PDA

View Full Version : Why doesn't Joe do pretty songs anymore?



sodascouts
08-16-2012, 07:32 PM
I was listening to some Joe shows today from previous tours that I'd recently obtained in a trade. In them, he's playing Pretty Maids All in a Row, Help Me Thru the Night, Indian Summer... these all used to be staples of his setlist; they're all beautiful and powerful.

Listening to these really brought home to me the stark difference between those old shows and this tour's setlist. Now, all we get in terms of ballads is I Shall Be Released, and most of that isn't even sung by Joe, let alone written by him!

He bears the brunt of playing the rockers for the Eagles show. I kinda hoped that his solo shows would be a place where we could hear the softer side. They used to be, at least.

Not on this tour, obviously.

Too bad for me, 'cause I'd like to hear that - especially HMTTN. At least I got to hear PMAIAR in Oklahoma last year, before it was dropped in favor of ILBTs.

Bring back the beauty, Joe!

Freypower
08-16-2012, 07:42 PM
I don't understand the thinking behind the setlist of this tour, but then I don't understand the thinking behind some of the tracks on Analog Man.

Maybe Joe thinks that he has to stand through so many ballads when he plays with the Eagles that when he is on his own he would rather 'play that rock'n'roll' because that is what people expect. The same as he apparently thinks they don't want to hear new material.

I was lucky enough to see the HFO tour, so I saw both PMIAR & HMTTN, and frankly I will take those over In The City any day. Obviously I will not see any shows on this tour, but as I have already said, I find this setlist very safe & uninteresting.

sodascouts
08-16-2012, 07:58 PM
In Oklahoma, he almost seemed apologetic about playing PMAIAR, like he figured all his audience wanted to hear were rockers. Maybe he thinks this is the kind of setlist that will appeal to casual fans the most.

I disagree, though. I get that the majority of his audience are middle-aged white guys, but even they like soft songs occasionally!

Tiffanny Twisted
08-16-2012, 08:04 PM
I think he is just being Joe and doing what he wants at that moment in time.
Think about it.

He"d have to change up wht he plays ...if he did the same thing night after night then he would get bored.

Variety is the spice of life...
tt

Freypower
08-16-2012, 08:25 PM
I think he is just being Joe and doing what he wants at that moment in time.
Think about it.

He"d have to change up wht he plays ...if he did the same thing night after night then he would get bored.

Variety is the spice of life...
tt

He is doing the same thing night after night. :confused:

We ARE suggesting variety in what he plays, not the opposite.

Tiffanny Twisted
08-16-2012, 08:51 PM
He is doing the same thing night after night. :confused:

We ARE suggesting variety in what he plays, not the opposite.
I thought you were suggesting no variety cause he doesnt do"pretty songs" any more.
Sorry ..my bad

Freypower
08-16-2012, 08:53 PM
I thought you were suggesting no variety cause he doesnt do"pretty songs" any more.
Sorry ..my bad

I should have said we would like to see MORE variety in his setlists, which would include more ballads.

You were the one who used the phrase 'variety is the spice of life'.

Prettymaid
08-16-2012, 10:14 PM
I was trying to find the setlist I heard at the IL state fair in 2007. I think this is pretty close...

http://www.setlist.fm/setlist/joe-walsh/2007/mahaffey-theater-st-petersburg-fl-33d644c9.html

Unfortunately, I wasn't familiar with any of Joe's pre-Eagles music at the time, so these songs didn't strike a chord with me (not to mention we were in the nosebleeds). If Joe did Meadows back then I sure wish I would have been familiar with the song - I really like it now. But I do remember him doing PMAIAR.

Do you think the reason he doesn't do any of his "pretty songs" now is as simple as he doesn't want any lull in the show?

Freypower
08-16-2012, 10:28 PM
I was trying to find the setlist I heard at the IL state fair in 2007. I think this is pretty close...

http://www.setlist.fm/setlist/joe-walsh/2007/mahaffey-theater-st-petersburg-fl-33d644c9.html

Unfortunately, I wasn't familiar with any of Joe's pre-Eagles music at the time, so these songs didn't strike a chord with me (not to mention we were in the nosebleeds). If Joe did Meadows back then I sure wish I would have been familiar with the song - I really like it now. But I do remember him doing PMAIAR.

Do you think the reason he doesn't do any of his "pretty songs" now is as simple as he doesn't want any lull in the show?

I suppose that is the reason (I note in that setlist you quoted he also did Indian Summer, which I absolutely love) but in my opinion the lack of ballads is far less of a concern than the reluctance to showcase Analog Man.

PM, I have just noticed you have hit 8000 posts. Head to Walsh Worship. :partytime:

WalshFan88
08-17-2012, 01:04 AM
I'll admit I do like his current setlist but as long as he keeps LBG, LITFL, ITC, etc in there I'll be ok with what he does to it. But I do prefer the rockers but I do like PMAIAR. Great song. HMTTN doesn't do much for me though.

Tiffanny Twisted
08-17-2012, 06:37 AM
pm
8,ooo posts and growing:bow::cheers:

congradulations-tt

Tiffanny Twisted
08-17-2012, 06:49 AM
Ok , so i guess one question is:

1) What is his reluctance to play new material from analog man?

2) Why does he not include his ballads. more ...aka pretty songs?

I guess he is either:

1) playing what he feels like playing.

2) Playing what he THINKS people want him to play

3) playing what he wants to play.

A man who has been playing as long as he has and has such a large variety of music to cover and or choose from I guess would be in the situation that no mater what he decides to do and for what ever reason he decides to do it , there will be people that will be happy and un happy with his choice.

For me, yeah I wanna hear my favorite songs but when I go to a concert its to see and hear that performer live in that moment and watch them at their craft.:bow:

:thumbsup::rockguitar:ROCK ON JOE!!!!!!:inlove:


TT (did I get it right or am I still not understanding the concept of this "Joe thread"????)

TimothyBFan
08-17-2012, 07:43 AM
I guess he is either:

1) playing what he feels like playing.

2) Playing what he THINKS people want him to play


Just seems weird that immediately after putting out the first solo album in decades, you go out on tour and don't play but a couple songs off of it. Doesn't seem to be promoting the fact he has a new album at all. I understand that the casual fan knows the Life's Been Good and Ordinary Average Guy songs but I'm sure they'd want to hear new Joe also and Help Me Thru The Night (don't say it PM!!!)

As for the "softer side" of Joe--- no doubt I'd love to hear PMAIAR and One Day At A Time which he could play as a new song also.

Brooke
08-17-2012, 02:04 PM
I'm completely at a loss as to what Joe is doing. Like Willie said, here he is supposed to be promoting his first new album in years and we get 1 or maybe 2 songs from it? That's not a new album tour! Remember when Timothy went out to promote his new album? Look at what Glenn has done recently with his!

Somebody from the Joe camp needs to come read this message board! We like most of his new album and it seems he has dropped it. What gives, Joe? :headscratch:

I really like most of the songs on Analog Man and would love to hear them at a show. Yes, he still needs to do all the songs that are popular with his fans that he sings on, like Funk 49, Rocky Mountain Way, Life's Been Good, and All Night Long, but he doesn't need to do Life In the Fast Lane just because he isn't the original singer of it. I wouldn't miss it, but that's just me.

Here's my picks for Joe to do on this, supposed, Analog Man tour in random order:

Analog Man
Wrecking Ball
Lucky That Way
Family
One Day At A Time
Funk 50
Funk 49
The Bomber
Walk Away
Turn To Stone
Rocky Mountain Way
Life's Been Good
Help Me Through The Night
I Can Play That Rock & Roll
Ordinary Average Guy
Pretty Maids All In A Row
In The City
Indian Summer
A Life of Illusion
Meadows

That's 20 songs, maybe too many for him but these are his best, imo. Come on Joe, get with the program! You're cool and we love ya! :nod:

VAisForEagleLovers
08-17-2012, 03:33 PM
I agree with those who say he should be singing more songs from the album. He could have talked about it more if he wasn't going to play more from it. As for the softer stuff, I can honestly say I didn't miss it. For the most part, I wasn't listening for something specific, just totally enthralled with watching his fingers on the guitar and listening to the sound of it. Which was hard to see from row U, but the man amazes me every time I see him. I know there's more to him than being a great guitar player and great entertainer. It would be nice to be reminded of that with some other songs, but until someone else mentioned it in another thread, I never gave it much of a thought.

Of course, it doesn't matter what he plays. He's cool. Everyone says so.

sodascouts
08-17-2012, 05:04 PM
I agree with most of what Brooke says, except that after seeing the HUGE reaction LITFL gets from the crowd, I realize why Joe would keep doing it. I also think Family would be a dud live. However, "Wrecking Ball" and "One Day a Time" would be great additions, and he definitely should keep including "Lucky that Way" along with "Analog Man."

If it's length that's a problem, Joe could truncate some of his extended guitar solos (I love his genius guitar playing, but they don't ALL have to be monster length) to add in an additional song - or, again, drop the infamous ILBTs. I also think The Bomber is expendable. It's cool but it can drag live.

Freypower
08-17-2012, 08:03 PM
I would go along with most of what Brooke said.

My problem is that I don't honestly think Analog Man is all that good (mainly because of the amount of rehashing of old ideas & the inexplicable inclusion of a 1971 jam), and I'm sorry if that is a heretical opinion; but I am even more sorry if Joe also thinks that because it is his work.

jdubfan
08-18-2012, 02:14 AM
Well, my .02 isn't probably worth that much...but anyway... my thoughts are that since concerts are now the only way artists make any money, the days of playing deep cuts for the "true fan" are over. Joe's set for life, but the tour still has to make money or there won't be another one. For the legacy guys still out there trying to do it, like Mellencamp, Seger, etc. They don't get airplay, record deals or money from selling the music, so they must feel they need to play for the "average" drunk, oblivious and comparatively uncaring concert goer that makes up 95% of the audience. And to generalize Joe's crowds, that person wants to rock to the big hits, not hear pretty. I was hoping the "new and improved" Joe would have the self-confidence to keep more new stuff in the set, but apparently the response and feedback isn't what he'd hoped. Since he's the pro that's done this a few times, I defer to his expertise. New stuff just isn't accepted in a concert setting, and I don't get it, but that's how it is and what I've seen during this tour. And for Joe to cut off his jams is a bunch of crap IMO. This isn't a Eagles concert, and I don't want it to sound like the record. That's my favorite thing about seeing Joe live. It's a pure expression of how he's feeling, how he wants to tell it and why he's bothering to come out and play for me that night. And in all the shows I've seen, they are never exactly the same, even if it's the same set list. As I've stated before, I'm just grateful that at nearly 65, he's still interested in exploring his craft, stretching his boundaries, and coming out to play. I keep that in mind, because the years to go are a lot less than the years that have been. That's my take on the concert-going reality in the 21st century. It's not great, but it is what it is. You can quityerbitchin', accept it, enjoy it as much as you can and be glad your favorite is still out there doing it, or you can stay home.

WalshFan88
08-18-2012, 02:41 AM
My problem is that I don't honestly think Analog Man is all that good (mainly because of the amount of rehashing of old ideas & the inexplicable inclusion of a 1971 jam), and I'm sorry if that is a heretical opinion; but I am even more sorry if Joe also thinks that because it is his work.

I have to disagree. I think Analog Man is a great album and that I'm glad he released it.

At least he wrote new music and put something new out there from Joe rather than just doing covers, or just playing shows with no new material and not even attempting to write/release new material. I have to give him props for that and everyone else should as well. I think Analog Man is a solid album with great tunes. I'm sorry that you are disappointed with it.

I think in general terms RnR as it was in the heyday is all but dead and music has really changed. I think the hardcore Joe fans love/like or have at least heard the album (I've seen many big name musicians tweeting about how they like it) and I think the general public that knows nothing of Joe or casual fans probably won't discover it. Their loss. I think that's why he doesn't do more than 2. I think he plays what everyone has heard and everybody knows to entertain them and throw the 2 songs in to tell everyone to check it out. Then maybe in a couple years or less he could start doing more songs from the album. JMO of course.

VAisForEagleLovers
08-18-2012, 09:02 AM
Well, my .02 isn't probably worth that much...but anyway... my thoughts are that since concerts are now the only way artists make any money, the days of playing deep cuts for the "true fan" are over. Joe's set for life, but the tour still has to make money or there won't be another one. For the legacy guys still out there trying to do it, like Mellencamp, Seger, etc. They don't get airplay, record deals or money from selling the music, so they must feel they need to play for the "average" drunk, oblivious and comparatively uncaring concert goer that makes up 95% of the audience. And to generalize Joe's crowds, that person wants to rock to the big hits, not hear pretty. I was hoping the "new and improved" Joe would have the self-confidence to keep more new stuff in the set, but apparently the response and feedback isn't what he'd hoped. Since he's the pro that's done this a few times, I defer to his expertise. New stuff just isn't accepted in a concert setting, and I don't get it, but that's how it is and what I've seen during this tour. And for Joe to cut off his jams is a bunch of crap IMO. This isn't a Eagles concert, and I don't want it to sound like the record. That's my favorite thing about seeing Joe live. It's a pure expression of how he's feeling, how he wants to tell it and why he's bothering to come out and play for me that night. And in all the shows I've seen, they are never exactly the same, even if it's the same set list. As I've stated before, I'm just grateful that at nearly 65, he's still interested in exploring his craft, stretching his boundaries, and coming out to play. I keep that in mind, because the years to go are a lot less than the years that have been. That's my take on the concert-going reality in the 21st century. It's not great, but it is what it is. You can quityerbitchin', accept it, enjoy it as much as you can and be glad your favorite is still out there doing it, or you can stay home.

I agree!

Tiffanny Twisted
08-18-2012, 09:54 AM
Well, my .02 isn't probably worth that much...but anyway... my thoughts are that since concerts are now the only way artists make any money, the days of playing deep cuts for the "true fan" are over. Joe's set for life, but the tour still has to make money or there won't be another one. For the legacy guys still out there trying to do it, like Mellencamp, Seger, etc. They don't get airplay, record deals or money from selling the music, so they must feel they need to play for the "average" drunk, oblivious and comparatively uncaring concert goer that makes up 95% of the audience. And to generalize Joe's crowds, that person wants to rock to the big hits, not hear pretty. I was hoping the "new and improved" Joe would have the self-confidence to keep more new stuff in the set, but apparently the response and feedback isn't what he'd hoped. Since he's the pro that's done this a few times, I defer to his expertise. New stuff just isn't accepted in a concert setting, and I don't get it, but that's how it is and what I've seen during this tour. And for Joe to cut off his jams is a bunch of crap IMO. This isn't a Eagles concert, and I don't want it to sound like the record. That's my favorite thing about seeing Joe live. It's a pure expression of how he's feeling, how he wants to tell it and why he's bothering to come out and play for me that night. And in all the shows I've seen, they are never exactly the same, even if it's the same set list. As I've stated before, I'm just grateful that at nearly 65, he's still interested in exploring his craft, stretching his boundaries, and coming out to play. I keep that in mind, because the years to go are a lot less than the years that have been. That's my take on the concert-going reality in the 21st century. It's not great, but it is what it is. You can quityerbitchin', accept it, enjoy it as much as you can and be glad your favorite is still out there doing it, or you can stay home.


i agree!!!!
GREATFULL THAT HE IS STILL OUT THERE DOING HIS THING:thumbsup:

sodascouts
08-18-2012, 11:20 AM
I too am very glad he is out there and i enjoy his jams, but I'm not of the mind that it's somehow wrong or ungrateful to express disappointment with his choices in song selection. I am disappointed, and I'll say so. I say this as a fan, not some meanie out to trash Joe.

I love AM. I think it's his best album in decades. I think it's a shame he doesn't play more from it, and I will "bitch" about that all I like. You don't have to agree with me, but don't try to shut me down either.

Just because we love our guys doesn't mean we can't criticize their choices if we feel it's warranted - and I do.

VAisForEagleLovers
08-18-2012, 11:45 AM
I'll approach it from a complete 180. While I stand by what I wrote and agree with what jdubfan wrote, I'll also agree with Soda in that AM (the album) is a great album. For his casual fans who don't know about it, he's doing them a disservice by not talking more about in concert, not promoting it more in concert, and not playing more songs from it. Because it's a great album and by not being pushed to go listen to it, they are being deprived of some great music. In today's world when radio is no longer the way to really reach people, he is missing a great opportunity to reach his fans by not promoting the album more in concert. However, for me, the 'pretty' songs weren't missed. Had he played them, I have no doubts I'd have loved them, too.

Topkat
08-18-2012, 12:47 PM
Frankly, I thought the whole idea of the tour right after the release of the album, was to help promote it???? I think he doesn't give his audience enough credit for accepting his new material. I mean it's been ages since his last solo release. He should be playing the new songs, maybe not the entire album, but at least 4-5 songs from AM would have been totally acceptable, even to people who aren't really there to hear the new stuff. Of course he's going to play many of the long time hit favorites, but I love to see something new or unexpected, (like maybe an old obscure song) thrown in there. That's the fun of seeing a solo show, to get some unexpected stuff in the mix! Just my opinion. I wouldn't really generalize as to who Joe's audience is, but I would suspect that most are long time fans of his.

jdubfan
08-18-2012, 02:01 PM
I too am very glad he is out there and i enjoy his jams, but I'm not of the mind that it's somehow wrong or ungrateful to express disappointment with his choices in song selection. I am disappointed, and I'll say so. I say this as a fan, not some meanie out to trash Joe.

I love AM. I think it's his best album in decades. I think it's a shame he doesn't play more from it, and I will "bitch" about that all I like. You don't have to agree with me, but don't try to shut me down either.

Just because we love our guys doesn't mean we can't criticize their choices if we feel it's warranted - and I do.

To your rhetorical question, I gave an answer I felt was warranted as well. Not aimed at you soda, just another pov, but it was taken personally, so I apologize. Shut you down? Didn't try, you had your say. I thought I had the same right, as in "discusson" board. You told me what I thought on another post lately. Not sure why, I'm as entitled to my opinion as you. At least I thought so. You're the boss, it's your site. Guess that makes me in the wrong again? Evidently. I come here to relax, to learn more about the guys from cool folks who really know their stuff. But, here lately, the fun's gone out of it. My bad, I know, but that's how things go sometimes.
:cheers: So... Here's to you and here's to me, and if we should ever disagree....

Freypower
08-18-2012, 05:45 PM
I have to disagree. I think Analog Man is a great album and that I'm glad he released it.

At least he wrote new music and put something new out there from Joe rather than just doing covers, or just playing shows with no new material and not even attempting to write/release new material. I have to give him props for that and everyone else should as well. I think Analog Man is a solid album with great tunes. I'm sorry that you are disappointed with it.

I think in general terms RnR as it was in the heyday is all but dead and music has really changed. I think the hardcore Joe fans love/like or have at least heard the album (I've seen many big name musicians tweeting about how they like it) and I think the general public that knows nothing of Joe or casual fans probably won't discover it. Their loss. I think that's why he doesn't do more than 2. I think he plays what everyone has heard and everybody knows to entertain them and throw the 2 songs in to tell everyone to check it out. Then maybe in a couple years or less he could start doing more songs from the album. JMO of course.

OK; I think I know what you're saying here. 'At least it isn't a covers album' unlike Glenn's, is that right?

Technical point but Glenn's album is 'new material' even if it is cover versions, and he played 9 tracks from it when I saw him. That was brave; whether the songs were 'original' or not was not important to me at least. Also the rearrangement of The Heat Is On was something out of the box.

There are some good tracks on Analog Man; the title track, Wrecking Ball, ODAAT (which is not technically new, by the way), Band Played On. There are some others I find ordinary (Lucky That Way, which is really a remake of LBG, and Family, which I know I should love, but I don't and Hi Roller Baby) and then there are tracks I don't 'get' at all - Funk #50, which is a remake of Funk $49, Fishbone, Spanish Dancer & especially But I Try which was recorded in 1971. 'New material'? Yes, it is probably unfair to say that.

This is my opinion only & it will probably be the last time I express it but yes, my overall feeling is one of disappointment. But I repeat.... even if it disappoints me, he should be playing more of it.

I don't know why I haven't taken to it the way others have; it is not just that I was consumed by After Hours because I was really looking forward to it. This is why I have been reluctant to express any opinions; perhaps I am too harsh. In any case as I said I will say nothing further about the album.

Prettymaid
08-18-2012, 06:32 PM
FP, if you look at my review of Analog Man in it's thread, you will see that I agree with just about everything you just said, and I'm a Joe fan! My point is, if I can feel okay about critiquing Joe's album, then you can certainly say what you think as well.

WalshFan88
08-18-2012, 06:46 PM
OK; I think I know what you're saying here. 'At least it isn't a covers album' unlike Glenn's, is that right?

Technical point but Glenn's album is 'new material' even if it is cover versions, and he played 9 tracks from it when I saw him. That was brave; whether the songs were 'original' or not was not important to me at least. Also the rearrangement of The Heat Is On was something out of the box.

There are some good tracks on Analog Man; the title track, Wrecking Ball, ODAAT (which is not technically new, by the way), Band Played On. There are some others I find ordinary (Lucky That Way, which is really a remake of LBG, and Family, which I know I should love, but I don't and Hi Roller Baby) and then there are tracks I don't 'get' at all - Funk #50, which is a remake of Funk $49, Fishbone, Spanish Dancer & especially But I Try which was recorded in 1971. 'New material'? Yes, it is probably unfair to say that.

This is my opinion only & it will probably be the last time I express it but yes, my overall feeling is one of disappointment. But I repeat.... even if it disappoints me, he should be playing more of it.

I don't know why I haven't taken to it the way others have; it is not just that I was consumed by After Hours because I was really looking forward to it. This is why I have been reluctant to express any opinions; perhaps I am too harsh. In any case as I said I will say nothing further about the album.

So Glenn's album is new material and Joe's isn't?! By new material I don't mean songs recorded by an artist for the first time, but rather new original material from an artist. Sorry for the confusion. I don't agree with that at all... Even though ODAAT was previewed on F1, it still is a Joe song and the fact it was never on an Eagles studio album. But I Try was an old song yes, but he did have plenty of new material such as Analog Man, Wrecking Ball, Lucky That Way, etc. Lucky That Way isn't a remake really. A sequel, yes, but not a remake. It's an acoustic-y countryesque song that bears no resemblence to the electric rocking LBG other than the fact it's looking back on life lyrically and a sequel to LBG many years after and a more mature look at things.

It's not that I have any problem with you expressing your thoughts - none at all. It's just that I felt that perhaps you were being a bit unfair to Joe while being somewhat biased toward Glenn's album/tour. FWIW I do think Glenn made a good covers album and I do like some of the songs from it. Nothing against him at all. I just felt a bit upset I guess and thought it was a tad harsh. That's all... Just my opinions of course as I said previously. You're free to dislike the album of course.

Onward. :)

Freypower
08-18-2012, 07:03 PM
I didn't say Joe's album was not new material, but a couple of tracks are not new and a couple of them are in my opinion revisions of previous themes. I suppose I should say there's nothing wrong with that, but I for one saw no point in Funk #49 being remade. I know Glenn's album is not original material but it is a huge departure for him.

You may say that I was harsh, but in my opinion so were you. You basically said that because After Hours is a covers album then it doesn't mean anything.

Bias? Yes, I'm biased, just as you are. Unfortunately, however, the contrast between Glenn's approach on his tour and Joe's is out there for all to see. Glenn was willing to play a large amount of After Hours & the fact that he did not write it is not relevant.

WalshFan88
08-18-2012, 07:16 PM
I didn't say Joe's album was not new material, but a couple of tracks are not new and a couple of them are in my opinion revisiting previous themes. I know Glenn's album is not original material but it is a new recording.

You may say that I was harsh, but in my opinion so were you. You basically said that because After Hours is a covers album then it doesn't mean anything.

Bias? Yes, I'm biased, just as you are. Unfortunately, however, the contrast between Glenn's approach on his tour and Joe's is out there for all to see. Glenn was willing to play a large amount of After Hours & the fact that he did not write it is not relevant.

Well that is certainly not what I meant (that After Hours means nothing).... I just meant that at least give the appropriate props to Joe for making new music rather than just rehash old material in general. If you read in the AH thread I gave it a positive review and said I liked it. Nothing against After Hours at all. I just meant generally speaking about new original material. I have nothing against covers - I do them myself. I love many cover albums. I have no bias against Glenn or anything against him at all so please don't think that.

What Joe is doing on his tour is working for him. With music discovery the way it is - the mainstream public probably hasn't heard it yet or heard of it at all. And the ones that come to his shows can hear a couple songs to let them know. Once he feels more people have heard it and wouldn't be put off by playing new songs or not hearing hits, perhaps he could include more.... I wish both Glenn and Joe success with their tours. I have no bias here. I just felt the need to defend Joe in this instance. Perhaps I was wrong, oh well c'est la vie.

But just for the record, I have nothing against After Hours... I was speaking generally. But I can see how you made the connection - which was not intended by me. I'm sorry about that. I thought you had something against Joe's new music. I just meant that I'm glad Joe made a record of new music period rather than just live off of the old stuff and never make one at all or tour and not do any more albums or just doing old material or covers, etc and become a caricature of himself. That's all I really meant. I wasn't comparing or even meaning to compare.

Tiffanny Twisted
08-18-2012, 07:21 PM
I too am very glad he is out there and i enjoy his jams, but I'm not of the mind that it's somehow wrong or ungrateful to express disappointment with his choices in song selection. I am disappointed, and I'll say so. I say this as a fan, not some meanie out to trash Joe.

I love AM. I think it's his best album in decades. I think it's a shame he doesn't play more from it, and I will "bitch" about that all I like. You don't have to agree with me, but don't try to shut me down either.

Just because we love our guys doesn't mean we can't criticize their choices if we feel it's warranted - and I do.

Who do you feel is trying to "shut You down"?
tt

Freypower
08-18-2012, 07:25 PM
I'm glad Joe made a new album of new material (but I add the caveat again, MOSTLY new material) and I would hope that so will Glenn in the future (he said that doing After Hours has made him wish to revisit songwriting, whereas at first he was quoted in Rolling Stone as saying he was completely uninterested in it).

I am aware that I was judging Joe too harshly because of my own disappointment (which I am afraid, remains). Perhaps the comparison between the respective setlists is also too harsh. Joe I guess has to do what he thinks is best for him, but getting back to what we were originallly discussing, there is a general sense of bemusement at his apparent lack of confidence in the new material.

WalshFan88
08-18-2012, 07:29 PM
I'm glad Joe made a new album of new material (but I add the caveat again, MOSTLY new material) and I would hope that so will Glenn in the future (he said that doing After Hours has made him wish to revisit songwriting, whereas at first he was quoted in Rolling Stone as saying he was completely uninterested in it).

I am aware that I was judging Joe too harshly because of my own disappointment (which I am afraid, remains). Perhaps the comparison between the respective setlists is also too harsh. Joe I guess has to do what he thinks is best for him, but getting back to what we were originallly discussing, there is a general sense of bemusement at his apparent lack of confidence in the new material.

I agree. And I am looking forward to anything else Glenn and Don might write.

As far as the setlist - I think there just isn't that many people into that type of music anymore and the ones that do want to hear his old hits. I think classic Rock N' Roll (not Modern Rock) is dead or close to it. Just not much of that kind of music anymore and the ones that do come out don't do well because there is a lack of interest by anyone other than hardcore fans.

VAisForEagleLovers
08-18-2012, 07:40 PM
I got what you meant, Austin, but I think it's because we think alike on these things. We really can't compare AH with AM at all. As I look at the albums on my hard drive, across all genres, I'd say that in each there's usually one that's truly great (rather, better than good). After that, one third that's good, one third that's OK, and one third that's filler material. Albums of covers are generally 90% great or at least better than good. It's the advantage of recording covers.

In my opinion, and I will put this in the thread when I find the song by song review that I did, Joe's album surpasses other albums of original material. I realize I'm biased completely with all four of our guys, but really, I see two 'fillers', and they aren't ones I skip over. I really feel like he gave me my money's worth and I didn't spend $15 on three songs like I do with most. Funk #50 was done at the request of ESPN. Having heard it all during last year's football season, listening to it now is really getting me geared up for this season. Of course, that doesn't take much for me since I sleep, eat, and breathe Steeler football.

I really like AM and especially when I compare it to other albums of new music recently released. It's what I meant when I said that casual fans who haven't bought it are missing out.

mustangkim11
08-18-2012, 07:45 PM
The guys on my favorite podcast (the Don Geronimo Show out of 1140am The Fan in Sacramento) love Joe and Analog Man. A couple of months ago, Joe's Crossroads show had come up in their news segment and ALL the guys agreed that Joe was awesome and that they liked his new album. The guys on this show range from Joe's age to guys in their 30's. I thought it was really cool to hear that.

As for myself, I'd take what I can get as far as Joe's live material. I just wish that he'd come here. I keep hoping.

WalshFan88
08-18-2012, 07:51 PM
I got what you meant, Austin, but I think it's because we think alike on these things. We really can't compare AH with AM at all. As I look at the albums on my hard drive, across all genres, I'd say that in each there's usually one that's truly great (rather, better than good). After that, one third that's good, one third that's OK, and one third that's filler material. Albums of covers are generally 90% great or at least better than good. It's the advantage of recording covers.

In my opinion, and I will put this in the thread when I find the song by song review that I did, Joe's album surpasses other albums of original material. I realize I'm biased completely with all four of our guys, but really, I see two 'fillers', and they aren't ones I skip over. I really feel like he gave me my money's worth and I didn't spend $15 on three songs like I do with most. Funk #50 was done at the request of ESPN. Having heard it all during last year's football season, listening to it now is really getting me geared up for this season. Of course, that doesn't take much for me since I sleep, eat, and breathe Steeler football.

I really like AM and especially when I compare it to other albums of new music recently released. It's what I meant when I said that casual fans who haven't bought it are missing out.


Exactly!! I completely agree.

Wildthyme
08-19-2012, 06:00 PM
Personally I think a comparison between After Hours and Analog Man is an apples to oranges kind of thing. They are very different albums made for different reasons and I personally like them both.

I am bit disappointed to hear Joe isn't doing much from his new album. I really enjoy several of the songs and was looking forward to the possibility of seeing them live when Rhonda and I go to the show this coming weekend... So Joe if you are listening... how about a couple of your new songs and maybe Help Me Through the Night or Pretty Maids? You'd make a couple of loyal fans sitting in the second row REALLY happy! :hilarious:

zeldabjr
08-19-2012, 10:15 PM
Personally I think a comparison between After Hours and Analog Man is an apples to oranges kind of thing. They are very different albums made for different reasons and I personally like them both.

I am bit disappointed to hear Joe isn't doing much from his new album. I really enjoy several of the songs and was looking forward to the possibility of seeing them live when Rhonda and I go to the show this coming weekend... So Joe if you are listening... how about a couple of your new songs and maybe Help Me Through the Night or Pretty Maids? You'd make a couple of loyal fans sitting in the second row REALLY happy! :hilarious:

yeah I was really hoping for Pretty Maids when I saw him last week! one of my faves

Prettymaid
08-20-2012, 07:13 AM
I'd LOVE to hear Pretty Maids. After all, I'm it's namesake! :hilarious:

TimothyBFan
08-20-2012, 07:56 AM
Well, my .02 isn't probably worth that much...but anyway... my thoughts are that since concerts are now the only way artists make any money, the days of playing deep cuts for the "true fan" are over. Joe's set for life, but the tour still has to make money or there won't be another one. For the legacy guys still out there trying to do it, like Mellencamp, Seger, etc. They don't get airplay, record deals or money from selling the music, so they must feel they need to play for the "average" drunk, oblivious and comparatively uncaring concert goer that makes up 95% of the audience. And to generalize Joe's crowds, that person wants to rock to the big hits, not hear pretty. I was hoping the "new and improved" Joe would have the self-confidence to keep more new stuff in the set, but apparently the response and feedback isn't what he'd hoped. Since he's the pro that's done this a few times, I defer to his expertise. New stuff just isn't accepted in a concert setting, and I don't get it, but that's how it is and what I've seen during this tour. And for Joe to cut off his jams is a bunch of crap IMO. This isn't a Eagles concert, and I don't want it to sound like the record. That's my favorite thing about seeing Joe live. It's a pure expression of how he's feeling, how he wants to tell it and why he's bothering to come out and play for me that night. And in all the shows I've seen, they are never exactly the same, even if it's the same set list. As I've stated before, I'm just grateful that at nearly 65, he's still interested in exploring his craft, stretching his boundaries, and coming out to play. I keep that in mind, because the years to go are a lot less than the years that have been. That's my take on the concert-going reality in the 21st century. It's not great, but it is what it is. You can quityerbitchin', accept it, enjoy it as much as you can and be glad your favorite is still out there doing it, or you can stay home.

Gotta say, you had me right up to the last line, then, not so much!!!

I think I (we) all have a right to bitch all we want, more so than the casual fan. We are passionate about their music. We all here are pretty much experts on all things Eagles and have spent more than our fair share, most of us over decades, to prove how much we love them. We've bought albums/8 tracks/cassettes/cds (I've got all of them in every album), concert tickets, posters, programs, t-shirts, etc..... and if I (we) have an opinion, rather everyone agrees or not, I (we) have a right to bitch about it. I LOVE their music but I don't always agree with what they do. I have stated that I don't like the price of the current concert tickets, I didn't like the suits, I think the track listing should be changed a bit, etc.... and now I think Joe should be playing and promoting his new album more than he is at this point. There---I said it and I'm glad I have!


I think in general terms RnR as it was in the heyday is all but dead and music has really changed. I think the hardcore Joe fans love/like or have at least heard the album (I've seen many big name musicians tweeting about how they like it) and I think the general public that knows nothing of Joe or casual fans probably won't discover it. Their loss. I think that's why he doesn't do more than 2. I think he plays what everyone has heard and everybody knows to entertain them and throw the 2 songs in to tell everyone to check it out. Then maybe in a couple years or less he could start doing more songs from the album. JMO of course.

I see your point but I also think it's sad that's it's come to the point that when an artist puts out a rare new album of material that he feels he can't play it for fear the fans would rather hear the old stuff (which we would ALSO).

sodascouts
08-20-2012, 03:36 PM
I think I (we) all have a right to bitch all we want, more so than the casual fan. We are passionate about their music. We all here are pretty much experts on all things Eagles and have spent more than our fair share, most of us over decades, to prove how much we love them. We've bought albums/8 tracks/cassettes/cds (I've got all of them in every album), concert tickets, posters, programs, t-shirts, etc..... and if I (we) have an opinion, rather everyone agrees or not, I (we) have a right to bitch about it. I LOVE their music but I don't always agree with what they do. I have stated that I don't like the price of the current concert tickets, I didn't like the suits, I think the track listing should be changed a bit, etc.... and now I think Joe should be playing and promoting his new album more than he is at this point. There---I said it and I'm glad I have!


Exactly, Willie. We've earned the right to "bitch" a bit, I think!

No one is "in the wrong" or "in the right" about Joe's setlist; we're expressing opinions.

The guys can take it. ;)

Brooke
08-20-2012, 03:53 PM
For the legacy guys still out there trying to do it, like Mellencamp, Seger, etc. They don't get airplay, record deals or money from selling the music, so they must feel they need to play for the "average" drunk, oblivious and comparatively uncaring concert goer that makes up 95% of the audience. And to generalize Joe's crowds, that person wants to rock to the big hits, not hear pretty.

I must say I have to disagree with 95% here. Really? Concert tickets cost way too much for me to act like that!


As I've stated before, I'm just grateful that at nearly 65, he's still interested in exploring his craft, stretching his boundaries, and coming out to play.

Amen here, for sure!


You can quityerbitchin', accept it, enjoy it as much as you can and be glad your favorite is still out there doing it, or you can stay home.

:hmm: Well, I think that everyone that wants to state their opinion on what they like or dislike is welcome to do it. Isn't that what we are here for, to cuss and discuss? Everyone isn't always going to agree. What a boring place that would be! I don't think we can compare After Hours with Analog Man, they are completely different, as someone mentioned. But as far as liking or disliking the albums, to each his own. I've said I don't love AH. It's just a different kind of music. Doesn't mean I've quit loving Glenn! I actually like AM better than AH. That's my opinion. Don't get mad at me for that. A bigger Glenn fan you will be hard pressed to find!

I stand by my first post and everything I said. And about wishing Joe would play more of his songs from AM because he said he was touring to promote it when it came out. I haven't even been to one of his solo shows! Doesn't change my mind. It's just what I would want to hear more of if I were able to go. :shrug:

Tiffanny Twisted
08-20-2012, 08:09 PM
ok...i have seen joe live and glenn live solo.Ihave enjoyed both, not one over the other. I have also sEEn Don Henley anf TBs live. Don was sick and I was so thrilled to see him and greatful he didnt cancel.

Joe didnt do anything from the yet to be released AN. I gotta admidt that ILBT's was a crowd pleaser.I enjoyed his show tremendously....had great searts 5th row.

I saw Glenn right after AH was released. I really enjoyed him and he knew how to play to an audience and his dads family was in attendance being from the area.

TBS did the whole expando cd and other songs (Poco and a few eagles)
I think (just my opinion) that getting to hear him do the whole cd live for the first time I heard it, really had me appreciate it all the much more.:thumbsup:

But that being said, I think most Joe fans wanna hear the "rock" type songs (again my opinion)

ah is a totally different cd. Glenn stated that it was something he had wanted to do for a long time and do it for his parents while they were still alive. ALso, it was music he was exposed to growing up. (this I understand... my hubby knew show tunes cause thats what his mom listended to).

So to sum up, my opinion is everyone has an opinion. No one will ever agree so u have to agree to disagree.

For Me I am just so greatful that at this time in my life, I can still afford to go to a show with my fav guy,JAHH and see the people we love perform their music live and that they still wanna perform it live.
I pay to be entertained, not pick therir set lists for them.

PS>I will mention that JAHH and I saw HAll and OAtes and one time we saw them, they did 7songs and said Good nite. Boy were we peeved. Everyone can have an off nite, but having had seen Don H. live when he was sick, well my standards were high.

I always love to see H and O . They were a favorite of my late cousin who died much too young of breast cancer. It was something she and I did to gether. I just dont think after that one 7 song concert I"d layout $100.00 apiece to see them again. I"ll put it in the jar that says "EAGLES TIX MONEY"
Peace everyone

tt:thumbsup:

Topkat
08-20-2012, 08:43 PM
Originally Posted by jdubfan
For the legacy guys still out there trying to do it, like Mellencamp, Seger, etc. They don't get airplay, record deals or money from selling the music, so they must feel they need to play for the "average" drunk, oblivious and comparatively uncaring concert goer that makes up 95% of the audience. And to generalize Joe's crowds, that person wants to rock to the big hits, not hear pretty.

I find a statement like this insulting. To say that "95% of the audience is an average drunk, oblivious and comparatively uncaring concert goer" is just plain outrageous! I wouldn't assume that or generalize about who goes to see Joe! I also think concerts these days are too expensive & people choose carefully who they want to see if they are spending well over $100.

I think most that go see Joe are long time fans, who would want to hear his new stuff, and of course everyone wants to hear some of their old familiar favorites, but to make comments such as this is really a huge insult! I don't think anybody there would mind hearing some "pretty".

Tiffanny Twisted
08-20-2012, 09:06 PM
Yep...Topkat ...tix are expensive and with this economy especially, people really have to think twice before they spend that money on a show...anybodys show
tt

Freypower
08-20-2012, 10:47 PM
Any comparison between AH & AM was supposed to be regarding the setlists, not the content of the albums. The point I tried to make was that Glenn very bravely played 8, then 9 tracks from AH on his tour even though his tour wasn't very long (and remember he had also done 4 tracks from it last year). This isn't even counting On The Way Home, which remarkably he played as an encore this year, or the amazing rearrangement of The Heat Is On.

Joe? Does he think all his fans are drunken white males who only like rock songs with long guitar solos, and hits? On this board he has a legion of female fans, most of whom I submit would be eager to hear his new material; and furthermore most of us are very impressed by the new material (I again feel I have to say that I appear to be the exception, but even I, if I were to attend one of these shows, would want him to play some of these songs because I might change my mind).

I also think it's a huge generalisation to say that Joe's fans don't want to hear 'pretty' songs. As I said earlier, give me PMIAR or HMTTN rather than the (in my opinion) overplayed & tired In The City any day.

TimothyBFan
08-21-2012, 07:43 AM
I find a statement like this insulting. To say that "95% of the audience is an average drunk, oblivious and comparatively uncaring concert goer" is just plain outrageous!


Agree with you 100% here!!!! I didn't even touch on that statement yesterday when I posted because it was so outrageous! There's always those drunks in the audience but 95%? Seriously? :headshake:

Prettymaid
08-21-2012, 08:21 AM
Maybe there is a slightly different kind of audience that goes to Ribfest festival and pays $15, than to a Joe Walsh concert and pays $100, but I think playing at least 3 songs from his newest album, which he is promoting, would be acceptable at either one. Liked -maybe not, but acceptable.

The people we were talking to at the Ribfest show go to all of these kinds of shows, so it's not like they are big Walsh fans, they just go see anyone they can afford to see and get the chance to. The small spattering of applause AM got when Joe mentioned it is probably representative of any Joe show, not just a festival.

As I said before, I noticed before the album was released that Joe wasn't playing much off of it, but I just figured that he would up the number of songs from it when it came out. I'm disappointed that he didn't do that, and I feel extremely lucky now that I got to hear Lucky That Way.

VAisForEagleLovers
08-21-2012, 09:00 AM
Any comparison between AH & AM was supposed to be regarding the setlists, not the content of the albums. The point I tried to make was that Glenn very bravely played 8, then 9 tracks from AH on his tour even though his tour wasn't very long (and remember he had also done 4 tracks from it last year). This isn't even counting On The Way Home, which remarkably he played as an encore this year, or the amazing rearrangement of The Heat Is On.

Joe? Does he think all his fans are drunken white males who only like rock songs with long guitar solos, and hits? On this board he has a legion of female fans, most of whom I submit would be eager to hear his new material; and furthermore most of us are very impressed by the new material (I again feel I have to say that I appear to be the exception, but even I, if I were to attend one of these shows, would want him to play some of these songs because I might change my mind).

I also think it's a huge generalisation to say that Joe's fans don't want to hear 'pretty' songs. As I said earlier, give me PMIAR or HMTTN rather than the (in my opinion) overplayed & tired In The City any day.

FP, I have to wonder here. Glenn did 8 then 9 songs from AH because that's the music he wants to do. He loves those songs and loves performing them. He should since he does them so very well. His interviews in and around the show all but flat out state he does the other songs because his audience expects it. Meaning he wouldn't do them otherwise and do all AH material. So I'm wondering if the real reason Joe is doing mostly older songs is because he wants to? Maybe he's not as enthralled with his new material as he should be (it's good stuff). Maybe the issue is a live setting? Maybe he doesn't think it plays as well live (I find that hard to believe) or with the musicians and singers he has on hand. Obviously, I have no idea what it is. It could be that in this day and age when people steal music rather than buy it, he doesn't see the point in promoting the new album for sales and so just does what he wants.

The obvious choice for a third song is Wrecking Ball, and doesn't Springsteen have a new album out called that? Maybe he doesn't want fans to be confused? There are others he could do... Maybe he just hasn't given it that much thought.

Brooke
08-21-2012, 10:13 AM
So I'm wondering if the real reason Joe is doing mostly older songs is because he wants to?

The only thing I can say to this is he has said at Eagles shows (and even his solo shows) before Life's Been Good that if he knew he was going to have to play it forever he would have written something different. Now, I know that was a joke, but it's got to tell us that he's probably pretty tired of playing the same old songs over and over again, year after year. Don and Glenn have also had similar comments about getting tired of doing some songs. So, here he has the opportunity to do new songs from a new album and we only get one or two! I don't get it! :headscratch:

Topkat
08-21-2012, 11:49 AM
The only thing I can say to this is he has said at Eagles shows (and even his solo shows) before Life's Been Good that if he knew he was going to have to play it forever he would have written something different. Now, I know that was a joke, but it's got to tell us that he's probably pretty tired of playing the same old songs over and over again, year after year. Don and Glenn have also had similar comments about getting tired of doing some songs. So, here he has the opportunity to do new songs from a new album and we only get one or two! I don't get it! :headscratch:

Brooke, I don't get it either. My only guess is that the musicians he has with him on the tour are not the ones on the recordings, so maybe it's more difficult to do the new songs! I'm not sure what the issue is, but he should be doing more from Analog Man on the tour! Thought he was promoting it??:headscratch:

Freypower
08-21-2012, 05:19 PM
FP, I have to wonder here. Glenn did 8 then 9 songs from AH because that's the music he wants to do. He loves those songs and loves performing them. He should since he does them so very well. His interviews in and around the show all but flat out state he does the other songs because his audience expects it. Meaning he wouldn't do them otherwise and do all AH material. So I'm wondering if the real reason Joe is doing mostly older songs is because he wants to? Maybe he's not as enthralled with his new material as he should be (it's good stuff). Maybe the issue is a live setting? Maybe he doesn't think it plays as well live (I find that hard to believe) or with the musicians and singers he has on hand. Obviously, I have no idea what it is. It could be that in this day and age when people steal music rather than buy it, he doesn't see the point in promoting the new album for sales and so just does what he wants.

The obvious choice for a third song is Wrecking Ball, and doesn't Springsteen have a new album out called that? Maybe he doesn't want fans to be confused? There are others he could do... Maybe he just hasn't given it that much thought.

That is what I have alluded to previously; the lack of confidence in the new material suggests that (like me) he doesn't actually think that much of it.

But as I said, this is a minority view; most people here want him to play it.

Topkat
08-21-2012, 05:44 PM
That is what I have alluded to previously; the lack of confidence in the new material suggests that (like me) he doesn't actually think that much of it.

But as I said, this is a minority view; most people here want him to play it.

I really highly doubt that is the case! Why would he even BOTHER to release it if he didn't think much of it, especially since he hasn't done a new cd in years! That makes no sense.....I do think it's the musicians available. I mean he has Jeff Lynne & Ringo on the album & he couldn't take them on the tour with him.....just another theory? behind the madness.

Freypower
08-21-2012, 05:47 PM
I really highly doubt that is the case! Why would he even BOTHER to release it if he didn't think much of it, especially since he hasn't done a new cd in years! That makes no sense.....I do think it's the musicians available. I mean he has Jeff Lynne & Ringo on the album & he couldn't take them on the tour with him.....just another theory? behind the madness.

I know that. It seems crazy.

I don't believe he was ever going to be able to play with Jeff and/or Ringo; you adapt & use who you can. That is what professional musicans do. I think the 'he can't get the musicians he wants' theory doesn't make much more sense than the 'he doesn't like the album' theory.

sodascouts
08-21-2012, 05:58 PM
Brooke, I don't get it either. My only guess is that the musicians he has with him on the tour are not the ones on the recordings, so maybe it's more difficult to do the new songs! I'm not sure what the issue is, but he should be doing more from Analog Man on the tour! Thought he was promoting it??:headscratch:

Professional musicians can learn parts. These are not elaborate symphonic pieces we're talking about here, but basic rock songs like "Wrecking Ball" and "One Day at a Time."

I think the most likely theory is that he believes his audience doesn't want to hear anything new and this tour is not so much about promoting the album as it is about making money in between Eagles gigs. An increase in album sales is simply an added bonus.

Topkat
08-21-2012, 06:15 PM
Professional musicians can learn parts. These are not elaborate symphonic pieces we're talking about here, but basic rock songs like "Wrecking Ball" and "One Day at a Time."

I think the most likely theory is that he believes his audience doesn't want to hear anything new and this tour is not so much about promoting the album as it is about making money in between Eagles gigs. An increase in album sales is simply an added bonus.

That made me laugh! Do you think he's not making ENOUGH MONEY as an EAGLE????? Are you serious? He doesn't need the money, that I'm almost positive about...

Who knows the reason he's not promoting the album?? It's the enigma that is Joe Walsh! He does whatever the heck he wants to do!

TimothyBFan
08-21-2012, 06:29 PM
I don't believe he was ever going to be able to play with Jeff and/or Ringo; you adapt & use who you can. That is what professional musicans do. I think the 'he can't get the musicians he wants' theory doesn't make much more sense than the 'he doesn't like the album' theory.

Exactly!! I mean look at the people Timothy had on Expando yet when he went out on the road, his band pulled off all but one of the songs off Expando with no problem at all.


I think the most likely theory is that he believes his audience doesn't want to hear anything new and this tour is not so much about promoting the album as it is about making money in between Eagles gigs. An increase in album sales is simply an added bonus.



That made me laugh! Do you think he's not making ENOUGH MONEY as an EAGLE????? Are you serious? He doesn't need the money, that I'm almost positive about...

Yeah--I really do think it's all about the money! I mean, do you seriously think ANY of them NEED the money but yet they keep going out there and they keep asking top dollar for concert tickets (Timothy seems to be the exception to the rule). They will all keep doing it as long as fans keep shelling out the big bucks! I think Soda hit the nail right on the head--you betcha it has a lot to do about $$$$$$$!!!!

Topkat
08-21-2012, 07:26 PM
TimothyBFan

Yeah--I really do think it's all about the money! I mean, do you seriously think ANY of them NEED the money but yet they keep going out there and they keep asking top dollar for concert tickets (Timothy seems to be the exception to the rule). They will all keep doing it as long as fans keep shelling out the big bucks! I think Soda hit the nail right on the head--you betcha it has a lot to do about $$$$$$$!!!!

I think The Eagles as a band are all about the Money, but as individuals, I don't really think so. They do get the big bucks as a band, but the solo shows are in smaller venues with lower than Eagle prices, that's for sure. Other solos that tour charge about the same for a show. Joe is not really more money than other people out there on tour.

I really do not think the solo shows are all about the $$$$$. If that's the case, he could have done a tour even without a new cd. Also the tours are not really that big. I think maybe they each like to do their own thing, without the rest of the band. Maybe they are also facing the fact that they may not be able to do it much longer, so they want to do it while they still can.

VAisForEagleLovers
08-21-2012, 08:17 PM
I do think it's about the money, but yeah, I think a highly motivating factor is doing it while they can and also for the fans. I think our guys have a true appreciation for their fans and love us as much as we love them. Unfortunately the ones who want PMAIAR aren't going to scream it at every break like the big dudes sitting all around me shouted for Turn to Stone until he finally sang it. So sometimes their feedback is a little skewed.

jdubfan
08-21-2012, 08:45 PM
Agree with you 100% here!!!! I didn't even touch on that statement yesterday when I posted because it was so outrageous! There's always those drunks in the audience but 95%? Seriously? :headshake:

Yes, I did mess that up. Should have been 95% are casual fans, as in not a fanatic like me. With some drunks and kooks thrown in. I go to a wide variety of shows, and the atmosphere is different than it used to be. That was the point I was trying to get at, but failed. I have opinions too, so what. I can even bitch about bitchin if I like. It's the negativity that's tiresome... mad about didn't do this song, mad about did that song, too much this, not enough that. Whatta drag, 2 bad 4 u....I'm just trying to be grateful for what is and not constantly crab about what's not. I've had a large dose of bigger picture living that's changed perspectives and priorities, this is so trivial. Here's to being more outrageous. I'm gonna go try that.

Freypower
08-21-2012, 10:25 PM
Yes, I did mess that up. Should have been 95% are casual fans, as in not a fanatic like me. With some drunks and kooks thrown in. I go to a wide variety of shows, and the atmosphere is different than it used to be. That was the point I was trying to get at, but failed. I have opinions too, so what. I can even bitch about bitchin if I like. It's the negativity that's tiresome... mad about didn't do this song, mad about did that song, too much this, not enough that. Whatta drag, 2 bad 4 u....I'm just trying to be grateful for what is and not constantly crab about what's not. I've had a large dose of bigger picture living that's changed perspectives and priorities, this is so trivial. Here's to being more outrageous. I'm gonna go try that.

I don't see this discussion as 'negative' or 'trivial'. I see that everyone including you has the right to express their opinions about some perfectly valid issues.

sodascouts
08-21-2012, 10:37 PM
I actually find this kind of thread stimulating. We can put our evaluative caps on. I love to gush as much as the next fan, and I do so on a regular basis! However, there are two sides to every coin, and intelligent exploration is always worthwhile.... IMHO, at least.

Brooke
08-22-2012, 10:18 AM
I find all of the discussion very interesting. What does it hurt to discuss it? Can't we have a discussion without getting upset and mad?

jdfan, I don't know of anyone that is mad about anything here. I wasn't mad about it, I am just disappointed that Joe has a new album out and doesn't want to play over a couple songs from it. I think any of the professional musicians that he has touring with him are certainly able to play the songs. Good grief, they are professionals!

I love all the Eagles and love hearing most any of their songs anytime. And it wouldn't make me decide to not go see them if all they were going to do were the oldies. So, if he chooses to not play anything new, I guess that is his perogative. But wouldn't you think if he was going to be bored with something, that he would be bored with LBG or RMW, for instance, and when he has a chance to play new stuff, play it?

But why did he do all the interviews and promotions for it and then decide not to do it? He launched a major tour for it. I wish I could ask him that question.

jdubfan
08-22-2012, 09:57 PM
I don't see this discussion as 'negative' or 'trivial'. I see that everyone including you has the right to express their opinions about some perfectly valid issues.

Close, but i didn't say the discussion was trivial. I said it was trivial to me right now. I don't see this discussion as particularly negative either, it's a cumulative thing from other threads and discussions about the tour, the new music, etc. You've been complaining about the setlist. Not that you're not free to do that, but to have not even seen a show, I'm not sure how that's quite fair. Have you ever seen a solo Joe show?



But why did he do all the interviews and promotions for it and then decide not to do it? He launched a major tour for it. I wish I could ask him that question.

Brooke, Joe's said in interviews that he feels he's doing what the people want. And it is a shame. Maybe next tour.

Freypower
08-22-2012, 10:20 PM
Close, but i didn't say the discussion was trivial. I said it was trivial to me right now. I don't see this discussion as particularly negative either, it's a cumulative thing from other threads and discussions about the tour, the new music, etc. You've been complaining about the setlist. Not that you're not free to do that, but to have not even seen a show, I'm not sure how that's quite fair. Have you ever seen a solo Joe show?



But why did he do all the interviews and promotions for it and then decide not to do it? He launched a major tour for it. I wish I could ask him that question.

Brooke, Joe's said in interviews that he feels he's doing what the people want. And it is a shame. Maybe next tour.

Because I have not (and will not) seen a solo show, it's not quite fair that I comment on the setlist? I'm sorry, but as a fan, I have as much right to comment on this as anybody else. I will never see a Joe solo show; so am I supposed to stay silent? In fact all I have done is express bemusment that he is not playing new songs and agreed with other people that he could play some ballads. I haven't said anything about the choice of other songs apart from ILBTs which frankly, I find bizarre (it would be similar to Glenn playing Better In The USA). I did make specific mention of In The City, which although I like it, I believe has been played live for far too long by both Joe & the Eagles at the expense of superior songs.

I did see Joe back in the 80s in Australia with the Party Boys & the Creatures From America when he was still fuelled by alcohol & those were great shows. But I very much doubt that he would ever tour solo here again.

For the record, I believe the Eagles' setlist is in dire need of shaking up as well.

Ive always been a dreamer
08-22-2012, 10:36 PM
Well - I've been wanting to post in this thread all week, and just haven't had the time until now. My first thought is that this is an Eagles message board for fans, so the reason most of us are here are to talk about the band and it's members. In the big scheme of things, I guess you could say this discussion is trivial, but it's certainly not if you are here to voice your opinion as a fan. I agree with Brooke - it's a shame that we can't seem to have a good discussion on the board anymore without someone getting offended or upset.

So, here is my opinion ...

With regard to the original question in this thread, I honestly don't care what songs Joe or any of the guys perform when I go to a show within reason. Of course, I have my favorite songs and would love to hear them, but, it's okay if I don't. For me, if I were to go to a show where I didn't know most of the songs, I would not find it as enjoyable - that's about my only criteria. I'm just easy that way. :wink: My guess is that Joe probably picks his setlist based on what he thinks the audience wants to hear, along with some things he personally wants to play.

However, I am a bit baffled over why Joe isn't playing more songs from Analog Man on this tour. When I saw him in Vienna last week, he hardly made mention of the album. IMO, four songs would be about perfect. Since the comparison was made to Glenn's After Hours tour, I'll weigh in on that as well. Even though I know a lot of folks here don't agree with me, I personally felt Glenn did too many songs from the album on his recent mini-tour. I think that many slow songs all bunched up together brought down Glenn's usual high-energy live show. For me, part of the live show experience is seeing the audience really get into the show, and I just didn't feel that at some of the After Hours shows (Borderers excluded, of course). I think 4 -5 songs from a new album is about right for an artist (Timothy's Expando-heavy shows being an exception). So for me, there's not enough Analog Man from Joe, and too much After Hours from Glenn. But, the bottom line is that won't stop me from going to see them or make me love them any less.

One more thing I wanted to say is that there is no way I believe any of the Eagles are still touring collectively or solo is just for the money. I'm not saying it's not a factor, but no one will ever make me believe it is the main reason. These guys are pretty wealthy, if they didn't love what they were doing, they would just rest on their laurels, fade off into the sunset, and live the rest of their lives doing what they want to do. And that's my point - I believe they are living their lives doing exactly what they want to do. And I say kudos to them - I think they've earned that right! I just wish it were me. :thumbsup:

TimothyBFan
08-23-2012, 07:35 AM
It's the negativity that's tiresome... mad about didn't do this song, mad about did that song, too much this, not enough that. Whatta drag, 2 bad 4 u....I'm just trying to be grateful for what is and not constantly crab about what's not. I've had a large dose of bigger picture living that's changed perspectives and priorities, this is so trivial. Here's to being more outrageous. I'm gonna go try that.

First, I just want to say, I'm sorry for whatever it is that is the "large dose of bigger picture" and that I SOOOOOOO get that!! I've been there, done that-- BIG TIME!! You're not alone in that. I lost BOTH of my parents to horrible, ugly, long illnesses within a couple years of each other and saw both of them take their last breaths in freakin' hospital rooms. And during those couple of years, lost several other loved ones, including 5 damn funerals between June and August of last year. Yeah---I got my dose of the "bigger picture" too.

That being said, I didn't take it out on anyone else on this board when they expressed their opinion about a setlist, a song that wasn't sung, a drunk at a concert, etc.... I respect everyone's opinions here, even if I don't agree with them and I try to discuss anything in a respectful manner. I never once have called anyone's opinion "trivial" (yes I know you tried to clarify it later as saying trivial to you but I must admit, the way you worded it above, I also thought you were calling other's opinions trivial). I think we'd all agree that it's ok to disagree and tell others you do but it's all about HOW you do it. And quite frankly, I find your last several post here kinda of disrespectful and harsh.

Please don't take this the wrong way, jdub, if you find others "negativity" and "bitchin'" "tiresome", perhaps you should step away from it for awhile. Afterall, this is a discussion board and the discussion is probably not always going to be about what everyone agrees on.


I agree with Brooke - it's a shame that we can't seem to have a good discussion on the board anymore without someone getting offended or upset.

You said a mouthful there, ladies!!! It's getting increasingly frustrating for me also and that saddens me very much.



One more thing I wanted to say is that there is no way I believe any of the Eagles are still touring collectively or solo is just for the money. I'm not saying it's not a factor, but no one will ever make me believe it is the main reason. These guys are pretty wealthy, if they didn't love what they were doing, they would just rest on their laurels, fade off into the sunset, and live the rest of their lives doing what they want to do. And that's my point - I believe they are living their lives doing exactly what they want to do. And I say kudos to them - I think they've earned that right! I just wish it were me.

Yeah--I know you're right. I guess I shouldn't have said it the way I did. But it does seem to be one of the factors tho. I need to remember to keep it in perspective and that they are wealthy and very well could call it quits any time and I sure don't want that to happen.

But, just in case they want to make just a little more money off of all of us here, I have some advice..... GET THAT DVD DONE BECAUSE I KNOW OF A FEW FANS THAT WILL BE SHELLING OUT MONEY FOR THAT!!! :hilarious:

Ive always been a dreamer
08-23-2012, 10:46 AM
But, just in case they want to make just a little more money off of all of us here, I have some advice..... GET THAT DVD DONE BECAUSE I KNOW OF A FEW FANS THAT WILL BE SHELLING OUT MONEY FOR THAT!!! :hilarious:

Alrightly - I'll definitely give this statement a big HELL YEAH!!! :partytime:

jdubfan
08-23-2012, 10:36 PM
[quote=TimothyBFan;190811]First, I just want to say, I'm sorry for whatever it is that is the "large dose of bigger picture" and that I SOOOOOOO get that!! I've been there, done that-- BIG TIME!! You're not alone in that. I lost BOTH of my parents to horrible, ugly, long illnesses within a couple years of each other and saw both of them take their last breaths in freakin' hospital rooms. And during those couple of years, lost several other loved ones, including 5 damn funerals between June and August of last year. Yeah---I got my dose of the "bigger picture" too.

That being said, I didn't take it out on anyone else on this board when they expressed their opinion about a setlist, a song that wasn't sung, a drunk at a concert, etc.... I respect everyone's opinions here, even if I don't agree with them and I try to discuss anything in a respectful manner. I never once have called anyone's opinion "trivial" (yes I know you tried to clarify it later as saying trivial to you but I must admit, the way you worded it above, I also thought you were calling other's opinions trivial). I think we'd all agree that it's ok to disagree and tell others you do but it's all about HOW you do it. And quite frankly, I find your last several post here kinda of disrespectful and harsh.

Please don't take this the wrong way, jdub, if you find others "negativity" and "bitchin'" "tiresome", perhaps you should step away from it for awhile. Afterall, this is a discussion board and the discussion is probably not always going to be about what everyone agrees on. ]

I guess you're right. Maybe I am farther gone than I thought. I'm the problem? Never meant to be that. Just trying to express how I feel like everyone else, poorly, evidently.

TimothyBFan
08-24-2012, 09:18 AM
Because I have not (and will not) seen a solo show,.

FP--been meaning to ask you because you've mentioned this before.... Why won't you see a solo show? Is it because you simply don't think you'll ever get a chance of him coming there to do so? Or do you simply have no desire to see him? How about Timothy & Don if you got the chance? Just curious so feel free to tell me none of my business if you wish. :)

Freypower
08-24-2012, 06:44 PM
FP--been meaning to ask you because you've mentioned this before.... Why won't you see a solo show? Is it because you simply don't think you'll ever get a chance of him coming there to do so? Or do you simply have no desire to see him? How about Timothy & Don if you got the chance? Just curious so feel free to tell me none of my business if you wish. :)

I'm happy to answer this.

1. I don't live in the United States! And no, I would only fly to the US to see Glenn, not the other three. I wouldn't go there to see the Eagles either. My funds are limited.
2. I think the chances of Joe, Don & Tim touring Australia are next to zero. Don never even came here on a promotional tour, whereas Glenn did come here to promote Strange Weather. As I said earlier, I did see Joe back in the 80s as a guest of the Party Boys & the Creatures From America.

Having said that of course I never dreamed that Glenn might tour here by himself either, so never say never.

3. Now for the tricky bit; would I go & see Joe, Tim or Don if I had the chance?

The answer is probably, although to be brutally honest, if I had to choose out of the three of them the order would be Joe, Tim, Don. I have read enough about Don's solo shows over the years to suspect that his show would not appeal to me very much. I don't know how else to say that. He'd have to include a lot more of my idiosyncratic favourites (which he doesn't do now). Most of my favourites of his I have seen him do with the Eagles.

This might make an interesting new topic; who would you see solo, why & why not. It may ruffle some feathers but that's what this board is about!

Topkat
08-24-2012, 08:05 PM
With regard to the original question in this thread, I honestly don't care what songs Joe or any of the guys perform when I go to a show within reason. Of course, I have my favorite songs and would love to hear them, but, it's okay if I don't. For me, if I were to go to a show where I didn't know most of the songs, I would not find it as enjoyable - that's about my only criteria. I'm just easy that way. :wink: My guess is that Joe probably picks his setlist based on what he thinks the audience wants to hear, along with some things he personally wants to play.

However, I am a bit baffled over why Joe isn't playing more songs from Analog Man on this tour. When I saw him in Vienna last week, he hardly made mention of the album. IMO, four songs would be about perfect. Since the comparison was made to Glenn's After Hours tour, I'll weigh in on that as well. Even though I know a lot of folks here don't agree with me, I personally felt Glenn did too many songs from the album on his recent mini-tour. I think that many slow songs all bunched up together brought down Glenn's usual high-energy live show. For me, part of the live show experience is seeing the audience really get into the show, and I just didn't feel that at some of the After Hours shows (Borderers excluded, of course). I think 4 -5 songs from a new album is about right for an artist (Timothy's Expando-heavy shows being an exception). So for me, there's not enough Analog Man from Joe, and too much After Hours from Glenn. But, the bottom line is that won't stop me from going to see them or make me love them any less.

One more thing I wanted to say is that there is no way I believe any of the Eagles are still touring collectively or solo is just for the money. I'm not saying it's not a factor, but no one will ever make me believe it is the main reason. These guys are pretty wealthy, if they didn't love what they were doing, they would just rest on their laurels, fade off into the sunset, and live the rest of their lives doing what they want to do. And that's my point - I believe they are living their lives doing exactly what they want to do. And I say kudos to them - I think they've earned that right! I just wish it were me. :thumbsup:

Dreamer, I agree with you on most of this. I really would be happy to see any of the guys solo shows & would be Ok with pretty much whatever they chose to play, but I had one exception this year & that is Glenn's show, which I heard was very heavy on the new album, After Hours.
I could have gone to see Glenn, as he played in NYC, but I am not really nuts about the songs on the new album. I am just not into these old songs or this style of music. I then made the choice to pass on his solo show this year. I think Glenn has a lot of material to pick from, both from the Eagles & his solo work, but I knew this tour was a lot of After Hours, which is not my favorite.

As for Don, Tim or Joe, well, I think I could be happy with whatever they wanted to play. I did find it disappointing that Joe didn't do more from Analog Man, but I do love Joe's old songs. Whatever his reasons were for not doing more of it, who knows???
Timothy's show was very heavy on Expando, but that was OK with me. I did love that he threw in some Eagles, Poco & I think just, The Shadow off an old album. Tim is my exception, as I can watch him do anything, but he really just has less material to choose from. I loved his show this year, so I was very happy with what he chose to play!
I have seen Don's solo show a few times, but not lately, but I do recall that I was happy with his selection of songs. Don also has a huge selection of material to pick from & he always played his best songs, as I recall.

Ive always been a dreamer
08-25-2012, 12:32 PM
I could have gone to see Glenn, as he played in NYC, but I am not really nuts about the songs on the new album. I am just not into these old songs or this style of music. I then made the choice to pass on his solo show this year. I think Glenn has a lot of material to pick from, both from the Eagles & his solo work, but I knew this tour was a lot of After Hours, which is not my favorite.

Yeah - Tk ... That's why I think 4 or 5 new songs from an artist is about right. Too much new stuff, no matter how good it is, is probably not going to appeal to the majority of the audience. Conversely, if the artist is promoting a new album, I think most folks expect to hear some new material.

However, these guys are so wonderful to me that I'll go see them no matter what they play. Even though Glenn's After Hours setlist is far from my favorite of his, and I was disappointed that I didn't hear more Analog Man from Joe, I'm such a hardcore fan that I still found their shows to be awesome. :partytime:

Topkat
08-25-2012, 05:51 PM
Yeah - Tk ... That's why I think 4 or 5 new songs from an artist is about right. Too much new stuff, no matter how good it is, is probably not going to appeal to the majority of the audience. Conversely, if the artist is promoting a new album, I think most folks expect to hear some new material.

Oh, I don't mind hearing some new stuff & I would expect Glenn to promote the new album, but "After Hours" is just very different from all his other material. If he did 4 songs from AH, I think I could be okay with that, but from what I was hearing about his show, it was a lot more than that. I guess I am just not as big a fan of Glenn, as maybe some of the other Eagles, so for me it was not much of a sacrifice to pass on this show ( ducks & runs). I do love a lot of Glenn's solo works, but just not the AH album.

Freypower
08-25-2012, 05:53 PM
He could have played the entire album & I would not have cared.

Most of the songs are 'old' but it is what he does with them that's important.

Ive always been a dreamer
08-26-2012, 12:23 PM
I hear ya, FP, but, unfortunately, I'd bet good money that your opinion is not reflective of the majority of Glenn's audience. As I said before, the average audience tends to get into the show more when they hear the hits. But, I guess deciding on the setlist is always a challenge for the artist - you can't please all the people all the time, that's for sure.

VAisForEagleLovers
08-26-2012, 01:55 PM
I agree, Dreamer, that FP's opinion probably doesn't match most on this board. However, it matches mine!!!

Brooke
08-26-2012, 02:33 PM
It used to be that most bands toured for a new album and then played several songs from that new album along with the standard hits. If I were going to a show that had been promoted as a tour for the new album, I would expect to hear a lot of new songs. If I didn't want to hear the new album in concert, then I wouldn't have gone to that particular show. KWIM?

I don't know, being a diehard Eagles fan may make us different than casual fans, but if the casual fan has done any research at all before buying a ticket, surely they would know if there were going to be new songs played or not. And surely, with ticket prices these days, the casual fan would surely check that out before buying. So, don't be upset if the band plays songs you don't know. :shrug:

sodascouts
08-26-2012, 02:48 PM
I think most folks have certain songs they expect to hear, and will be disappointed if they don't hear - the big hits. However, most folks also expect to have a few songs they don't know sprinkled in. It's typically acceptable to a casual fan to hear a few songs they don't know as long as those songs aren't in the majority, and the artist still plays the hits that the audience loves.

VAisForEagleLovers
08-26-2012, 02:50 PM
I was thinking about this earlier today. I remember reading a lot of reviews (critics, not fans) of shows for our guys leading up to their concert here in DC back in 2008. And typing that number in has me thinking it's been WWAAAYYYYYYY too long since they've been here. But I digress. As concert time was coming up, I read a lot reviews from other cities and our guys were highly criticized for playing songs off LROOE. Apparently fans don't want to hear the Eagles play songs they've never heard before. They come to hear the hits. Other bands can get away with that, but not bands like the Eagles. When people pay that amount of money for a ticket, they should hear the hits. The Washington Post put in a review after the concert that read exactly the same and I sent a lot of emails over it.

Of course, our guys can't win. I've read reviews from other cities more recently where they were criticized for cranking out the hits and nothing else. I guess it doesn't matter what they do, they're wrong.

sodascouts
08-26-2012, 03:00 PM
I was thinking about this earlier today. I remember reading a lot of reviews (critics, not fans) of shows for our guys leading up to their concert here in DC back in 2008. And typing that number in has me thinking it's been WWAAAYYYYYYY too long since they've been here. But I digress. As concert time was coming up, I read a lot reviews from other cities and our guys were highly criticized for playing songs off LROOE. Apparently fans don't want to hear the Eagles play songs they've never heard before. They come to hear the hits. Other bands can get away with that, but not bands like the Eagles. When people pay that amount of money for a ticket, they should hear the hits. The Washington Post put in a review after the concert that read exactly the same and I sent a lot of emails over it.

Of course, our guys can't win. I've read reviews from other cities more recently where they were criticized for cranking out the hits and nothing else. I guess it doesn't matter what they do, they're wrong.

Yeah, but back in 2008, they were playing NINE songs off of LROOE, one of which was 10 minutes long. I can see why some casual fans might feel that's a bit much, although I loved it.

The key is balance: not to go too far one way or the other.

Ive always been a dreamer
08-26-2012, 03:25 PM
ITA Soda about the key being balance. Yes, us hardcores always love to hear the new stuff - often times, the more ... the better for us. But, as we've often said, we are not the majority of the audience. In the case of LROOE, the band started out playing that many songs, maybe to test to see how they played. As we all know, several of them were quickly dropped, and then eventually, the setlist dwindled down to only about 4 LROOE songs. I maintain that as a general rule, 4 -5 songs seems to be safe - enough to meet the expectations of those that want to hear new stuff, but not too much to lose the casual fans.

Freypower
08-26-2012, 07:07 PM
It used to be that most bands toured for a new album and then played several songs from that new album along with the standard hits. If I were going to a show that had been promoted as a tour for the new album, I would expect to hear a lot of new songs. If I didn't want to hear the new album in concert, then I wouldn't have gone to that particular show. KWIM?

I don't know, being a diehard Eagles fan may make us different than casual fans, but if the casual fan has done any research at all before buying a ticket, surely they would know if there were going to be new songs played or not. And surely, with ticket prices these days, the casual fan would surely check that out before buying. So, don't be upset if the band plays songs you don't know. :shrug:

Agreed.

This 'casual fan' stuff has gone way out of proportion & I don't know why these people are supposed to be more important and why they have to be catered to before real fans.

My opinion of the After Hours setlist may not be shared by many people apart from VA, but I stand by what I believe; that it was incredibly challenging and exhillarating, and I felt the same way when I heard a lot of songs from LROOE, some of which were then unceremoniously dropped the very next night, leaving us with all the usual stuff.

I don't know what to say to people who thought there were too many songs from After Hours except that I am sorry they feel that way.

Quite honestly I am not sure what the appeal of the upcoming shows in Atlantic City is with the current shortened & predicitable setlist. And please don't say 'we get to look at them'. That's all very well. I've seen that stuff often enough now. If I ever see them again I want something different just as I was lucky enough to have with Glenn.

sodascouts
08-26-2012, 07:18 PM
Quite honestly I am not sure what the appeal of the upcoming shows in Atlantic City is with the current shortened & predicitable setlist. And please don't say 'we get to look at them'. That's all very well. I've seen that stuff often enough now. If I ever see them again I want something different just as I was lucky enough to have with Glenn.

The appeal for me is that I'll be seeing them in a relatively small venue, which is quite rare... not that I "get to look at them." Geez.

Freypower
08-26-2012, 07:25 PM
The type of venue is irrelevant to me as I hardly have any choice. Fair enough. I knew I shouldn't have said anything. :-(

sodascouts
08-26-2012, 07:29 PM
Just try to be considerate in how you phrase your comments, FP. I'm sure you didn't mean it to sound like you were pouring contempt on the people who chose to go to AC, but that's how it came across to me.

Ive always been a dreamer
08-26-2012, 08:59 PM
I agree Soda. FP, even if it wasn't mean to be, your remarks come across as very judgmental. No one should feel compelled to explain why they are going to the Atlantic City show. But for the record, I am going because I want to see the band. I don't know if that's the same thing as 'we get to look at them', but if it is, then so be it. It's my time and my money so I don't feel I need to have a reason other than I want to go.

And as far as the 'casual fan stuff', I don't think the issue is because "these people are supposed to be more important and why they have to be catered to before real fans" - I think the issue is that they outnumber the hardcores by a lot ... it's kinda the concept of 'majority rules'.

Henley Honey
08-27-2012, 09:27 AM
Quite honestly I am not sure what the appeal of the upcoming shows in Atlantic City is with the current shortened & predicitable setlist. And please don't say 'we get to look at them'. That's all very well. I've seen that stuff often enough now. If I ever see them again I want something different just as I was lucky enough to have with Glenn.


For me, the journey is the appeal. The anticipation, the travel, meeting new people with shared interests, and knowing that at the end of that journey I have the priviledge of seeing an always-stellar peformance from an extraordinary group of musicians. Same setlist or different setlist -- it doesn't matter to me. No two performances are the same. The energy is different, the audience is different. How the band interacts with each other and with the audience is different. Subtle changes can have an enormous effect on the overall experience. It never gets old for me.
I also realize that a 2013 tour is not guaranteed. I'd rather live in the moment and enjoy the experience to the fullest. Plus, it's just plain fun!

luvthelighthouse
08-27-2012, 11:01 AM
While I will not be going to AC...if the band was close to me, I'd see them again... shortened set list and all. I just enjoy live music. To me, I listen to their CD's so much... so the concept of "what is the appeal" is lost on me. CD or live, I just like the Eagles and don't mind hearing their stuff over and over.

I would have liked to have seen Joe when he was close by, but I had something else going on. While seeing them individually certainly would be fun, I perosnally, perfer them as a group. (Except for TBS, because I just felt that was an unusal treat since he hasn't done the solo thing prior to Expando) :smile:

TimothyBFan
08-27-2012, 11:31 AM
And as far as the 'casual fan stuff', I don't think the issue is because "these people are supposed to be more important and why they have to be catered to before real fans" - I think the issue is that they outnumber the hardcores by a lot ... it's kinda the concept of 'majority rules'.

I've been thinking all morning about this whole "casual fan" thing.

I guess by some people's standards (especially here on the board), I might be considered a "casual fan" since I don't see them live often or travel great lengths to do so. But, I don't consider myself that at all. I know a lot more than most people do about them, I've bought all there stuff on album, 8 track, cassette, cd, dvd, etc... I have a collection of bootlegs, posters, autographs, memorabilia, etc..... Have spent lots of money on them for almost 4 decades. But I truly believe that without the casual fan, the Eagles would be no where close to the historical band they are today. Afterall, like Dreamer says above they are the majority for sure and for a concert, it's going to take more than the "diehard" fans to fill an arena.

So I guess where I'm going with this is that I totally get where they would play what the "casual fan" wants to hear (the hits they hear on the radio and are familiar with) more than what the "diehard fan" wants to hear (the new albums we pre-order and listen to over and over again because, afterall, it is our favorite band). That's where the BIG money is coming from. Just my opinion, of course.

Troubadour
08-27-2012, 12:17 PM
It's tricky, isn't it. I'm like Deb in the sense that I'm usually pretty happy to take what I can get when it comes to the guys, but I think, as Soda said, there should be balance. When Neil Young went on stage years ago and played the entire Tonight's The Night album from beginning to end, refusing to play any tracks from Harvest, he got booed and people were fuming and demanding their money back. Whether you agree with it or not, it is generally expected that at least some hits will be played. I don't think it is just the casual fans who want to hear the hits either; I think quite a few of us "hardcore" fans would be a bit disappointed if we didn't hear Lyin' Eyes or Take It To The Limit at an Eagles show!

Most musicians will say that, although they want to play newer stuff too, they would never disrespect their old, successful songs because they allowed them to get to where they are now. Those songs mean a lot to fans on an emotional level and I'm sure they actually enjoy playing the old hits and feeling the intense reaction from the audience. In a sense, I think it's like a little thank you for sticking with them for so many years.

It is a bit of a shame that Joe isn't playing a few more songs from Analog Man, but I have no explanation for that. Maybe he just thinks other songs play better in a live show and he feels that the tour might be enough to whet some appetites... Who knows! I will say that Joe's solo show in Tulsa back in May was fantastic and he seemed genuinely happy, content, and very pleased with where he is at the moment musically and personally. I don't think for one second it's that he has a crippling lack of confidence in his new material, even if it comes across that way.

Topkat
08-27-2012, 04:08 PM
It's tricky, isn't it. I'm like Deb in the sense that I'm usually pretty happy to take what I can get when it comes to the guys, but I think, as Soda said, there should be balance. When Neil Young went on stage years ago and played the entire Tonight's The Night album from beginning to end, refusing to play any tracks from Harvest, he got booed and people were fuming and demanding their money back. Whether you agree with it or not, it is generally expected that at least some hits will be played. I don't think it is just the casual fans who want to hear the hits either; I think quite a few of us "hardcore" fans would be a bit disappointed if we didn't hear Lyin' Eyes or Take It To The Limit at an Eagles show!

Most musicians will say that, although they want to play newer stuff too, they would never disrespect their old, successful songs because they allowed them to get to where they are now. Those songs mean a lot to fans on an emotional level and I'm sure they actually enjoy playing the old hits and feeling the intense reaction from the audience. In a sense, I think it's like a little thank you for sticking with them for so many years.

.

Funny you should mention Neil Young, because when I saw him once a long time ago, some fan was yelling out a song he wanted to hear & Neil went ballistic! He just stopped right in the middle of a song & says something like, "I have planned exactly what I will be playing. Don't you think I know what to play, so don't tell me what to do" Then he put the guitar down & walked off the stage. I guess someone talked him into going back on stage, but he didn't come back for about 10 minutes.

I think performers do get irritated by people yelling out songs to them. They obviously come prepared & Neil was pretty much over reacting, but I think others get annoyed with that stuff too. I would never do this, but I have seen & heard it pretty LOUDLY at some concerts! Some fans just do not SHUT UP until they hear what they wanna hear!

VAisForEagleLovers
08-27-2012, 04:12 PM
Funny you should mention Neil Young, because when I saw him once a long time ago, some fan was yelling out a song he wanted to hear & Neil went ballistic! He just stopped right in the middle of a song & says something like, "I have planned exactly what I will be playing. Don't you think I know what to play, so don't tell me what to do" Then he put the guitar down & walked off the stage. I guess someone talked him into going back on stage, but he didn't come back for about 10 minutes.

I think performers do get irritated by people yelling out songs to them. They obviously come prepared & Neil was pretty much over reacting, but I think others get annoyed with that stuff too. I would never do this, but I have seen & heard it pretty LOUDLY at some concerts! Some fans just do not SHUT UP until they hear what they wanna hear!

Like the chick at Glenn's DC concert who wanted to hear I Found Somebody. She went up to the stage and just kept saying it over and over and it really bothered the people on that side of the stage. Like me. He just ignored her for the most part and we all wondered where security was.

Brooke
08-27-2012, 04:39 PM
That is just so rude. How can they not realize what fools they are making of themselves? Not to mention how distracting it is for the performer and the audience! :thumbsdown:

Troubadour
08-27-2012, 05:09 PM
Oh, I agree. It is rude and there is absolutely no need for it. It's like they are going to the show purely to hear that song, which is a far cry from going to a show and enjoying both old and new. Someone kept calling out 'I Can't Tell You Why' at Timothy's show in London (I mentioned it in my review), which was both annoying and insulting, especially as this was a solo show and the song was a band song. Thankfully 99% of the audience were there to enjoy Tim's new solo efforts as well as the few Eagles tunes he played, but it must be frustrating for the performer at times.

Topkat
08-27-2012, 06:29 PM
I know that I get totally pissed off when people do this. It is so rude & annoying to the people at the show & I can't even imagine how the performer must feel. If I was on stage I would probably say something, like Neil did, but walking off the stage was a bit much. You can tell that he was just so angry that this person had the nerve to yell out a song title right in the middle of him singing another song!! It was so obnoxious!!

I can imagine that Timothy would have been annoyed as well. He always does " I Can't Tell You Why" as far as I know, so there is no need to yell it out at him! Hell, he knows everyone wants to hear it. There is always one IDIOT that has to spoil things for everyone else!

Ive always been a dreamer
08-27-2012, 10:02 PM
I've been thinking all morning about this whole "casual fan" thing.

I guess by some people's standards (especially here on the board), I might be considered a "casual fan" since I don't see them live often or travel great lengths to do so. But, I don't consider myself that at all. I know a lot more than most people do about them, I've bought all there stuff on album, 8 track, cassette, cd, dvd, etc... I have a collection of bootlegs, posters, autographs, memorabilia, etc..... Have spent lots of money on them for almost 4 decades. But I truly believe that without the casual fan, the Eagles would be no where close to the historical band they are today. Afterall, like Dreamer says above they are the majority for sure and for a concert, it's going to take more than the "diehard" fans to fill an arena.

So I guess where I'm going with this is that I totally get where they would play what the "casual fan" wants to hear (the hits they hear on the radio and are familiar with) more than what the "diehard fan" wants to hear (the new albums we pre-order and listen to over and over again because, afterall, it is our favorite band). That's where the BIG money is coming from. Just my opinion, of course.

Yep Willie - speaking for myself, that bolded part of your post makes you a hardcore in my book. And you didn't even mention your Border obsession! :wink:

EaglesKiwi
08-27-2012, 11:24 PM
Oh, I agree. It is rude and there is absolutely no need for it. It's like they are going to the show purely to hear that song, which is a far cry from going to a show and enjoying both old and new. Someone kept calling out 'I Can't Tell You Why' at Timothy's show in London (I mentioned it in my review), which was both annoying and insulting, especially as this was a solo show and the song was a band song. Thankfully 99% of the audience were there to enjoy Tim's new solo efforts as well as the few Eagles tunes he played, but it must be frustrating for the performer at times.
I'm with you on that. When I saw the Eagles someone was yelling out over and over again for Rocky Mountain Way - fortunately in between songs rather than during. I really wanted to turn round & yell back, "you can see the talk box tube, just keep your pants on and WAIT FOR IT already!".

Or, I could have just yelled at him, "Get Over It!" :lol: Might have been a bit subtle, though...

Tiffanny Twisted
08-28-2012, 06:54 AM
i HATE REUDE PEOPLE AT CONCERTS WHO RUIN IT FOR EVERYONE ELSE WHO IS THERE TO ENJOY THE SHOW. I FDONT CARE WHAT THEY PLAY I JUST WANNA ENJOY THE MOMENT OF SEEING THEM LIVE.

I ALSO KNOW THEY MAKE THERI MONEY ON POPLE SPENDING 10.00 FOR A BEER BUT COME ON I AM THERE FOR THE MUSIC SHOW....NOT THE IDIOT SHOW OF POPLE WHO HAVE TO MUCH TO DRINK AND GET OBNOXIOUS.

TT