A Mark In Time
Mark Knopfler Discussion => Mark Knopfler Discussion Forum => Topic started by: Jarle on February 15, 2013, 07:51:52 PM
-
Mark's famous lyrics from Tunnel of Love will be a part of the new public piazza in front of the Spanish City Dome in Whitley Bay...
-
sweet!
-
What a nice thing to do! :clap
-
Nice touch and fitting for a truly special song. :thumbsup
-
That is a nice occasion to dig ToL out. ;D
But I doubt that it will happen....
-
Nice touch and fitting for a truly special song. :thumbsup
Indeed.
My nickname for TOL is "the martyr song".
It is up there among MK's (and the world's) very best songs of all times, but it has not been played for 21 years now. It did not deserve this fate...
Come on Mark ! They only thing that make me forgive you for retiring TR is to replace it with TOL like in the OES tour good old days...
And I want the break in the middle for band introductions, too ! :)
-
Nice touch and fitting for a truly special song. :thumbsup
Indeed.
My nickname for TOL is "the martyr song".
It is up there among MK's (and the world's) very best songs of all times, but it has not been played for 21 years now. It did not deserve this fate...
Come on Mark ! They only thing that make me forgive you for retiring TR is to replace it with TOL like in the OES tour good old days...
And I want the break in the middle for band introductions, too ! :)
+1 :clap
-
Nice touch and fitting for a truly special song. :thumbsup
Indeed.
My nickname for TOL is "the martyr song".
It is up there among MK's (and the world's) very best songs of all times, but it has not been played for 21 years now. It did not deserve this fate...
Come on Mark ! They only thing that make me forgive you for retiring TR is to replace it with TOL like in the OES tour good old days...
And I want the break in the middle for band introductions, too ! :)
So true! Without doubt the most wanted song by fans, but for some reason it seems to be long gone. In connection with the 2010 tour, Guy said this on his forum:
He actually categorically didn't want to play that tune as it was suggested by one of the band.
So it was suggested, but he did say no... I hope he has changed his mind :)
-
What a great piece of news ! One of Mark's best songs ever written, musically and lyrically. Not to mention the killer guitar solo. I'm listening to it right now !!! Love it !!!!!!!!!!! :thumbsup :clap
-
What a great piece of news ! One of Mark's best songs ever written, musically and lyrically. Not to mention the killer guitar solo. I'm listening to it right now !!! Love it !!!!!!!!!!! :thumbsup :clap
Which version ?
I like the monster ones but also the simple and clean sound studio version...
-
What a great piece of news ! One of Mark's best songs ever written, musically and lyrically. Not to mention the killer guitar solo. I'm listening to it right now !!! Love it !!!!!!!!!!! :thumbsup :clap
Which version ?
I like the monster ones but also the simple and clean sound studio version...
He will never beat the Alchemy version.
-
What a great piece of news ! One of Mark's best songs ever written, musically and lyrically. Not to mention the killer guitar solo. I'm listening to it right now !!! Love it !!!!!!!!!!! :thumbsup :clap
Which version ?
I like the monster ones but also the simple and clean sound studio version...
He will never beat the Alchemy version.
Some 85/86 live versions are just incredible.
-
Some 85/86 live versions are just incredible.
Or this one from the the Mandela-warmup-gigs in 1988:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omuOv8WF-Yw
I also hope he will play it during the next tour, with the long break with band-introductions. But I doubt he ever will.... And *if* he's gonna play it again, please without flutes, mandolines, etc etc... Just guitars/bass/drums/keyboards as it used to be!
Regards
Lars B.
-
The only reason I
-
The only reason I
-
What a great piece of news ! One of Mark's best songs ever written, musically and lyrically. Not to mention the killer guitar solo. I'm listening to it right now !!! Love it !!!!!!!!!!! :thumbsup :clap
Which version ?
I like the monster ones but also the simple and clean sound studio version...
He will never beat the Alchemy version.
Some 85/86 live versions are just incredible.
Agreed. It is master of taste... Alchemy has a longer and better sax intro; 85 versions had the long break, a longer built to the finale (some find it more elaborated, some find it too lenghty), and some nice, albeit a bit cheesy, backing vocals.
I (slightly) prefer Wembley'85 to Alchemy, but I prefer Alchemy to Sydney'86, which has no intro, no break, a strange guitar tone, and a long solo which makes we wonder "where are we going exactly", unlike Wembley one that was much better IMHO.
But my absolute favorite would be Munich'91.... yeah, I know, romanticized with this Pensa sound.... but sooooo good :)
-
The only reason I
-
Alchemy has a longer and better sax intro
the only reason is because it's linked to Portobello Belle.
for many years, I thought it was the TOL intro too, but it's in fact the PB outro, or at least the bridge from PB to TOL ;)
the "real" TOL intro begin when the drums come sin I think, so juste before the usual them, which was used from teh On location tour (longer but without sax) to the BIA tour.
it's a litlle bit like the "bridge" between SFA or OW and R&J on the BIA tour, which was later used between Heavy Fuel and R&J.
It's not really the R&J intro, which begin with the keyboards and sax
-
I don't think TOL guitar part is too demanding for him otherwise he wouldn't play TR either.
BTW is he still able to sing it? :think
-
BTW is he still able to sing it? :think
His vocals are better than ever. It's or a emotional thing, or he can't play it anymore technically. There are many long solos in a certain order during the outro, that leaves less space for improvisation. Without these solos it's not ToL. And maybe he think's he can't do that anymore.
Regards
Lars B.
-
BTW is he still able to sing it? :think
His vocals are better than ever. It's or a emotional thing, or he can't play it anymore technically. There are many long solos in a certain order during the outro, that leaves less space for improvisation. Without these solos it's not ToL. And maybe he think's he can't do that anymore.
Regards
Lars B.
Is that possible? I have often thought the same thing, but can it really be that Mark is not longer able to play some of his songs? If you do a search on Youtube, you will find several cover versions of the song, and even I can play the outro solo, although I am no guitarist at all... Mark has played guitar for several hours every day over the last 45 years, shouldn't he be able to play Tunnel of Love? This is actually a question... I hope this year that he proves once and for all that he still can play anything :)
This guy, for instance. Great playing, but is he "better" than Mark is today when it comes to playing this song? Isn't Mark able to do this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y_r9y9I1YE
-
I really think it is far simplier then that. Just like all of us, mark prefers some songs compared others. He has played it too often for his taste. Maybe it simply does not have the special place in his heart that it has for us? Maybe he really does not care and has long forgotten bout it? Guess guy is not gonna keep mentioning that all the fans want it. And I guess no one or not enough people have asked him about I directly. Most of the time the simplest solution is the correct one.
-
One of the things one must remember is that Mark is under pressure to perform well night after night and deliver his special sound without any glaring mistakes. The audiences expect that. He also doesn't get the chance to record another video if it all goes wrong!
I think a good point has already been touched upon in that the singing would be demanding in that it involves loud, energetic delivery and these are two adjectives not associated with MK these days!
Herlock is right too in that he was out of breath after every performance of this song and IMO he was struggling with it on the OES tour - there are a few ropey versions there. :o
-
Mark still plays SOS, mistakes included. And IMHO when comes the time to go guitar soloing on it, it is a very demanding song for him, even his modern half speed version (Guy would use "groovy feel" words instead)
-
What a great piece of news ! One of Mark's best songs ever written, musically and lyrically. Not to mention the killer guitar solo. I'm listening to it right now !!! Love it !!!!!!!!!!! :thumbsup :clap
Which version ?
I like the monster ones but also the simple and clean sound studio version...
For me, it has to be Alchemy. It's mostly the only version I listen to regularly. I think Mark can still play anything he wants to including TOL. It's only our guess why he wouldn't play it anymore. Perhaps he can't play it the way it used to be played, but I bet he can add some twidly bits to it and it will sound awesome. just like SOS these days.
I don't remember munich 91 version. Will check it out.
-
Munich 11.10.91 is okay, but he didn't quite nail it that night. Surely there are many, many better versions than that?
-
Munich 11.10.91 is okay, but he didn't quite nail it that night. Surely there are many, many better versions than that?
I find the finale very emotional. I know that many (including you, dmg, probably :) ) think that the pensa is not the right guitar for that solo, and that the Log/BIA tour versions are better, but I just can't help finding the 91/92 versions very moving.
By the way, dmg, I know you prefer the BIA tour versions to the Alchemy version (and I tend to agree, only by a small margin, at least for Wembley), but what is your second best ? 91/92, or Alchemy ? do you prefer Sydney'86 or Alchemy ?
-
Munich 11.10.91 is okay, but he didn't quite nail it that night. Surely there are many, many better versions than that?
I find the finale very emotional. I know that many (including you, dmg, probably :) ) think that the pensa is not the right guitar for that solo, and that the Log/BIA tour versions are better, but I just can't help finding the 91/92 versions very moving.
By the way, dmg, I know you prefer the BIA tour versions to the Alchemy version (and I tend to agree, only by a small margin, at least for Wembley), but what is your second best ? 91/92, or Alchemy ? do you prefer Sydney'86 or Alchemy ?
Oh, that's a toughie! Sydney '86 or Alchemy... :think Although I probably prefer the arrangement of the LOG tour better, I still think that Mark was a better guitarist on the BIA tour and the way he built up the final solo - you know the fine, delicate parts - he could do far better. It just sounded so lovely, the way he found those beautiful sounds for the right moment. :P
-
Munich 11.10.91 is okay, but he didn't quite nail it that night. Surely there are many, many better versions than that?
I find the finale very emotional. I know that many (including you, dmg, probably :) ) think that the pensa is not the right guitar for that solo, and that the Log/BIA tour versions are better, but I just can't help finding the 91/92 versions very moving.
By the way, dmg, I know you prefer the BIA tour versions to the Alchemy version (and I tend to agree, only by a small margin, at least for Wembley), but what is your second best ? 91/92, or Alchemy ? do you prefer Sydney'86 or Alchemy ?
Oh, that's a toughie! Sydney '86 or Alchemy... :think Although I probably prefer the arrangement of the LOG tour better, I still think that Mark was a better guitarist on the BIA tour and the way he built up the final solo - you know the fine, delicate parts - he could do far better. It just sounded so lovely, the way he found those beautiful sounds for the right moment. :P
Well, I follow your meaning, but I also think the BIA tour was not homogeneous: the arrangements on Wembley 85 are wonderful, agree, the guitar tone is slightly overdriven and its smoothen the song... but on Sydney'86 I just find that the guitar tone is very different and not right, and that the solo is too convoluted for me - in this particular case I prefer Alchemy. Don't you think ?
And what about 91/92 vs. Alchemy ?
-
Munich 11.10.91 is okay, but he didn't quite nail it that night. Surely there are many, many better versions than that?
I find the finale very emotional. I know that many (including you, dmg, probably :) ) think that the pensa is not the right guitar for that solo, and that the Log/BIA tour versions are better, but I just can't help finding the 91/92 versions very moving.
By the way, dmg, I know you prefer the BIA tour versions to the Alchemy version (and I tend to agree, only by a small margin, at least for Wembley), but what is your second best ? 91/92, or Alchemy ? do you prefer Sydney'86 or Alchemy ?
Oh, that's a toughie! Sydney '86 or Alchemy... :think Although I probably prefer the arrangement of the LOG tour better, I still think that Mark was a better guitarist on the BIA tour and the way he built up the final solo - you know the fine, delicate parts - he could do far better. It just sounded so lovely, the way he found those beautiful sounds for the right moment. :P
Well, I follow your meaning, but I also think the BIA tour was not homogeneous: the arrangements on Wembley 85 are wonderful, agree, the guitar tone is slightly overdriven and its smoothen the song... but on Sydney'86 I just find that the guitar tone is very different and not right, and that the solo is too convoluted for me - in this particular case I prefer Alchemy. Don't you think ?
And what about 91/92 vs. Alchemy ?
Well, as I've said before I think there are a few ropey versions from the OES tour, mainly early on in the tour. In saying that, there are also some wonderful versions and he really knew how to build up the solo with some delightfully delicate touches by this stage too so I have a slight preference for a good OES version. Anyway, is there ever really a bad version of this song? ;)
Highlights probably for me:
BIA: Seattle 20.09.85
OES: East Rutherford 23.02.92
-
I need to hear a live version from OES tour, I knew he had played it but I never got round to downloading one. Time to dust off the old computer. Their is a great version from The Houston 85 radio recording. Its blooming long as well.
-
I need to hear a live version from OES tour, I knew he had played it but I never got round to downloading one. Time to dust off the old computer. Their is a great version from The Houston 85 radio recording. Its blooming long as well.
That's a good one, but Seattle 20.09.85 is 20m20s approximately of pure gold. San Francisco 13.09.85 is great too but "only" 19m40s!
-
I need to hear a live version from OES tour, I knew he had played it but I never got round to downloading one. Time to dust off the old computer. Their is a great version from The Houston 85 radio recording. Its blooming long as well.
That's a good one, but Seattle 20.09.85 is 20m20s approximately of pure gold. San Francisco 13.09.85 is great too but "only" 19m40s!
Whats the quality of the recordings like on those as I struggle to enjoy poor ones even if MK is on fire. There was an kind Dylan fan last year that got some amazing audio. Think
he/she did Saskatoon with the Yon Two Crows I like.
-
I need to hear a live version from OES tour, I knew he had played it but I never got round to downloading one. Time to dust off the old computer. Their is a great version from The Houston 85 radio recording. Its blooming long as well.
That's a good one, but Seattle 20.09.85 is 20m20s approximately of pure gold. San Francisco 13.09.85 is great too but "only" 19m40s!
Whats the quality of the recordings like on those as I struggle to enjoy poor ones even if MK is on fire. There was an kind Dylan fan last year that got some amazing audio. Think
he/she did Saskatoon with the Yon Two Crows I like.
On these two the quality is about as good as it gets. There are two Seattle recordings on the go, one from the 19th as well which is only average quality. 20th is much better.
There are also two SF recordings available, one is quite rare to find now but the best one is the complete one and that is more readily available.
-
I need to hear a live version from OES tour, I knew he had played it but I never got round to downloading one. Time to dust off the old computer. Their is a great version from The Houston 85 radio recording. Its blooming long as well.
That's a good one, but Seattle 20.09.85 is 20m20s approximately of pure gold. San Francisco 13.09.85 is great too but "only" 19m40s!
Whats the quality of the recordings like on those as I struggle to enjoy poor ones even if MK is on fire. There was an kind Dylan fan last year that got some amazing audio. Think
he/she did Saskatoon with the Yon Two Crows I like.
On these two the quality is about as good as it gets. There are two Seattle recordings on the go, one from the 19th as well which is only average quality. 20th is much better.
There are also two SF recordings available, one is quite rare to find now but the best one is the complete one and that is more readily available.
Thanks I will look to see if they are on the tracker.
-
I like 81 versions because intro theme with piano/guitar is longer than in LOG or BIA tour, and Mark add licks he never played later, but I don't like the outro on this tour. I don't like Dortmund (live at the BBC) : out of tune at the end !
I love Alchemy for the intro (bridge from portobello belle) and the tone
I love BIA for band introduction / musical quotes / piano theme just before the outro / intro with more musical quotes than alchemy (in the name of love) / background vocals on the chorus / and the final solo
I don't find anything more in Wembley than other 85 versions. I think that versions during october-november 85 were the best ones
I remember TM and JVT saying that the "best" version was Stuttgart, and/or Uniondale (which is the longest : 24 min !)
I don't like sydney very much : too short, and the solo don't bring anything more IMHO, I can't hear anything "special" or "weird" in the tone. I don't fin the solo "convulated"
I don't like OES versions : don't like the pensa, don't like the tone, it lacks the intro, and the solo don't bring much more than 85 versions
but Herlock I know what you feel about Munich version : sometimes we love a specific version, without any reason, sometimes because it's one of the first we heard.
Cocaine 85 is the first BIA bootleg I've heard, and RATR is my fav version (with Jack's wah), but I suppose it has nothing special compared to other versions
chorus 78 is my fav sultans version from early years, but it has nothing special compared to other version from the same era.
sometimes, a version is in our heart for other reasons than "musical" ones :)
-
I like very much Sydney 86. Of course too short but tight version. And this sort of abrupt start "waouh", no boring intro, straight to the thing.
-
How nice is that. To have such a monument on the site where The Spanish City used to be.
Nothing would be more fitting than the words to Tunnel of love. :)
I just love Tunnel of love, it's among my favorite DS songs.
On the 14th of may I will be at the Amsterdam show and yes, I deep down in my heart hope he'll play it, even if I do know he won't.........
Why Mark doesn't want to bring it out again? Well...., I guess only he really knows.
The only thing I can't really believe, is him technically no longer being able to play it. Mark still plays on a daily basis and gets plenty of practice, which means he is still keeping his guitar skills on a proper level. So no, I don't think that is the reason.
Maaike
-
I agree with what others have said here - im pretty sure that if MK chose to he could still play and sing TOL pretty god damn well
So yes - i wholeheartedly agree - time to park Telegraph Road and or Speedway and bring out this typically 15 minute audio spectacular!
-
I like very much Sydney 86. Of course too short but tight version. And this sort of abrupt start "waouh", no boring intro, straight to the thing.
I see what you mean, but I wouldn't call the TOL intro "boring"
-
I like very much Sydney 86. Of course too short but tight version. And this sort of abrupt start "waouh", no boring intro, straight to the thing.
I see what you mean, but I wouldn't call the TOL intro "boring"
Indeed, I loved in the intro. Terry's powerful drums, then Chris on his sax followed by Mark doing some wonderful improvisation - never the same twice. Great and powerful. Impact, followed by near silence as they brought it down to a whisper, then Mark would play little pieces and talk about the Spanish City etc. What's not to like about that? Talk about setting the mood! Sheer brilliance.
-
I like very much Sydney 86. Of course too short but tight version. And this sort of abrupt start "waouh", no boring intro, straight to the thing.
I see what you mean, but I wouldn't call the TOL intro "boring"
Indeed, I loved in the intro. Terry's powerful drums, then Chris on his sax followed by Mark doing some wonderful improvisation - never the same twice. Great and powerful. Impact, followed by near silence as they brought it down to a whisper, then Mark would play little pieces and talk about the Spanish City etc. What's not to like about that? Talk about setting the mood! Sheer brilliance.
Agreed, dmg, this intro is fab, both on the LOG tour and on the BIA tour; I prefer the BIA tour overall for this intro, for one reason - the synth sound to help the guitar gives a nice romantic touch, probably by Guy Fletcher ? one positive influence ;) on Alchemy without synth it sounds a bit dry, all the more that the guitar tone is stronger. But still, Alchemy strong point is the longer sax intro... I undertood some call it the "Portobello outro" instead, but come on, this sax part coming after the band intros, and after the carribean vibes (which can still be heard on the CD, but not on the video, probably for the better), I have troubles calling it an "outro" :) Also, Terry's overdriven-to-death drums at the beginning in the BIA tour are really too much, I prefer the link with the sax part of Alchemy...
Oh well, matter of tastes, all these versions are fab in the own sweet way ! Watching Alchemy one now, really love it...
btw what do you think of the studio version ? I really love it, simple and clean sound, I think the MM record was really well produced... and I think the studio version is better than the OL tour version, where the guitar is too soft, falls flat, and is out of tune at the end, as already spotted.
As for Sydney'86, I stand by my opinion that it is not my favourite (although very nice too). It is too short, the band is tired, the guitar tone falls a bit flat compared to Wembley, and the solo, alhtough longer than Alchemy, is less convincing that both Alchemy (short and efficient) and Wembley (long but very well built).
(I'm always quoting Wembley/Sydney because I prefer watching videos than listen to pure sound, and these are the only two available. Houston sounds similar to Wembley anyway).
-
The studio version is nice but doesn't build up as slowly. I always like to listen to live stuff for some reason; I think you see artists for what they are on a given night and not a remixed, take whatever record version. I suppose live is more honest!
-
Agreed, dmg, this intro is fab, both on the LOG tour and on the BIA tour; I prefer the BIA tour overall for this intro, for one reason - the synth sound to help the guitar gives a nice romantic touch, probably by Guy Fletcher ?
[/quote]
Interesting you should say this, and I agree, because JI said in an interview regarding new band members circa 1986 that on the last tour they didn't really know what they were doing regarding the use of synths and that was an interview with John and Alan!
-
Agreed, dmg, this intro is fab, both on the LOG tour and on the BIA tour; I prefer the BIA tour overall for this intro, for one reason - the synth sound to help the guitar gives a nice romantic touch, probably by Guy Fletcher ?
Interesting you should say this, and I agree, because JI said in an interview regarding new band members circa 1986 that on the last tour they didn't really know what they were doing regarding the use of synths and that was an interview with John and Alan!
[/quote]
So, they jump from almost no synth in the LOG tour, to way too much synth on the BIA tour, to again almost no synth (but heavy pedal steel) in the OES tour... synth should be use with care. But somethimes provide a very ambiance filling, like in this intro which seems a bit dry in the LOG tour (nothing scandalous, but still).
-
I like very much Sydney 86. Of course too short but tight version. And this sort of abrupt start "waouh", no boring intro, straight to the thing.
I see what you mean, but I wouldn't call the TOL intro "boring"
The sax part is not my fave. If I remember well, by 91 no more sax on it
-
I like very much Sydney 86. Of course too short but tight version. And this sort of abrupt start "waouh", no boring intro, straight to the thing.
I see what you mean, but I wouldn't call the TOL intro "boring"
Indeed, I loved in the intro. Terry's powerful drums, then Chris on his sax followed by Mark doing some wonderful improvisation - never the same twice. Great and powerful. Impact, followed by near silence as they brought it down to a whisper, then Mark would play little pieces and talk about the Spanish City etc. What's not to like about that? Talk about setting the mood! Sheer brilliance.
TOL whatever versions, I LOVE them all. :) I love it a lot when Mark talked about the Spanish city. And the version where he introduced band members. Uniondale with over 20 minutes is pure heaven. I just wish that all these bootlegs come in better sound quality. I'm so spoiled by Simfy.
-
I'm always quoting Wembley/Sydney because I prefer watching videos than listen to pure sound
opposite for me : I prefer listen to audio only with headphones, or in the car.
therefore I can focus on music only : melody, arrangements, new chords changes, new licks, musical quotes....
while watching videos, I try to see what PU combination is used, what stompbox is on the floor, Mark's facial mimics, other musician's instruments and so on....so sometimes I just forget to listen to the music ;D
-
Jarle, thank you for this wonderful news! In the beginning I didn't know what the Spanish city was and wondered what Mark was singing about :hmm, until one of the MK fans told about it! ;D
I like the song, especial the Uniondale version because of the introduction of the band, it is great! :clap
I prefer watching the video of Wembley 1985, because it has a good quality! :P
Fieneke
-
I'm always quoting Wembley/Sydney because I prefer watching videos than listen to pure sound
opposite for me : I prefer listen to audio only with headphones, or in the car.
therefore I can focus on music only : melody, arrangements, new chords changes, new licks, musical quotes....
while watching videos, I try to see what PU combination is used, what stompbox is on the floor, Mark's facial mimics, other musician's instruments and so on....so sometimes I just forget to listen to the music ;D
Actually, this makes me think of what I call the "live album paradox".
A live album is something like an oxymoron: by definition, "live" is an experience, not an album. I noticed that, as much as I love collecting concert videos and/or listening to audio bootlegs, these experiences don't even come close to the emotion of attenting a concert. Even a high definition blu-ray disc with superb DTS-MA sound cannot reproduce this experience. Ohterwise concerts would be empty... and they are not, far from it ! concerts are maybe the only thing in the music business that people are still ready to pay a high price for ! because it is a unique experience. Video or audio recordings are certainly nice as a souvenir, or to get an idea of what you have missed; but it is no substitute for the real thing.
And maybe we have here the explanation of why Mark is so reluctant to issue DVDs. He loves the experience of playing live, an experience he wants to share with fans, but he does'nt feel the need for recording them and let them live forever. Each concert is different, and have a very short live spam - when it is over, it is over, just a memory. Maybe that's why he could't care less if we want a DVD of Wembley'85 or even Montreux'2010. You like my music ? come to my concert and enjoy ! :)
-
I'm always quoting Wembley/Sydney because I prefer watching videos than listen to pure sound
opposite for me : I prefer listen to audio only with headphones, or in the car.
therefore I can focus on music only : melody, arrangements, new chords changes, new licks, musical quotes....
while watching videos, I try to see what PU combination is used, what stompbox is on the floor, Mark's facial mimics, other musician's instruments and so on....so sometimes I just forget to listen to the music ;D
Actually, this makes me think of what I call the "live album paradox".
A live album is something like an oxymoron: by definition, "live" is an experience, not an album. I noticed that, as much as I love collecting concert videos and/or listening to audio bootlegs, these experiences don't even come close to the emotion of attenting a concert. Even a high definition blu-ray disc with superb DTS-MA sound cannot reproduce this experience. Ohterwise concerts would be empty... and they are not, far from it ! concerts are maybe the only thing in the music business that people are still ready to pay a high price for ! because it is a unique experience. Video or audio recordings are certainly nice as a souvenir, or to get an idea of what you have missed; but it is no substitute for the real thing.
And maybe we have here the explanation of why Mark is so reluctant to issue DVDs. He loves the experience of playing live, an experience he wants to share with fans, but he does'nt feel the need for recording them and let them live forever. Each concert is different, and have a very short live spam - when it is over, it is over, just a memory. Maybe that's why he could't care less if we want a DVD of Wembley'85 or even Montreux'2010. You like my music ? come to my concert and enjoy ! :)
I absolutely agreed with you. It's not only the experience of being at the concert, but also the excitement and the anticipation of going to the concert.
But a concert dvd is particularly nice to relive the memory. Especially when you can't attend one.
-
Thats nice, but...
What happens with all the fans from the South part and the east of the planet Earth?
They cant live what its a MK concert and they cant have a dvd to at least get an idea.
Do you think all those fans would agree with you?
-
1- agree with Jbaent
2- maybe I am an exception, but although I like the excitation to go to a concert, I must admit I enjoy more listen, re-listen, and re-re-listen to live recordings. I think it's the purpose of music : to be listenened (and yes also to be shared as human experience). Of course the live experience is a nice one, but in the case of DS/MK I tend to think that musical arrangements are more important than the artist-public interaction. Marks is not really a showman, his art is more in playing music than giving a show, so I'd say that DS/MK gigs are rarely a "live" memory. On the other hand, the way the songs are rearranged is (almost) all the time great IMHO.
I think it's more relevant to talk about "live experience" with bands/artists like hendrix (obvisouly)/ stones/ ac/dc / springsteen (for atris-public interaction) / floyd (for the visual experience), etc...
3- about "live albums", yes Herlock you're right about the oxymore in most of the cases, BUT there are several "anti-examples" where the release of a live recording was in the same way as an album (because it was thought as whole concept with a film, a special songs ordrer, a special cover artwork, sometimes stuido mixed with live, etc...) :
- Led Zep / songs remains the same
- U2 / rattle and hum
- band / the last waltz
- floyd / live at pompei
...
and surely many others
since the first time I heard and saw Alchemy, I always considered it as an "album" :
- "theatral" concept with stargazer introduction
- songs rearranged, with old ones fitting well with the new ones, as if they were from the same era
- artwork concept
- the video introduced by a little pool scene with band members
- musical, package, visual unity
to me it was THE live album from DS discography, it could'nt be another one
at the time I thought it was reharsed, played, produced only in the purpose of the release....
Of course I was wrong, and that's only after discovering bootlegs, I realized that it was "just" a gig from the LOG tour ( at least the las one), nothing less, but nothing more....
another gig could have well be released instead (Paris was recorded because PB appeared on the MFN comp)