GEN
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by drewhiggins[..]

    It's about time the unedited versions were used. Live is LIVE - not some bullshit edited together to make up something to make it sound better. Well, that's a bit of a disappointment. By the way, I listened to Zoo Station from Buenos Aires off here + the video (it was that good I got it twice) then the version and it is edited. In the video there is lots of empty space at the beginning like you can actually hear the wind then it's turned down. This isn't the same with the B-side.

    Ripped off!!! But god I love bootlegs - the whole kit, not half-kitted.


    its a shame U2 feel the need to do this. I can understand them editing it in a way that makes the audio quality better but changing the whole thing, adding bits, removing bits hacks me off soo much. Same with DVD's filmed over 2 nites
  2. Originally posted by germcevoy[..]

    its a shame U2 feel the need to do this. I can understand them editing it in a way that makes the audio quality better but changing the whole thing, adding bits, removing bits hacks me off soo much. Same with DVD's filmed over 2 nites


    It's not a show then. It's a hacked-up, styled-up, overdone, redone, overworked effort which would have been good in the first place but is now second-rate. We want originals, not cheap imitations. If, like you say, the audio quality can be improved, great. Just don't modify it and take away the shine. And this is why I'll praise video/audio bootlegs over an official release - sure, they're not professional; the ones like Joshua Tree LA, ZooTV Adelaide, Buenos Aires 2006, Anaheim are outstanding for a bootleg but hey, they're not hacked to shit. Just a raw, live show with fun, emotion and other themes - which is what it should be.

    A reason I liked Live 8, not hacked to crap. It was filmed then and there and that's how it stayed. Not 451 different camera angles, not terrible audio quality - just perfect. Don't get me wrong, Slane is great - but why edit it if it is great? But Milan2005 really was a disaster - 32 camera angles per second and almost gave you motion sickness.

    I haven't had the chance to see Red Rocks yet, but hopefully that's not hacked to crap. Hamish Hamilton wasn't around in those days was he?

    On a second note, keep re-editing your posts. Make them like an official release - over-edited.
  3. Originally posted by drewhiggins[..]

    It's not a show then. It's a hacked-up, styled-up, overdone, redone, overworked effort which would have been good in the first place but is now second-rate. We want originals, not cheap imitations. If, like you say, the audio quality can be improved, great. Just don't modify it and take away the shine. And this is why I'll praise video/audio bootlegs over an official release - sure, they're not professional; the ones like Joshua Tree LA, ZooTV Adelaide, Buenos Aires 2006, Anaheim are outstanding for a bootleg but hey, they're not hacked to shit. Just a raw, live show with fun, emotion and other themes - which is what it should be.

    A reason I liked Live 8, not hacked to crap. It was filmed then and there and that's how it stayed. Not 451 different camera angles, not terrible audio quality - just perfect. Don't get me wrong, Slane is great - but why edit it if it is great? But Milan2005 really was a disaster - 32 camera angles per second and almost gave you motion sickness.

    I haven't had the chance to see Red Rocks yet, but hopefully that's not hacked to crap. Hamish Hamilton wasn't around in those days was he?

    On a second note, keep re-editing your posts. Make them like an official release - over-edited.


    someone feels strongly about this subject and i'm the same. I did like Milan (apart from some terrible cheesy bits) but I must admit but Chicago was beyond belief it was soo bad. 30 angles a second and when they finally held a shot for more than a second you were looking directly at a spotlight which blinded you. I'll never watch that DVD again. Hail audio and video bootlegs
  4. Originally posted by germcevoy[..]

    someone feels strongly about this subject and i'm the same. I did like Milan (apart from some terrible cheesy bits) but I must admit but Chicago was beyond belief it was soo bad. 30 angles a second and when they finally held a shot for more than a second you were looking directly at a spotlight which blinded you. I'll never watch that DVD again. Hail audio and video bootlegs


    Thank god I didn't pay for Chicago, because I refused. An absolutely over-worked, cheesy, shit-house piece of bullshit which isn't even worth the $9 it's going for now. Maybe it'll end up in the bargain bin....I feel strongly about it because we're being fed second-rate crap.

    U2 don't do second-rate crap at the actual shows but Hamish Hamilton does (he does it as a profession). We need a director back who can do something like ZooTV Sydney, a real concert film where it only gets better (best version of Streets to date), and is able to half-film when they're pissed or sober. Maybe he's sober but just does a crap job.

    I don't know why, but he's just terrible. He did a great job with Robbie Williams' Live at Knebworth (What We Did Last Summer) from 2003 but with Chicago I don't know what he was smokin'...I'll admit though, I am partial to Larry's drumming at the end.

    "You can defeat a great show with crap directing".
  5. So am I too late to get the link emailed to me?

    jhask33@yahoo.com

    Much appreciated!
  6. Originally posted by haytrainSo am I too late to get the link emailed to me?

    jhask33@yahoo.com

    Much appreciated!


    look here and download(descargar):

    enjoy
  7. removed your link. It clearly states in the house rules that you can't post links to official material on the forums. Please read through them
  8. Originally posted by germcevoyremoved your link. It clearly states in the house rules that you can't post links to official material on the forums. Please read through them


    ok,sorry about that.
  9. Originally posted by drewhiggins[..]

    It's not a show then. It's a hacked-up, styled-up, overdone, redone, overworked effort which would have been good in the first place but is now second-rate. We want originals, not cheap imitations. If, like you say, the audio quality can be improved, great. Just don't modify it and take away the shine. And this is why I'll praise video/audio bootlegs over an official release - sure, they're not professional; the ones like Joshua Tree LA, ZooTV Adelaide, Buenos Aires 2006, Anaheim are outstanding for a bootleg but hey, they're not hacked to shit. Just a raw, live show with fun, emotion and other themes - which is what it should be.

    A reason I liked Live 8, not hacked to crap. It was filmed then and there and that's how it stayed. Not 451 different camera angles, not terrible audio quality - just perfect. Don't get me wrong, Slane is great - but why edit it if it is great? But Milan2005 really was a disaster - 32 camera angles per second and almost gave you motion sickness.

    I haven't had the chance to see Red Rocks yet, but hopefully that's not hacked to crap. Hamish Hamilton wasn't around in those days was he?

    On a second note, keep re-editing your posts. Make them like an official release - over-edited.


    True..Chicago sucks in several ways, this is one of them. The audio sucks too compared to Boston/Slane..I wonder what they did wrong. The show is overdone...Milan is better, altough it's a mix too, but the songs played there aren't edited, are they? Original of the Species is so greatly performed there..just amazing.
  10. Originally posted by drewhiggins[..]

    It's not a show then. It's a hacked-up, styled-up, overdone, redone, overworked effort which would have been good in the first place but is now second-rate. We want originals, not cheap imitations. If, like you say, the audio quality can be improved, great. Just don't modify it and take away the shine. And this is why I'll praise video/audio bootlegs over an official release - sure, they're not professional; the ones like Joshua Tree LA, ZooTV Adelaide, Buenos Aires 2006, Anaheim are outstanding for a bootleg but hey, they're not hacked to shit. Just a raw, live show with fun, emotion and other themes - which is what it should be.

    A reason I liked Live 8, not hacked to crap. It was filmed then and there and that's how it stayed. Not 451 different camera angles, not terrible audio quality - just perfect. Don't get me wrong, Slane is great - but why edit it if it is great? But Milan2005 really was a disaster - 32 camera angles per second and almost gave you motion sickness.

    I haven't had the chance to see Red Rocks yet, but hopefully that's not hacked to crap. Hamish Hamilton wasn't around in those days was he?

    On a second note, keep re-editing your posts. Make them like an official release - over-edited.

    I have to say that I agree with this, I don't know why U2 keeps hiring Hamish Hamilton, makes Bono look better?(don't think so, there's a shot in the Elevation DVD of Bono during Bad that makes my grandfather look younger), or maybe they never look at their DVDs and Hamilton is cheap... pure crap
  11. Originally posted by Carlosgfc[..]
    I have to say that I agree with this, I don't know why U2 keeps hiring Hamish Hamilton, makes Bono look better?(don't think so, there's a shot in the Elevation DVD of Bono during Bad that makes my grandfather look younger)



    during the first 'woo hooo' ?
  12. Originally posted by Carlosgfc[..]
    (don't think so, there's a shot in the Elevation DVD of Bono during Bad that makes my grandfather look younger)



    HAHAHA!