The Worse Band(s) You've Ever Seen in a Live Environment

Back on the topic of worst bands you've ever seen in a live environment:

Opeth

Hands-Down THE ABSOLUTE WORST live band I have ever seen. Granted, progressive death metal is not always my thing, but concerning this genre it is usually the band's live show that wins me over. While this band may be technically amazing and their song-writing brilliant to the hard-core progressive death metal fans, this band's performance has been awful every time I have seen them live. I actually feel asleep standing up at the 9:30 Club once when they were playing.

I have actually seen Opeth multiple times, never on purpose, only because there was another band on the bill I was there to see, and it has always been the same thing. The band members did not move on stage. They did not look happy or excited to be there. They did not look at or engage with the audience in anyway. They barely looked at or engaged with each other on stage. There was very little (if anything) said between songs by the singer/growler (or any of their members) from what I recall. Maybe they play their songs perfectly (I'm not enough of a fan to discern this), but they have absolutely THE WORST stage presence of any band I have seen live EVER!

I can totally see why people would not like Opeth live. They don't move around much at all. But for me a great live band is not someone who necessarily jumps around or bangs their head a lot, but a band that has a certain vibe and energy and emotion that comes across when they play. When I say energy I don't mean physical movement either. To me Opeth epitomizes all these qualities which is why I think they're one of the best bands of any genre out there.
 
4. Moonspell - They too played with Dimmu and Danzig. Another band I love most of their material but their performance just seemed sloppy from an instrumental standpoint as well as vocally. I also found it odd that they had these huge ass banners up above them that came down during their performance, despite only getting 30 minutes or less. Just a real big disappointment, yet their live cd/dvd I think is pretty good. So I don't know if it's just that they don't do well with that limited amount of time or what.

Interesting! I've seen them a bunch of times and they were fantastic. Heck, they even gave Morbid Angel a run for their money when those two toured together back in 96.
 
It's not the band's job to promote the show (although it is in the band's best interest to do so), it is the promoter's (hence the title).

There is a big difference between a promoter who gives bands tickets to sell and then some of those earnings are shared between the bands and the promoter (if the band cannot meet a certain criteria of tickets sold then the band can't play the show), and a promoter who forces a band to spend 2,000 bucks just to cover is ass and the band gets the "honor" of opening up a larger act. That is a terrible practice that nobody should support. If the promoter does not have enough money to put on a show, don't put it on. Don't prey on smaller bands' hopes and dreams of becoming successful by financially ruining them.

If I was in a band and we had enough money to buy on to shows like that, it would make far more sense to just rent a van and tour DIY playing dives, people's basements, whatever while hiring a publicist to spread the word as best he or she can. Labels couldn't care less if you've done one or two shows opening for some larger act. That's not enough exposure to sell a CD to them. Showing that your band is able to be proactive and able to tour and do the necessary things to get the name out there (as well as be smart with money) is what a label looks for. I don't think I have heard of a single "successful" band that had ever bought onto shows like that. It's just a trap for bad promoters.

There's also a staunch difference from buying onto a tour and buying onto a show. When a band buys onto a tour, that money goes to the headliner's guarantee per night,your band's bus share, backline, food, hotel, etc etc. Only a small % of that goes to the booking agent. When you pay a promoter an exorbitant amount of money to play a show, all of that money just goes to the promoter's pocket so he can make extra profit, or to cover his booty from losing money and not having to do any work to promote the show.

You are my hero for saying all of this. 100% agreed.
 
I don't know. It depends on the show/venue/crowd. Sometimes a big package can be cool, but alot of times it's just a waste. I saw 6 bands open for Carcass and it was just too much. Should've just been like 2 or 3 tops. Opeth/Enslaved was so refreshing because I had been sick to death of these 5-6 band packages at that point.

Oh yeah, in those cases I definitely agree with you, especially because it's rare that a touring package is all bands I want to see. I just thought he was talking about local shows only. When you have a good scene and good place for shows, people come out just to hang out and watch music and not necessarily to see bands. It becomes a cool hangout spot.
 
You are my hero for saying all of this. 100% agreed.

It's so weird that it's accepted to practice pay to play in some small promoter circles when it's pretty much not accepted anywhere period. Putting on a show is an investment and a commitment. When you invest in the stock market and lose that money can you demand that another company give you that money back to cover your losses? When you adopt a puppy and don't have the money to care for it do you demand another shelter to cover for those costs? When a label puts out a record does it demand that other bands pay upfront fees to cover those costs? Triple-dipple hell no.
 
I have a problem with labels that don't spend a dime on anything (not even promotion) as well. Chances are if all they do is drop the record in its distro channel, it doesn't even have good distro because most good distros require a certain amount of money to be spent on promotion on the label's part to begin with.

But I don't have as big of a problem with it as I do with promoters because A) record labels are hurting. The live music scene is not really hurting (or rather, not as much). Some of these scumbag promoters make a killing ripping off bands. I've heard horror stories. B) sometimes there could be advantages to a label asking the band to cover some costs. For one thing, some deals will give bands more % on royalties in exchange for no recording advance. For another, even if it's not a licensing deal, if the record doesn't do well, there's less incentive for the label to drop the band because it's not like the label spent THAT much money to begin with, so the band still has an outlet and channel to get its music out.
 
... sometimes there could be advantages to a label asking the band to cover some costs. For one thing, some deals will give bands more % on royalties in exchange for no recording advance. For another, even if it's not a licensing deal, if the record doesn't do well, there's less incentive for the label to drop the band because it's not like the label spent THAT much money to begin with, so the band still has an outlet and channel to get its music out.

Well, what I have a problem with is the situation where label not only tells the band to pay for promotion even for printing CDs (in that case it would be a distribution deal), but where the label says "we need you to pay us x amount of $'s upfront so we don't have to pay the copyright organizations when they come knocking on our door". WTF? The copyrights are the only place smaller bands gets paid these days, and now the labels insists on the bands PAYING for that themselves?
 
Well, what I have a problem with is the situation where label not only tells the band to pay for promotion even for printing CDs (in that case it would be a distribution deal), but where the label says "we need you to pay us x amount of $'s upfront so we don't have to pay the copyright organizations when they come knocking on our door". WTF? The copyrights are the only place smaller bands gets paid these days, and now the labels insists on the bands PAYING for that themselves?

Yeah that's bullshit. :(

*hugs*
 
Interesting! I've seen them a bunch of times and they were fantastic. Heck, they even gave Morbid Angel a run for their money when those two toured together back in 96.

Like I sort of hinted at, it could've been a very bad night for them. I've seen videos as well as other live recordings where they sound great. On that Danzig show in Chicago, they just seemed sloppy.
 
The only PPUSA performance (did not see the Midnight show) that I thought was purely bad was Spiral Architect. I hate to talk bad about those guys because they were super cool, meeting with their fans etc. but they sounded like they were all playing different songs.
Saga circa 1986. THey opened for Heart and were just absolutely aweful. I was looking forward to them because I had heard good things, but it wasn't on tat night.
Yngwie with Jorn on vocals. Yngwie is a guitar God and Jorn is a vocal God, but Jorn sounded absolutely horrid on YM songs and Yngwie really was improvising all of his solos even more than he had before. They were pretty bad.


Bryant
 
Yngwie with Jorn on vocals. Yngwie is a guitar God and Jorn is a vocal God, but Jorn sounded absolutely horrid on YM songs and Yngwie really was improvising all of his solos even more than he had before. They were pretty bad.

I take it this happened in Europe? I had no clue they had ever even played together. When was this? I can't say I'm surprised it was bad though. I like both, but it definitely seems like a duo that wouldn't sound good together.
 
it is interesting that people only chose bands they dont like...my list has bands that I consider myself a big fan of....


Nevermore - saw them with COB / Hypocracy / Dummy Burger. I am not a fan of the band but usually with veteran bands like this live they can hold my interest. Nevermore could not. They plodded slowly through thier never ending set almost making me want to pull out my eyes and ears.

Powerglove - the novelty wore off after 2 minutes. Music and live they are a joke and dont deserve to even be on any tour.

Swashbuckle - saw them on the Pagan Fest Tour 2. Another band that is a total gimmick that has zero talent live or on disc. With so many other talented bands out there....it is sad that these guys get any shows. Basically a generic death metalish band wearing pirate outfits.

Seven Witches - super generic live and musically.

Finntroll - the second tour they seemed to be just walking through the motions. The first time they were amazing but the second time around they just didnt do it for me. I think a weak crowd also had a lot to play with this too but the band kind of just stood there and it seemed like ever comment and move was just rehearsed.

Pagan's Mind - musically dull and they followed it up perfectly live. The longest hour that year. It just seemed like one long song that never ended.

Eluviete - the first time they blew me away but when the twins left the band the second time around it was just a bunch of people standing on stage playing music. Zero movement and lack of enthusiasm. After an amazing first time around they will always be compared to that time.

Evile - both times I have seen them they actually bored me. I like them. I have both thier disc but they are the one thrash band that live bores me.


Pagan's Mind? Seriously?? You may not like the music, but PM is one of the tightest and amazing sounding band I have ever seen. Nils voice is amazing live.
 
Probably Nightwish. Anette made the band into something so incredibly mediocre that it was just plain sad.
 
There is a big difference between a promoter who gives bands tickets to sell and then some of those earnings are shared between the bands and the promoter (if the band cannot meet a certain criteria of tickets sold then the band can't play the show), and a promoter who forces a band to spend 2,000 bucks just to cover is ass and the band gets the "honor" of opening up a larger act. That is a terrible practice that nobody should support. If the promoter does not have enough money to put on a show, don't put it on. Don't prey on smaller bands' hopes and dreams of becoming successful by financially ruining them.

I agree with you in a sense, because promoters should promote. Of course they should, that's what they're there for! But some clubs don't have promoters. They have owners, managers, and no promoters, so yes, they use locals to sell tickets because they won't do it themselves. That does suck. At the same time, bands can take advantage of this by promoting themselves.

You say that it's not the band's job to promote the show. I dissagree a little bit here, because if you're in a band, and you want people to see you, you should promote the show. Go out and flyer, get radio ads, do e-mailing, do whatever you can do to get the word out.

Like they say; if you want it done right, do it yourself!