kiwijazza said on July 2, 2003 10:55:

“Whoever thinks they aren’t are either, not into heavier rock (And they went ALL OUT) or caught them on a bad day”

I like that quote. Many people need to realise this.

Jackie_Radiorox said on July 2, 2003 18:39:

Marie sings very well live but conserves her voice and doesn’t hit the notes that she can hit. You have to understand Marie is older, had kids... and that does things to your voice. Also, I am sure Marie is pretty bored of singing the same ol songs.

Amy is pretty fresh on the scene, has more drive and a lot more to prove.

My main complaint is that the mixer needed to drop the guitars a bit to hear her better. But for 95% of the time she hit the notes perfectly. And I was surprised because so many people told me that they were no good live. They were fucking awesome. I had so much fun (and I am super sick with a cold right now) that I had to get home and peel my clothes off due to them just being stuck on me from jumping around with everyone else. LOL!! Haven’t rocked out that hard in a while!

Too many people go to concerts expecting to hear what the music sounds like on CD and that is impossible. I’ve never seen Rox live but I have a lot of the live material on CD, VHS, DVD and they don’t sound the same. A lot of the songs are tuned down to make it easier to sing. Which I have absolutely no problem with. The main thing is to go, see them perform, have a good time etc. If you wanted to hear an album, stay home and play the CD.

I think the only people that sound close to playing a CD that I’ve been to in the last few years - Phil Collins, Pat Benatar, and Stevie Nicks. Not on all of their songs, but for the most part.

I can’t really say that Amy sings better than Marie because it’s two different genre’s and vocal registers. I have always thought, and still do, that Marie has much more potential in her voice

Jackie_Radiorox said on July 3, 2003 05:03:

Roxette too is a studio band. There are very few Roxette songs that you can take on the road without adjustments or backing music. The arrangements on a good portion of Roxette songs are not meant to be done live... Some songs have to be stripped or made edgier to survive. Or, if you pay attention very well, some of the Live Versions of Roxette songs are the same arrangements as the Demo versions of those songs. Which are usually a few keys lower than the album version.

As for Evanescence, the album would lead you to believe they are a studio band, but really they are not. My thought is that all of the “noises” in the album is just a way to make it more dramatic. LIve they just rock out which is what every good rockband would do.

“My Immortal” is a very studio based song. LIve she played most of it alone at the keyboard, then to the last chorus came the rest of the band and just rocked out on it. As for her having a whine, I’ve gotten used to it and rather like it because it is a part of the charm in her voice. As Marie’s accent is a part of the charm in her voice.

Coy, you keep defending Roxette as if this were a Roxette issue and it isn’t. If you don’t like EV that is fine, but don’t kill it for the people that do.

powerpoplarry said on July 4, 2003 20:55:

OK, I like Evanescence’s whole CD, solid through and through, BUT I wouldn’t like a band like them if they couldn’t pull it off live. As a matter of fact every record worth its salt is such if the songs can be played live.

Roxette is NOT strictly a studio band, no way!!! Those songs are MADE to be performed live!! If it was all studio tricks and no substance, Roxette would suck, but Per is a genius and Marie has a killer voice that is worth its salt in a live setting.

As a matter of fact, the best bands are live first, studio second, and all the best records are basically LIVE recordings in the studio, period!!

Hell, even Pet Sounds and both Jellyfish records were able to be pulled off live, so that only adds to their genius....

Jackie_Radiorox said on July 9, 2003 01:06:

Yes, all bands need studio tricks. But I’ll stand my ground about what I said above with Roxette going live. From what I’ve seen and heard they do kick ass live. But, still they need to do many tricks to make songs work live.

EV didn’t need to use so many tricks, they just played the songs rocked out which is what I prefer. I thought she wouldn’t be able to hit any of the notes from the album. I was proved wrong. And I am not falling to my knees over them. I just am very anal retentive about music and can usually pick out problems when I have gone to even see an orchestra perform. (if someone is off tune, my dog ears can hear it.)

Yes they have a long way to go, but they are having a really good start. Plus I’ve found some of their demos that hopefully would wind up in the next album, should they put one out. I am very curious to hear where they will go from here now that they have “shattered” the whole Christian band thing.

I rave about it Coy, because TO ME (and you don’t have to agree and I could care les sif you do agree) this is a breath of fresh air in a somewhat dead musical era. And for once since the 2000s started, a CD I can listen to from one end to the other without getting bored.

I am not a huge dance fan, I am not a huge techno fan, I am not a huge pop fan. (Unless it’s 80s music!) I am a huge rock fan, and I do like to see a band that has a chic on lead vocals rather than our testosterone driven rock scene.

Euro4Ever said on July 13, 2003 17:50:

Not bad. The Songs are very Melodic and Emotional, the vocals are also nice. Of course not as good as Roxette, but hey a nice try. They need more Catchy hooks and a little less Gore to be like Roxette.

It’s basically Nickleback with Female frontwoman

immoraldissident said on July 30, 2003 01:21:

me no like... sorry.... the song is overplayed... and it isnt really rock... its like rap/metal... and it even kinda tears metal apart... like Lynkyn Park but... not

Aaso said on August 22, 2003 09:10:

is it the right place or not, I think the “going under” video is great! So cute. I watch it everyday!!