|
kevcat
|
 |
« Reply #25 on: October 15, 2012, 09:46:16 AM » |
|
Looks like alot of homos are in here, who would rather go and see a high pitched man dancing and crotch grabbing, as opposed to an actual band playing guitars etc  |
|
|
|
|
|
kevcat
|
|
« Reply #26 on: October 15, 2012, 09:47:26 AM » |
|
Elvis, Michael Jackson and then the Beatles. The Beatles weren't much of a live band in comparison to other acts of the time. I would have loved to have seen Led Zeppelin, Queen or Journey in their prime.
Are you serious? Explain who were a better live band in the 60s? You know fuck all about music mate  |
|
|
|
|
|
Mensa Bob
|
|
« Reply #27 on: October 15, 2012, 12:24:43 PM » |
|
I'd rather watch prime-Beethoven, prime-Vivaldi and prime-Erik Saade
lül wtf |
|
|
|
|
|
Pet shop boys
|
|
« Reply #28 on: October 15, 2012, 12:33:36 PM » |
|
you realize he is lip syncing there.
But it was his prime 1983. WOOOSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH |
|
|
|
|
|
Man of Steel
|
|
« Reply #29 on: October 15, 2012, 12:34:59 PM » |
|
MJ
Elvis
Beatles
|
|
|
|
|
|
CalvinH
|
|
« Reply #30 on: October 15, 2012, 12:47:55 PM » |
|
Beatles
|
|
|
|
|
|
El Diablo Blanco
|
|
« Reply #31 on: October 15, 2012, 12:53:35 PM » |
|
I've seen Michael twice in his prime, on his BAD and Dangerous tour in LA. Fucking insane. I would have loved to see Elvis, but only because I've never seen him in person. But I would put Johnny Cash ahead of Elvis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CalvinH
|
|
« Reply #32 on: October 15, 2012, 12:58:17 PM » |
|
I've seen Michael twice in his prime, on his BAD and Dangerous tour in LA. Fucking insane. I would have loved to see Elvis, but only because I've never seen him in person. But I would put Johnny Cash ahead of Elvis.
You didn't see him when he played in Folsom   |
|
|
|
|
|
intenceman
|
|
« Reply #33 on: October 15, 2012, 02:53:40 PM » |
|
Of this list- 1. Beatles- Hamburg era, 2. Elvis- Sun Records era. Off the list 3.Doors - Whisky era, 4. Stones circa 1969.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Groink
|
|
« Reply #34 on: October 15, 2012, 03:03:51 PM » |
|
Elvis, Michael Jackson and then the Beatles. The Beatles weren't much of a live band in comparison to other acts of the time. I would have loved to have seen Led Zeppelin, Queen or Journey in their prime.
I saw all three, Queen was by far the best live band. followed by Zep. Journey i went because a chick that i was boning got tickets, i didn't even pay attention |
|
|
|
|
|
Archer77
|
|
« Reply #35 on: October 15, 2012, 03:29:24 PM » |
|
Are you serious? Explain who were a better live band in the 60s? You know fuck all about music mate The Who, Cream, Jimi Hendrix to name a few |
|
|
|
|
Mr Anabolic
Getbig IV
Gender: 
Posts: 1465
"If you don't have it... then don't hit it"
|
|
« Reply #36 on: October 15, 2012, 03:59:55 PM » |
|
Elvis: Early concerts only (ie Sun records/Ed Sullivan period). He was still good when he started playing Vegas in 1970, but he went down hill after a couple years.
Beatles: Cavern Club and Hamburg period. Also Shea Stadium in 1965 and their last concert in 1966 Candlestick Park because of the history involved.
MJ: Not really into MJ, but I would go to see him during the "Thriller" period if someone else bought my ticket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wiggs
|
|
« Reply #37 on: October 15, 2012, 08:49:02 PM » |
|
MJ
Beatles
Elvis
|
G
|
|
|
|
uberman
|
|
« Reply #38 on: October 15, 2012, 09:08:48 PM » |
|
Isnt here,and this performance is far better than the Motown one Candizzle posted. I saw the bad tour in London in 88, only songs he lip synched were Smooth Criminal and Man in the Mirror, he could sing all his songs like his albums but used to lip synch to take a breather, songs that required heavy danced routines or being on his knees etc like man in the mirror.He got lazier at he got older until he lip synched most of his songs like the History tour. come on... it doesnt sound like the studio versions and you know it... far from it. Cause computers/electronic effects just transform everything, even at that time. |
|
|
|
|
|
PJim
|
|
« Reply #39 on: October 16, 2012, 04:33:51 AM » |
|
MJ was a paedo though
|
tied behind his back
|
|
|
|
kevcat
|
|
« Reply #40 on: October 16, 2012, 07:32:19 AM » |
|
The Who, Cream, Jimi Hendrix to name a few
Decent acts all of them, but for quality of songs MJ, Elvis and The Beatles easily beat the 3 of them, with the Beatles number 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Tito24
|
|
« Reply #41 on: October 16, 2012, 07:33:15 AM » |
|
i saw michaels dangerous concert as a kid, awesome
|
|
|
|
|
|
Army of One
|
|
« Reply #42 on: October 16, 2012, 07:33:50 AM » |
|
come on... it doesnt sound like the studio versions and you know it... far from it. Cause computers/electronic effects just transform everything, even at that time.
No it doesnt, but its because he's singing it differently while dancing, the whole performance (dancing included)is better than Motown.Put him in front of a Mic while not in concert and fully rested and Im fairly certain there would be little difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
