WIESS and The River at MSG
colonialacres
about flying cross-country!
The fact that I can't understand the excitement leads me to believe I'm not
insane and that I do indeed have a life.
doerz
"colonialacres" <coloni...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hcsc9r$j22$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
cwb
so, you guys *wouldn't* want to see them perform the complete River
album?
Come on...
cwb
On Nov 4, 8:58 pm, gumboman <gu...@gumbo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:40:22 -0500, "doerz" <jmNOdoerzS...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >do these decisions mean that bruce is a nostalgia act?
>
> >"colonialacres" <colonialac...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >news:hcsc9r$j22$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> >> Bruce nuts are scrambling like mad to get MSG tix now, some even talking
> >> about flying cross-country!
>
> >> The fact that I can't understand the excitement leads me to believe I'm
> >> not insane and that I do indeed have a life.
>
> yes :)
doerz
"cwb" <querosu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:59a0bf63-eb4f-4b0c...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
burtonlmb
"doerz" <jmNOdo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7lee64F...@mid.individual.net...
> do these decisions mean that bruce is a nostalgia act?
Bruce himself, I don't know. But Bruce and The E Streeters, it's hard to
deny that they're headed in that direction.
They're touring after releasing two albums in the last 2-3 years (one of
them an absolutely brilliant record, the other not bad), and they play very
few tracks from either. Instead, they choose to play old complete albums,
and requests. And if you're advertising that you're gonna play old albums,
you're certainly leaning towards being a nostalgia act.
burtonlmb
"cwb" <querosu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:59a0bf63-eb4f-4b0c...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
"so, you guys *wouldn't* want to see them perform the complete River
album?
Come on..."
Sure I would. But I wouldn't fly 3000 miles for it. I wouldn't drive 100
miles for it. I'm not having a hissy fit because I can't be there.
Even if it was in Oakland, I'd much rather see them perform the newer songs
as a tightly rehearsed unit (a la 1980-81 or 1984-85), mixing in the older
gems and rarities, and with a good sound system. You know, like a real
concert.
Robert Neugarten
"burtonlmb" <burt...@comcast.net> schreef in bericht
news:hcuk2s$qj0$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
It's more than leaning. The audience wants to see/hear the old stuff (and
we're talking 30-35 years old stuff here) much more than the new material
and Bruce is granting them their wish.
Zeke
> "so, you guys *wouldn't* want to see them perform the complete River
> album?
> Come on..."
"burtonlmb" <burt...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Sure I would. But I wouldn't fly 3000 miles for it. I wouldn't drive 100
> miles for it. I'm not having a hissy fit because I can't be there.
> Even if it was in Oakland, I'd much rather see them perform the newer
> songs as a tightly rehearsed unit (a la 1980-81 or 1984-85), mixing in the
> older gems and rarities, and with a good sound system. You know, like a
> real concert.
Thanks Mr. Burt. Your post is what I would have answered had I been around.
Like you, I don't have the Bruce bug, haven't for many years.
The last show I saw was San Jose "Magic". It was fantastic. I think
general consenses among the aficianados is that show ranked in the top 5
from that tour. Did it leave me wanting more? No.
The way I see it the entire WOAD tour has been a bad joke. The guy puts out
a beautiful, brilliant album for people in their 50's, tours behind its name
and then fails to play any songs from it. Now he's playing oldies on home
turf. Yeah, I think that qualifies him as a nostalgia act. One who knows
there are always 20,000 nuts willing to jump planes.
===================================
Better bring your own redemption when you come
To the barricades of heaven, where I'm from.
Jackson Browne
burtonlmb
"Zeke" <kedzi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hd46vq$emt$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> "cwb" <querosu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "so, you guys *wouldn't* want to see them perform the complete River
>> album?
>> Come on..."
>
> "burtonlmb" <burt...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Sure I would. But I wouldn't fly 3000 miles for it. I wouldn't drive 100
>> miles for it. I'm not having a hissy fit because I can't be there.
>> Even if it was in Oakland, I'd much rather see them perform the newer
>> songs as a tightly rehearsed unit (a la 1980-81 or 1984-85), mixing in
>> the older gems and rarities, and with a good sound system. You know, like
>> a real concert.
>
> Thanks Mr. Burt. Your post is what I would have answered had I been
> around. Like you, I don't have the Bruce bug, haven't for many years.
>
> The last show I saw was San Jose "Magic". It was fantastic. I think
> general consenses among the aficianados is that show ranked in the top 5
> from that tour. Did it leave me wanting more? No.
>
> The way I see it the entire WOAD tour has been a bad joke. The guy puts
> out a beautiful, brilliant album for people in their 50's, tours behind
> its name and then fails to play any songs from it. Now he's playing
> oldies on home turf. Yeah, I think that qualifies him as a nostalgia act.
> One who knows there are always 20,000 nuts willing to jump planes.
I have now seen Bruce 13 or 14 times or so, in 5 cities, and have traveled,
oh, must be 100 to 150 Bruce Miles all together, in 30 years now. Call me
crazy, but it was all worth it.
Mystic
>I have now seen Bruce 13 or 14 times or so, in 5 cities, and have traveled,
>oh, must be 100 to 150 Bruce Miles all together, in 30 years now. Call me
>crazy, but it was all worth it.
>
Agreed. My experience and memories are cemented in the 75-81 tours,
and that for me, was the pinacle of the Springsteen experience. The
guy still makes outstanding studio albums for the most part and I'm
sure the recent live shows are great, but for me those tours will
never be topped by Bruce.
15 shows in 78 in 8 cities, 6 shows in 81 in 4 cities now those are
some great memories!
burtonlmb
"Mystic" <mys...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:sgjbf51d3vdlb7tmb...@4ax.com...
> Agreed. My experience and memories are cemented in the 75-81 tours,
> and that for me, was the pinacle of the Springsteen experience. The
> guy still makes outstanding studio albums for the most part and I'm
> sure the recent live shows are great, but for me those tours will
> never be topped by Bruce.
> 15 shows in 78 in 8 cities, 6 shows in 81 in 4 cities now those are
> some great memories!
Wow. Now to me that would have been worth the effort, especially at a young
age. How did you happen to see all those shows? Did you have a music related
job, or did you just have lots of free time those years?
Mystic
>Wow. Now to me that would have been worth the effort, especially at a young
>age. How did you happen to see all those shows? Did you have a music related
>job, or did you just have lots of free time those years?
>
I did both, worked as a freelance studio producer as well as working
in another profession. I was fortunate to have a very good friend who
was also a Springsteen fanatic since 74-75 who had a private plane
which flew us to those cities over the weekend or week day and flew us
back the day after those shows. It was interesting to see the true
local colour of the fans without the outside influence in those early
years. The 78 tour will forever be embeded in my memory as one of the
special times in my life!
musicaner
> that wasn't my question's implication...
>
i wouldnt go 1 mile to see the current BRUCE show no matter what he
did PLAY, he could do then entire discoraphy and i WOULD STILL PASS.
the show i saw as 100% yawner. playin it by NUMBERS. pass in a big
way.
i dont even wanna think what they can do to them WIESS songs. BRUCE
surely needs a big rest. maybe give up the road and do some records he
got enough dough he cain chill.
musicaner
> > "cwb" <querosuave.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "so, you guys *wouldn't* want to see them perform the complete River
> > album?
> > Come on..."
> > Sure I would. But I wouldn't fly 3000 miles for it. I wouldn't drive 100
> > miles for it. I'm not having a hissy fit because I can't be there.
> > Even if it was in Oakland, I'd much rather see them perform the newer
> > songs as a tightly rehearsed unit (a la 1980-81 or 1984-85), mixing in the
> > older gems and rarities, and with a good sound system. You know, like a
> > real concert.
>
> Thanks Mr. Burt. Your post is what I would have answered had I been around.
> Like you, I don't have the Bruce bug, haven't for many years.
>
> The last show I saw was San Jose "Magic". It was fantastic. I think
> general consenses among the aficianados is that show ranked in the top 5
> from that tour. Did it leave me wanting more? No.
>
> The way I see it the entire WOAD tour has been a bad joke. The guy puts out
> a beautiful, brilliant album for people in their 50's, tours behind its name
> and then fails to play any songs from it. Now he's playing oldies on home
> turf. Yeah, I think that qualifies him as a nostalgia act. One who knows
> there are always 20,000 nuts willing to jump planes.
>
> ===================================
> Better bring your own redemption when you come
> To the barricades of heaven, where I'm from.
> Jackson Browne
the LONGEST 3 hrs ever, the last BRUCE show i saw yet the MAGIC show
was good. BRUCE is BURNED out
from too MUCH TOUROLOGY. gotta give it up. dont end up like bob
soundin like DONALD DUCK. true, nobody cain sell a cd anymore but
BRUCE cain put em out on VINYL and sell a few, give up the road. give
up that JUNGLELAND stuff ASAP.
musicaner
> "Zeke" <kedzieav...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:hd46vq$emt$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
> >> "cwb" <querosuave.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> "so, you guys *wouldn't* want to see them perform the complete River
> >> album?
> >> Come on..."
>
> >> Sure I would. But I wouldn't fly 3000 miles for it. I wouldn't drive 100
> >> miles for it. I'm not having a hissy fit because I can't be there.
> >> Even if it was in Oakland, I'd much rather see them perform the newer
> >> songs as a tightly rehearsed unit (a la 1980-81 or 1984-85), mixing in
> >> the older gems and rarities, and with a good sound system. You know, like
> >> a real concert.
>
> > Thanks Mr. Burt. Your post is what I would have answered had I been
> > around. Like you, I don't have the Bruce bug, haven't for many years.
>
> > The last show I saw was San Jose "Magic". It was fantastic. I think
> > general consenses among the aficianados is that show ranked in the top 5
> > from that tour. Did it leave me wanting more? No.
>
> > The way I see it the entire WOAD tour has been a bad joke. The guy puts
> > out a beautiful, brilliant album for people in their 50's, tours behind
> > its name and then fails to play any songs from it. Now he's playing
> > oldies on home turf. Yeah, I think that qualifies him as a nostalgia act.
> > One who knows there are always 20,000 nuts willing to jump planes.
>
> I have now seen Bruce 13 or 14 times or so, in 5 cities, and have traveled,
> oh, must be 100 to 150 Bruce Miles all together, in 30 years now. Call me
> crazy, but it was all worth it.
the COMPUTER has destroyed everythin in its PATH. if it werent FOR the
COMPUTER BRUCE wouldnt have to tour non stop, he would still sell some
cds, but thats in the past, i dont think he can shift 100 000 units
anymore. FOLKS are gettin BURNED on the road, and the TIX thing is
about to implode due to the GREEDY prices.
say GOOBAY to the music thing.
burtonlmb
"musicaner" <musi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7f93c74a-50a4-4ab4...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
You're right, and it's obviously also the reason he got the K-TEL quality
dime store sound system. The shows would be tolerable (in a nostalgiac way,
at least) if the sound were decent, but apparently Bruce isn't happy with
simply making a profit; he gotta make a killing. And who can totally blame
him ---- there's plenty of suckers out there who'll willingly hand him their
wallets, so long as he plays energenically (sp?), crowd surfs, and leads the
Sunny Day singalong.
Bruce has gone the way of the big corporations --- cut costs, deplete the
quality of the product, and hope there's still enough diehards, newbies, and
nostalgia fans to keep the huge profits coming in. The shows have become an
oldies act, because the fans who buy tickets want it that way, and Bruce
knows who butters his bread.
At least he's still making good albums, really the only thing he's offering
that keeps me around.
Zeke
> "the COMPUTER has destroyed everythin in its PATH. if it werent FOR the
> COMPUTER BRUCE wouldnt have to tour non stop, he would still sell some
> cds, but thats in the past, i dont think he can shift 100 000 units
> anymore. FOLKS are gettin BURNED on the road, and the TIX thing is
> about to implode due to the GREEDY prices.
> say GOOBAY to the music thing."
"burtonlmb" <burt...@comcast.net> wrote:
> You're right, and it's obviously also the reason he got the K-TEL quality
> dime store sound system. The shows would be tolerable (in a nostalgiac
> way, at least) if the sound were decent, but apparently Bruce isn't happy
> with simply making a profit; he gotta make a killing. And who can totally
> blame him ---- there's plenty of suckers out there who'll willingly hand
> him their wallets, so long as he plays energenically (sp?), crowd surfs,
> and leads the Sunny Day singalong.
> Bruce has gone the way of the big corporations --- cut costs, deplete the
> quality of the product, and hope there's still enough diehards, newbies,
> and nostalgia fans to keep the huge profits coming in. The shows have
> become an oldies act, because the fans who buy tickets want it that way,
> and Bruce knows who butters his bread.
> At least he's still making good albums, really the only thing he's
> offering that keeps me around.
That's enough for me.
As long as he keeps making good albums I'm happy.
By the way... few weeks ago I watched the NYC Serenade clip from the WIESS
night at MSG. Was pleasently surprised. No drawl, twang, mumbling or lazy,
slurred vocals like he used to do on Thunder Road (the kinda thing always
made you feel like he doesn't want to be there). Just a real nice version
played true to the original album.
burtonlmb
Yeah, thank god he has stopped the twang bit.
I haven't had time yet to watch those videos or listen to the bootlegs of
the oldies shows, but intend to sometime this weekend.
No doubt they will be pleasing, if for no other reason than he was playing
lots of songs that he doesn't play much, rather than the same old
crowd-pleasing no-rehearsal-needed stuff he's been playing for the last 3 or
4 tours.
musicaner
> "Zeke" <kedzieav...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:hepa23$oei$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
> > Musicaner wrote:
> >> "the COMPUTER has destroyed everythin in its PATH. if it werent FOR the
> >> COMPUTER BRUCE wouldnt have to tour non stop, he would still sell some
> >> cds, but thats in the past, i dont think he can shift 100 000 units
> >> anymore. FOLKS are gettin BURNED on the road, and the TIX thing is
> >> about to implode due to the GREEDY prices.
> >> say GOOBAY to the music thing."
>
accordin to MR LANDAU another DVD of this TOUR is next up alon with
DARKNESS REMASTER!! it used to be BRUCE woulndt go on TV due to his
ARTISTIC STATURE now they have to have security out lookin out for
him.
hes also with COSTELLO in his tv show, which by the way did nothin for
me, all these people READIN the LYRICS while they play.
then in 2 years time back on the road with JUNGLELAND etc.
musicaner
> Musicaner wrote:
> > "the COMPUTER has destroyed everythin in its PATH. if it werent FOR the
> > COMPUTER BRUCE wouldnt have to tour non stop, he would still sell some
> > cds, but thats in the past, i dont think he can shift 100 000 units
> > anymore. FOLKS are gettin BURNED on the road, and the TIX thing is
> > about to implode due to the GREEDY prices.
> > say GOOBAY to the music thing."
the DRAWL is not doin good due to the VOICE bein shot. you gonna miss
the DRAWL when he commences with
that UPSINGIN.
Zeke
> > you gonna miss the DRAWL when he commences with that UPSINGIN.
LMAO!
I suppose you're right!
musicaner
and you KNOW a XMAS album is in the cards, no way thats not gonna
happen in not TOO DISTANT FUTURE>
Mystic
>and you KNOW a XMAS album is in the cards, no way thats not gonna
>happen in not TOO DISTANT FUTURE>
Oh God................please no!!
musicaner
> "Zeke" <kedzieav...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:hepa23$oei$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
> > Musicaner wrote:
> >> "the COMPUTER has destroyed everythin in its PATH. if it werent FOR the
> >> COMPUTER BRUCE wouldnt have to tour non stop, he would still sell some
> >> cds, but thats in the past, i dont think he can shift 100 000 units
> >> anymore. FOLKS are gettin BURNED on the road, and the TIX thing is
> >> about to implode due to the GREEDY prices.
> >> say GOOBAY to the music thing."
>
in 2 years then theyll reconvene AND DO ANOTHER NEW JERSEY PEP RALLY
type of tour with the
LITTLE KIDS JUMPIN ONSTAGE with the ROCKAWAY NJ t shirts on. NJ expats
will flock to the shows
like they was goin back to the old COUNTRY. there 2 songs that they
should really think about not
doin ever again, despite the CHEERLEADIN section: jungleland and
thunder road. i know its like the whole
JERSEY SHORE comes to life but musically its like beatin a dead horse.
musicaner
if he does it before he totally LOSES his voice it shouldnt be TOO
bad, if he does a ROCK and ROLL XMAS record.
all he needs is for someone in a charity to ask him and itll be done.
that BOB xmas record is the most unlistenable thing ive ever heard,
nothing can be as bad as that.
rawbylaw
now this! this is the xmas spiritum! folks with no lives fussin bout
someone with no voice singin for folks with no food. pass the cactus
juice! noel!
-jim
burtonlmb
I'm waiting for the Magic and Working On A Dream oldies tours.
burtonlmb
"rawbylaw" <rawb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9f43d9d3-4c87-4614...@33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
No el!
musicaner
> "rawbylaw" <rawby...@aol.com> wrote in message
I SUPPOSE im mission out on the FUN , listenin to BOB do quacky
version of LITTLE TOWN of BETHLEHEM!! all that fun with the BOB CROAK
and the BOOZE, the wigs and the RAY CONIFF singers. dont know what
come over me.
must be crazy to miss out on that. or them BRUCE shows with the
everybody wearin the NJ t shirts. countin the days
for the next tour.
i read on the magazine that MR LANDAU was sayin the there was lots of
young folk at the BRUCE shows
specially "UP FRONT". that MR LANDAU gotta be the greatest SPINMASTER
of all time.
musicaner
> "musicaner" <musica...@gmail.com> wrote in message
the MAGIC REMASTER , REMASTERD by BRENDAN!!! talk about a sox stuffin
stuffer.
burtonlmb
"i read on the magazine that MR LANDAU was sayin the there was lots of
young folk at the BRUCE shows
specially "UP FRONT". that MR LANDAU gotta be the greatest SPINMASTER
of all time."
Maybe he's talking about the gal who puts her young daughter up on the stage
for dancin. Or maybe Hal, he's kinda young.
But more likely, it's like you or me going to see Tony Bennett or Dion or
somebody else popular 1 or 2 or 3 generations before ours. Of course the
audience seems young. But we're once and gone. Paying our respects to the
older classic performers, but it's not like we're a fan base gonna buy each
release and go to multiple shows. Of course Jon or Bruce ain't gonna say:
"We're becoming an oldies act".
It's bad news whenever they say they see lots of youngsters at shows,
because you know that means they will continue to play the same old
warhorses, rather than putting on an interesting show where they might have
to rehearse or something.
burtonlmb
Re-release 3 versions each of the Brendan albums --- the original done by
him; 1 remastered by whoever did it before him; and 1 remastered by a
chimpanzee.
Mystic
>It's bad news whenever they say they see lots of youngsters at shows,
>because you know that means they will continue to play the same old
>warhorses, rather than putting on an interesting show where they might have
>to rehearse or something.
>
Agreed. A contemporary audience would be open to newer and perhaps
more challanging material via new unreleased or unrehersed stuff
versus the younger gen who want the hits.
Yep...............it's lookin more like an oldies act with every new
turn of events. Always felt Bruce should have abandoned the big label
mother ship 10-15 years ago and hooked into a smaller but wider form
of communication with his fans. Would have given him more freedom and
room to manevour in the musical world.
colonialacres
"Evan Z" <n...@mail.please> wrote in message
news:hf44o1$jpg$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> without leaving the major label. He's spent a lot of time over the past
> decade playing to smaller crowds than he could draw with the band, playing
> new material that the masses don't love (though not on this last tour for
> some reason), and for better or worse playing old material in radically
> new ways. He's been more prolific than ever before, and he's gotten
> involved in politics more directly than ever before. Bruce does some
> things for fame and money, but I don't think he's been terribly
> constrained lately. More likely, IMO, he's doing what he does because he
> likes it.
>
> No doubt Bruce makes a lot of money touring with the band for big crowds.
> But I think we shouldn't dismiss the idea that he loves the songs they
> play every night and that he's moved by the fact that so many people love
> hearing them. That's the sense I got, anyway, from reading that Billboard
> interview.
>
> IMO, Bruce hasn't changed much if at all. For decades now he's been a guy
> who loves to entertain, loves to play for huge crowds, and also sometimes
> loves to do other things. He's still like that.
Bruce has changed in at least two major ways: he doesn't play much off his
current albums for the past two tours; and he has let the sound quality at
his shows go to hell.
It's wonderful that he loves the songs he plays most every concert, and it's
great that he is moved by the fact that so many love hearing them. I'm happy
for Bruce. Still, that doesn't make for a very interesting concert.
What I would love to see him do is to tour with a rock band, and play some
of the incredible treasure trove of gems in his catalog that he rarely
plays, completely rehearsed (Bruce is musically at his best when rehearsed;
he's not really an improvisor); and with a sound system that is worthy of
the 21st century (or even the late 20th!).
The folk band is fine (a commendable effort though poorly executed IMO), the
solo thing is fine (sometimes even interesting), the E Streeters playing
warhorses is fine (though old hat at this point). But how about something
exciting? Some exciting live rock music, in particular? Bruce became famous
mostly for his exciting, interesting rock shows. He can still do it on the
albums; why can't he do it in concert? Sure it's somewhat exciting just to
see how much he loves the band, and how much energy a 60 year old can
generate, but musically it's boring.
How often do you put on a CD of a band show from the past 10 years that
you've heard before? For me: never, because musically they don't hold up.
musicaner
> "musicaner" <musica...@gmail.com> wrote in message
all the LITTLE KIDS go up front KNOWIN BRUCE is gonna pick one of em
to be ON THE BIG TV behind the stage.
so all congrate right up front. meanwhile outside of the first few
feet of the PIT there aint NOBODY under 40 years old
but HEY WE ARE SEEIN A LOTTA YOUNG FOLK up front. 10 years old.
probably dont even know who BRUCE is.
they are learnin the ways of the OLD COUNTRY.
they probably set up that way so they cain claim to be happenin.
another BRUCE tour soon and hes voice gonna give he gotta relax and
just do a few shows no more year long tours.
burtonlmb
"Evan Z" <n...@mail.please> wrote in message
> On 12/1/09 5:22 PM, colonialacres wrote:
>> "Evan Z"<n...@mail.please> wrote in message
>
>
> Burt, I snipped a lot of this just because it's a new version of an old
> disagreement.:) I think your reasons for disliking the current Bruce shows
> are perfectly good--I can't argue with them.
>
> I'd only say I'm not a fan of the "Bruce is an oldies act" idea. My
> feeling is that if we want to argue that the songs are enduring works of
> art, then we can't also argue that they're mere nostalgia 30 years after
> they were written. Those old songs are still good, IMO, and they still
> have life.
Well, nostalgia wouldn't be nostalgia if the old songs weren't still good.
That said, who WOULD you consider an oldies act, Evan? What is your
definition? Or is there no such thing?
I know it's sort of a subjective thing, but I figure you must draw the line
somewhere.
colonialacres
"Evan Z" <n...@mail.please> wrote in message
> On 12/2/09 9:03 AM, burtonlmb wrote:
>
>> That said, who WOULD you consider an oldies act, Evan? What is your
>> definition? Or is there no such thing?
>
> attached to being one.
There's only a stigma if the listener thinks there's one. I see nothing bad
about oldies acts. I'm an oldies act!
To me, especially now, so many things suck, and
> anything that makes people feel pretty good for 90 minutes is a good
> thing.
Oh no, please don't use that one on me! That excuses just about anything.
Including the inexcusable sound system.
There are probably lots of 1950s-1970s acts that tour and just do
> letter-perfect versions of their old hits and let the audience relive the
> good old days.
Yep. Oldies acts. And I see plenty of exactly that from Bruce and his
audience of late. It's wonderful kumbaya stuff, but it's not interesting
music.
The Who released an album a few years ago, I think,
> but they're probably a great band that's toured mostly as an oldies act
> this decade. Lesser bands--Styx, Journey, REO Speedwagon--still tour. And
> older acts too.
>
> But IMO Bruce isn't an oldies act. The tour wasn't about WOAD, but he
> played more from it--and a lot more post-2001 stuff--than he did from
> anything he released between 1988 and 2001.
True, the WOAD tour wasn't about WOAD <scratching head>.
He did his stock post 2001 stuff, and his stock pre-1988 stuff.
And "American Land" is a
> pretty new song that he played just about every night.
Yep. But man, to be honest (and crude), that song sucks balls, don't you
think?
He played plenty
> from Magic on that tour until a band member died and he absolutely toured
> in support of WSO and D&D.
True. But I wonder if he (and the band) liked how seemingly easy it was, at
that point, to not play difficult (read: new or seldom played) songs, and
instead rely almost exclusively on the old sods (really what most of the
audience probably wanted to hear anyway). I think it's likely he did, and
went with that same philosophy on the next tour. These old dudes DO NOT want
to spend valuable time rehearsing.
> I like the way you put it before--what's strange about Bruce is not that
> he's just playing old stuff, it's that he's leaving out so much great old
> stuff that he could be playing and breathing new life into.
>
> To me, Bruce isn't an oldies act, in any event, because he's released five
> new albums in the past decade. He writes new songs, and he tries to
> respond to the world as it is today.
True, and I think the albums with the band are excellent. But their live act
is heading towards "too comfortable" territory. Oldies-ville.
I love the albums, but refuse to go to a show (and Bruce'll never miss me)
until they fix things, which will probably never happen.
musicaner
> On 12/2/09 5:04 PM, colonialacres wrote:
>
> > "Evan Z"<n...@mail.please> wrote in message
> > about oldies acts. I'm an oldies act!
>
>
> > To me, especially now, so many things suck, and
> >> anything that makes people feel pretty good for 90 minutes is a good
> >> thing.
>
> > Oh no, please don't use that one on me! That excuses just about anything.
> > Including the inexcusable sound system.
>
> The worst sound at a Springsteen show, by far, that I've heard was at my
> first, in 1992. Since then, the sound has ranged from pretty bad (a lot
> of the time) to surprisingly good (a few times). I think I've been to 14
> or 15 shows, most between 1999 and 2004.
>
> I don't know anything about sound and I don't know why it mostly sucks
> for Springsteen arena shows (and most other arena shows I've seen). I
> doubt it's because Bruce refuses to spend for good sound. These guys are
> working hard on stage and traveling and all that--it's hard to believe
> they wouldn't want people to actually hear what they're playing.
>
> There are much easier ways than touring for Bruce to make a zillion
> dollars if he really wants money that badly.
>
> [...]
>
> > And "American Land" is a
> >> pretty new song that he played just about every night.
>
> > Yep. But man, to be honest (and crude), that song sucks balls, don't you
> > think?
>
>
> > He played plenty
> >> from Magic on that tour until a band member died and he absolutely toured
> >> in support of WSO and D&D.
>
> > True. But I wonder if he (and the band) liked how seemingly easy it was, at
> > that point, to not play difficult (read: new or seldom played) songs, and
> > instead rely almost exclusively on the old sods (really what most of the
> > audience probably wanted to hear anyway). I think it's likely he did, and
> > went with that same philosophy on the next tour. These old dudes DO NOT want
> > to spend valuable time rehearsing.
>
> and they don't really need to to sell tickets. But I also wonder if the
> calculation is that it's better to vary setlists via random one-offs
> (the unrehearsed or barely rehearsed requests) than to rehearse and
> perfect a setlist of more unusual songs, which they'd then play every
> night. If they went this route, they might have a more interesting and
> exciting and challenging show for every big Springsteen fan who sees it
> once, but a less exciting show for brand new people (who want classics)
> and for the people who go again and again (who wants lots of variety).
>
> In short, the population of big Springsteen fans that wants a very
> different kind of concert is probably small.
>
> >> I like the way you put it before--what's strange about Bruce is not that
> >> he's just playing old stuff, it's that he's leaving out so much great old
> >> stuff that he could be playing and breathing new life into.
>
> >> To me, Bruce isn't an oldies act, in any event, because he's released five
> >> new albums in the past decade. He writes new songs, and he tries to
> >> respond to the world as it is today.
>
> > True, and I think the albums with the band are excellent. But their live act
> > is heading towards "too comfortable" territory. Oldies-ville.
> > I love the albums, but refuse to go to a show (and Bruce'll never miss me)
> > until they fix things, which will probably never happen.
>
> skipped this tour too, for a lot of the same reasons. But like you say,
> Bruce won't miss you or me. All that means is that other people--maybe
> people who've never seen him before--get the fun of the conventional E
> Street Band tour. A friend of mine, a U2 fanatic, saw Bruce for the
> first time this year and she raved and raved about how great it
> was--much better, she said, than the U2 show she saw a week or so later.
> So that's nice.:)
>
> In general, I don't begrudge the band celebrating their legacy or
> looking back on what they've done. They've earned it. But yeah, it's not
> exactly the show I'd most want to see.
>
> --
> ez
folk RAVE about all kinda things. some folk rave about watchin GOLF on
the TV. but on a HIGHER LEVEL of MUSICAL CONSCIOUSNESS(sp) the last
tour was a bad thing for BRUCE. that NON STOP cottonin to the AUD is
just not PAR for the MUSCIAL COURSE. the last show was like havin to
watch golf on tv for 3 hrs. no doubt lotta folk were ravin about
it. but for me, big MUSICAL PASS.
and then this thing where it has to be 3 hr!! like its a rule you
gotta reach the 3 hr finish line even if you to ROLL SIDEWAYS to the
finish line.
somethin just aint right. it remind me of a instance many years ago
when by some circumstance i ended up a minor league baseball game.
never been a big SPORTS fan and baseball specially would put me in a
comatose state. but anyways the fellow i knew next to me was talkin
about MICKEY MANTLE, and i told him i know the name but what was his
claim to fame? there was an OLD TIMER sittion on the other side who
STOOD UP and commenced to curse at me
WHAT the F do you mean you dont know who MICKEY MANTLE is??? you
STUPID MFer!!! he was so angry he TURNED and LEFT!!! i remember that
incident but not the game. dont even remember who was playin or who
won and have avoided BASEBALL games ever since. this WHOLE BRUCE thing
is remindin me of a 3 hr baseball game but without the CRAZY OLD
TIMERS.
colonialacres
"Evan Z" <n...@mail.please> wrote in message
> On 12/2/09 5:04 PM, colonialacres wrote:
>>> anything that makes people feel pretty good for 90 minutes is a good
>>> thing.
>>
>> Oh no, please don't use that one on me! That excuses just about anything.
>> Including the inexcusable sound system.
>
> The worst sound at a Springsteen show, by far, that I've heard was at my
> first, in 1992. Since then, the sound has ranged from pretty bad (a lot of
> the time) to surprisingly good (a few times). I think I've been to 14 or
> 15 shows, most between 1999 and 2004.
I went to both Bay Area '92 shows, and the sound was great. But the shows
were at a shed, and Bill Graham Productions put on the show, so their sound
was as good as ever.
In '99, at an arena, the sound was the worst I'd ever heard. Not Bill Graham
shows, btw. Quite a bit better in 2002 at an arena (behind the stage) and
2003 at a stadium (right behind the pit), but still not up to snuff.
> I don't know anything about sound and I don't know why it mostly sucks for
> Springsteen arena shows (and most other arena shows I've seen). I doubt
> it's because Bruce refuses to spend for good sound. These guys are working
> hard on stage and traveling and all that--it's hard to believe they
> wouldn't want people to actually hear what they're playing.
Now see, I'd never heard bad sound at an arena til Bruce '99. I'm surmising
that maybe because all the other arena shows I'd been to before that were
Graham shows, and he spoiled me. I just figured that good sound had been
perfected by then, and I believe I was right. If Graham could do it (and
we're talking early 1970's here), everyone else should be able to as well.
So, that's why I think it's a matter of money. Whoever took over for Graham
is probably more expensive than other companies. Bruce used to care, but
doesn't seem to anymore. And if he can save some bucks and still sell out
the shows, ......
> There are much easier ways than touring for Bruce to make a zillion
> dollars if he really wants money that badly.
I don't know how, except whoring his songs out for commercials. The CD
market ain't gonna do it.
The money is in touring. And your profit is determined mostly by receipts
vs. expenses.
> [...]
>
>> And "American Land" is a
>>> pretty new song that he played just about every night.
>>
>> Yep. But man, to be honest (and crude), that song sucks balls, don't you
>> think?
>
> I like it, but mileage does vary.:)
My brain always goes straight to "Always after me Lucky Charms .....".
> I agree that they don't want to rehearse. They're older, they're richer,
> and they don't really need to to sell tickets. But I also wonder if the
> calculation is that it's better to vary setlists via random one-offs (the
> unrehearsed or barely rehearsed requests) than to rehearse and perfect a
> setlist of more unusual songs, which they'd then play every night. If they
> went this route, they might have a more interesting and exciting and
> challenging show for every big Springsteen fan who sees it once, but a
> less exciting show for brand new people (who want classics) and for the
> people who go again and again (who wants lots of variety).
>
> In short, the population of big Springsteen fans that wants a very
> different kind of concert is probably small.
You're absolutely right I think, although Bruce does have enough
under-played songs to do two completely different shows in two nights, but
they don't wanna take the time to rehearse enough for even one.
But yeah, he's trying to please as many people as he can (taking many risks
seems to be designated for non-E Street Band shows only), and his way is a
very effective way to do that.
> I can understand that criticism and I can understand not going, since I
> skipped this tour too, for a lot of the same reasons. But like you say,
> Bruce won't miss you or me. All that means is that other people--maybe
> people who've never seen him before--get the fun of the conventional E
> Street Band tour. A friend of mine, a U2 fanatic, saw Bruce for the first
> time this year and she raved and raved about how great it was--much
> better, she said, than the U2 show she saw a week or so later. So that's
> nice.:)
Even though he's not really giving the 100% he used to, Bruce still gives
more to an audience than most acts. He still can blow newbies away with
ease.
> In general, I don't begrudge the band celebrating their legacy or looking
> back on what they've done. They've earned it. But yeah, it's not exactly
> the show I'd most want to see.
Ew, the "L" word! ;-). I had hoped the "celebrating their legacy" bit would
have ended with the reunion tour. But apparently it's gonna run until the
band shuts down forever.
Then there's the other "L" word they've been using lately: I finally got the
new Ian Hunter CD yesterday, and the sticker on the shrink-wrap made me
chuckle because it reminded me of Bruce. It said something like "The new
album from the Legendary Mott The Hoople singer, Ian Hunter".
musicaner
> On 12/3/09 10:08 PM, musicaner wrote:
>
> > folk RAVE about all kinda things. some folk rave about watchin GOLF on
> > the TV. but on a HIGHER LEVEL of MUSICAL CONSCIOUSNESS(sp) the last
> > tour was a bad thing for BRUCE. that NON STOP cottonin to the AUD is
> > just not PAR for the MUSCIAL COURSE. the last show was like havin to
> > watch golf on tv for 3 hrs. no doubt lotta folk were ravin about
> > it. but for me, big MUSICAL PASS.
>
>
> > and then this thing where it has to be 3 hr!! like its a rule you
> > gotta reach the 3 hr finish line even if you to ROLL SIDEWAYS to the
> > finish line.
> > somethin just aint right. it remind me of a instance many years ago
> > when by some circumstance i ended up a minor league baseball game.
> > never been a big SPORTS fan and baseball specially would put me in a
> > comatose state. but anyways the fellow i knew next to me was talkin
> > about MICKEY MANTLE, and i told him i know the name but what was his
> > claim to fame? there was an OLD TIMER sittion on the other side who
> > STOOD UP and commenced to curse at me
> > WHAT the F do you mean you dont know who MICKEY MANTLE is??? you
> > STUPID MFer!!! he was so angry he TURNED and LEFT!!!
>
> people like that. As a (displaced) NYer and a non-Yankee fan, it's annoying.
>
> i remember that
>
> > incident but not the game. dont even remember who was playin or who
> > won and have avoided BASEBALL games ever since. this WHOLE BRUCE thing
> > is remindin me of a 3 hr baseball game but without the CRAZY OLD
> > TIMERS.
>
> Say hey.:)
>
> --
> ez
its like this TIGER WOODS, i know him but i DONT KNOW HIM. never seen
a golf match never played golf
dont care about golf and outside of him i dont know any other ones.
but i KNOW him but why i dont know.
i know WILLIE MAYS but not too sure what his claim to fame is. sports
in general BORE me. BRUCE show turnin into a PEP RALLY, if you happen
to be fixated about ROCKAWAY NJ then i suppose its just the best tour
of all times
but to me i dont like PEP RALLIES. dont LIKE TO HAVE TO WATCH TV while
the show is on. dont like CHOOO CHOO durin JOHNNY 99 dont like the
comedy schtick that now goes from the beginnin to the end of the show.
not my thing. im not into that ENTERTAINMENT thing. the fact that
BRUCE voice is shot dont help. a nice rest will do good.
cwb
The wife and I made the trip and The River MSG show was phenomenal!
cwb
colonialacres
"cwb" <querosu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c5544997-1d29-498c...@e7g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
>
> The wife and I made the trip and The River MSG show was phenomenal!
I'd have been stunned if you hadn't gone!
musicaner
> "cwb" <querosuave.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c5544997-1d29-498c...@e7g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > The wife and I made the trip and The River MSG show was phenomenal!
>
> I'd have been stunned if you hadn't gone!
i caint even IMAGINE what that woulda been like thats a DOUBLE ALBUM,
33 rpm performed at 16 rpm.
burtonlmb
Ha! I can remember clicking the turntable setting to change from a 45 to an
album, and accidentally going too far without knowing it, to 16 instead of
33. Sometimes these days I feel the way that sounded!
I'd have loved to go to a River nostalgia show if it were local and he fixed
the sound. I'm not near a big enough fan to travel for it though.
I'm hoping the success of it will nudge Bruce to play more of his obscure
songs from The River and other albums, regularly on forthcoming tours.
cwb
> "musicaner" <musica...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:a5fc3302-e14c-4bd3...@q18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 16, 4:49 pm, "colonialacres" <colonialac...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > "cwb" <querosuave.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:c5544997-1d29-498c...@e7g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > The wife and I made the trip and The River MSG show was phenomenal!
>
> > I'd have been stunned if you hadn't gone!
are you stunned we couldn't make the W&I night before? I'm sure it was
great, but we've seen all of those songs at some point on the past few
tours plus we just couldn't get away for another day.
> I'd have loved to go to a River nostalgia show
Heh. Felt quite alive and in the moment actually. On account of the
economy, etc.
> if it were local and he fixed
> the sound.
the sound was excellent to my ears. Check out the recordings.
>I'm not near a big enough fan to travel for it though.
We felt lucky to go. We like New York too.
> I'm hoping the success of it will nudge Bruce to play more of his obscure
> songs from The River and other albums, regularly on forthcoming tours.
I thought the same thing. "Crush on You" and "I'm a Rocker" were so
good, I thought they'd play 'em again before the tour's end.
He did "Restless Nights" in Buffalo, but I guess that was a Steve
thing.
burtonlmb
On Dec 17, 8:13 am, "burtonlmb" <burton...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "musicaner" <musica...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:a5fc3302-e14c-4bd3...@q18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 16, 4:49 pm, "colonialacres" <colonialac...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > "cwb" <querosuave.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:c5544997-1d29-498c...@e7g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > The wife and I made the trip and The River MSG show was phenomenal!
>
> > I'd have been stunned if you hadn't gone!
"are you stunned we couldn't make the W&I night before? I'm sure it was
great, but we've seen all of those songs at some point on the past few
tours plus we just couldn't get away for another day."
Plus there goes another $200, minimum.
> I'd have loved to go to a River nostalgia show
"Heh. Felt quite alive and in the moment actually."
That might be because Bruce's regular shows have been snoozers lately?
"On account of the
economy, etc."
As you can tell, I'm not crazy about the whole decades-old album thing. I've
a terrible old aversion to musicians with gimmicks; but that's just me.
> if it were local and he fixed
> the sound.
"the sound was excellent to my ears. Check out the recordings."
There seemed to be mixed opinions of the sound, on RMAS. I guess it depended
on where you were. Been meaning to listen to the show, but just haven't
found the time yet.
>I'm not near a big enough fan to travel for it though.
"We felt lucky to go. We like New York too."
> I'm hoping the success of it will nudge Bruce to play more of his obscure
> songs from The River and other albums, regularly on forthcoming tours.
"I thought the same thing. "Crush on You" and "I'm a Rocker" were so
good, I thought they'd play 'em again before the tour's end."
People keep talking about "Crush", but I've never cared for it; and "Rocker"
happens to be the only other one on the album I'm not crazy about. Different
strokes.
But it would have been cool to hear the slow songs again (saw/heard em in
1980), and "Fade Away" and a couple others for the first time.
I think he should have added the "Here She Comes" preamble to "Marry You"
too (one of the highlights in 1980), but you can't have everything I guess.
"He did "Restless Nights" in Buffalo, but I guess that was a Steve
thing."
Great number.
musicaner
CRUSH on YOU is the same song as I WALK the way i WANNA WALK, and so
is im a ROCKER. most of the songs
on that record are sorta like the same song.. i like INDEPENDENCE DAY
but i saw him do that way back in the day
and dont wanna have the MEMORY ERASED by havin to watch a version with
a CHOOCHOO CODA or/ and 12 year old kid singin a verse or two and
assorted GIMMICKS and JERSEY SHORE nostalgia. forget it.
musicaner
KISS barely qualify as music, BUBBLEGUM music is better thatn that
KISS stuff. dont think they are capable of even
writin a TUNE. the only tune they ever had was that GOD GAVE ROCK AND
ROLL to YA and my memory serves
that wasnt even their song. that CARTOON PUFFNSTUFF was better music
than KISS. dont know what goin on
with all the BRUCE folk listenin to that stuff.
i always laugh at that EDDIE and THE CRUISER movie. the guy on there
THREW A FIT and disappeared on account he wasnt ALLOWED
to be HIMSELF MUSICALLY> its like MARIO LANZA wantin to do a SITAR
ALBUM. its a good movie if you view it as a comedy.
burtonlmb
burtonlmb
"CRUSH on YOU is the same song as I WALK the way i WANNA WALK, and so
is im a ROCKER. most of the songs
on that record are sorta like the same song.. i like INDEPENDENCE DAY
but i saw him do that way back in the day
and dont wanna have the MEMORY ERASED by havin to watch a version with
a CHOOCHOO CODA or/ and 12 year old kid singin a verse or two and
assorted GIMMICKS and JERSEY SHORE nostalgia. forget it."
I think I'd have been disappointed, especially in an arena. But I can see
why folks who'd never seen most of the River numbers in concert would be
excited.
Again, I'd rather see the new songs performed, mixed with the older
rarities. Bruce basically gave up on the last 2 albums as concert material,
caving to the fans.
burtonlmb
"KISS barely qualify as music, BUBBLEGUM music is better thatn that
KISS stuff. dont think they are capable of even
writin a TUNE. the only tune they ever had was that GOD GAVE ROCK AND
ROLL to YA and my memory serves
that wasnt even their song. that CARTOON PUFFNSTUFF was better music
than KISS. dont know what goin on
with all the BRUCE folk listenin to that stuff.
i always laugh at that EDDIE and THE CRUISER movie. the guy on there
THREW A FIT and disappeared on account he wasnt ALLOWED
to be HIMSELF MUSICALLY> its like MARIO LANZA wantin to do a SITAR
ALBUM. its a good movie if you view it as a comedy."
I suppose my aversion to gimmicks kept me from ever giving Kiss a fair shot.
I can safely say that I've never heard a Kiss song that I know of. But I can
live with that!
Saw Eddie & The Cruisers back in the old days when it seemed like they ran
it on cable non-stop. A decent flick, but nothing to write home about.
Seemed like a blatant rip-off of Bruce, capitalizing on his being hot at the
time.