Springsteen-esque Sets

[GeorgeDawes]

Controversial I know, but... does anybody else wish the guys played maybe 3-4 songs fewer? Just enough to keep you wanting more? Maybe it's because I've seen them so many times but on a couple of occasions now, I've nipped out for a quick ciggie, missed a couple of songs and not been too bothered.

JFPL tour was the best - little break after album play-through, then short greatest hits set - lovely. Interested to know what others think - very much in favour of quality these days, whereas quantity was once the order of the day. Anybody else feel the same?

[Beat Poet]

I've only thought that on this tour, maybe because I haven't enjoyed the gigs quite as much as I have in the past.

[sculptureofabloke]

I'd take a shorter set if it made them feel obliged to rotate a bit more. It's a shame how they've got 200+ songs and having seen them 10 times so far on this tour, I've only seen about 30 of them. I always enjoy their gigs, but I'm sure I could always enjoy them more.

[Flint]

Longer sets would probably coax them to increase their repertoire.

[Sepia]

In their current format - yes the sets should lose the 5 or 6 filler songs. If they wanted to play Springsteen-esque sets, ie varying a good third of the setlist each night, then it could happily be longer by that same 5 or 6.

The advantage Springsteen has is that his band is composed entirely of musicians, all of whom can play pretty much any of his songs on request. The man takes 4 or 5 requests every night, it's fantastic. It's one of the many reasons his shows worth going to see tour after tour. His solo acoustic tours showcase more material live than most bands do in their entire careers.

[Dancing Kirby]

Originally Posted by Sepia

The advantage Springsteen has is that his band is composed entirely of musicians, all of whom can play pretty much any of his songs on request. The man takes 4 or 5 requests every night, it's fantastic. It's one of the many reasons his shows worth going to see tour after tour. His solo acoustic tours showcase more material live than most bands do in their entire careers.

This is how I always see it when there are moans about setlists. JDB might be able to pull something like that off, but it's never gonna happen with Nicky and Sean.

You can also expect plenty of jamming from the E Street Band. The Manics recently said they don't like jamming. More like they can't.

[Beat Poet]

Originally Posted by Dancing Kirby

You can also expect plenty of jamming from the E Street Band. The Manics recently said they don't like jamming. More like they can't.

That's the reason for their lack of discipline at making rare/difficult songs gig-ready. I couldn't imagine being in a band and not jamming and bashing out new songs in a room to iron them out, but it seems like the Manics hardly ever play new songs as a band before they record them. They probably do, but they should be able to play songs live that they've written and recorded. If Murray and Reed can't play them, sack them.

You learn to play as a band by jamming and I don't think the Manics play as a cohesive unit musically, live. James'll look at Sean occasionally to watch his count offs, the Wire will look nervously at James when he starts forgetting the notes and Sean seems scared to look up from the kit! It's probably the "old-school division of labour" thing, they all have their separate jobs, but it would be good to see them introduce new dimensions to their live performance as they get even more experienced!

[Takk]

Originally Posted by Dancing Kirby

This is how I always see it when there are moans about setlists. JDB might be able to pull something like that off, but it's never gonna happen with Nicky and Sean.

You can also expect plenty of jamming from the E Street Band. The Manics recently said they don't like jamming. More like they can't.

I think you underestimate nick, and definitely underestimate Sean. He's effectively a classically trained musician, he's not some guy who just bangs the drums.

[centralscrutiniser]

Originally Posted by Takk

I think you underestimate nick, and definitely underestimate Sean. He's effectively a classically trained musician, he's not some guy who just bangs the drums.

Sean's a terrific musician. I don't know how much songwriting he really does but I imagine it's a great deal more than we generally give him credit for.

As for the bass parts, I think Nicky is a perfectly competent Bassist. Even still, it's only more recent music that requires more than hammering root notes so I don't think it would be a massive stretch to 'learn' some older stuff.

I wonder if the reluctance to jam is based mostly in the style of the group. Early years and onwards (as I understand it) James and Sean write music, Nicky and Richey write lyrics. James brings the two together then they learn the song together. Whereas other bands write songs by jamming together, I think the fact that they've never done it is the main reason they never fancied it.

[everlasting]

3/4 fewer? No way, people pay good money to see them live. Play 3/4 more songs! Or more realistic like lots of people say - play more different songs!

[Sepia]

^ Don't get me wrong - I think they should be charging less for tickets anyway, and definitely if they cut the sets a bit

[Industrial Symphony No.1]

I think the Manics definitely need to re-invent their live act.

[The Gutless Wonder]

Don't think they need to do anything else with the live shows themselves as they are always a powerhouse. But some different songs would be good. Don't be lazy Nicky!

[Takk]

23 songs is hardly long.

[sculptureofabloke]

Originally Posted by Takk

23 songs is hardly long.

To be fair, it's probably longer for someone like James who spinaroos and hops all over, than for someone like Robert Smith who'll stand there for 35 songs. I think 23 songs is perfectly reasonable, it's just a matter of which 23.