PDA

View Full Version : Nirvana: Live At Reading



Rooster
10-07-2009, 04:12 PM
I just found out this is being released in november:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_At_Reading


I'm getting it when it comes out (so far i have every album they officially released), and possibly also the Bleach deluxe edition also (it's supposed to be re-released), but at the same time i think this is just milking the band for all its worth. I wonder how much money will Krist and Dave get (if any at all), the most of it will end up in Courtney's greedy hands.

SMASHedTHEignition
10-08-2009, 04:21 AM
yeah i heard about that, krist n dave will only get like 4percent and chad channing gets like 8 but the rest of nirvana sales was sposed 2 goto kurt but seems as hes dead(RIP),courtney will get the rest, i dunno the exact details but it has all the assests somewhere on the web..

and yeah i have all the cds, all the bsides and stuff that i downloaded(thank you holland25 :) )

ThunderPX
10-08-2009, 08:29 AM
I don't think Chad Channing will get royalties on a release where he didn't do anything. I especially doubt he would get more than Krist and Dave.

Rooster
10-08-2009, 09:50 AM
I don't think Chad Channing will get royalties on a release where he didn't do anything. I especially doubt he would get more than Krist and Dave.

He wouldn't get anything from the live album release, but he SHOULD get something from re-release of Bleach (it's being released on the same day as Live At Reading), as he was the drummer on that album...

SMASHedTHEignition
10-10-2009, 03:48 AM
I don't think Chad Channing will get royalties on a release where he didn't do anything. I especially doubt he would get more than Krist and Dave.

yeh thats what i thought, but apparently chad gets more..il hav 2 look it up again

dav0147
10-11-2009, 04:33 PM
I find it sickening that the people that helped make them as big as they were (krist and dave) don't really see the royalties of it (I know they don't need the money but thats not the point). I mean nirvana wouldn't have made it without them either.

Rooster
11-05-2009, 01:01 PM
Bump.

Bought this today (the CD+DVD version). I haven't watched the DVD yet, but i have listened to the CD in the car on my way home, and i can say that the sound is fantastic - in fact, it sounds good for today's standards, as it didn't get the "loudness war" treatment in such extent as some of the recent music CDs, as the songs have 9db of dynamic range or more. You actually want to turn it up a bit more. So no complaints from this point of view.

Now the things thad bother me: much of the crowd interaction has been cut from the CD version, but this is only a minor complaint, as you still get the full performance on DVD (have yet to confirm this myself, as i haven't watched the DVD yet; however i have read about this on some other review) with all the interaction with the crowd. Now here's what bothered me the most - public cheering at the beginning of the songs. Now this is a live album so it's something you would expect. BUT why the hell would people enthusiastically cheer the songs like All Apologies? The performance happened on 30th august 1992, and as we know at that time All Apologies was not a very well known song yet, as it was released in '93 on In Utero. So, why cheer a song you don't know well? But then i noticed that all the cheering (and whistles) of the audience sounds very similar when you compare song to song (especially the whistles - they all follow the same pattern). Almost like it would be added later in the studio. And guess what? Later i found out somebody else noticing the same thing - apparently it was added later, as the user said (an user review on amazon if i'm correct) that it was absent from the bootleg copies. Sounds like a (very) cheap trick to make the performance sound more spectacular. I'm still trying to figure out if this is indeed true or not, but damn it DOES sound a lot like it. This is a major low point, another gimmick to make the release more commercially appealing, which unfortunately results in an experiance that is fake in a way (dammit Courtney, you would still make shitloads of money from this even without the fake crowd cheers).

Overall i like what i got, i would rate the CD with 4/5 (it would be a 4.5/5 if there would be no fake crowd cheering, which indeed seems to be present) because it sounds great and the songs aren't as brickwalled as you would expect in these times. It's a great collection of songs, the setlist was great (although for some reason Love Buzz has been cut from the CD version). Now i have to check the DVD for the final opinion.


edit: ok, i made an mp3 with the parts where "fake crowd" problem is most easilly noticed (there are many more moments like these), the clip order is: All Apologies (intro), Aneurysm (intro), Drain You (intro), Drain You (outro), Stay Away (intro - here it's a bit harder to notice because of bass and drums, but you can still hear it without much problems).

2 links (in case one or another wouldn't work for someone):
http://rapidshare.com/files/302900058/nirvana-live_at_reading_possible_fake_crowd.mp3.html
nirvana-live_at_reading_possible_fake_crowd.mp3 - 1.49MB (http://www.zshare.net/audio/680328476c9149dc/)

Seriously, why would you want to present the concert different than it really was? It was an awesome performance, that fake audience addition was needed just as much as you need sandpaper to wipe your ass after you've taken a big fat dookie in the urinal...

edit2: yep, the crowd cheering IS FAKE, and here's the proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDdnx-bsRJQ
This is a bootleg version of All Apologies performance, and if you compare the intro of the song to the mp3 i posted you'll clearly see the cheering present in the official release version is absent in the bootleg video. Why did they have to add it? Because otherwise the production is awesome, and mastering engineers did a great job, there is very little to no clipping present (a look at waveforms tells everything). Oh well, i guess they had to screw up somewhere...

tayluhhx3
11-10-2009, 03:07 PM
i think anything new from nirvana shouldn't be released, it's obvious they don't really "exist" anymore. it's lame how after 15 years of the foo fighters, people still talk or ask dave about kurt. i think foo fighters are way better than nirvana was.