Getting Bored With The Setlists

[darkanddivine]

Originally Posted by BradfieldsLoveChild

That is an interesting list, but the question is, would the people that have listed those songs on Last FM be going to the gigs? If that's just a collection of all the Manics songs in order, there's a good chance that many of them were played by people who thought "I fancy a bit of Design For Life today", listen to it once or twice, and then go back to listening to something else. Basically, they like a few songs, but wouldn't necessarily shell out £30 to see them live. I don't know the answer; I'm just playing Devil's Advocate.

I think the band should really enter their gigs with the mindset that a good 85% of the audience are going to own at least FD, EMG, TIMT and SATT and therefore shouldn't be afraid to play some album tracks from them.

I think Lastfm is a decent barometer in a way because the people on there are bothered enough about music to be showing what they listen to. I would hedge a bet that these are the types of folks who would go to a show for sure as they are music fans in general.

For what it's worth I do agree, I'm also playing Devils Advocate of course! I totally think they should be slightly more adventurous with the sets, but judging by stats and so on, they are giving a good chunk of people exactly what they want.

[bluehammer]

The Bands and forums change but the complaints remain the same.

As to what D&Divine wrote on the previous page... agree completely

I reckon setlists were designed to be heard by punters at the venues and not read on the net. I think web communities have contributed to this 'problem' massively, we sit here (and I do it) watching the setlists as people text them through, and kinda groan when the order is the same as the night b efore.

but tell that to the people there hearing it. I bet they're not disappointed there in the moment.

With another band I'm into I try to avoid all setlist threads, reviews and photos until after I've seen them. If I'd done that with the Manics I'd not have looked at a web forum in 11 years.

But yeah, go with this thought... setlists are made to be heard. Not read.

[darkanddivine]

Originally Posted by bluehammer

But yeah, go with this thought... setlists are made to be heard. Not read.

Nail, head and all that.

[centralscrutiniser]

These comments about sitting reading a setlist vs actually being there are true, but the majority of people here analysing the setlists and discussing what was or wasn't played will still be there themselves at some stage of the tour. In a lot of cases we're looking at these setlists and expressing disappointment because we're anticipating what we're likely to hear when we are there ourselves.

And it's not just complaints that the set is the same as the night before, it's that it's almost the same as the tour before, and before that. There are so many songs now that were played last night, last week, last year and two years before that...

[darkanddivine]

Originally Posted by centralscrutiniser

These comments about sitting reading a setlist vs actually being there are true, but the majority of people here analysing the setlists and discussing what was or wasn't played will still be there themselves at some stage of the tour. In a lot of cases we're looking at these setlists and expressing disappointment because we're anticipating what we're likely to hear when we are there ourselves.

And it's not just complaints that the set is the same as the night before, it's that it's almost the same as the tour before, and before that. There are so many songs now that were played last night, last week, last year and two years before that...

That's fine, and yes we're here to discuss these things so I'm not saying that it shouldn't happen. To my mind at least it's just a negative way to be. Personally I never go anywhere near the websites and forums of a band I like if I know I'm going to find out the set, I want to have no idea what they might play when I go the the shows, even if it ends up being similar to last time, it's just a much more positive experience.

As the set gets texted in, many folks both from this forum or not are by the sounds of things having a damn good night out watching the band. They then pop on here saying how awesome it was but to be greeted by posts from the armchair brigade, sat at home on the internet posting comments judging a gig they weren't even at.

[Takk]

Whatever. I think you'll find that most people making the comments are actually going to the gigs too.

[Ben]

Originally Posted by centralscrutiniser

And it's not just complaints that the set is the same as the night before, it's that it's almost the same as the tour before, and before that. There are so many songs now that were played last night, last week, last year and two years before that...

Very true. Certain songs remaining night in/night out on a specific tour is fine, but when it's the same songs tour after tour it starts to grate a little.

I agree with the whole "setlists should be heard not read" (or whatever the phrase was) but I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't fantasising about how great it would be to hear Ready for Drowning or Life Becoming a Landslide during the "the longest three and a half minutes of my life" (aka: Ocean Spray) at Lincoln.

Also, I agree with bluehammer that about avoiding setlists before you've seen them. That's exactly what I did in Edinburgh, and when they opened with Sleepflower I totally got the Manics fan rush back in a huge way. The frustrating thing is, once you have seen them, you might as well look at the setlists for the next shows (even if you're going to see them again) as they pretty much don't change. Also, when the unusual songs get dropped in favour of other staples from previous tours I can't help but feel like the band just don't have the courage in their convictions. I would like to know exactly why Empty Souls got dropped. If they thought it wasn't working then fair enough, but if they were enjoying it but decided to drop it because the crowd weren't going crazy for it, then I think that's really sad.

[centralscrutiniser]

Originally Posted by darkanddivine

That's fine, and yes we're here to discuss these things so I'm not saying that it shouldn't happen. To my mind at least it's just a negative way to be. Personally I never go anywhere near the websites and forums of a band I like if I know I'm going to find out the set, I want to have no idea what they might play when I go the the shows, even if it ends up being similar to last time, it's just a much more positive experience.

As the set gets texted in, many folks both from this forum or not are by the sounds of things having a damn good night out watching the band. They then pop on here saying how awesome it was but to be greeted by posts from the armchair brigade, sat at home on the internet posting comments judging a gig they weren't even at.

Well yea, it depends on whether you consider the setlist a spoiler or not. If you want the songs and the order to be a surprise, great, but like me many people are really interested to know what they're playing. Partly because we're going or we've already been to at least one gig on the tour, and partly because we're just interested in what one of our favorite bands are playing.

The armchair brigade you refer to have, in most cases, been to the gig the day before or are going next week. They might not have been there that night, but chances are they saw pretty much that same setlist themselves, so it does relate to their own experience.

And again, I think it's important to remember that no one (that I've seen) has said 'that was a totally rubbish gig, they were dreadful and I hate those songs'. They enjoyed it, the love and band but they just want two songs out of 23 to be songs they haven't heard before.

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by lovesean4ever

Just for feedback is anybody disappointed not to hear more of the new album on this tour?

I'm both surprised and a bit gutted.

[darkanddivine]

Originally Posted by centralscrutiniser

Well yea, it depends on whether you consider the setlist a spoiler or not. If you want the songs and the order to be a surprise, great, but like me many people are really interested to know what they're playing. Partly because we're going or we've already been to at least one gig on the tour, and partly because we're just interested in what one of our favorite bands are playing.

A setlist is a bit of a spoiler yeah I have to say I'm just going to remain confused about that, I have looked at these setlists only because I wasn't going to the shows, otherwise I'd have stayed off FD for sure. To me it's a bit like going to the cinema but watching a crappy DVD copy first, you know exactly what will happen and in what order, that just seems really unappealing.

Either way if I relate this to another experience, I went to see Placebo once, followed up again a year later and they played an identical set in terms of content and order. If they'd have slipped one alternate song and changed the order a bit I would have been happy enough, but I got a bit bored of it.

I've seen the Manics every tour since 99 (bar this one) and even though there are staple songs, they always change small details about the set and that usually gets me going enough, even though I've been seeing them for years.

I do agree that it's great when a band plays stuff you haven't heard but as I say I still think it's a negative way to look at things, I like my concerts to be full of the joys of spring!! Unless they are utter crap of course

[StrummerMan]

Im probably the last person who would winge about the setlist but I really wish they would do the same as last year`s JFPL tour and play all the new album and then the usual stuff but swapping it around a bit. I would dearly love to hear " Landslide " and " Enola/Alone " again but I know that won`t happen.

[centralscrutiniser]

Every tour I've been on I've tried to avoid looking at the setlist and keeping it all a surprise, but I've always cracked! Maybe one day I'll manage it.

You're absolutely right, there's plenty about the staples that does change and give's them a new flavour. I suppose for me personally the endless setlist discussion is just about counting down the days till I get my turn to go and see them!

[Son of Stopped]

Well some of you got Sleepflower on the tour!...

And yes, we need more PFAYM material. A casual fan I met at the gig was saying the new stuff was the best thing they'd heard that night. So they may as well play more stuff from it.

[MDWill]

I'm pretty excited to see them, based on the set lists this tour. Stay Beautiful, (VERY SLIM POSSIBILITY OF) Yes, Sleepflower, Roses in the Hospital, it has a bit of what I didn't think they wouldn't be playing anymore. I'm pretty happy with what we might be in for in a week, but I am surprised they aren't playing much off the new record. Last shot at mass communication, and you guys are mumbling

"You" as in "they". You know what I mean... Er, not "they" that time, but... forget it.

[darkanddivine]

Originally Posted by centralscrutiniser

Every tour I've been on I've tried to avoid looking at the setlist and keeping it all a surprise, but I've always cracked! Maybe one day I'll manage it.

You're absolutely right, there's plenty about the staples that does change and give's them a new flavour. I suppose for me personally the endless setlist discussion is just about counting down the days till I get my turn to go and see them!

Exactly. Like, given my expectations to have them open with Sleepflower would have gotten me hugely excited, and You Love Us too (even though I've seen them do that.)

I needed a break and it has been the right time to miss out for me, however I will more than likely be back to see them next time they tour