Lewisham soundboard

[Kory]

Just re-read this thread thanks to Heston's link in the other one. I know this may be a controversial speculation, I'm really just musing here, but I half-wonder if the band are reluctant to release live albums because they recognize how inconsistent they were as a live unit. Shit-hot and exciting to be sure, but a lot more onstage flubs than most bands who have released multiple live documents. Is it perhaps a case of public embarrassment? Again, a not wholly serious speculation, but it has come to mind a few times during my fandom.

[Low Down Low]

Just re-read this thread thanks to Heston's link in the other one. I know this may be a controversial speculation, I'm really just musing here, but I half-wonder if the band are reluctant to release live albums because they recognize how inconsistent they were as a live unit. Shit-hot and exciting to be sure, but a lot more onstage flubs than most bands who have released multiple live documents. Is it perhaps a case of public embarrassment? Again, a not wholly serious speculation, but it has come to mind a few times during my fandom.

I could see that being a record company consideration at least. But i still think there are enough decent tight performances to work on and, as per Shea, there would be the obligatory serious "touching up" before being passed fit for release.

[Kory]

Just re-read this thread thanks to Heston's link in the other one. I know this may be a controversial speculation, I'm really just musing here, but I half-wonder if the band are reluctant to release live albums because they recognize how inconsistent they were as a live unit. Shit-hot and exciting to be sure, but a lot more onstage flubs than most bands who have released multiple live documents. Is it perhaps a case of public embarrassment? Again, a not wholly serious speculation, but it has come to mind a few times during my fandom.

I could see that being a record company consideration at least. But i still think there are enough decent tight performances to work on and, as per Shea, there would be the obligatory serious "touching up" before being passed fit for release.

Yeah and obviously the performances on FHTE are tight too (although my hypothesis could be one of the reasons it was a compilation rather than a full show).

[Low Down Low]

Just re-read this thread thanks to Heston's link in the other one. I know this may be a controversial speculation, I'm really just musing here, but I half-wonder if the band are reluctant to release live albums because they recognize how inconsistent they were as a live unit. Shit-hot and exciting to be sure, but a lot more onstage flubs than most bands who have released multiple live documents. Is it perhaps a case of public embarrassment? Again, a not wholly serious speculation, but it has come to mind a few times during my fandom.

I could see that being a record company consideration at least. But i still think there are enough decent tight performances to work on and, as per Shea, there would be the obligatory serious "touching up" before being passed fit for release.

Yeah and obviously the performances on FHTE are tight too (although my hypothesis could be one of the reasons it was a compilation rather than a full show).

Tbh I've not put a lot of thought into this before but it does occur to me that i can't recall a live album being seriously mooted while they were still active as a band. And the stuff for Rude Boy, of course, had to be worked up so maybe it was a thing with them from the start. But like you, I'm only speculating that and I did always think the Clash were a band to see raw and in the moment anyway, not one to be cooing over while listening to a bootleg 30-40 years after.

[Heston]

Just re-read this thread thanks to Heston's link in the other one. I know this may be a controversial speculation, I'm really just musing here, but I half-wonder if the band are reluctant to release live albums because they recognize how inconsistent they were as a live unit. Shit-hot and exciting to be sure, but a lot more onstage flubs than most bands who have released multiple live documents. Is it perhaps a case of public embarrassment? Again, a not wholly serious speculation, but it has come to mind a few times during my fandom.

I'd say it is a perfectly reasonable opinion. They could go from being transcendental to downright awful from song to song.

[matedog]

Just re-read this thread thanks to Heston's link in the other one. I know this may be a controversial speculation, I'm really just musing here, but I half-wonder if the band are reluctant to release live albums because they recognize how inconsistent they were as a live unit. Shit-hot and exciting to be sure, but a lot more onstage flubs than most bands who have released multiple live documents. Is it perhaps a case of public embarrassment? Again, a not wholly serious speculation, but it has come to mind a few times during my fandom.

I could see that being a record company consideration at least. But i still think there are enough decent tight performances to work on and, as per Shea, there would be the obligatory serious "touching up" before being passed fit for release.

Yeah and obviously the performances on FHTE are tight too (although my hypothesis could be one of the reasons it was a compilation rather than a full show).

I don’t know, there are a lot of flubs on FHTE - that glaring wrong chord on CC before the “I don’t trust you” which they even chose as the single to the meandering hit or miss adlibs on STH (which I happen to love but know they aren’t for everyone).

[matedog]

Also Shea has Terry fuck ups galore (though that might just be my pet peeve).

[gkbill]

Just re-read this thread thanks to Heston's link in the other one. I know this may be a controversial speculation, I'm really just musing here, but I half-wonder if the band are reluctant to release live albums because they recognize how inconsistent they were as a live unit. Shit-hot and exciting to be sure, but a lot more onstage flubs than most bands who have released multiple live documents. Is it perhaps a case of public embarrassment? Again, a not wholly serious speculation, but it has come to mind a few times during my fandom.

I could see that being a record company consideration at least. But i still think there are enough decent tight performances to work on and, as per Shea, there would be the obligatory serious "touching up" before being passed fit for release.

Yeah and obviously the performances on FHTE are tight too (although my hypothesis could be one of the reasons it was a compilation rather than a full show).

I don’t know, there are a lot of flubs on FHTE - that glaring wrong chord on CC before the “I don’t trust you” which they even chose as the single to the meandering hit or miss adlibs on STH (which I happen to love but know they aren’t for everyone).

Hello,

I'm not as musically literate as many on this board but I much more consider energy of performances. If the band is putting out sincere effort, I'm pretty forgiving as the live experience is really gratifying.

[Marky Dread]

I think warts and all is best and honest when it comes to live stuff.

With the Rude Boy tracks being redone with overdubs it was allegedly for technical deficiencies on the tapes. So maybe when matched up to the film footage the audio didn't sound so great.
There were live tracks done while they were still a band that they were happy to release the Concert for Kampuchea album has the live Armagideon Time on it and obviously Bankrobber and London Calling were also prepared but not used.

[Dr. Medulla]

I think warts and all is best and honest when it comes to live stuff.

Full-on agreement. Only artsy fartsy Steely Dan—yeah, I went there!—loose stool cares about perfection. Yes, the Clash had moved on from being gutter punks and all that, but the essence of their live performance was the total effect of the energy, not precision and perfection. If you want something close to perfection, that's what the studio recordings are for.

[Low Down Low]

There's a lengthy passage in Pete Townshends book, covering several pages, detailing all the technical changes and additions that were made before Live at Leeds was released, so i think it might be fair to say none of these renowned live albums are actually put out in their raw, elemental state. Also, I can't ever recall being at a rock gig and remarking, oh no, the lead guitarist flubbed the crucial middle note in that guitar solo or the drummer missed the hi-hat tap during that complex rhythm change.

[Silent Majority]

There's a lengthy passage in Pete Townshends book, covering several pages, detailing all the technical changes and additions that were made before Live at Leeds was released, so i think it might be fair to say none of these renowned live albums are actually put out in their raw, elemental state. Also, I can't ever recall being at a rock gig and remarking, oh no, the lead guitarist flubbed the crucial middle note in that guitar solo or the drummer missed the hi-hat tap during that complex rhythm change.

Thin Lizzy's incredible Live and Dangerous is more or less a studio album.

When I saw Pete Doherty live, I definitely noted flubs-a-plenty.

[Low Down Low]

There's a lengthy passage in Pete Townshends book, covering several pages, detailing all the technical changes and additions that were made before Live at Leeds was released, so i think it might be fair to say none of these renowned live albums are actually put out in their raw, elemental state. Also, I can't ever recall being at a rock gig and remarking, oh no, the lead guitarist flubbed the crucial middle note in that guitar solo or the drummer missed the hi-hat tap during that complex rhythm change.

Thin Lizzy's incredible Live and Dangerous is more or less a studio album.

When I saw Pete Doherty live, I definitely noted flubs-a-plenty.

Fun fact: the crowd noise on Live and Dangerous at least partially come from a Bowie concert.

I do recall when i saw the Mescaleroes in Shepherds Bush, 2001 i think, i practically recoiled at their effort to do Mondo Bongo, which seemed all over the place to me and not something you'd ever imagine you'd say about that group of musicians.

[Marky Dread]

There's a lengthy passage in Pete Townshends book, covering several pages, detailing all the technical changes and additions that were made before Live at Leeds was released, so i think it might be fair to say none of these renowned live albums are actually put out in their raw, elemental state. Also, I can't ever recall being at a rock gig and remarking, oh no, the lead guitarist flubbed the crucial middle note in that guitar solo or the drummer missed the hi-hat tap during that complex rhythm change.

Thin Lizzy's incredible Live and Dangerous is more or less a studio album.

When I saw Pete Doherty live, I definitely noted flubs-a-plenty.

"It's Alive" is overdubbed.

[Low Down Low]

I think this is semi related to the whole TotP thing. While some bands did want to play live or take the piss, the vast majority and the record execs too no doubt, preferred to mime to the studio track to the extent it was common practice to bung a bribe to the head engineer so that the backing track they were obliged to lay down as per Musicians Union rules was discarded. The goal was to shift product and playing some second-rate, live-studio recording was not the way they wanted to do it.