Saw Smashing Pumpkins in Buenos Aires last night

jmorbita · #1 11-19-2010, 06:20 AM

Last night Smashing Pumpkins played in Buenos Aires. Boy, am I dissapointed. They sounded like crap. No bass whatsoever in the mix... all you could hear was the kick drum. The venue were they played (Luna Park) is known to have bad sound, but last night was incredible. they only thing you could hear clearly was the snare drum. I can't recall worst sound than last night in a pro touring band.
It's such a shame, because the band really seemed to be very tight. This new drummer kid, he's a monster player, but me and my friends agreed he seemed to lack a bit of sweetness... Billy lets the kid do his thing I guess, but the kid never seems to put the intensity down, even on songs such as By Starlight. His drum solo was great though.
At some points during the show, one couldn't even tell what chord they were playing... no way of hearing the fundamental of the chord... I moved around the venue a bit to see if i was just in a bad spot, but no, there was just no bass in the mix.
On top of it all, half of the set was new songs that half the people had never heard before. I have no problem with that generally, but since we were only hearing mudd, I really don't know wether I like those songs or not.
The best part of the show was on the encore, Billy came back with his acoustic guitar and played a song from the last album and Disarm. These were the only 2 songs we got to hear clearly.
The worst part is that I saw them back around 98 or 99, when they first came to Buenos Aires, during the Adore period, they sounded just as bad. So is it normal for the Smashing Pumpkins to have bad live sound? I've heard some recorded live preformances and they sounded great IMO... I guess it's just Buenos Aires.

Smashing Pumpkins is listed amongst my top ten favourite bands of all times, so you might imagine how dissapointed I am..

lousybassplayer · #2 11-19-2010, 06:28 AM

Never saw them live, but I always got the impression they were a "studio" band. On all fo their recordings you can hear that they played with it a lot. I like em, but I always just assumed what you have said about their live performances would be true.

hover · #3 11-19-2010, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lousybassplayer

Never saw them live, but I always got the impression they were a "studio" band.

Noooooooooooooooooooo. They USED to really RIP it live. Corgan could play his ass off, as could Iha and Chamberlain. The bass was always window dressing in that band. Their new bass player is a friend of a co-worker of mine...great player in her own right (saw her a few times when she was in a late-incarnation od Veruca Salt), but...yeah. Not the same band.

Bassdirty · #4 11-19-2010, 06:39 AM

hmm..I didnt even know they were still around.

jmorbita · #5 11-19-2010, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lousybassplayer

Never saw them live, but I always got the impression they were a "studio" band. On all fo their recordings you can hear that they played with it a lot. I like em, but I always just assumed what you have said about their live performances would be true.

Yeah, but the thing is, how hard can it be to mix drums, 2 guitars, a bass and a lead vocal? that's what I don't get. There's a sound guy right in front of the stage! doesn't he have ears!? I tell you, it's not that their playing was sloppy at all, it didn't seem that way (maybe on a couple of songs when Billy started fooling around in the guitar solo...) As much as their drummer seemed to be overdoing it in some songs (my friend compared him with the guy from the movie "The Rocker", though I think he exagerated a bit) he never missed a bit. The bass, I have no idea was she played. No idea whatsoever.

jmorbita · #6 11-19-2010, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hover

Noooooooooooooooooooo. They USED to really RIP it live. Corgan could play his ass off, as could Iha and Chamberlain. The bass was always window dressing in that band. Their new bass player is a friend of a co-worker of mine...great player in her own right (saw her a few times when she was in a late-incarnation od Veruca Salt), but...yeah. Not the same band.

Never got to see Chamberlin live (he was out of the band in the Adore period when they first came here).
Billy's playing didn't seem off, and his voice still sounds as good as it always did. I don't think the problem was the band, it might have been the horrible venue ( a closed stadium with horrible acoustics) but I don't think it would be the first time the sound guy plays a place like this.
As much as the bass lines are simple in the songs, as with any band I believe they drive the band... Last night there was no bass, it all got lost, never cut through the mix. I believe the kick drum was so loud it chew up the bass.
Everyone knew we were there to see Billy and not really the pumpkins, but last night was horrible.

Blah114 · #7 11-19-2010, 06:49 AM

wouldn't it be nice to be able to get your money back in these situations? it's all subjective.. but we pay for these bad-sounding shows... it sucks.. I have seen them live once... I feel they are not a good live band honestly.. the vox especially sounds bad live when I have seen them.

JulienJeff · #8 11-19-2010, 06:54 AM

I've never been a "big fan" of them but I've always liked them. I saw them 4 times and each time it was really good. Each time very different, but each time REALLY GOOD.

edit: I saw them in 1996, 1998, 2000, 2006

lousybassplayer · #9 11-19-2010, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmorbita

Yeah, but the thing is, how hard can it be to mix drums, 2 guitars, a bass and a lead vocal? that's what I don't get. There's a sound guy right in front of the stage! doesn't he have ears!? I tell you, it's not that their playing was sloppy at all, it didn't seem that way (maybe on a couple of songs when Billy started fooling around in the guitar solo...) As much as their drummer seemed to be overdoing it in some songs (my friend compared him with the guy from the movie "The Rocker", though I think he exagerated a bit) he never missed a bit. The bass, I have no idea was she played. No idea whatsoever.

I see your point. I guess I meant I never anticipated that their stuff would sound very much like the level of polish and effects etc found on the studio recordings. But you're right, that's no excuse for having a terrible overall sound live.

jmorbita · #10 11-19-2010, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blah114

wouldn't it be nice to be able to get your money back in these situations? it's all subjective.. but we pay for these bad-sounding shows... it sucks.. I have seen them live once... I feel they are not a good live band honestly.. the vox especially sounds bad live when I have seen them.

Yeah, have the soundguy pay from his salary!

Quote:

Originally Posted by lousybassplayer

I see your point. I guess I meant I never anticipated that their stuff would sound very much like the level of polish and effects etc found on the studio recordings. But you're right, that's no excuse for having a terrible overall sound live.

Yes it's true. but some of the songs are just plain beautifull regardless of the arrangements. I've heard an acoustic did they did a while ago and all the songs sounded great ripped off of the studio production.