MaryJanes2ndLastDance

Yipes! Thanks for sharing. That is crazy. It sounds good on paper, fans getting in for free but the execution of it must've been a friggin' nightmare. Bad enough trying to get tickets through Ticketron back then right? Or camping out and whatnot but to be dependent on a radio station's whims...Money King etc.

I read this in a Rolling Stone magazine from the ITGWO tour. From the Petty Archives site: https://www.thepettyarchives.com/archives/magazines/1990s/1991-10-12-billboard "...By the time of Petty and the Heartbreakers' last effort together, 1987's underrated Let Me Up (I've Had Enough), sales were slipping, and there were more and more empty seats when the group hit the arenas. "We played a lot of shows where they'd put a curtain up to hide the fact that there was only a two-third house," says Campbell. "But we played like we had a full house and then worried about it when we got back to the hotel."

In one day I went from thinking the song had never been performed live to hearing its (supposedly) only performance! The sound quality was fine, I was more interested in the performance, the leisurely way the band pulled together during the intro, the overall feel of the song and the outro...felt like it could've kept on going for my taste, that quick pause before the last note could've led into some extended soloing. Still, interesting to hear how the band filled out an additional thirty seconds or so of the song, what Benmont did and the way it built towards that end. I like the quick, sharp ending. I think it could've become something really good in concert had they kept playing it but rough in performance or a bit in sound quality, I'm still glad they played it and now we can all listen to it. cheers

That would be incredibly infuriating. Imagine nowadays the radio station would be hit with such bad publicity via twitter they'd have to surrender the tickets. I could understand why people were angry, it's crazy and how could the Rosemont/band management ever think this was good or fair. Of course now one could make claims about ticketmaster and reselling of tickets after scalpers so...maybe not much has changed. Regardless, they played the song so that's good. cheers

Hey man, it's better than nothing! Thanks a lot for sharing this! cheers

Music starts around 2:18.

I agree. And in the end, just my opinion, it's too bad the full power of the band wasn't let loose, be it trying random deep tracks, or randomly playing an extended version of a song they normally stuck close to the record and so on. I'm not a big fan of You Can Still Change Your Mind but the version Benmont did on his own is great! Oh well (not the song). cheers

On this I agree.

Based on the Live Anthology I'm going to say this is quite possible.

I agree, but it's difficult to not see it that way when the band only plays so many songs, since they weren't going to drop a hit, the only choice is to drop a cover. Sure, they could've played both, could've done all sorts of things....I'll just stop there, you heard it all before, ha ha. cheers

Nice find! 2nd last song...interesting spot for it; I wonder if it was something spontaneous or considered; did they stretch it out a bit or play it close to the album. And will a soundboard of it ever emerge? Assuming it's true... cheers

Truly one of the most wretched covers they'd ever done. In the middle of the show (or first quarter) here comes a fast number with Tom playing maraccas. Who cares? I'm not here for Fleetwood Mac, play one of your countless original tunes, something upbeat! If they didn't want to go back that deep for Finding Out or Makin Some Noise or What Are You Doing In My Life,, why not Jammin Me or Too Much Ain't Enough? Oh Well was just a terrible moment live, a real boring song considering its an upbeat one too. Looking back on it, probably part of the reason (a small part) why that was the last tour I ever saw them on. cheers

I understand this and respect it and I'd even add the simple notion that for many a band, breaking into a cover is fun; perhaps there is less pressure in performing it as well, a chance to let loose on stage. That's all good. But for me, while some covers are fine, and some I even like, I'm there because of the headlining band's songs and their ability to deliver on stage. While a cover song may mean a lot to them, with rare exception I'd much rather here their own music than what influenced them; besides which, often times what an artist (doesn't have to be a musician either) likes or was influenced by doesn't necessarily mean I'll enjoy it. Sometimes when I've gone for a writer or musician's recommendations I've been disappointed. I think you're onto it though when you say it was a way for Tom and the band to honor their predecessors and take part or revel in the tradition they'd become a part of; makes sense for sure and comes through, especially in Benmont interviews where he seems to love so much music and brings that joy to playing it, with the Heartbreakers or his own solo shows. Good observation, Shelter. cheers

What matters is that the band just didn't plum feel like playin' these here deep cuts and if they did, well shore as shite Mr. Petty didn't and there it lay in the dirt. Now maybe too, the crowd are a-gonna respond more to a song they recognize that's a cover than to a song they dont' a-recognize that ain't a cover but is a 100-purcetn oreeegeenal tune, so maybe a lame, disinterested audience response to a deep cut and the lowering of the crowd's collective energy was another raisin this here band just kept their stagecoach on the well worn trail. Yup.

I think in one of those ten-thousand links I flooded you with is a discussion or two of the sets, how they went during a tour, the disappointment and vitriol from some quarters in contrast to the concertgoers. Read 'em if ya dare. Or maybe if you need help falling asleep at night. cheers

I think that's why it became either/or regarding covers. With so few spots available, play the deep cut not the cover. Or it seemed that way anyway, that it was either going to be one or the other since they didn't add that many songs to the overall total played after a certain point. If the deep cuts even registered with the band; what I think of a deep cut (Finding Out or It Ain't Nothing To Me) versus what they did, (Two Gunslingers, Swingin'). Bad enough I helped shatter this damn topic to so many itsy-bitsy pieces, now I'm digging it back up and having another go! Nice points you make overall though. cheers

Ha ha, boy. I mean, it was a lively discussion with some really good points, alternate possibilities the band could've done and so on but it was also like dropping a nuke on this place. Whatever the alternative suggested at the time, I think they were preferable to the path the band took but many thousands of satisfied fans and the band's checkbook might argue otherwise. The big mystery man, was why they didn't play so many songs; didn't like how they sounded, figure the audience would be bored, just forgot them? Even a lot of the Beacon/Fonda shows they'd pull out songs I didn't care for, so I just think my taste happened to not align with the band's when it came to things like this; I like the song Two Gunslinges and Swingin' is all right but man, so many other really good deep cuts never played. Oh well. Peace!

I think the Fillmore is so highly rated not just because of the length but the quality of the performances, the band having played 19 prior shows there were really focused yet also able to have fun. Factor in the A sound quality and some nice jamming throughout the night and you have a special one of a kind show. Of course it's shocking to see the covers outnumber the originals. Interestingly enough, aside from Red Rocks I think, maybe one other show, their last tour they skipped the covers. ' cheers

I was right there with you, ha ha! Legitimate arguments but man I flogged the damn thing to dust. cheers

I agree but it's definitely a minority opinion. I understand enjoying the band in close quarters and that the shows were different from the standard tours but I didn't quite understand everyone's excitement over the covers. I still don't but I figure, people just really love seeing them play live, so seeing them live and in close quarters is more than enough; sure maybe they'd like to hear deep cuts but are still just happy to be there. From a songwriting point of view, most of the covers they did, for me, were inferior to their own music. But I figure most people don't care and like I said, it's all moot now. The band enjoyed playing those songs so they played 'em and that's it. Now, I view the covers I do like as a fresh alternative to the usual things they played and enjoy them at that level but I get where you're coming from. cheers

Pearl Jam Lollapalooza 2007 Chicago Grant Park.

Yours are square like mine...right?