Pharoah

[alimcg]

No, it wasn't the Opera House. I've never been there. The Branford gig had better sound than Hamer Hall, but it was still an inappropriate venue for that band. I'm sure they only played there because of economics.

[pettman]

But at least they did come to play. So, did you like the gig? Was it great to see them play even if the sound wasn't so great. Surely there must be some positive aspects you can share with us rather than harping on about the sound. This is such a positive forum after all.

[glean]

freddy said:

aj said:

'Le Pettomaine' is, of course, french for 'Scott Tinkler'

LP had far more class than Tinkler.

and his pitching was more precise! (lol)

[alimcg]

The gig had its moments. I would have enjoyed it more in a less cavernous room. Sound is an important issue, but also the closeness of the audience has an impact. When a band is on a huge stage and the nearest people are 10 metres away it makes for a very different experience from seeing them in a more intimate venue.

[alimcg]

I also heard that the Hamer Hall folk completely screwed up sound for the Westside Arts concert.

[pettman]

Yes Alimcg, that intimacy is important. I really see your points a bit more now, the enjoyment I get from sitting up close at Bennetts Lane and seeing each bead of sweat and hear each little inflection of tone does make the performance so much more real. I guess you don't get that in those larger venues at all. Again, like you say, it must come down to economics. I may have to gracefully change my view on this subject, though I still think it's better than not having them here at all.

[alimcg]

Sure it's better than not seeing them at all, but I'm one who whould happily pay a little more to see them in a better venue. Then again, surely if you pay $100+ for a concert ticket you're entitled to expect good sound production.

[captain]

You say the State Theatre is a good venue for amplified music, but the BMQ is not amplified music, and it still sucked. Worth the bucks though - a fun gig.