just spent the last few days listening to boots and watching boots from different eras...and i have to agree with the man himself " the band has never sounded better"....many will argue about the declining skills and fewer long intros, solos etc...but the band as a unit is in top form

....expecting to be slagged but it is mho

peter

Bruce may believe it, but the emperor does not have new clothes.

More fluffed notes these days and the overall mix on live shows is horrible (plays havoc with recordings) It's all a bit of mush. Sound-wise the rot set in on the River tour. In '78 the sound was crisper and the band tighter. Hence the decent recordings from the era - even given the primitive equipment and media (C90s!) So, even if they are better - we can’t tell.

In particular Max had lost all the subtlety in his work and even Roy seems to be declining - I winced at Hyde Park during Racing. Nils and Steve seem to fight for space. On the plus side, Charlie has added something and Garry is as solid as ever. Sadly the Big Man is more of a totem than a musician these days. It's nice to have a violin on stage ( shades of Suki) but some of the Jungleland intro's have been horrible.
Viv adds nothing these days unless she's not there.

Having said that I'm still pleased they can perform at a pretty decent level and Bruce is prepared to trawl the back catalogue. There are far more surprises these days - 70's set lists were remarkably static. I'm sure if SPL was around then we'd all be complaining about something

yes complaining is one our strong points.....otherwise we'd be glers or something

i agree the mix at a live show can be quite bad depending on where you are in the venue...particularly the stadiums

I disagree with about everything in your post, apologies

IMO the band in ´78 played a lot faster, not necessarily tighter, on the contrary, some of the songs played faster than on the record are often close to falling apart. Lots of more excitement, though, sure, still I think the combined playing as a band is much tighter today.

Disagree about Max and Charlie as well. Max's drumming has become much more powerful yet steady and swinging which may be an age thing but I think he is more impressive a drummer today than on the 70s and 80s boots. Charlie is horrible, playing by the numbers, if one hadn't realized what a brilliant band musician Danny was (listen to the first record on headphones, For You especially) before, just compare a decent sounding boot (where the keyboard is listenable) from 2007 with one from 2008 or 2009. Or just Charlie's Independence Day intro from MSG 2, or any Hungry Heart solo or or or....He may be a technically talented musician but that's about it, the classic difference between band member musician and session musician, Charlie will always be the latter.

Agree about the women on stage, though, except for the JL intro, they are of absolutely no use, musically.

Overall there is of course a musical routine that can't be measured against the wildness of the ´78 and ´80/´81 shows, but I would not say the band was playing "better" back then...

Yeah I'll chime in too.

First and foremost, Patrick is correct - Charlie makes me realize how amazing Danny was and how essential his playing was to the overall E Street sound. Charlie seems to lack the subtelty and sensibility that Danny had. In live shows and even more so on boots, I 'notice' the organ much more than before, and - more often than not - I don't care for it. To explain it all away with the 'mix' is to discredit Danny.

I agree that the band seemed 'tighter' back then, but I think that's a function of Bruce's apparent decision that quantity is more important to today's audience than quality. Rather than show off his prowess as a band leader by showcasing complex arrangements full of intricacies and nuance (something I think Bruce correctly realizes would be lost on today's ADD/ADHD audiences), Bruce seems to focus on his band's ability to rip through the catalog on a whim. And also the fact that shows are in arenas and stadiums these days rather than theaters, Bruce correctly recognizes subtlety is lost in a big room.

I listened to Main Point 75 the other day and marvelled at Bruce's showmanship - it even comes through on a bootleg. Could today's E Street pull that off? One thing's for sure - it would take practice, which doesn't seem to be the current modus operandi on E Street these days.

That`s because Charlie is actually playing single notes the way the music would be transcripted to a note sheet instead of interpreting, on Independence Day, for example, it's like "Dude, you have learned the notes, fine, now start playing the song"...

I have never accepted the switch in Bruce's singing style that kicked in many years ago. The emphasis and intonation he places on the lyrics while singing, more so than the slowing down of the songs, is a major detraction.

I must say that I haven't really been bothered too much the last couple of years (though the '08 Barcelona shows were truly magnificent).

Last night, however, I decided to take a break from the remastered Bond DVD's and old Hammer Horror movies and I watched a few of the Bruce DVD's I got off ebay last year (can't be arsed downloading this stuff - I only download movies with big boobs in, like any self-respecting man) and I was blown away. The fine Argentinian wine and the seafood might have helped but I really got into it.

It was an NYC Bitch Committee 19th April 2009 show at the Spectrum and then re-watched Glastonbury - first time since watching the actual broadcast. The band sounded great. Was funny to watch the band's facial expressions during Jay Weinberg's high-tempo versions of The Rising and Lonesome Day from the Philadelphia show. I think Springsteen was really enjoying it, though.

I still miss Danny though. A certain fluidity of touch is missing, as good as Charlie is. The intro to Spirit in the Night at Nou Camp was just wrong, somehow.

So, I can see where you're comin from Peter, but any ultimate version of the E Street Band's gotta have Danny in there. He was always my favourite.

Hi Patrick,

You may find this hard to believe, but Danny isn't on the first record at all! Maybe he wasn't deemed disciplined enough for the studio or something. The organ must be Sancious.

PS Did you hear that Faber and Faber are pleading with Moz for his autobiography? Could be more than interesting...

Thanks, TM, for wiping away all my alleged expert credibility in two lines!

Charlie Giordano still sucks....

Dead on comment. It's not what you play. It's how you play it. Or as they put it in another era, "It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing." Playing rock, jazz, r&B isn't just playing the right notes. It's the feeling. Danny had that feeling. Charlie doesn't.

As for the band as a whole, I'm more with the "it ain't like it used to be" comments. Gary and Nils are still as great as ever. The rest of the band isn't. Clarence is obviously not what he once was. Steve is nowhere near as good a guitarist as he was in the BTR, Darkness, and River tours. Max has better learned how to be always right there with the right beat, but the energy level isn't as high and intense. As for Suzi, she's fine on the songs from Rising and Magic since those songs were written with her parts in mind. On the older songs, she sometimes is a welcome addition and sometimes a real drag and distraction. Patti's only purpose is as a harmony singer on certain songs and Suzi or Nils can fill that part almost all the time.

good point! if one compares his singing in the ghost of tom joad acoustic and electric one hears the foll voice and the rock voice of bruce. the rock voice has unfortunately got some folk rock additions like in latter day versions of darkness on the edge of town. in the 70´s and 80´s bruce only had the rock voice and it worked fine on nebraska songs as well!

another thing is the loss of clarity and high pitch in bruce´s voice, comes with age sure but this imho makes it impossible for the band today to surpass old live versions from the 70´s and 80´s.

Think there is a story from the drummer/pianist rehearsals when Danny was in there picking a new painist. Guy from Julliard auditions and after the audition he asks Danny to give him lessons. He was, according to Danny, a technically excellent musician, but he didn't have the 'swing', or as the modern parlance goes - the X Factor.

I posted yesterday and figured I'd leave it 36 hours before checking back. Very pleased to see some proper debate and disageements without things getting personal.

I must admit Danny's contribution is often overlooked. There's a warmth to his playing that Bruce always valued. Mind you, Charlie has carried the baton really well and played in sympathy with Danny's style rather than showing off his superior technical ability. It's a difficult call to make - we wouldn't want anyone pretending to be Danny, likewise someone else's style (or swing) would have distracted. I think Charlie has judged it just about right.

One thing we might actaully all agree on is that the tempo on Thunder Road in recent years is way too slow - now that really was better back in the day.

Women on stage? it worked in '88 on Boom Boom but that's about it.

charley vs danny is a no win for charley no matter what he does...he is a bit more ffront and center than danny was but it's just not the same sound as with danny. howver an organ player is needed and he fits in well with the rest of the lineup

Superior technical ability? Huh?

When you compare the 78-85 performances with 09+ , it becomes clear that the intentions are good, the will to surprise is there, but the hunger is gone. I have enjoyed seeing the long lost songs reappear in the setlist, but the performance and drive just aren't there. There's no way today's band is superior to the band pre-85.

For kicks, I'm going back and delight in what once was.

Touring a good part of the decade with more than 400 concerts, regularly 3 hour shows with sometimes more than 30 songs but the hunger is gone? They must have been very hungry before 85...

As far as I understood the initial question aimed at the band's playing abilities as individuals and as a group, right? Nobody is saying that a 2009 ESB concert experience would be superior to a '78 show...

For my two penny ...

I think the band sounds better than ever - I really beleive this.
As for Charlie well no-one can replace Danny's (my hero) natural intuitive play and Charles can come accross a little heavy handed sometimes but shit - how long has he been in the band ? - how do you learn to play someting not written down ? - trust me this guy is a fucking great musician - give him time to grow and he will come up trumps and will shine. Bruce trusts him and thats enough said ?!

Rgarding 78 - yes the one year I never saw the band and regret it - but lets be realistic here - look at the material Bruce can call on now ! - its was a limited show in 78 nes pas ? - Now in the 2000s its the skys the limit and yet we still get Thundercrack etc - so the band is old (VERY OLD in some circumstances) and yes we dont have the power and youthfulness of 78 but we a seriously good live and studio band - who and lets not forget this can probably (if they have to !) wipe the floor with any band on the face of the earth - the band are at their peak and will get better. Oxygen permitting. -