Spoiled by Pearl Jam

imca43

So last year wife and I saw Metallica in Philly. we just got back from Smashing Pumpkins in Philly. Each band played 3 hours like PJ and the pumpkins played 31 songs. the last 3 shows for PJ that we saw in philly all ran 3 hours 30+- songs. Upon doing some research before and after this most recent pumpkins concert and metallica last year, they play the same show night after night with very little variance in songs. I know this has allot to do with elaborate stage shows and lighting. I had once heard that Eddie writes the setlist an hour before the show and i must say, that is awesome. I love the fact that each show is different and unique. Not the same exact 30 songs grinded out show after show. Dont get me wrong metallica and pumpkins shows where great but knowing its the exact same show the rest of the country got takes away some of the magic. 

we also noticed that throughout town and at pumpkins show there was not that electricity and comrade that we notice for PJ shows. We're from central NY and love making trips down there for shows.  So at this point, we truely feel spoiled by PJ and their shows. 

Oh and back to the 3 hours, i heard people at the smashing pumpkins concert and reviews online that 3 hours was too long for a concert. Heres a tip, please dont buy a ticket next time. Who in their right mind would complain that 3 hours is too long to see a rock band that you paid for. Especially to the tune of $150 a ticket. 

cincybearcat

It's recently been reported that Metallica uses Spotify to see what songs are the most popular in that area and do change the setlists....is this not correct?

lolobugg

imca43 said:

So last year wife and I saw Metallica in Philly. we just got back from Smashing Pumpkins in Philly. Each band played 3 hours like PJ and the pumpkins played 31 songs. the last 3 shows for PJ that we saw in philly all ran 3 hours 30+- songs. Upon doing some research before and after this most recent pumpkins concert and metallica last year, they play the same show night after night with very little variance in songs. I know this has allot to do with elaborate stage shows and lighting. I had once heard that Eddie writes the setlist an hour before the show and i must say, that is awesome. I love the fact that each show is different and unique. Not the same exact 30 songs grinded out show after show. Dont get me wrong metallica and pumpkins shows where great but knowing its the exact same show the rest of the country got takes away some of the magic. 

we also noticed that throughout town and at pumpkins show there was not that electricity and comrade that we notice for PJ shows. We're from central NY and love making trips down there for shows.  So at this point, we truely feel spoiled by PJ and their shows. 

Oh and back to the 3 hours, i heard people at the smashing pumpkins concert and reviews online that 3 hours was too long for a concert. Heres a tip, please dont buy a ticket next time. Who in their right mind would complain that 3 hours is too long to see a rock band that you paid for. Especially to the tune of $150 a ticket. 

def spoiled.  I enjoyed both bands when I saw them this year and last. I am a huge Pumpkins fan but I agree those shows are missing the magic of the PJ shows. It has a lot to do with the fans!!!!

EM194007

cincybearcat said:

It's recently been reported that Metallica uses Spotify to see what songs are the most popular in that area and do change the setlists....is this not correct?

Not 100% sure on spotify. But, on their recent euro tour, they changed up 5 songs on the setlist nightly. Then the rest of the set is played the same every night.

Tristelune

cincybearcat said:

It's recently been reported that Metallica uses Spotify to see what songs are the most popular in that area and do change the setlists....is this not correct?

Looks like a great idea but for some reason I would totally hate that.

uninnocent-

EM194007 said:

cincybearcat said:

It's recently been reported that Metallica uses Spotify to see what songs are the most popular in that area and do change the setlists....is this not correct?

Not 100% sure on spotify. But, on their recent euro tour, they changed up 5 songs on the setlist nightly. Then the rest of the set is played the same every night.

I saw the article over the weekend. Yeah they play variations of the same set, but those variations can be  unexpected rarities, not unlike PJ.
https://consequenceofsound.net/2018/07/metallica-base-setlists-spotify-data/

On a side note, if everyone in Toronto could start listening to The Unforgiven III on repeat for the next year, I'd highly appreciate it.

bootlegger10

imca43 said:

So last year wife and I saw Metallica in Philly. we just got back from Smashing Pumpkins in Philly. Each band played 3 hours like PJ and the pumpkins played 31 songs. the last 3 shows for PJ that we saw in philly all ran 3 hours 30+- songs. Upon doing some research before and after this most recent pumpkins concert and metallica last year, they play the same show night after night with very little variance in songs. I know this has allot to do with elaborate stage shows and lighting. I had once heard that Eddie writes the setlist an hour before the show and i must say, that is awesome. I love the fact that each show is different and unique. Not the same exact 30 songs grinded out show after show. Dont get me wrong metallica and pumpkins shows where great but knowing its the exact same show the rest of the country got takes away some of the magic. 

we also noticed that throughout town and at pumpkins show there was not that electricity and comrade that we notice for PJ shows. We're from central NY and love making trips down there for shows.  So at this point, we truely feel spoiled by PJ and their shows. 

Oh and back to the 3 hours, i heard people at the smashing pumpkins concert and reviews online that 3 hours was too long for a concert. Heres a tip, please dont buy a ticket next time. Who in their right mind would complain that 3 hours is too long to see a rock band that you paid for. Especially to the tune of $150 a ticket. 

I can see how people think 3 hours is long enough.   You can always leave at 2 hours if you wanted, but I guess you may not get to hear the hits they end with . 

PJ_Soul

I totally understand how 3 hours is too long for some people, and I also get why nobody would want to leave a show early even if it's too long for them. I sure don't begrudge people for feeling that way and would never suggest they just not buy a ticket .... I think 3 hours is too long for many simply because most can't keep their energy up for that long, and not for lack of trying, especially when we're talking these aging Gen X crowds. Rock concerts are an intense experience for the senses, and can eventually lead to a kind of sensory overload, which translates into emotional exhaustion for a lot of people. Not to mention physical exhaustion as well, if you're up in the pit.
There is also the other problem that isn't felt everywhere, but does here because of the liquor laws as they apply to the largest arena/stadium venues in the city: the concessions close down when the main act hits the stage. So everyone who is drinking and partying it up before the show and during the opener might have a drink or two stashed under their seat for the main act, but besides that, you can't keep drinking. That leads to a whole lot of hungover people by the 2 hour mark or so. It's really really stupid.

Eddieredder

I saw Candlebox last week. They had two openers and did maybe an hour and fifteen minute set. I do not take these shows for granted. Definitely spoiled. 

pashapasaman

EM194007 said:

cincybearcat said:

It's recently been reported that Metallica uses Spotify to see what songs are the most popular in that area and do change the setlists....is this not correct?

Not 100% sure on spotify. But, on their recent euro tour, they changed up 5 songs on the setlist nightly. Then the rest of the set is played the same every night.

got tired how everytime Metallica ends with Sandman

aurelgugus

I saw the Smashing Pumpkins in 2011 in Luxembourg. The venue was sold out and the crowd was very exited as it was their first show here since 2007.
The setlist was awesome as they played a lot of deep cuts...after the show I realised that the majority of the crowd was pissed because the band played a lot of ‘unknown’ songs.
They came back two years latter and the same venue was half empty.
The fact that Billy Corgan seemed to be bored and basically did not communicate further alienated the crowd.
In my area, a band like the SP attracts essentially casual fans and I think that their crowds are not prepared for revolving setlists where all the staples are not played.

The same can be said with Metallica but the way that they mixe staples with a few deep cuts in rotating slots is what make the majority of people fine. I had to admit that I would be disappointed at a Metallica show without Master of Puppets played.

I saw Candlebox last year in Germany and they played only 80’. We were less than 100 so I don’t want to blame them for performing a short set...Regarding the 25th anniversary shows, the fact that they were played by the original line up probably explains why they played only songs from the first album. However I am sure that I would have been pissed as it was supposed to be exceptional shows.

Eddieredder

aurelgugus said:

I saw the Smashing Pumpkins in 2011 in Luxembourg. The venue was sold out and the crowd was very exited as it was their first show here since 2007.
The setlist was awesome as they played a lot of deep cuts...after the show I realised that the majority of the crowd was pissed because the band played a lot of ‘unknown’ songs.
They came back two years latter and the same venue was half empty.
The fact that Billy Corgan seemed to be bored and basically did not communicate further alienated the crowd.
In my area, a band like the SP attracts essentially casual fans and I think that their crowds are not prepared for revolving setlists where all the staples are not played.

The same can be said with Metallica but the way that they mixe staples with a few deep cuts in rotating slots is what make the majority of people fine. I had to admit that I would be disappointed at a Metallica show without Master of Puppets played.

I saw Candlebox last year in Germany and they played only 80’. We were less than 100 so I don’t want to blame them for performing a short set...Regarding the 25th anniversary shows, the fact that they were played by the original line up probably explains why they played only songs from the first album. However I am sure that I would have been pissed as it was supposed to be exceptional shows.

I wasn't pissed at all. I really enjoyed it. They honestly probably don't have two hours plus of material IMO.

Other bands just do it differently. In comparison I've seen a lot of bands do short sets as well. Not everyone can pull off the three hour show. They don't have the songs, stamina, longevity etc etc. 

pjhawks

I always thought a band playing the same set list would be boring for them after a while. who wants to do the same thing night after night?

PJ_Soul

pjhawks said:

I always thought a band playing the same set list would be boring for them after a while. who wants to do the same thing night after night?

 I think when you're earning that much money in only a couple hours it suddenly becomes a lot more fun, lol.
Plus, I'm sure there is an adrenaline rush involved for most rock stars just being in front of crowds like that, which might keep it un-boring no matter what they're playing.

Stickman24

In a word yes we are spoiled 

aurelgugus

Eddieredder said:

aurelgugus said:

I saw the Smashing Pumpkins in 2011 in Luxembourg. The venue was sold out and the crowd was very exited as it was their first show here since 2007.
The setlist was awesome as they played a lot of deep cuts...after the show I realised that the majority of the crowd was pissed because the band played a lot of ‘unknown’ songs.
They came back two years latter and the same venue was half empty.
The fact that Billy Corgan seemed to be bored and basically did not communicate further alienated the crowd.
In my area, a band like the SP attracts essentially casual fans and I think that their crowds are not prepared for revolving setlists where all the staples are not played.

The same can be said with Metallica but the way that they mixe staples with a few deep cuts in rotating slots is what make the majority of people fine. I had to admit that I would be disappointed at a Metallica show without Master of Puppets played.

I saw Candlebox last year in Germany and they played only 80’. We were less than 100 so I don’t want to blame them for performing a short set...Regarding the 25th anniversary shows, the fact that they were played by the original line up probably explains why they played only songs from the first album. However I am sure that I would have been pissed as it was supposed to be exceptional shows.

I wasn't pissed at all. I really enjoyed it. They honestly probably don't have two hours plus of material IMO.

Other bands just do it differently. In comparison I've seen a lot of bands do short sets as well. Not everyone can pull off the three hour show. They don't have the songs, stamina, longevity etc etc. 

Sorry, my reply was not clear enough.
I would have been pissed if I had make the trip from Europe to Seattle thinking that these would be very special shows to attend.

cwoycheese

A lot of bands don’t have the catalog of songs at thier disposal. Just go back from Pixies and Weezer and I think they went three hours together. Weezer could go longer if they wanted to. Pixies just hammered away a lot of songs in a shorter time.  No convo with the crowd.  

belthook

Very valid point here.  Just saw the Foo Fighters MSG 2 weeks ago.  I was only able to see Night 2 but the show was great.  My cousin went to both nights and other than a few covers the setlists were exactly the same top to bottom.  If you see PJ at MSG you will hear roughly 60 songs with maybe 5 repeats.  Foo Fighters played 23 songs with 20 repeats.

Mike D88

It's not just setlists, either. Some bands do the exact same show right down to the "banter" between songs.

Gern Blansten

Mike D88 said:

It's not just setlists, either. Some bands do the exact same show right down to the "banter" between songs.

yep...foo fighters...corny as hell

mpedone

pjhawks said:

I always thought a band playing the same set list would be boring for them after a while. who wants to do the same thing night after night?

I can understand this point, but it also allows the band to focus on playing just that group of songs, knowing them inside and out, and so they can play them flawlessly night in and night out. I know PJ rehearses stuff when they get ready to go out on tour, but the ever-changing set list means they can't possibly have everything prepped for each night, which leads to fun things like Eddie forgetting the lyrics, Stone flubbing the guitar fill in Thin Air, or Matt Cameron playing the intro to Grievance a few songs too early (and, I do mean fun non-sarcastically; I always hope for flawless performances, but I don't mind when they mess up). The point is, I can see the advantage to playing the same songs night-in and night-out.

RS65573

mpedone said:

pjhawks said:

I always thought a band playing the same set list would be boring for them after a while. who wants to do the same thing night after night?

I can understand this point, but it also allows the band to focus on playing just that group of songs, knowing them inside and out, and so they can play them flawlessly night in and night out. I know PJ rehearses stuff when they get ready to go out on tour, but the ever-changing set list means they can't possibly have everything prepped for each night, which leads to fun things like Eddie forgetting the lyrics, Stone flubbing the guitar fill in Thin Air, or Matt Cameron playing the intro to Grievance a few songs too early (and, I do mean fun non-sarcastically; I always hope for flawless performances, but I don't mind when they mess up). The point is, I can see the advantage to playing the same songs night-in and night-out.

I believe this is why PJ merch is much more coveted than any other band. The shows truly are one of a kind.

MisterEtake2

I love Pearl Jam but hardly feel spoiled by them.  Compared to Pearl Jam, I feel spoiled by the Dave Matthews Band.  They release new music,  and they tour extensively almost every year.  Unless you have a lot of disposable income and disposable time, it is very hard to see Pearl Jam live on a regular basis.

reedrothchild

Pearl Jam definitely play long and mix it up a ton, BUT a lot of other bands do too if you get outside of the 90's rock/legacy act bubble.  Off the top of my head bands I've seen in the last couple of years that mix it up quite a bit and play 2+ hours (some over 3):


Bruce Springsteen
Greensky Bluegrass
Phish
Radiohead
Tedeschi Trucks Band
Ween
Wilco

pashapasaman

Mike D88 said:

It's not just setlists, either. Some bands do the exact same show right down to the "banter" between songs.

Agree so corny how metallica have the same banter before Sandman and Sad But True for more than 5 years

PJ_Soul

MisterEtake2 said:

I love Pearl Jam but hardly feel spoiled by them.  Compared to Pearl Jam, I feel spoiled by the Dave Matthews Band.  They release new music,  and they tour extensively almost every year.  Unless you have a lot of disposable income and disposable time, it is very hard to see Pearl Jam live on a regular basis.

All they need now is some music that sounds good, and they'd be perfect.

PJWGIII

I’m totally spoiled by PJ setlists. I wish all my favorite artists had the same approach.

helplessdancer

coming partly from a jam band background i am use to 3 hour shows and ever changing set lists   lol
i would not be the PJ fan that i am today if it wasn't for the element of surprise...the point of knowing that almost anything can happen at any time. that is the thrill IMO

SP218311

Definitely feel spoiled/lucky.  Though I can still enjoy other bands that have a fairly static setlist (U2 and Foo Fighters, for example) because they appear to bring some passion and fun to their shows (I just try to avoid checking setlists prior to going).  And they are in the 2.5+ hour club, which I think is just generally rare outside of the jam band scene.  Saw the Chili Peppers on their last tour and I was totally disappointed that the show was like an hour long.

On the other hand, just saw Radiohead over the weekend and was blown away... 25 songs, 2.5 hours, really awesome light show and a different set each night.  The show's production didn't lend itself to differing setlists... it seemed so choreographed, yet I know the crew didnt get the setlist until a few hours before the show. 

Other bands that I like that change it up each night are Deer Tick, Wilco, My Morning Jacket, Bruce, Ryan Adams, and Father John Misty (even though they don't like each other).  Leaving Jack White off of this list even though I do love him (he claims to play without a setlist, but it really seems to be the same songs ordered differently each night).

rummy

reedrothchild said:

Pearl Jam definitely play long and mix it up a ton, BUT a lot of other bands do too if you get outside of the 90's rock/legacy act bubble.  Off the top of my head bands I've seen in the last couple of years that mix it up quite a bit and play 2+ hours (some over 3):


Bruce Springsteen
Greensky Bluegrass
Phish
Radiohead
Tedeschi Trucks Band
Ween
Wilco

Yep, for Radiohead, anyway. During their two shows in Toronto a week or so ago they performed 25 songs each night and only three songs were repeated. Awesome.

cp3iverson

Radiohead is on a different planet than everyone else