ZSebs Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 I was just watching Awesome as Fuck and it made me think, is Green Day going to release a live album of the 99 Revolutions tour? I know that they do record the audio from all of their shows, but I have not heard of many shows actually being recorded on camera, and the only examples I can think of are the festival shows and the recordings of the shows seen in Cuatro. So, I was wondering what are the chances of a live album being released for their most recent tour. What does everyone think? I think that they will probably release one just because they have for the past two tours, and even though the trilogy was not all that successful, it will be a way to get some money flowing while they are on this break. I looked to see if a topic like this was already open, but could not find any. Feel free to close if a topic like this has already been opened.
The Disappearing Boy Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 Unlikely. The tour finished 9 months ago. We would have had it months ago.
Guest Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 Contrary to popular belief (at least on GDC it seems), releasing a live album for every tour is very unusual, especially tours for albums that tanked.
Spike Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 Unlikely. The tour finished 9 months ago. We would have had it months ago. Awesome As Fuck came out 14 months after the Tokyo gig
Tubbie Head Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 mmm, maybe Billie's instagram pic and hashtags meant a live album indeed. But hope not, hope for something... better
The Disappearing Boy Posted November 24, 2014 Posted November 24, 2014 Awesome As Fuck came out 14 months after the Tokyo gig Less than 5 months after the tour finished though. I'm certain Green Day has moved on from the Triogy. I was certain of that from the moment the tour started
Cath Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 the number of people buying it would be disastrous don't think they will put the money for it. i wouldn't.
DookieLukie Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 This past tour was boring and the band didn't give a shit. Why would they try to sell that?
Maid Meringue Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 I could go my whole life without seeing another concert video released. That's what youtube is for
Nemo. Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 I won't it even call triology tour because there were so little triology songs played.
WhiteTim Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 I won't it even call triology tour because there were so little triology songs played. The band treated the trilogy as a single album and performed the same amount as they did for AI during its tour and 21st for its tour
Nemo. Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 The band treated the trilogy as a single album and performed the same amount as they did for AI during its tour and 21st for its tour then they should have released it as a single album and stop ripping off fans with relasing shitty, overproduced "music"
alienlifeform Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 then they should have released it as a single album and stop ripping off fans with relasing shitty, overproduced "music" not everybody dislike the trilogy. I have it in 3 different formats (CD, CD-Book and LP) + singles. and I like it a lot, specially UNO. The only thing that I agee with haters is that it could have louder guitars, with more distortion. As I said once, the citicism about the trilogy is the same people have about Warning back then... and no mater how much people say it was not a good album, it stills remains one of their best work
Nemo. Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 not everybody dislike the trilogy. I have it in 3 different formats (CD, CD-Book and LP) + singles. and I like it a lot, specially UNO. The only thing that I agee with haters is that it could have louder guitars, with more distortion. As I said once, the citicism about the trilogy is the same people have about Warning back then... and no mater how much people say it was not a good album, it stills remains one of their best work but you can't compare the triology to warning. warining has a very different style of music, the triology style is a weaker american idiot/21cb style with no musical development. warnig has strong lyrics (macy's day parade, hold on, minority) while the triology's only lyircal content is in wide parts only party and celebrating life... not really deep imo.
alienlifeform Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 but you can't compare the triology to warning. warining has a very different style of music, the triology style is a weaker american idiot/21cb style with no musical development. warnig has strong lyrics (macy's day parade, hold on, minority) while the triology's only lyircal content is in wide parts only party and celebrating life... not really deep imo. ok, but I don't think that every line written need to have a deep meaning.. I think music can be great even with meaningless/fun lyrics... Ramones used to have songs in their earlyer albuns that has only two lines (I wanna be your boyfiend, I don't wanna walk around with you, beat on the brat and so on) and to me those are great songs
WhiteTim Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 then they should have released it as a single album and stop ripping off fans with relasing shitty, overproduced "music" Nothing on the trilogy was overproduced
Cameron. Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 Nothing on the trilogy was overproduced Out.
PanicAttack! Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 I don't know why you would think this likely to happen, it's not gonna happen, I can promise you that. If it does I will eat my physical copies of Uno, Dos and Tré. I guess you're a fan of the AI/21CB era, and yes, those albums had their official Live Album counterparts, but if you're looking for a pattern, just look at what came before. Bullet in a Bible was the first official live album they released. 21CB picked up on AI's success, and it's tour was very similar in style and scale, and therefore it got Awesome As Fuck, which obviously wasn't even as ambitiously produced as BiaB. They were back to back exceptions. The trilogy was nowhere near as succesful, and that is quite alright, because I don't think Green Day ever thought it would be either, it was ambitious on another level. It touched some new ground for the band, and I think it was intended to be a treat for their already established fanbase, which I think is apparent by releases such as Cuatro and Demolicious (which I've always viewed as the Trilogy's equivalent of BiaB and AAF). A live album is not a given part of an album-release, it is something that is scheduled towards the end a tour if there is demand for it. I've always seen it as a way to extend the profits of a tour without exhausting the band. I think many casual listeners heard of the AI tour towards the end of 2005, and didn't have the chance to see it, right there is a huge market for a DvD that can simulate the experience. The Trilogy era ended with Demolicious over half a year ago. Time to look forward to the next one.
PanicAttack! Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 Awesome As Fuck came out 14 months after the Tokyo gig That is not what matters, it is when the tour ended that matters. They need to go on momentum or not go at all. BiaB came out a month before the AI tour ended in Dec 2005 AAF came out 5 months after the last show of the 21CB tour in Oct 2010 The 99 Revolutions tour had its last show in Aug 2013, 15 months ago
ZSebs Posted November 25, 2014 Author Posted November 25, 2014 I don't know why you would think this likely to happen, it's not gonna happen, I can promise you that. If it does I will eat my physical copies of Uno, Dos and Tré. I guess you're a fan of the AI/21CB era, and yes, those albums had their official Live Album counterparts, but if you're looking for a pattern, just look at what came before. Bullet in a Bible was the first official live album they released. 21CB picked up on AI's success, and it's tour was very similar in style and scale, and therefore it got Awesome As Fuck, which obviously wasn't even as ambitiously produced as BiaB. They were back to back exceptions. The trilogy was nowhere near as succesful, and that is quite alright, because I don't think Green Day ever thought it would be either, it was ambitious on another level. It touched some new ground for the band, and I think it was intended to be a treat for their already established fanbase, which I think is apparent by releases such as Cuatro and Demolicious (which I've always viewed as the Trilogy's equivalent of BiaB and AAF). A live album is not a given part of an album-release, it is something that is scheduled towards the end a tour if there is demand for it. I've always seen it as a way to extend the profits of a tour without exhausting the band. I think many casual listeners heard of the AI tour towards the end of 2005, and didn't have the chance to see it, right there is a huge market for a DvD that can simulate the experience. The Trilogy era ended with Demolicious over half a year ago. Time to look forward to the next one. I wasn't really pushing or hoping for it to happen, it was merely a theory. They did cancel a bunch of their shows, so I was thinking that it would be a treat for those who had tickets to a show that was ultimately cancelled. I guess it came from the idea that they released a behind the scenes look at how the trilogy was made and an album with demos, so why not throw in a live album as well? They did the live album thing for the past two tours, so it was mostly just a guess. All in all, I was not expecting them to release one.
PanicAttack! Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 I wasn't really pushing or hoping for it to happen, it was merely a theory. They did cancel a bunch of their shows, so I was thinking that it would be a treat for those who had tickets to a show that was ultimately cancelled. I guess it came from the idea that they released a behind the scenes look at how the trilogy was made and an album with demos, so why not throw in a live album as well? They did the live album thing for the past two tours, so it was mostly just a guess. All in all, I was not expecting them to release one. You did say that you thought they would "probably release one" though, but never mind. Unfortunately there is no such thing as a free "treat" in the world of mainstream music, it would cost them a lot of money to produce a live album, and they would need insurance that it would turn a decent profit. They even made a lot of effort trying to market the Trilogy to the mainstream listeners which was doomed to begin with, they should've focused on the fans on that one, made it more intimate.
WhiteTim Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 You did say that you thought they would "probably release one" though, but never mind. Unfortunately there is no such thing as a free "treat" in the world of mainstream music, it would cost them a lot of money to produce a live album, and they would need insurance that it would turn a decent profit. They even made a lot of effort trying to market the Trilogy to the mainstream listeners which was doomed to begin with, they should've focused on the fans on that one, made it more intimate. It wouldn't cost them a lot of money to produce a live album as they record all shows Labels like live albums cause they're cheap as compared to studio albums
PanicAttack! Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 It wouldn't cost them a lot of money to produce a live album as they record all shows Labels like live albums cause they're cheap as compared to studio albums They are cheaper not cheap. They still have to hire sound engineers and video editors, basically a whole team like with any other production, because it has to be done right. And then there is manufacturing costs for people who'll want it on DVD, and surely they'd need some advertisement as well. It would be a huge gamble, and the profit would not be large even in the best case scenario. It would not be worth it for them.
WhiteTim Posted November 25, 2014 Posted November 25, 2014 They are cheaper not cheap. They still have to hire sound engineers and video editors, basically a whole team like with any other production, because it has to be done right. And then there is manufacturing costs for people who'll want it on DVD, and surely they'd need some advertisement as well. It would be a huge gamble, and the profit would not be large even in the best case scenario. It would not be worth it for them. Trust me I know it's cheaper Sound engineers what part did you miss that GD Records all their concerts? I know for a FACT Warner would release a live album every day of the week over a studio album They did film some shows I know they filmed the Austin SXSW show the Reading is filmed Rock Im Ring (or whatever that festival is called) Promo is cheaper as well Cause live albums are promised to have hits that mainstream people know they don't have to promote heavily as oppose to a new album with new songs that no one knows
PanicAttack! Posted November 26, 2014 Posted November 26, 2014 Trust me I know it's cheaper Sound engineers what part did you miss that GD Records all their concerts? I know for a FACT Warner would release a live album every day of the week over a studio album They did film some shows I know they filmed the Austin SXSW show the Reading is filmed Rock Im Ring (or whatever that festival is called) Promo is cheaper as well Cause live albums are promised to have hits that mainstream people know they don't have to promote heavily as oppose to a new album with new songs that no one knows Well, if Green Day didn't record their shows it wouldn't even be possible to release a live album now would it? And how is that an argument? I have two words for you, dude: POST PRODUCTION It's not just the guy with the camera burning the raw file to a DVD. I'd like to point you to Awesome as Fuck's wikipedia page, it lists a staggering team of 20 people involved directly in the post-production of that DVD/CD; 8 engineers on the CD, 10 on the DVD besides Chris Dugan. And then there's the guy who made the artwork. And that is not nearly all the expenses of such a project, a lot of other people surely had minor parts to play. And promo is expensive too, especially when the mainstream doesn't care about Green Day at this specific point in time. It'd be a tough product to sell, and the core of steady Green Day fans is not enough by itself. You argument about how Warner would release a live album over a studio album any day, doesn't make a lot of sense either. It's two completely different things and can not be compared. Yes, people buy live albums because they contain hits that they know, and maybe it's from a tour they went too or maybe didn't get to see in person. But without new original music from time to time there is no fans to buy the live album. A live album is only worth it if the band in question is in the spotlight at that point in time, which often means within a year of a studio album. Some of the biggest acts in the world could maybe pull it off, the likes of Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen, The Rolling Stones, but let's face it, Green Day is not really relevant to the world right now, and therefore they are not relevant to Warner Bros either until they are ready to release new music and make some money for them. 'Uno, Dos, Tré' simply didn't earn a live album.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.