Skip to main content

Closed12 replies

Does the Internet make concerts less enjoyable?

T The_TheStolen Car
Last night I went to a Wyclef Jean concert. Other than that he used to be a Fugee, I knew nothing about him.

The show was amazing--he had tons of energy, inviting all of the women in the place onto the stage, heading to the balcony at the back of the room to sing a song, and just putting forth the amount of energy that we like to think of as exclusive to Bruce.

Afterwards I realized how refreshing it was just to go to a show and enjoy the music. I didn't spend any time thinking about

-how good my seats would be
-whether he'd play anyhting I hadn't heard live before
-what song to use for a bathroom break
-whether the setlist would be posted
-what the knights of the setlist thread though about a show that they hadn't seen

I'd just gone and enjoyed watching a great performer put on a live show.

Are we more likely to enjoy a concert when we don't know much about what's going to be played? I'm thinking when it comes to info about what a musician is playing in concert, the answer is yes.

I hadn't been paying much attention to the setlists before I saw my first show on this Springsteen tour (DC). Nor had had I listened to any boots. While it was a great setlist and my seats were fantastic (first row, against the divider, of regular GA), I think the show was one of my favorite Springsteen shows because I didn't know what to expect. Everything was an audible.

Has anyone else had a similar experience, where remaining ignorant about the setlist made for a better show?
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

S SwitchbladeLoverMember
Having seen setlists before going to a show has definitely had a negative effect on several shows that I attended, making them too predictable. I have stopped looking at setlists prior to attending shows. I also don't listen to boots of a current tour before attending shows.
Of course, your question also extends to attending several shows on the same tour.

Can you deny, there's nothing greater
Nothing more than the traveling hands of time?

chancechanceRagamuffin Gunner
A. This belongs in General, and you know it.

B. It's a skewed question. The Internet isn't the culprit in ruining a concert - WE are. Message boards are built around people obsessing, and that obsessiveness - about the setlist, about how well the boot will turn out, about the reaction to the show - we shove down one another's throats at every turn. The Internet can only make a concert less enjoyable if you let it. No one forces anyone to come here or the Lake (I think BTX does threaten family members for membership). The man's been performing the same way for 30 odd years - a formed setlist with interchanging song spots. Common sense tells you going to a message board at any point will clue you in to what that form is. And yes, the argument is there that without the Internet it would stay hidden, but the pros outweigh the cons - boots are readily available, art is readily available. You can only harm yourself. It's really a question as to how much you want to deny yourself a simple pleasure. And why. And that's a question for a different type of message board.
T timdMember
I personally think it makes it more difficult for the performer. Now the performer must find a way to keep it fresh and really pull something out of the bag of tricks to surprise us. It keeps them on their toes. Bruce seems to do this though and then of course the raw energy you get at a live show cannot be captured on a bootleg no matter how good it is.
JoadJoadDuke Street King
Well, I am no "setlistfag" studying the setlists posted on the board, so for me the setlist in Stockholm felt very fresh and enjoyable and well constructed. All I expected was it to start with "Radio Nowhere" and end with "American Land", the rest was new for me. And I believe I enjoyed the concert more this way.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey kid, you think that's oil? Man, that ain't oil that's blood

R rainoneMember
It's the ones that take you by surprise that are always the best. The internet is screwing this up giving access to everyones opinion with "minutes after" reviews that provide every bit of information you want (or don't) before you realise you do (or don't). This is then followed by analysis from everywhere all sorted and laid out in an easy to find format by the likes of Google. What chance do we have of going to a major artists show and been taken by surprise - and what chance does the artist have of surprising?

It's the ones that take you by surprise that are always the best, that in itself is encouraging for music; if you take chances and just turn up - much in the same way that you used to buy an LP because the cover looked good.
Bobby_GBobby_GHoney I'm...
Originally Posted By: rainone
It's the ones that take you by surprise that are always the best, that in itself is encouraging for music; if you take chances and just turn up - much in the same way that you used to buy an LP because the cover looked good.


This is an excellent point. In the Spring of 2006, I was very busy with a project at work, then had to go to Europe for 6 weeks to finish it. I had very little contact with what was going on in BruceLand.

Two days after I got back to NJ, I was lucky enough to get a ticket to the first Seeger rehearsal show at Convention Hall in Asbury Park. I had absolutely no idea what to expect. From the first notes of 'Long Black Veil' to the end, I was blown away. The element of surprise at that show was exhilarating.

I think part of the reason I haven't liked the current tour so much is becuase of the familiar, expected ESB concert rituals, which I've come to expect, reinforced by the up-to-the-second setlist reporting on the internet.
P pk56Tougher Than The Rest
I agree. This time I just had tickets for the O2 and deliberately stayed clear of any boards,newsgroups and websites for the whole duration of the tour. Being the last show of the tour it was like being in a monastery for 3 months but the end result was that I enjoyed it much more than I would have done. It was like coming up into the light after months of darkness. Sure, looking at the setlists since Wednesday I'd loved to have seen him do Kitty's Back instead of Jungleland, but in fact that was one of the highlights of the show.

The thing that stuck me when I started reading some of the posts was the amount of negativity, mainly from people who had been to or downloaded several shows. I don't think that some people know how lucky/privileged they are to be able to afford the time/money to attend several shows.

I'll definitely be abstaining again once the next section of the tour starts, until it reaches the Emirates.

E Street Band - the new American resistance

C chrisMember
someone said it before: it?s what you make out of it. of course you know several songs beeing played if you read setlists before. but do you enjoy "reason to believe" less when you already heard it. i heard it before the gig and was looking forward to that song. and it could not have been better when not knowing it.

when i attend gigs from other artists, i hope for songs, too, not having an idea of the setlist, i could be sure to get some magic songs from bruce and i couldn?t expect the older songs he plays.

you always hope for a "rosalita", even if you didn?t read the setlists before.
Views: 275
Post

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×

Access to this requires a premium membership.

SPL VIP

We do not sell VIP memberships at this time.

$25.00 per 12 Months (plus tax if applicable)
×