#1
|
||||
|
||||
Springsteen-esque Sets
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? |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Longer sets would probably coax them to increase their repertoire.
__________________
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
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.
__________________
Experience is lost on me I am melancholia eternally But I still smile so stupidly |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
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!
__________________
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
^ Don't get me wrong - I think they should be charging less for tickets anyway, and definitely if they cut the sets a bit
__________________
Experience is lost on me I am melancholia eternally But I still smile so stupidly |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
I think the Manics definitely need to re-invent their live act.
__________________
Margate 22-09-98 Wembley 16-12-98 Cardiff 31-12-99 Brixton Academy 30-03-01 Wembley 07-12-02 Brixton 08-12-02 Wembley 09-12-04 Hammersmith 18-04-05 Hammersmith 19-04-05 Kentish Town 29-05-07 Astoria 30-05-07 Shepherd’s Bush 31-05-07 Brighton 06-06-07 Cardiff 06-12-07 Brixton11-12-07 Brixton 12-12-07 Brighton 14-12-07 O2 Arena 28-02-08 Royal Festival Hall 12-09-08 Camden 28-05-09 Camden 29-05-09 Camden 30-05-09 Brighton 02-06-09 Kentish Town 08-06-09 Southend 20-10-10 Bournemouth 22-10-10 Brixton 15-12-10 Brixton 21-01-11 Brixton 22-01-11 Hard Rock Cafe 02-02-11 Wolverhampton 19-05-11 O2 Arena 17-12-11 Shepherd's Bush 24-09-13 Cardiff 29-03-14 Wolverhampton 06-04-14 Brighton 09-04-14 Brixton 11-04-14 Brixton 12-04-14 Rough Trade East 08-07-14 London Olympia 14-09-14
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
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!
__________________
"Former glam-punk rocker James Dean Bradfield now looks like your friendly, slightly rumpled Welsh uncle who always brings you chocolate when he visits. That's not a bad thing." - Allister Thompson aka The Gateless Gate (Canadian musician) |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
23 songs is hardly long.
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
I'd rather have more variety regardless of the amount of songs. Saying that, I do love long gigs.
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
I'm not crazy about long gigs, I generally get bored after about an hour and a quarter and start thinking about home. The only exception is Idlewild, who could play every song they've ever written in one night and I'd still be enthusiastic at the end.
Surely James is the problem as he can never remember the lyrics? |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
it depends on how I feel during the gig, some are amazing so I'd love them to be twice as long as they are. others would be okay when finish after 17 songs. if I had to choose, no, I would like them to be on stage as long as they can. but as everyone says - new songs in setlists would be great to see.
__________________
Being a fan doesn't mean you were there from the beginning, it means you are willing to be there until the end. Oh, love isn’t there to make us happy. I believe it exists to show us how much we can endure. Hermann Hesse |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah, I just meant to me it doesn't sound like a springsteenesque set length!
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|