What sort of a performance do you prefer in a live show?

1. Do you want the band/artist to stick to what they did on their albums without any substantial change cause you shouldn't mess with what is already good/excellent/perfect?

2. Or do you want improvisations, jam sessions and alternative versions of the familiar songs?

Give examples.

sleeper wrote: Id go for the second option, Dream Theater turned Hollow Years from a poor pop-rock attempt to an amazing pice of art by adding a spanish guitar themed intro and the most amazing 3 minute solo towards the end that i have ever heard. All in all it was increased from 4 to 9 minutes and it was one of the highlights of the Live At Budokan CD's

But if they were to alter a great song of theirs you really love, would you appreciate it better than to hear the original version?

All depends on how they altered it, for instance the song played just before Hollow Years, Beyond This Life, had almost 10 minutes worth added but most of it was some very strange sounding keyboard work that I think made the song worse than the studio version. Having said that most of the improv that they added was excellent!

Like I said, it all depends on what they do 

Forgotten Son wrote: I like a bit of improv, though nothing too excessive. Sometimes just an adding a word or two to the orginal lyrics can make a song so much better (eg "A mask" before the Rothery solo in Incubus from Live in Loreley), while an extended 5 minute guitar and keyboard solo can detract from the orginal. For that reason I prefer artists to do a couple of songs with a fair amount of improv and the rest with just a slightly altered lick or lyric.

I think youve hit the nail on the head

I saw all 3 ELP shows at Royal Albert Hall in '92 and whilst being thrilled to have finally seen them for the first time ever I was really disappointed that each show was exactly the same, even the same corny gags between tunes. I assumed it was because of the complexity of their music but it took the edge of the event....

I was therefore thrilled when I saw Keith Emerson's Nice a few years ago ( again saw them 3 times) at the amount of improv between the band, KE and Dave Kilminster trading licks and trying to outdo each other, Blinky bashing away on the drums, it was fabulous and fun. A good time was had by all. Each show was different and unique. I have much fonder memories of these shows.

.....and then there is VdGG who can head off at times into often dangerous territory at any moment...

yargh wrote: Live shows that just rehash the albums are an insult to live music.

Now I wouldent go quite that far but I do like live music to at least match the overall feal and quality of studio recorded material, and improve on it were possible.

Sadley Ive never had the chance to see King Crimson perform on stage but i do very like the idea that they jam a lot on stage, its something that could make each show unique. 

Forgotten Son wrote: yargh wrote: Live shows that just rehash the albums are an insult to live music. So too are live shows where the band just pointlessly noodle for yawn-inducing periods of time.

I disagree; that's an insult to the audience.  It's not an insult to live music because it's at least spontaneous, which is the point of live music. The noodling could have been interesting. 

Some of my favourite bands are great at and known for lots of improvisations live - Gong, Guru Guru, Hawkwind, Van der Graaf Generator (also Peter Hammill solo). With VdGG or Hammill it is never clear how long an improvisational passage will last; all musicians look at Hammill all the time while playing, and when he gives a sign they know it is time to return to the normal song structure. I have watched this in Hammill concerts several times (only saw one VdGG gig so far, this year in London); it is really amazing how well it works. And I love these wild improvisational parts.

I would really hate it if an artist or a band played their material the same way they played it on the studio albums; why should I go to such a concert?

Morandar wrote: I absolutely love improvisation (in fact, it's my favourite aspect in playing - it is witnessed by one of my bands, with which we do only jam sessions), and I like very much when bands do them live. Two days ago I saw Dream Theater in Milan, and liked the fact Jordan improvised almost every keyboard solo, with the exception of the classical ones (the ones written by Moore). This is a good choice: retaining the historical solos and improvising the others can truly add some flavour. I also like extended versions of the songs, with a longer ending for example. I don't like musicians who cannot improvise. It's like a man who cannot talk while not reading...come on...

There are worse things, many of todays popular indie bands cant perform well live at all, everything is down compared to the studio release and its just amazing to me that people like this???