do you prefer queen live or recoreded

do you think queen sounded better live or recorded or the same

I don't think this is the right place for this question, but I'll answer it. They sounded better in studio. However, their live performances were top-notch. That is, they really knew how to put on a good show, and didn't always stick to playing the song exactly like on the album.

Coincidentally, I think other bands that sound real good live, tend to not have to great of studio albums(ie Grateful Dead).

both me darlings

depends wot mood am in

Live... Especially songs like Liar, Mustapha, Don't Stop Me Now, Action This Day, Stone Cold Crazy (so on...). They are a bit faster and have more bass on it.

It just feels more energetic to be honest :)

But there is NOTHING wrong with any of the studio albums.

you know what grinds my gears??i will tell you.when people piss about which section posts are in.here is a hint...GET A LIFE!!!and to all those who wish to post you questions-post wherever the fuck you want to post them to piss these babies off even more.we are lucky to get interesting questions from people .and to answer question i prefer live because the have the worlds greatest frontman(had i should say)always giving his all.

Well alrighty then, live I guess.

Depends on the song. If its Tie Your Mother Down, Live. If its BoRap, then no.

I love the instruments live, so id pick live

Easy question for me. I prefer studio recordings. I can only enjoy live recordings if there's video attached, and even then I'm not a big fan of live stuff.

It saves me a lot of time and money as a 'collector', avoiding live stuff :)

stateside fan wrote:

you know what grinds my gears??i will tell you.when people piss about which section posts are in.here is a hint...GET A LIFE!!!

Since I was the only person to mention it at all, I have to assume that you were referring to me. I don't want to get into a pissing match with you, but it's only fair for you to hear from me that I wasn't pissing and moaning. I was only stating what I thought was the way the forum gods want it. I really couldn't care less. You should be able to see that I just stated it, and got off of it just as quick to answer the question.

Michael

Different forums are meant to keep different subjects separated, so one can read only the kind of subjects one prefers. Questions about taste (live or recorded, album covers, a band's name, which singer, beards or moustaches, gay or straight) are to some terribly boring and the answers will add probably nothing to one's Queen interest or knowledge.

Forum "rules" are only here to keep some order.

if there's one thing queen knew how to do better than almost any band that ever used a studio to record an album, it was... to use a studio to record an album. They used it their full capacity... and went one step further! If there's any one song to prove this, it would obviously be BoRhap.

And I think it would be fair to say that queen were perfectionists... therefore they would always sound better in studio than live. They were, however, an amazing live act. In my opinion, they "sounded" a lot better in studio than live, but of course, put on a killer live show.

BOTH cant choose!!!

Well...it depends on the song...for example, hammer to fall or even seven seas of rhye i'd rather recorded instead of live..but others songs are better alive such as one vision, tie your mother down, it's a hard life and somebody to love!