So where does that leave us? With some fantastic moments and a reminder why Springsteen and the E Street Band still matter. The down moments in this show suck just a little bit more because of that and because they're self-inflicted and avoidable.
Local bands can do shows that are 20 percent covers. Bands fronted by one of the greatest songwriters in rock history shouldn't, particularly when said band is doing their third US tour in three years and so many songs haven't been played or haven't been played often.
The pacing of the show still feels like it needs some help, even if I set aside my bias towards covers and "Sunny Day." There doesn't seem to be a dominant theme for the show. There's a recession suite followed by good times covers. The encore kicks off with another recession-theme song to remind us the economy is in the toilet, only to be followed with more energetic good time rock and roll.
Maybe he's trying to summarize the headlines on CNN and then lift us out of it. It's ambitious, but it doesn't translate the way the show is structured. Maybe he's just playing 24-27 songs a night. That's fine, but the lack of flow makes for some awkward pauses. It was money well spent and more than enough to make me eager to hear it all again Saturday night in Greensboro, even though I know in my heart it could still be so much more.
- Badlands
- Darkness on the Edge of Town
- Outlaw Pete
- She's the One
- Working on a Dream
- Radio Nowhere (w/ Jay Weinberg)
- Seeds (w/ Jay Weinberg)
- Johnny 99 (w/ Jay Weinberg)
- The Ghost of Tom Joad (w/ Jay Weinberg)
- Raise Your Hand
- 96 Tears
- Trapped
- Waitin' on a Sunny Day
- The Promised Land
- The Wrestler
- Jungleland
- Kingdom of Days
- Lonesome Day
- The Rising
- Born to Run
- Hard Times
- Tenth Avenue Freeze-out
- Land of Hope and Dreams (w/ Jay Weinberg)
- American Land (w/ Jay Weinberg)
- Detroit Medley
Article comments
1 - Glen Boyd
Good review Josh, although I think you need to relax a little and get over the fact that you can't control the setlist.
I'm not crazy about songs like "Marys Place," or "Waiting On A Sunny Day" either (although I've always thought the latter to be a good excuse to connect with other fans in the shared communal experience of the sing-along).
That's the thing about Springsteen shows. For those three hours or so, its like you're sharing a joyful communal sort of experience with 10,000 or so of the best friends you've ever had. It's part of what sets his shows apart. And I love his shows for that reason as much as I do for the music.
The other thing about Springsteen shows is they've always been about ebb and flow. For every "Badlands" or "Shes The One," you've got the slower, more thoughtful songs like "The Wrestler" now, or on past tours something like "Empty Sky" or "City Of Ruins" Its all part of the whole experience.
As for the covers, they've always been a big part of a Springsteen show, and the only thing that would disapoint me about hearing the E Street Band take on "96 Tears" would be that Danny wasn't there to do the organ part. In past years, its always been stuff like Fogerty, Guthrie, or Buddy Holly. These days its the Ramones and ? & The Mysterians. Hell man, I'll take it.
The other thing though, is that since these things go gavel to gavel for three hours, if he plays a clunker, that's a good excuse for a bathroom or a smoke break. At three hours, you need a clunker or two, particularly if it's a long one like Marys Place used to be.
-Glen
-Glen
2 - JC Mosquito
Y'know, I caught Neil Young a week ago here in town, and I couldn't help but compare his show to Springsteen's, which I had caught back in Calgary on The Rising tour. And I gotta say the Boss struck me as more of an entertainer, but Young was more entertaining. I guess maybe it depends whose songs resonate more in a given person - I was a Neil Young fan long before I got into the boy from Jersey and his pals. Mind you, Young's show was 2 hours plus a 2 song encore, while I'm sure Springsteen's was much longer.
3 - Josh Hathaway
Glen, absent from this story is my interaction with some of the folks in the pit and I don't mind saying they weren't all that pleasant. I don't go to concerts to "commune," although a little friendly banter is nice. I already have friends. I go to hear songs. The music is what matters.
I don't have a problem with ballads or slow songs, even in an arena but when the momentum of the show is stopped dead in its tracks I think you have to look at that. "Point Blank" is a great song and the same thing happened in Atlanta last year when he played it. The room just died and I know people were excited to hear it.
There is no escape from the pit, especially as close to the stage as we were. I just had to hang in there, but I did my "Tom Joad" moment and made my stand.
4 - 11
Glen, I'd like to know where you sit at Springsteen shows, because I'm never around anyone who knows what the hell is going on.
Of course, as a grown man, I insist on having a SEAT, so I am not down in the pit with the sycophants. However, people who are in the pit at every show are missing a lot of what goes on.
Just because everyone in GA is insane with pleasure during WOAD does not indicate what is going on elsewhere in the arena.
Josh paints an accurate picture of Atlanta. I was up in the club level, and I can tell you, this review is spot-on in its appraisals of the high and low spots of the night.
As an album, WOAD isn't getting it done. The crowd last year in Atlanta was far more recpetive of the songs from Magic than it was WOAD, and Josh is dead-on in asking what it says that we are already down to four songs from WOAD on this tour. It says the album isn't resonating, and Bruce senses it. It's good of him to not be stubborn about it.
Overall, the show had some euphoric highs and some painful lows. I found myself -- and I don't use this word to be melodramatic -- BORED from the sign songs (though I love Trapped) until Jungleland, and I don't think I was alone.
Three shows in a year; I think either me or Bruce needs a break. I think it might be both of us.
5 - Glen Boyd
My most unpleasnt interaction with Bruce fans was in the nosebleeds at Giants Stadium, where these drunk fans kept falling all over me. Now, that I admit was unpleasant. Other than that though, I've always found Bruce's fans to among the nicest and most fun I've had the pleasure of spending a few hours with at a concert.
While the new album may not be resonating with some (and I have my own mixed feelings about it as well), the fact is that WOAD is the reason we have another tour this soon. If he is tinkering with the set at this point...and I clearly think that he is...all the better. Give the man credit for having the sense to adjust, even if it isn't necessarily the exact adjustment you'd like to see. Do you see U2 adjusting their sets when something isn't working as well as they expected?
I just think you guys (Josh, 11)-- that if you sat back and just enjoyed it rather than trying so hard to second-guess it, and expressing your public displeasure by things like that whole "turning your back" thing -- which makes me wonder about your "unpleasnt experiences" with the fans around you -- you'd have a better time.
I saw Bruce a number of times on the Rising tour and the sets hardly varied at all. Was I disapointed? Sure I was, but that didn't stop me from enjoying watching the greatest band on earth backing the hardest man in show business.
Its the best show on earth. Relax and enjoy it.
-Glen
6 - Josh Hathaway
Glen, some guy tried to put his hands on my wife. Before the show. I nearly missed the show because I was almost to the point of demanding that he kick my ass because no one is putting hands on her while I'm breathing.
As to the rest of this, Glen, it's fine if you don't have any expectations and will gladly gobble up whatever is shoveled on your plate. I happen to agree that Bruce Springsteen is one of the great rock and rollers in history and I expect as much. I don't pay $100 for one of rock's legends to play "Wooly Booly." I'm not a Springsteen sycophant. I'll praise the good. I'll criticize the bad. I'll call it honestly and I can do it all the while being a fan. I had a great time at the show but I know it could have been more because I know he's capable of it. If I didn't care, I'd stay home. I care deeply.
U2 did adjust their set list. On Popmart when Bono said he could smell the popcorn. Bruce stopped playing the new songs but that only fixed one of the problems. He's still leaking oil.
7 - Glen Boyd
Sorry to hear about the idiot and your wife Josh. That's a guy who shoulda' been shot Point Blank, to quote a phrase. No doubt about it.
As to the rest of your argument...I know there are good Bruce shows and there are also those that, well, that aren't quite as good. I haven't seen any of the shows on this tour, but from what i've been able to tell this probably falls somewhere in the middle.
The Magic shows were amazing, and are undoubtedly going to be a hard act to follow, especially when the album they are touring behind just doesn't have as many good songs as the one before it did.
But from everything I've read, the energy level on this tour has been way up, and the covers I think are helping to re-energizie the guys. Tonight they busted out Fire/Fever/Mountain Of Love back to back in Philly. I think they're starting to hit their stride. And I think the covers are helping, but thats just me.
I saw 4 shows on Rising over the course of a year, and the setlist barely changed at all. They were good shows, but they were also really static. At least hes willing to experiment more now, and I believe thats because he heard the fans. The request signs were the beginning of that.
If I do see him on this tour (doubtful between his schedule and my finances), I'll absolutely take a cover or two though. They mix things up, keep the band sharp, and make for a fun show.
That said, he's played some of these songs nearly every night since the 78 tour (even Promised Land and Badlands, two of my favorites), and they could probably stand a rest, at least for now.
And of course I grant you your right to your opinion, as long as you can do likewise.
-Glen
8 - Josh Hathaway
I have no problem with you having your own opinion, Glen, but I do have a problem with the idea I should just "shut up and enjoy" whatever Bruce feels like serving up. Okay, you said sit back and not shut up and I've taken a liberty there. I don't think the inference is that faulty, though, and I've heard it from more than you so some of this is global.
I think Bruce has plenty of songs in his own catalog that can energize himself, the band, and the crowd. I don't accept that he needs to play ZZ Top songs to have a good time. If he does, maybe he needs a break from the road rather than third rate songs from other artists. He does a speech about the economy and tells us he understands it's tough out there but then he takes $100 of my money and reads off a teleprompter while trying to teach Roy what key to play someone else's song in. That kind of bugs. A cover or two is one thing. 20-25% of the show is another. I don't pay $100 to hear Bruce play other people's songs. I don't pay $100 to hang out with strangers, even the ones who were very nice at the show. There were some assholes, there were some nice folks. I pay $100 to hear Bruce Springsteen play Bruce Springsteen songs because those songs mean things to me that I can only try to begin to describe.
The only real experimentation we've seen in this tour is that he rotates songs in the 2 hole where he's no longer playing "Lucky Day" and the covers. The encores are virtually the same every night. He has hundreds of songs he doesn't ever play. There's just no reason for it.
Beyond that, as I absolutely predicted, we're focusing in on the portion of the review that's critical, completely ignoring how much I loved most of the opening salvo and the fantastic performance of "She's the One" and "Jungleland." I mean, it's not like I'm saying the guy sucks or that the show sucked.
9 - Donald Gibson
Bruce uses a teleprompter for every song, not just the covers.
As for your criticisms of the performance...Of course you're entitled to your opinion; you're critiquing the show for a written review.
It's your reaction when he played something you didn't like -- turning your back to the stage as some sort of protest -- that makes you look childish, if not downright disrespectful, to those around you in the audience.
10 - Josh Hathaway
And the people all said sit down, sit down you're rocking the boat...
Donald, I'm 5'8 1/2 whether I'm facing the stage or the arena's back door. I wasn't throwing up signal flares or calling undue attention to myself. I wasn't holding up my sign during the non-sign portion of the show from the front row like one mouthbreather, effectively sealing off the view at points when Bruce or Stevie were closest to us. Anyone who wanted to watch the show and enjoy that turd of a song -- as I pointed out many around me were -- could still do that. I wasn't being disrespectful to them. I don't subscribe to this notion that if I'm not having a good time I'm some how letting down the collective because the audience is as important as the band to the show.
This was my own little 'protest' and I did it without calling attention to myself in a way that disrupted my fellow concert attenders. My 'right' ends where theirs begins. I would not have done that if it would have interfered with their ability to get their $100 worth. It didn't. The only person who noticed what I was doing was my wife, who laughed and then ignored me and watched the show.
As I mentioned in the review, it was actually worthwhile from a critical standpoint because I got a glimpse of what Bruce was seeing when he played that song. I know I'm not the only one who despises it but there are a lot of people who either enjoyed it or were willing to fake it. It was educational. And a little nauseating. It was 5 minutes. It was harmless, humorous homage to punk rock bands that played with their back to the audience. I've explained it. I've defended it. I don't regret it for a moment. I wasn't pouting. I was laughing. I was having fun on my own terms, in some fashion, and doing it without hurting anyone else.
11 - Cody McCain
I was at the show and I agree with Josh for the most part. I was also at the Nashville show on the Magic Tour, and I think it had more energy overall than the ATL show. When Bruce is on, there is nobody in the business better. Those first 10 songs had the roof coming off Phillips. But then the show gets bogged down some with covers and slow songs that seems to never end. And WOAD is a pretty bad album. Sitting in the 300 levels, you could see people leave during these songs. So, you know Bruce has to see it and realize that WOAD isn't a tour worthy effort. I've seen Bruce several times, and I've still yet to hear the river, Born in the USA, or Glory Days live. I know after a 30+ year career he probably gets tired of playing these, but I would think that the fact that if he played a 25 song set list of gems rather than 15 gems, 5 covers, and 5 duds, that he would prove he's still the boss and keep the audience on fire. The place would have gone bananas with Ramrod, and even responded with the tease, and then let out a collective sigh when he flipped over for Trapped. I did love the Hard Times cover, because I had a grandma that used to sing that song when I was a kid. I will post my dream set list and let me know what you guys think. (In order too)
1.Badlands
2.Working on a Dream (If he's GOT to play one of the songs off his new album, this is the one.)
3.Darkness on the Edge of Town
4.Radio Nowhere
5.Darlington County
6.I'm going Down
7.4th of July (Sandy)
8.Jungleland
9.The Rising
10.Johnny 99
11.The River
12.The Promised Land
13.Pink Cadillac
14.Dancing in the Dark
15.Atlantic City
16.She's the One
17.Murder Inc.
18.Brilliant Disguise
19.Blinded by the Light
20.Glory Days
Encore (The last 5 songs should have the crowd whipped up into a frenzy from start to finish)
21.Tenth Avenue Freezeout
22.Thunder Road
23. A cover of some kind
24. Born To Run
25. Born in the USA (People want to hear that song, misinterpreted or not)
12 - 11
Sorry for the delay in answering Glen, but hell yes, I can see U2 adjusting based on what works and what doesn't. Check an early setlist from PopMart against the last leg of the U.S. tour that same year, only six months apart. From memory, they dropped 'Miami,' 'Do You Feel Love,' 'If God Will Send His Angels' and 'The Playboy Mansion' in favor of classics.
They dropped 'The Ground Beneath Her Feet' and 'Sweetest Thing' on Elevation as well.
It's not like I drove four hours and spent $125 on a ticket in the hopes of being disappointed or having a bad time. Overall, the show was OK, but I expect more from a Bruce Springsteen show than 'OK.'
I swear to God, Glen, I am not trying to be contriarian. I was bored during a good portion of the show, and I remember shaking my head in complete bewilderment during 'Lonesome Day.'
People were leaving before the show was over. What does that tell you?
13 - Glen Boyd
I didn't see U2 during Popmart, but I did see them last time around, and what they did on that tour was basically go with a basic setlist that changed very little, except when they did two nights in the same city and they'd bust out things like "An Cat Dubh" on the second night.
In other words, they stuck to a basic set with very little in the way of variation. I'm not necessarily even criticizing that, as a lot of bands do this, especially when they are at the level of a U2, Stones, etc.
Bruce did it as well on the Rising tour. I saw him in Seattle and Portland early on, later that year in Jersey, and the following year in Vancouver, and it was the exact same set even though the shows were nearly a year apart.
Which is why I loved it so much when he started to mix things up again with the Magic tour. Two shows, back to back in Seattle and Portland and we got wildly different sets packed with rarities like "Lost In The Flood," "Night," "Jungleland," "Trapped," and I could just go on and on here. For the hardcore Springsteen fan, it was as about as good as it gets.
As a setlist watcher on the sidelines this time around (damn you for skipping Seattle Bruce), I've noticed that there isn't near as much variation. Although just lately I've been noticing more of it -- and this includes doing the cover songs. Again, what I think he's doing here is tinkering. He obviously knows certain things aren't working (and let's face it, the album he has to work with just isn't as good as Magic), so he's experimenting with the setlist to see what works. If the cover songs get good fan reaction (11 and Josh notwithstanding), he's probably going to stick with it, so you probably best get used to it. I also think throwing these in makes for a looser, more fun sort of feel. In the same way "Not fade Away," "Rave On," or "Quarter To Three" worked in '78, more contemporary stuff like "London Calling" works now for younger fans who aren't old enough to remember Buddy Holly. It makes sense.
I understand some of what you guys are saying, but I also choose not to second guess a guy who, even though he's pushing 60, still beats the crap out of most performers half his age when it comes to giving 200%, regardless of the song selection.
Thats all I'm saying here.
-Glen
14 - 11
It's all good Glen; I don't mean to nitpick, but when a show works (to use U2 as an example on Zoo TV and Elevation) there is little reason to tinker. The songs from Pop weren't working live, so they dropped them. Bruce did the same thing this time out, and I dearly wish he would drop two more.
I do applaud Bruce for not continuing to play eight songs from WOAD when they clearly do not work for the vast majority of the audience.
At this point, I think we have to start thinking that the release of WOAD may have been the biggest mistake of Bruce's career. I think it is Bruce's 'Re-Load,' if you follow my reference.
15 - Glen Boyd
Its all good...isn't that a new Dylan song?
I'm mostly in agreement with you 11 about WOAD...although biggest mistake of his career might be overstating (the nineties were pretty bleak for a lot of us Bruce fans).
But yeah, I think three songs would just about do it from that album would be plenty. Bring back "Lucky Day," keep the title track and go with "Outlaw Pete" if you absolutely must (since Bruce seems to see this as one of those major "cinematic" deals).
Keep a cover or two, and get back to more mixing it up with the rarities and such and I think we got ourselves a show. However, in my case, I'd be perfectly happy with the current model making it to the Northwest.
-Glen