Shelter
-
Content Count
3,131 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
187
Posts posted by Shelter
-
-
Yes.
Of course they should.
Just like they should give all of them core staples a rest now and then. Key word being "rotation".
-
There's so many.. How about these for starters:
Finding Out
Mystery of Love
Wasted Life
You And I Will Meet Again
Deliver Me
-
To me this is the best live band in the world. Even more so in recent years, when I detect an extra notch of heavy, or just mature, an extra bass and drums dimension in the mix in the 2010s. I would honestly say that it IS indeed all positive, in terms of "how". What ails is the general approach and spunk in terms of "what". All else is beyond fine, thus the sometimes frustration on my side. These guys are the best and they just seem to be getting better with age!
-
Good points abound here.
Let me just add a few things to my above post..
- I forgot to mention Mary Jane's Last Dance. Another 89-94 song that quickly became a staple -strengthening my view on this. MJLD then took up another steady slot that could be used to rotate material. This means that even if songs like Don't Do Me Like That, Even The Losers and You Got Lucky (and by all means, Something In The Air!) haven't get played that extensively after the Greatest Hits release (and even if Breakdown, I Need To Know and The Waiting has been played less frequently in recent years too, when real slowly the Hits focus rotates almost-but-not-quite noticable around the never changing 89 hub) - the Gr Hits album still holds about 10 of the available nightly live slots watermarked. Moreover, those "hits-became-rarities" soon enough in the 90s got steady stand-ins in the shape of You Wreck Me, It's Good To Be King, You Don't Know How It Feels. Add to this the list of usual suspects, semi-regular older hits that never made it to the Greatest Hits albums, such as A Woman In Love, Yer So Bad or the return of Rebels and Kings Highway and things starts to pile up, hitting the ceiling for the usual 18-20 song set. Not to mention that many of the covers have been on heavy repeat too only rotated a few times since the 90s. The total effect of which is - "No vacancies!! Oh, wait, perhaps one.. or two.. eh.. Come back next year and we'll see what we can do."- The importance of the 89-94 era is even more distinctly framed by the fact that the only album before the Wildflowers follow-up She's The One, that comes to mind as not having at least a semi-staple (a long term keeper at one point or other in the career), is Let Me Up, the album right before the beginning of the "Hits era". And no album since that same era - cept Mojo - have had any. At least in one way, the latter is good news to someone who don't like sameness or staples taking over the set. Keeping songs as regulars isn't the best idea imo. Problem is those post Wildflowers songs hardly ever gets played once "their" tour's been over. While the Hits era songs always get played.
- I too probably should've mentioned the early Last DJ tour. I recognize it as being a wildly different animal, much like Mojo Tour but even better at it. An exception from the rule in the way it integrated the lion part of the more or less thorough concept album into the live setting and tried one or two other unusual cuts as well. It was brave and a very cool thing to do - the first actual post "Hits era" attempt at doing something different with the live set. The reason I named Mojo as more of an event in this context, was - again - that that was the last time (so far) they did something different. It was also the first and last time since Wildflowers, that a new song made it into the long time core, which makes it important in itself.
Ok then. Nothing much to discuss, I thought..
-
^ Well aalright! For being a perfect example of "songs by rich musicians" that ain't nothing to me, I must say... Haven't heard or seen this in a few years.. and at least in parts it really redeems itself in terms of some of my genuine disinterest.
More specifically, there are three things I like with this version.
-> The intro! Up until the horn starts and the whole Vegas tux atmosphere is let loose, this is actually terribly awesome for a few seconds!!
-> Mike. Again intro. And the solo too. Great yet different stuff!
-> Ben. As with everything he touches, he's brilliant. He's among the few things here that ties this thing down to earth and provides some real soul. And that is no small task when having the tinsel dum-dum boys doing their syncronized moves to it, something that qualifies as among the very least Rock'n'Roll of all the TP moments I can recall to ever have seen or heard.
This piece - and the whole 1985 tour for that matter - goes to show how thin the line can be at times, with certain arrangements. And I'm not talking about the horns, which are so far over any line that it's not even funny. No, it's the choir girls. I find them to be next to horrific. Yet just a year later, TP&TH set out accompanying Dylan for the True Confessions tour and again found themselves backed by a "gospel section". And all of sudden, in 1986 it worked wonders and did not seem at all as forced and hysterical as it does here.
Anyway, MJ2LD... Thanks for posting. I guess.. when you dance, I can go right with you.
-
Not much to discuss perhaps.. Although, I would like to add the perspective that up to a point the commonly known hits, the big ones, reaching far and beyond the fanbase, the type of material TP seems to prefer in his sets - weren't quite enough to clog up the whole set. This was particularly true before the Lynne to Wildflowers era obviously. Before a good 7-10 new standard hits just HAD to be played each night. Before that it was easier. But even then - when a set could change quite a bit from tour to tour, introduce a good deal new material etc - even then they were not famous for switching the set too much from night to night. These days they talk about doing so, but it never seemed to have been their style in reality. (Fillmore, VIC, Fonda, Beacon type of events aside).
It's important to say that each tour they still try to find room for one more or less "deep" cut, perhaps an older hit that's been on hiatus and perhaps a "new" cover. Fair enough. But given their approach, they are kinda tied up. There's just so much they can do as long as they refuse to touch what they seem to consider the core. A core that in my opinion has swollen out of proportin, making it impossible to manuever a good varied set without playing longer sets. (Like I've said many times, if they had the guts to trust their skill and groove enough to cut back the untouchables by say one third, and started to switch a bit from night to night, there would be plenty of room within their 90 minutes frame to work wonders.)
I think, for me Mojo Tour stands out as the watershed. For one thing they went ahead bravely with outing that material on tour, making a bit of an exception to what had long since starting to fixate. Unfortunately that set in the set was mainly made room for by cutting the precious "other" material, rather than the core, that was basically untouched even if they squeezed in so many new songs each night. For another thing, Mojo Tour was the last time so far a new staple was added, I Should've Known It clogging up one of the few remaining slots that could be used for other stuff.
I know none of this is a 100%, but from my experience, I'm not sure how and why 2003 is the important year of difference. The general approach, as I see it, have been pretty much the same all the time. New songs was added now and then. Each tour followed plan more or less. Then the biggest change happened with all the hits in 89-94 era.. If there hasn't been any long term keepers at all from She's The One, Echo, Last DJ or Highway Companion and only one song from Mojo - well that should say a lot. The list is now officially crammed. If they should return to any of the Hypnotic Eye material ever again, let alone making some of it staples in the set, I'd say, given one or two covers as usual - that nothing further can be done. They need to rethink their basic approach if anything should be able to happen in the future. If they truly want change and variety and if they want to make room for future songs. They are not gonna play 3 hour shows when they are 75 if they didn't when they were 35. That's how I see it.
-
^ Let me rephrase all that.
Don't get me wrong. I just very much doubt that anything we say - here or elsewhere - are likely to change anything, no matter who sees what. And I even think that is good in a way. See, I don't want TP&TH to be the kind of act that do stuff simply cause we ask them to. No, I want them to find these things out for themselves, to do stuff because they want to, to the benefit of themselves and everybody's. That would be the natural direction, the higher order.
Still, it can't hur to nag.. to keep the ball rolling. I am right to symbolically start this thread and you are right to bump it. Right we are. If you don't run you rust.
-
Ok.. I have a bad day apparently.
Let's break this mother down..
1. I "know" someone's seen it. Here I trust previous experience, that people with tie-ins, sometimes even the tying people themselves, if you catch my drift, do look around here occasionally. (NOTE: I have however no reason to believe that the top pin himself hasn't indeed sold his computer and bought (yet another) guitar, so that he never could or would visit places like this. I frankly trust he doesn't. I don't think I would. But who knows. I don't say he's seen this, or anything else here. Just that "someone" surely has. Because I truely think so.
2. Me being pretty certain that's not where it's at. Here I may have shot from the hip, lingustically speaking. What I meant was that I really don't believe that anyone "on the inside" reading this would change anything with regards to what they play in their live shows. To me it seems obvious that TP knows well enough that they have tons of fans out there who want to hear this rare song or that, or those who would just want for them to mix things up generally, dig deeper, move on and all that. It's not that they don't know. If anything, the way they speak about these things shows they know all too well what people want them to say. But they seem to forget that people also want them doing it.
So, really, it's a good thing you bumped this, and I thank you for it!
I put it up there - like a lot of my usual rants about the set lists - simply b-e-c-a-u-s-e someone is bound to see it. I wouldn't bother repeat myself this much if I didn't know the superiority of the logic and my case and that it is likely to be noticed, if ignored.Still, even if we get 100.000 names and they actually play You And I Will Meet Again because of this, that in itself is not gonna change the core issue - their general approach to setlists. It would be totally awesome as a one-off thing, or a one tour thing, but still it would be just that, a one-off. In that sense this thread was a symbolic gesture to begin with. More of a statement than an actual plead. But either way, you are right.. somewhere subconciously, perhaps eventualy the realization creeps in all the way, that there actually are numerous great alternative ways to go about things with grace, groove and honor.
So, I did not mean to shut you up. Not at all. Just to say - perhaps in a bantering way - that I started this fully knowing how naive it would be to think that they after hearing for years how they should mix things up more, play this or play that, that they should suddenly listen to this one! Let alone suddenly take the undelying concept of real honest variation to heart and go right ahead with it, even the slightest bit! In that sense it is almost a dead issue, but I thought that you of all people knew that.
But you know what? Now they probably will play this song. Just to shut me up.
Disclaimer. As always. Read this with caution. I am one sneaky bastard. But I'm also a serious ditto, so..
Whatever you do, don't let it go! Keep fighting the good fight! Thank you! -
Don't hold back, tell me what you really think.
Holding back? Not my forte..
My point wasn't that the band should recreate the same album every time, but the simple 'what if' of a band having achieved the perfect studio situation and recording in that, let's say every album having the sonic clarity of Wildflowers. It was a bit of fun that I think you took and responded to much too seriously.
Well.. perhaps another case of misreading. Since I thought that what I wrote could be read (and justly should be so) as if Unchained carries a better out sound profile for the Echo material, I just wanted to make clear - in the view of your "further confounding" there - that I meant what I wrote only with regards to this material. Not that the "Unchained sound" would be optimal for anything they do. (However if they had to choose one sound and stick to it, Unchained could be a good choice, imo.) That's all.
I did not mean to specify this in a manner that seemed harsh or "overly serious" to you. Sorry, if you took it that way. If my "absurd" remark hurt your feelings, don't feel bad. Coming from me, that is more like praise! Remember, there is always a tinge of the unserious in everything I do or say. Call it survival instinct. Anyway.. no hard feelings. I's just answering what you were asking, if rhetorically so, that I just don't think there's no such thing as an "ideal recording". It's fun, it's serious.
Peace, man. -
Mike nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
To further confound, is there an ideal recording, or even if there is, let's say it's Wildflowers, would every album be served if they sounded like that? Would we be getting TPATH at their most pure? Would it be better than each album having its own distinct sound and vibe, even if in some cases, it's not as good as others?
That is absurd. The world is full of useless bands making the same record over and over. To me it's obviously not only better, but essential, for bands to explore, to go places, for albums to have their "own distinct sound and vibe". At least to a degree. As for my ponderings about how this particular material perhaps would've been better served by a bit more of an Unchained touch, the "ideal recording" was not at all the dimension I was aiming for. Just to clearify. There's no such thing as an ideal album or an ideal method, it all depends on the material and the circumstances.
Besides - even if I can imagine ways to present the core of Echo even more effectively raw and human like that, and even if I would (and did) dispute the notion that Echo is such an unmatched masterpiece in terms of capturing "what was happening naturally and organically", my main concerns - again - are really none of that. It's the core vs filler quota and most of all it's the somewhat sour sound that is seemingly due to compression.
-
Oh, someone's seen it alright. That was kinda part of the point.
I'm pretty certain that's not where it's at though..
-
I'm a big fan of Echo. I rate it as the best TPATHB album. --- I would also rate it the most true and genuine Heartbreakers record --- I think it is also a very brave record --- rooted in a genuine human place --- There is a rare honesty and believability in this album. --- I love this album, I don't see it as a depressing album --- The honesty transcends into a bigger picture for those who refuse to surrender heart and soul. --- My most treasured studio album!
Ok, wow. But why not. There are times when I think those things you say are pretty accurate. (I mean, of course they are accurate... To you. I mean accurate the me way.
) Only, those aspects, to my mind, are mostly.. eh.. just in my mind. That is, at least theoretically I think you might be right. It is honest, it is genuine. Still......You can't program and create these emotions in the studio, luckily Rick Rubin was there and able to just record them and recognise what was happening naturally and organically. a rare skill in and of itself for any producer to be able to recognise what is happening naturally without artificial interferance.
I couldn't agree more. Well put. That is always the case, and seems to be all the more important for an album of Echo's gravity. It's just that to me Rubin and TP only succeeds at.. if I was forced to give a figure.. let's say a 75% rate with Echo.
To specify, I think there might be a case made that Rubin's contributions here are as fair to the material's sentiments as ever. However, I'm not sure this famous lack of "artificial interferance" mentioned, are any more "real" or "raw" on Echo than it is on say Wildflowers. I think all that is in your deep reading of the album lyrics. If anything, I feel that Echo - aside from the actual arrangements and production, that sure has some merits (as being at the same time both richer and rawer, so to speak, than Wildflowers) - still sounds too compressed and.. depressed. That is, the songs are not depressing, you are right, the best of them are beautiful and real heavy human stuff, but to me they s-o-u-n-d depressing, technically. It's not that the heartbreak, despare and loss are so painful, it's the actual tone and ring that occasionally seeps through some of these songs, that's got an almost sour, saturated quality to it at times. (I might be an army of one in thinking that it sounds like TP even sings out of key a few times on this album.) All this makes Echo THE album in the catalog that I'm most eager to hear in a fullstudio sound experience. I do have a feeling that's what's on the CD and even on the LP in this case, is miles subpar to what's really there.
As for TP's part in things, I think he really wrote some raw and painfully true stuff here. But not only did he write some filler as well, he let them on the album rather than keeping it a more striking 50 minutes experience. One of the best things he wrote for the album - Sweet William - didn't fit the album, and he wisely left it off. Others a lot lesser songs weren't treated as wisely.
In short, as far as TP and Rubin goes, between 1994's Wildflowers and 1999's Echo, I'd say they did their most genius, their most pure, human, true and raw music on their 1996 Unchained LP for Johnny Cash. An album sounding a bit more like an enhanced Unchained and getting a bit of a slim treatment by cutting out some fillers and putting more focus on the core material, would take that "honesty and believability", key to an album like this, even further, imo.
-
Oh, man.. Don't know what happened to that stuff! Can't even seem to find it anymore, when you are mentioning it.
The Early Tracks are indeed quite unpolished and from his formative years, to say the least, but still great stuff. And it's stil available officially over at cdbaby, I believe (should be, at least as files), in case someone still hasn't checked this gem out.
I very much still want that "I Go on Living" LP released! It's a crying shame that this great music man never had his own record out.
-
Interesting topic, good questions!
What do you think of the album?
I think it’s great! If not quite as great as it could have been.
What do you like about it, what do you not like about it?
I like the sleeve..
Especially the vinyl original, needless to say. And the inner.Apart from that, I like the underlying sense of ambition that I, despite the fact that it fails in so many ways, feel is all over the place on this somewhat underrated masterpiece. I like the absolute fantastic level of songwriting, imagination and concept on titles like Rebels, Best of Everything, Spike, Dogs on The Run and, of course the title track. All of which would be – and are - a great core selection for any imaginable “South” themed album. (I even kinda like Mary’s New Car, although those lyrics.. well.. they.. never mind.)
I don’t like how the initial concept and aim (in general terms, as I understand it, and as loose as it may have been) could have been so absolutely brilliant, but got sort of derailed in many ways. Something both TP and Stewart have expressed more or less frustration or sadness over. As great as the album’s core song selection is, as totally out of context, sync, even character are the filler and a whole lot of the general production. Seemingly less wise decisions on all levels. (Although I hear about Dave sporting real life elephants, free spoons and flamboyantly dancing little people at his LA home parties during this period, there is little proof none of that helped creativity. Or dignity. I suppose those red swollen eyes behind his shades all through the 80s, were not only due to him being sad after all...)
To specify, I generally don’t like the pop offerings It Ain’t Nothing and Me or Make It Better.* I almost like Don’t Come Around Here No More, but not really.**
Was it maybe your first contact with Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers?
No.
What does it to you 30 years after it entered the music world?
Some of those sounds make me feel old.. But, yeah.. the album does more, but also less, to me now than it did when I first heard it in its entirety in the late 80s. Some remarkable songs. A beautiful yet humbling album, in many ways. A reminder that oil and water don’t mix.. That TP already in 1985 was a great, charismatic, mature and imaginative songwriter, but that TP&TH is another species all together from the likes of Eurythmics, Bob Geldof and Feargal Sharkey.***
Also what wild1forever says: Those were days when new stuff got played live, before all the slots were already taken, dedicated to the holy hits selection. Good point, and times sorely missed, if only from that perspective.
Does its title suit the songs after all?
Not really, no. Well, in parts it does..
Would it have been a better album as a double album, including outtakes as "Trailer"? Or is it the eccentric mixture of styles and sounds that highlights it as one of Petty's most interesting and ambitious offerings?
I don’t know. Was there ever enough decent material (or focus) to actually make this a double album? If there was, it’s even less flattering to their respective egos that they couldn’t make a more coherent single disc.
Given that there are a few more decent outtakes in the vault, switching those and Trailer for It Ain’t Nothing and Make It Better (as well as perhaps leaving the Mary’s New Car for a b-side, since it’s not great but still a tad underrated musically) would most certainly have rendered this an absolutely stunning single disc album, as I see it. One of the best in the TP catalog even.
Was Dave Stewart a good choice for producer? Is his more pop approach responsible for the abandonment of the original southern theme? Or was it Jimmy Iovine's suggestion not to release it as a double album?
Let's just say.. I can't imagine he was the best choice. I don’t know who is the most “responsible” of the lot, but I would guess that some of TP’s ideas, on a more elaborate level, were beyond comprehension for Stewart. And vice versa, for that matter.
Playing at making a smash hit pop album does not necessarily match well with being a rock’n’roll band, let alone one with a southern vision. It seems to me they were just trying to do too many things at once. Some of which were not even that well conceived to begin with. The decision to abandon the double album may be thanks to Iovine – as it stands, it seems like the obvious one anyway. All things considered, the biggest surprise is not that this never became a double disc masterpiece, but rather how well some of the material prevail trough the muck and still today, 30 years later, work as well as they do. And maybe that is the angle? The good moments on SA make us think how great a double album of that standard would have been, but in reality I doubt if neither vision, focus nor the amount of material were ever anywhere near making it a double.
And what would you think of a 30th anniversary Edition: Southern Accents as it was originally conceived? Maybe with the acoustic version of Rebels and a remastered "Pack Up The Plantation" disc, maybe even on DVD/BluRay? Plus the documentary?
Or is Southern Accents not deservant of such a treatment?
Not only is it well deserved of such treatment, in its’ best moments it begs and cries for redemption. But as I’ve implied, I’m not sure it was that thoroughly conceived to begin with. If TP had all the material needed, the vision crystal clear and his head screwed on right when the time came to hit the studio, I very much doubt he would’ve went with Stewart to begin with, or that he would’ve ok:ed some of those ideas or choosen some of these songs. Even in 1985 something slightly different must have been possible to imagine, if not easy to arrive at, apparently. But even if the vaults are stuffed full of great outtakes and untouched masters of the album tracks – which is another thing I very much doubt - it’s hard to imagine a 2015 SA related release, complete with a largely alternative song selection and at least in part re-produced and/or remixed – the way I would personally love to hear it. So, to me the question of a 30th Anniversary release is rather rhetorical. Is there really, and was there ever, an original concept album to be had out of this??
However – much in line with Dylan’s Bootleg Series concept, I would love for TP to do something along the same lines. Perhaps a little like they did for Damn The Torpedoes Deluxe Editon, but optimally with a lot less rehashing. (If the point hasn’t been made – I hate repackaging!) A neat Southern Accent era box with acoustic versions, whatever great outtakes there might be, perhaps a good demo or two, a complete 1985 live show, and the beautifully entertaining SA documentary and the Pack Up The Plantation films, both remastered. Sure, why not?! I’d love it!!****
That said, they seem to have enough on their hands, getting the Wildflowers 20 Anniversary “All The Rest” album out in time for the 21st Anniversary (before it’s 22 years already), putting the lid on the rumored Live album and cutting a new, exciting and much awaited Mudcrutch album. Times are tight. Adding a SA Anniversary release to the mix.. well.. nah..
-----
*To me it’s almost absurd – given that there really was all this disappointment and frustration about how the initial theme got blurred and how the recording process fizzled into something they did not necessarily go for or even wanted - that Make It Better then got to be a single and even a video, while the title track, Dogs on The Run or Best of Everything did not get highlighted at all and songs like Trailer even got left out all together. Seems to me that the supposed failure of this album is not only about a lack of focus and gravity in terms of material, it’s rather that whatever gravity there was, knowingly got shushed for the benefit of some state of the art sounds and pop posing. Priorites and marketing seem to have been at least as confusing as was reportedly the making of the album.
**Especially I don’t like how it feels and sounds in the context of this album. I must say though, it has got something groovy and rather special going. And I do believe it would have been a decent record - not to say excitingly oddball and actually kind of fun - had it been released as a 12” single-only, perhaps as a tribute song to those Stewart parties mentioned, why not.... someone got to pay the powder bill, after all. I don’t see how it fits the flow – the intended or the actual flow - or for that matter how it fits in most TP&TH live set lists, then and now. No. I don’t.
*** I know, I know.. Stewart today tries to be, and somehow succeeds in being not only a demon producer and super star of 80s pop, but also an acclaimed serious songwriter and artist with roots, depth and authentic qualities in his own right. Good for him. But this was 1985. Which makes this the equivalent of 2015’s TP having Shellback produce TP&TH. Doesn’t strike me as particularly desirable. But then again.. this was the mid 80s and everybody was out of their heads for the time being..
**** Much like I would love for the same thing to be done to other eras and or albums in the catalog.
-
Ha! That is a fun one. Very creative video!
-
THE Zombies!! How cool! I would love to see that line up. But.. am I confused? Are they gonna hit it with two bass players n two drummers??
-
Let a fan come up on stage and play their hit single "Big Me."
That really IS quite extraordinary! If that was on a whim, it's a fantastic call by Grohl, and he's insanly lucky with it as well, considering how many half bad, home cooked drummers there are likely to be in an average FF crowd. Seems like planned stunt to me, but who knows. Really cool as it plays out beautifully, must say!
That said- this general drive of pulling Average Joes up on stage to have hugs, teaddy bears signed, to sing some horrid vocals or to get the Holy Communion or whatever, seems to be spreading like the plague in our "interactive" day and age, all the way from Nobody's Garage to Sir Paul. It really isn't doing much good when it's all about collecting thumbs-up, IMO. (I know it's been done since Leif Erikson days, but not on the level and at the frequency of later trends.) I shall not expand on this too much further, but it just seems to me a real anti-music move to make, a circus element, snake charming style, all cooked up by the biz-wizards. Another sour example of "swag value", if you like.. (Seems like a very KISS thing to do. And we all know KISS is primarily famous for their music and musical skills, right?!? But sure, the case at hand goes to show, at least it can be done in a not totally undignified manner: they play music and the guy does it well.)
This all make me wonder if I - or perhaps a randomly choosen Geocaching Winner dude from the TP facebook site - can somehow get to play the triangle on the upcoming Mudcrutch album? Would be really awesome, right!! Both for the person (getting the kick and the royalties) and for the rest of the fans (getting the "it could had been me" moment). This according to many contemporary managements apparently. Somehow, I wish TP management stop way short of this type of mediocracy.
-
You almost had me there for a sec. Some praise. Kudos!
To me, what you say about the ending of it, is what's really striking about this song. For one thing, I agree that the "enjoyable chaos" part remains it's great merit. Very cool and fascinating stuff, considering. The other good part about the ending, is that it ends the song.
Apart from that, while you've got that many interesting things to say about this song, the word that most accurately nails it in my view, would be.. "confused".
-
Babydoll, good point! I wouldn't mind that scenario myself. I like the idea of doing nothing (rather, something else!) for one's birthday. Pretty cool. If somehat wtf?:ish for Steve, Scott and especially Ron.. if they don't have anything to do for the big 40. Perhaps the three of them could play some Tom Petty tribute shows to mark the occation?!
-
^ & ^^
Indeed. Some most well put thoughts on the subject! Of course, that may be just because these things are so utterly obvious to me.If anything, I get dizzy from trying to grasp all the elaborate arguments frequently voiced against this logic. Like you, I don't get it. And I doubt there is much to get, cept lack of will or inspiration. Or perhaps some 'inner aspects' of a more vague and unspecified quality. Either way, what I really don't get is why they would want to speak contrafactually then. Why they would want to keep our hopes up, time and time again. As if this "dig deep" was an image thing, so important to them that reality don't even matter, or as if they actually have view of reality that just don't compute.. And when I say 'them', I suppose I mean TP. For all the fantastic greatness and all the beauty of the TP&TH guys, story and music, this aspect to me remains the disturbingly, even increasingly, strange one. And I guess that is why I - and we - come back to it time and time again. Can't let go, can't stop waiting for the legend to come full circle, like it should. Not only is their approach half-*ssed. It's against better judgement, seemingly. Moreover - it's just unecessarily untrue and unfair to their poor rock'r'roll hearts.
As I see it, they're at some kind of threshold at this stage of the career - in terms of playing live. It's either skip three or four of the hit revue stuff each night, in favor of going places, moving on, staying Contemporary, creating something and/or visit places or dimensions in the catalogue or elsewhere. OR - it's skipping the two or three "deep cuts" or album tracks that gets choosen and played each tour, the stuff that tells them from other fullblown nostalgia bands and for TP&TH too to travel the board walk circuit, keeping all the semi drunks in wife beaters on the same page for as many years they feel up for it. Drastically speaking. Most of what I'm trying to say is between the lines here, so don't shoot the messenger. I know this was harsh. But it's wake up time, isn't it.
On the other hand - I should be fair and say that as long as they keep delivering absolutely briliant albums like Hypnotic Eye, I guess that's the most important thing. I could live with that. Suppose I'll live, even if they won't play any of it live. Even if they decide that they can't possibly shake it up, even if do keep at the current quotas of predicability, or even if they stop playing live all together - I hope at least they will keep being as prolific, imaginative and creative in the studio as they have been up til now.
Even at outdoor festivals, where you may want to to reach even the most casual listener, a RDAD and a Mary Jane would do... and just play an interesting set for the rest of the night!
Yes!! That's always been my view. Grab the ingnorants by the balls and charm the fans alike by five or six huge hits each night. For the rest of it, they could and should just use their unique genius to explore, excite and enjoy.
-
I meant the sentence I wrote
Oh..! I see! That good hearted sarcasm of mine was all for nothing then.. But still..
Let's just file this under "Will-bury", shall we.. Let's pretend it never happened. It will soon be buried in the mix.Your points are well made and interesting even when I disagree
Thank you kindly! I try. So are yours, btw - even when I misread them.
-
That convoluted sentence could make eyes melt.
But I write so many of them. You must understand, some convolution is bound to take place.
Jokes aside - granted it was a joke, which at least in some ways it all is (here I go again.. convoluting matter) - isn't it a waste of perfectly good eyes to have them melt over a mere discussion anyway? When the reality discussed is what really hurts to the bone. After all, the one thing more tedious than dicussing certain sorry state of afairs that you care about, are the sorry state of afairs themselves. It's all very philosophical in some ways. But, yeah, what can I say? It really DOES have effect on me when substance becomes swagger. You are right. (I even like to think that being wired that way, could be part of the many reasons why I got switched on to TP&TH in the first place. The no BS factor, let's call it. Again, this could be perceived as a tad philosophical, or at least somewhat ironic.
Then, of course, we have the fact that English isn't really my language. I ususally talk Gibberish.
Other than that. Good then. We really ARE on the same page. Let's turn it..
At this point, it would take something like a Full Moon Fever tour to make me go see 'em again. Maybe not even then.
But why? Isn't that a bit harsh? How the songs are played, the very musicianship, the performance, is never anything less than fantastic with these guys, the way I see it. To me all it would take to turn me on big time, are fairly minor adjustment to their approach - like has been discussed, mentioned, convoluted. To me it would suffice if...* So, I am just surprised that you don't like their thing more - or perhaps I should say, that you dislike the hits so much, even more than the sameness itself? - that you wouldn't even enjoy a general mixed, varied and slowly everchanging type show enough to go.
If an album themed show in general, and only FMF in particular, is the only thing that would get you back with the herd.. well then.. Some grim prospects.
* Just for your reading pleasure - careful with your eyes now - and to avoid being accused of forcing this type of experimental and extremist thinking on any involuntary public, I put my conclusion down here. To me, the whole set list issue, isn't quite that grave. I would be happy if - other than a bunch of nice hits, of cours - I would get a bunch of unusual but predictable songs each tour (unusual in the sense they have not been frequently played over the last few years, predictable in the sense they could be at least semi-foreseen from reading up on current events at setlists.fm - these are songs "on for the tour", so to speak). Apart from that, it would also be useful if a few genuinly unpredictable songs gets rotated in and out of the set each night, as surprise moments of excitement pitch to the die hards. Songs that hence don't get played more than twice or so each during a tour. That way the TP&TH show would still be - basically - a greatest hits show. But one that does provide quite a few gems that tells one tour from another, and more importantly a show that is truly alive, that changes both from tour to tour and from night to night, sufficiently enough to always keep both the band, the core fans and the ticket buying hang arounds on our toes and happy. No desperate need for obscurities-only shows, or album-theme shows to get things moving. Oh, sorry.. I know, we've been through this back and forth. I just don't see how what I just described would not be enough with musicians like this. To me it would be heaven! Both to experience and, as a fan, to know about. That things are kept real and ideals realized. Good thing I put this in a footnote, wouldn't you say.
-
Your earlier point about Tom's view on a set list that flows and encompasses their career falls into the making-Shelter's-brain-melt-category.
Wait what? You mean to say that my own point (not sure which one exactly) makes my own brain melt? Oh, the self inflicted harm of it all! Eh, but if, perhaps, you just meant nicely to confirm what I already stated - that people not putting their act where their mouth is, causes me severe headaches - well, then.. OK!
Maybe my brain really has melted, but from what I can tell you and I are on the same page - perhaps not the very page that TP speaks of trying to keep everybody on - but on the same page in general terms as far as these discussions go. (Cept perhaps about the full merits of album themed shows, but I personally find that to be a very stylish disagreement.) No reason to melt any brains over that.
-
^ Hm.. indeed! Quite understandable if the plate is pretty ful right now, what with the Dos Mudcrutchitos, the "Wildflowerer" (good one, MJLD!), and the earlier discussed plans on releasing some kinda live album, and stuff. And perhaps they simply don't know how and what just yet. But since the subject of playing live came up in the article, it would've been interesting if any plans or ideas for the upcoming "Big 40th" would have been mentioned, or at least addressed by the interviewer(erer).
And I do agree with you - if, again, only in part. The part about them coming over to Europe, more specifically. To see all the devoted fans over here who haven't got many chances to see the band over the years. (And perhaps then especially the northern parts, where TP sales and hype always been well above the radar, comparetively.) Such a move, as part of a 40th Anniversary celebration, would be great news! As of venues, settings and/or set lists, I don't think any of that would matter much here, as long as they just come. That is exciting enough for most. As sorry a level of ambition it may be, it will still be enough for profit and success, I'm sure. All I know is that a certain hit angle would be unavoidable - and great, of course - and perhaps that the imagined album theme show idea is even less likely to come true over here, than over states side. You won't get rich putting a bet on for another round of the usual parade, I guess, but it will still be great having them here.
Where we differ then? Well, I for one would mind the set. Sad to say. That is, I've reached the point in my life where I see no reason to go see "the show" any more times unless it goes somewhere. I've experienced a certain degree of total variation and a not totally unfair total number of songs since 1992 - but that is in 23 years - and the bulk of the set that stays the same has increased with the years, the core grown stiff with the "mandatory" section, and to me it would take for them to start acting on what they all - even TP - talks about in terms of digging and spreading, so to speak.* In five or ten years, if they are still at it (and if I'm still at it) I might again feel the urge for a fix of the "usual core" kind. But for now, until I get sufficient evidence that something is actually starting to happen to the approach, I'm on hiatus. (I wish them saying how stuff will happen would be enough, but all that does is reminding me of the story of the boy who cried wolf, if a bit more like the boy who cried cake.. eh.. ? Anyway. )
But never mind me, really. I'm just a guy. Let's have them over here any shape or form! Most fans here are still starved since the last 20+ years period of missing out, on European soil the set up may not even seem that tired yet.. So, by all mean - a few European dates for the Big 40? Yes, please! Not to mention how they need to go down under!! Those fans I really feel kinda sorry for. Might be overly straining, but perhaps a real World Tour is what next year should be. Just a little one
---
*Ah, this, as you know, has been discussed to an irksome degree, sure (sorry!), but I myself have many times pointed out how very little it would take to get this b*stard of a legend rolling, how it would not take the bore revolution many seem to be so afraid of, how it wouldn't effect the band member's financial fortunes all too negatively (or even at all) and how much it would all seemingly delight everybody, insiders and outsiders that keep this venture close to heart, alike. Every time I think it will be the last that I bring this up, but I'm sure it will be more times, that's how insanely obvious the argument is to me. How sickening it is fitting the image and statements with reality. But never mind that now.
Nurk
in Depot Street
Posted · Report reply
Sorry for the hardships, man! Hang in there!