anyway, I like the old style better. Especially in indoor concerts.

But I gotta say that I had no problem seeing the band in first Helsinki show, as I was right next to the stage. But on the other night when I was little further, some of the light nearly made me blind for couple of seconds. Especially during LALD :smoking:

I don't mind too much light really...I watched Rio 2001 again the other day and it's true the lights were way different back then. To be honest I cared more about the music than the lights, and one of my favorite shows of 2006 was definitely Dublin...

(http://www.gnrfrance.net/groupe/miniature.php?tnH=600&url=/concerts/2006/05_07_europe/0609_dublin/061.jpg)

(http://www.gnrfrance.net/groupe/miniature.php?tnH=600&url=/concerts/2006/05_07_europe/0609_dublin/056.jpg)

Warsaw looked cool as hell too:

(http://www.gnrfrance.net/groupe/miniature.php?tnH=600&url=/concerts/2006/05_07_europe/0615_varsovie/11.jpg)

(http://www.gnrfrance.net/groupe/miniature.php?tnH=600&url=/concerts/2006/05_07_europe/0615_varsovie/28.jpg)

FYI, that was the case on the UYI tour too.

The strobelights were used during Live And Let Die back then too....


I didn't really pay attention to the lights. I do remember that during Patience, when Axl sings the line "'Cause the lights are shining bright", the lights would light up the crowd.



/jarmo

was in daylight, right? :P


wow, how I Love this shot! Thanks, Will! :D

Yup! ;D

But then again, I loved the Paris show too, and it was indoor, "in the dark"... ;)

yeah the patience effect is real dramatic.

as will posted, daylight shows are awesome cause you can clearly see the different members and "feel" their presence as "real person simply palying an instrument "

indoor, with the amount of light the new band uses, there is an "unreal" dynamic that kinda annoys me a little bit.
too much smoke too.

an old show like Tokyo 92 or indiana 91 clearly render the use of neutral white light: you can define their face expression, their eyes, their clothes - it gives a "reality" bonus :)


for example in this picture
(http://gnrfrance.net/groupe/miniature.php?tnH=400&url=/axl/george_chin/33.jpg)
i find it amazing that you can detail the fabric, the sweat and the the way the bandana is tighten. i dont know. immersion  ;D

I love the band, whether old band in whatever light or new band in whatever light.

Although the darker hues with the new band, is a bit more mystic and modern.

I'm on the side that too much stuff going on while they are playing sucks. The perfect example came when I saw the Motley Crue/Aerosmith concert this past fall. Motley Crue had about everything you could imagine on stage (fire, smoke, lights, dancers etc.) and then Aerosmith came out with nothing on the stage and just minimal amount of lights. It was partly due to Aerosmith just being a better band, but their show was way better because it seemed to be more about just jamming and playing music whereas Motley Crue was almost like a circus act.

Yeah, but that's about two different bands being different. Aerosmith comes from that old school 70's rock vibe, where it is about jamming and doing the best show musically. Whereas Motley Crue is infamous for their incredible stage show. If Motley came out without that, fans would be disappointed.

I've been telling people this for a while now...

Old rock shows ... not just GnR... but a lot of old rock shows ... they look kick ass.  The bands look rawer.

The new GnR is great, but they're no where near as raw as the old band.  The production side of the new shows is a bit toooo slick for me.  All them purple lights and shit .. :P lol

Yeah I know, but this was not just during Live And Let Die. I remember many times I looked at Tommy and then the strobes behind him would go like "WOOMM!" and I can't see nothing again. Didn't really bother me though, great gig :peace:

White-lights are much better than the purple/green/reds. I remember the strobe for Live and Let Die from the old shows. It seemed much more intense. I also miss Robin's army helmet.