PDA

View Full Version : Judas Priest Playing all of Nostradamus Live


Maiden33
12-20-2008, 08:12 AM
The poll is pretty simple, do you think the possibility (and at this point probability) of Judas Priest performing the entire Nostradamus album live is a good or bad idea?

overkiller
12-20-2008, 09:08 AM
Horrible, horrible idea.

JRA
12-20-2008, 09:10 AM
I'm alright with it, I just hope they don't expect sold out shows.

SomewhereInTime72
12-20-2008, 09:24 AM
Voted yes because I'm not opposed to it. A lot of the songs could work out pretty well live, and the segues would probably seem a lot less annoying.

Spiral_Slave
12-20-2008, 09:29 AM
Yes, I think in it's entirety live would be pretty enjoyable.

Div
12-20-2008, 11:00 AM
theyre probably going to do it anyway because maiden did it, even though AMOLAD was a much much better album than nostradamus. but even then, the crowd at that show was pretty lame and just bitched that amolad sucked and yelled at everyone to sit down, it wasnt really the type of album that made for a good live show.

infact, unless they had some good opening acts i dont know if i would even want to go.

DethMaiden
12-20-2008, 11:14 AM
I'm for it and I'll go if it comes close because I'd like to see how they do the theatrical aspects.

ADD
12-20-2008, 02:41 PM
I wouldn't go.

SirLardsAlot
12-20-2008, 05:19 PM
I wouldn't go.Sadly I have to second this. Nostradamus is a ... borestradamus? I dunno. It's not that good is basically what I'm saying.

overkiller
12-20-2008, 06:29 PM
I would not go.

SomewhereInTime72
12-20-2008, 07:39 PM
So many people wouldn't go, they might play smaller venues.

If so, I definitely would go. :tongue:

rjturtle9
12-20-2008, 09:05 PM
i voted yes cause i think it would be a good move for priest for their fans, but i wouldn't go because since the album is like 2 hours long they wouldn't have time to play anything else

mankvill
12-20-2008, 09:07 PM
I think it would translate surprisingly well live. I'd go.

Sinfulsot
12-21-2008, 05:49 AM
as much as i love Priest, i voted nay. and if the ticket isn't hard on the wallet i am most likely going to this particular performance. the two guys i usually see Priest shows with are definitely not going b/c they did not like Nostradamus.

ravenheart
12-21-2008, 08:21 AM
It's not that good, but I think it would work better live with a full stage production than on the CD.

Rumour is they'll do it at the Royal Albert Hall in London. That will be awesome.

JuuKun
12-21-2008, 09:40 AM
I voted yes. Not because I think Nostradamus is amazing (because I don't), but because I love when bands do some sort of set that's different from their normal fare, whether it be a set related around one album, or just older, lesser-played tracks/b-sides. Adds something to the show, I think, even if it's not your favorite album or songs being played.

Maiden33
12-21-2008, 09:43 AM
I voted yes. Not because I think Nostradamus is amazing (because I don't), but because I love when bands do some sort of set that's different from their normal fare, whether it be a set related around one album, or just older, lesser-played tracks/b-sides. Adds something to the show, I think, even if it's not your favorite album or songs being played.

Thank you, amen.

hot_turkey_ed
12-21-2008, 10:00 AM
I vote a mighty HELL FUCKING YES. :agree:

TonyD
12-26-2008, 04:44 PM
I voted no, but would go depending on ticket prices, day of the week etc. I would definitely have said yes if I liked the album.

Dextrimental
01-30-2010, 05:45 PM
I went to see My Chemical Romance perform the entire Black Parade album and loved it, seeing a band play an entire album, and base the show around it, is very, very entertaining in nearly all aspects of the performance, and its a novelty as most of the songs will never see the light of day in a setlist again. If Preist do this, I would consider travelling to see it, it would be an epic performance by a downright epic band.

Wrathchild_84
01-31-2010, 02:13 AM
even though AMOLAD was a much much better album than nostradamus

IMO both albums where total shit.

ravenheart
01-31-2010, 04:08 AM
I went to see My Chemical Romance perform the entire Black Parade album and loved it, seeing a band play an entire album, and base the show around it, is very, very entertaining in nearly all aspects of the performance, and its a novelty as most of the songs will never see the light of day in a setlist again. If Preist do this, I would consider travelling to see it, it would be an epic performance by a downright epic band.

Not always true at all. I saw Dio play the whole 'Holy Diver' album (the show for the 'Holy Diver Live' DVD) and it sucked.

I also saw W.A.S.P. play all of 'The Crimson Idol', and that sucked too. The album isn't that great (very, VERY repetitive), and they barely played anything else. Like, three other songs.

But then, I saw Testament play all of 'The Legacy' and 'The New Order' and it rocked.

Difference being, Dio plays over half of 'Holy Diver' on every tour anyway, so it wasn't even remotely interesting. Testament were able to bring out a bunch of songs they rarely play, and I think that's the key if it's an album that isn't a concept album and doesn't have a whole other dimension attached to it. It needs to be an album they don't already play all the songs from.

That's why AC/DC doing the whole of 'Back In Black' will suck. They should do all of 'Highway To Hell' or 'Let There Be Rock', if they want to do a popular album all the way through.

Div
01-31-2010, 05:29 AM
>W.A.S.P. play all of 'The Crimson Idol', and that sucked too. The album isn't that great (very, VERY repetitive)


>Testament play all of 'The Legacy' and 'The New Order' and it rocked.

http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/7228/1264944559488.jpg

Dextrimental
01-31-2010, 11:53 AM
Not always true at all. I saw Dio play the whole 'Holy Diver' album (the show for the 'Holy Diver Live' DVD) and it sucked.

I also saw W.A.S.P. play all of 'The Crimson Idol', and that sucked too. The album isn't that great (very, VERY repetitive), and they barely played anything else. Like, three other songs.

But then, I saw Testament play all of 'The Legacy' and 'The New Order' and it rocked.

Difference being, Dio plays over half of 'Holy Diver' on every tour anyway, so it wasn't even remotely interesting. Testament were able to bring out a bunch of songs they rarely play, and I think that's the key if it's an album that isn't a concept album and doesn't have a whole other dimension attached to it. It needs to be an album they don't already play all the songs from.

That's why AC/DC doing the whole of 'Back In Black' will suck. They should do all of 'Highway To Hell' or 'Let There Be Rock', if they want to do a popular album all the way through.

Id agree so far as that in some cases the albums make up most of their setlist anyway.. But I believe that your dislike of the performances is hindered by the fact that you dont altogether like the albums being performed.. I personally think seeing any album performed in its entirety would be not only novelty, but a great show.. And Back in Black is an anniversary show, it will probably only happen once too!

ravenheart
01-31-2010, 03:03 PM
Id agree so far as that in some cases the albums make up most of their setlist anyway.. But I believe that your dislike of the performances is hindered by the fact that you dont altogether like the albums being performed.. I personally think seeing any album performed in its entirety would be not only novelty, but a great show.. And Back in Black is an anniversary show, it will probably only happen once too!

As stated, that's only true in the case of 'The Crimson Idol', which is far too dull an album to play all the way through live. Especially when you're only going to play three or four other songs and go off stage after only 70 minutes.

AC/DC absolutely should not be celebrating 30 years of 'Back In Black'. They should be celebrating the 30th anniversary of Bon Scott's death and play an entire set of Bon songs. To make a point of playing 'Back In Black' is a joke and an insult.

JRA
01-31-2010, 03:19 PM
AC/DC absolutely should not be celebrating 30 years of 'Back In Black'. They should be celebrating the 30th anniversary of Bon Scott's death and play an entire set of Bon songs. To make a point of playing 'Back In Black' is a joke and an insult.

Agreed.

Dextrimental
01-31-2010, 05:36 PM
AC/DC absolutely should not be celebrating 30 years of 'Back In Black'. They should be celebrating the 30th anniversary of Bon Scott's death and play an entire set of Bon songs. To make a point of playing 'Back In Black' is a joke and an insult.

I disagree whole-heartedly. Back in Black is the second biggest selling album of all time, and I, for one, would like AC/DC to play that album in full, as its the first album their current singer sang on. To play a set of songs that Bon played on, and just Bon songs would be ignoring the second biggest selling album of all time as well as EVERYTHING their current singer. AC/DC will no doubt honor Bon Scott, and play a good lot of songs he sang on.

mankvill
01-31-2010, 08:28 PM
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/7228/1264944559488.jpg

>reactionimage.jpg to "Testament" and "rocked"

what

ravenheart
02-01-2010, 09:26 AM
I disagree whole-heartedly. Back in Black is the second biggest selling album of all time, and I, for one, would like AC/DC to play that album in full, as its the first album their current singer sang on. To play a set of songs that Bon played on, and just Bon songs would be ignoring the second biggest selling album of all time as well as EVERYTHING their current singer. AC/DC will no doubt honor Bon Scott, and play a good lot of songs he sang on.

The success of the album is irrelevant. This is a significant anniversary of the death of the guy without whom AC/DC would probably have never became a big band. Far, FAR more worthy of a special set than 'Back In Black'. They should have the balls, and frankly the respect, to resist cashing in on the popularity of that album even more than they do already and celebrate the reason they were ever able to get as far as making that album in the first place.

They're being incredibly disrespectful.

Maiden33
02-01-2010, 09:39 AM
Not always true at all. I saw Dio play the whole 'Holy Diver' album (the show for the 'Holy Diver Live' DVD) and it sucked.

I also saw W.A.S.P. play all of 'The Crimson Idol', and that sucked too. The album isn't that great (very, VERY repetitive), and they barely played anything else. Like, three other songs.

Difference being, Dio plays over half of 'Holy Diver' on every tour anyway, so it wasn't even remotely interesting.

I saw The Crimson Idol show and I thought it was one of the best shows I've ever seen - then again, it's one of my favorite albums of all-time. This "repetitiveness" you criticize is mostly just the recurring musical themes which I think make that album what it is. Frankly it's not much more repetitive than any other WASP album, which isn't even doing it for any good reason. The typical WASP set is only 13 songs these days, so the fact that that tour's set was only 14 tracks shouldn't leave you all butthurt.

And I agree, Dio does play 3 or 4 tracks off Holy Diver on every tour, but still - you saw tracks like Caught in the Middle and Invisible live, which are great and never get played. Not to mention he played some other really cool stuff (Tarot Woman, One Nigh in the City) at that show. It wasn't exactly the most pedestrian set ever.

DethMaiden
02-01-2010, 10:27 AM
I saw The Crimson Idol show and I thought it was one of the best shows I've ever seen - then again, it's one of my favorite albums of all-time. This "repetitiveness" you criticize is mostly just the recurring musical themes which I think make that album what it is. Frankly it's not much more repetitive than any other WASP album, which isn't even doing it for any good reason. The typical WASP set is only 13 songs these days, so the fact that that tour's set was only 14 tracks shouldn't leave you all butthurt.

And I agree, Dio does play 3 or 4 tracks off Holy Diver on every tour, but still - you saw tracks like Caught in the Middle and Invisible live, which are great and never get played. Not to mention he played some other really cool stuff (Tarot Woman, One Nigh in the City) at that show. It wasn't exactly the most pedestrian set ever.

Don't get too heartbroken, ravenheart just needs to keep up his cred with the anti-status quo crowd by bitching about bands playing classic albums. ;)

Dextrimental
02-01-2010, 12:40 PM
The success of the album is irrelevant. This is a significant anniversary of the death of the guy without whom AC/DC would probably have never became a big band. Far, FAR more worthy of a special set than 'Back In Black'. They should have the balls, and frankly the respect, to resist cashing in on the popularity of that album even more than they do already and celebrate the reason they were ever able to get as far as making that album in the first place.

They're being incredibly disrespectful.

The success of the album is not irrelevant, its probably the sole reason they're performing it. Besides, I'm sure its still heavy on their minds that its Bon Scotts anniversary this year as well, but since the setlist more than likely be Back In Black then what, one song off Black Ice then the rest will more than likely be Bon songs. And I'm sure they don't want to be living in the past. They've had their current singer for 30 years, I think it'd be more disrespectful to undermine him, and ignore the fact that its the anniversary of the second biggest selling album of all time. I think it'd be more disrespectful to Bon to cash in on HIS death in order to sell tickets.