Bands Touring Old Albums: thumbs down

Yeah, I'm not entirely sure what there is to be angry about here. It's a strange stance to take over the whole thing. Sceptical to say the least. As Axl said, they created the album, surely it's their prerogative to play it in it's entirety if they like? And why not, considering there's obviously thousands of people who would love to see it happen?

I am at a complete loss as to how Roger Waters touring The Wall could be construed as being an opportunist move by an artist in search of more money. The only down-side to the whole thing is undoubtedly what is being charged for a ticket but that's a whole other argument, in my opinion.

Man creates album
People like album
Man plays album live
PEOPLE FUCKING COMPLAIN?

No, people turn up and love it.

This. This and a lot of Mahoney's post, although I do acknowledge Mr Yates's point. When it gets to McAlmont and Butler playing their first record in full you'll know it's gone too far.

I'm glad rubbersoulman brought up the Suede gigs though, they sounded fantastic although I can't believe anyone would have paid to hear "A New Morning" in full.

they fucked up the recording of dog man star that night so played it aswell on the "a new morning" night,

really? I'm sure it was just coincidence...

I wasn't complaining. I was just commenting on ATP's involvement in the "fad" (for lack of a better word).

No point, they've been touring that since 1996.

even U2 doing it now.

if only bb king hadn't died it could be rattle & hum next year.

Interpol too

Bands touring albums started as a cynical cash-in but now it's one of the few marketing ploys major promoters are willing to consider. The live market has changed dramatically in the last 10 years, mainly for the worst. Fewer smaller venues, fewer indie bands able to finance tours etc. And at the other end every cunt now charges £60 and upwards.

Do the setlists for these gigs tend to be in the same order as the tracklisting? If so, yes, if not, not arsed. I'd love to see Eels play Electro-Shock Blues in full for example but if it's not in sequence then it's not really different to any other gig for me. For the artist I guess they may attract people who may not necessarily be huge fans but love a certain album. And in that sense it's sly marketing towards a band or artist who only have one decent album - I mean, I see The Stone Roses are still touring their first album! Lol.

Yeah these gigs are usually performed in the same sequence as the album.

yeah my general stance on this is 'fuck off with this shit, until it's an album i really want to see live'

90% of them I've seen were in sequence. In fact, I think they all were, apart from Bryan Adams, and he's a cunt to begin with, so that isn't a surprise.

with joshua tree i'd hate that though.

first 6 tracks are great.

last 3 i can take or leave tbh.

gotta close with bullet the blue sky.

You're telling me he played Love Is Hell pt.2 before pt.1? RIDICULOUS

I've been to a few of these over the years, just trying to remember..

Belle & Sebastian (If You're Feeling Sinister)
British Sea Power (Decline of..)
Dinosaur Jr (Bug)
Flaming Lips (Soft Bulletin)
Manics (Holy Bible)
Neutral Milk Hotel (In the Aeroplane..)
Pixies (Doolittle)
Public Enemy (It Takes a Nation of Millions..)
Sonic Youth (Daydream Nation)
SFA (Fuzzy Logic & Radiator)

Saw THE BOSS do Darkness on the Edge of Town straight through at one of his gigs as well.

Mostly they were pretty great

I think I've only seen Manics doing Everything Must Go and a festival performance, which is not the best environment for that kind of thing, but I still believe it's a good idea. I mean, bands from another era playing records from when they (both bands and record) mattered for fans who still care about it all. It also allows bands and fans taking a break from regular setlists and celebrating that old way of life that's going to disappear. It's 100% nostalgic but so what.