2012/05/12 - Stadium Live, Moscow, Russia

[shotgunblues1978]

Except that football games are broadcast nationally on television for public consumption, and the teams generate far more money from their TV contracts than they do from ticket sales.

Whereas the concerts are performed specifically for the people in the audience; just because people film it and put it on Youtube doesn't mean that the performance was intended or geared toward anyone but the people who paid for a ticket. Unless the band releases the concert on DVD or the concert is broadcast on television, which typically isn't the case.

[Silent Jay]

Look, I think that everyone following the shows on a regular basis would like the setlist to be opened up a bit. By that I mean, we've all seen the "master list" posted before. It has songs like Oh My God, If The World, Scraped, Catcher, etc. on it that haven't been played in a long time. So, I can see why people might say "Why not break out If The World every few shows? Why not play Catcher more? Why not do Mama Kin or Dead Flowers" Etc.

11 - In many forums and there are many fans show always asking you to play songs like There Was A Time Catcher In The Rye, Oh My God, etc.. Why these songs are not played?

B: I'll play any music. But it is easy for me, my fingers still work if I'm sick, if I'm sleepy, but it's different when you have to sing for months. As a singer in my solo band, while on tour, you choose songs that will leave your neck healthy and able to do the whole tour. These decisions are the singer, and have to be.

from ron's interview

[ARX77]

Look, I think that everyone following the shows on a regular basis would like the setlist to be opened up a bit. By that I mean, we've all seen the "master list" posted before. It has songs like Oh My God, If The World, Scraped, Catcher, etc. on it that haven't been played in a long time. So, I can see why people might say "Why not break out If The World every few shows? Why not play Catcher more? Why not do Mama Kin or Dead Flowers" Etc.

11 - In many forums and there are many fans show always asking you to play songs like There Was A Time Catcher In The Rye, Oh My God, etc.. Why these songs are not played?

B: I'll play any music. But it is easy for me, my fingers still work if I'm sick, if I'm sleepy, but it's different when you have to sing for months. As a singer in my solo band, while on tour, you choose songs that will leave your neck healthy and able to do the whole tour. These decisions are the singer, and have to be.

from ron's interview

TO me this simply comes down to crowd reaction with the exception of TWAT (which is probably pretty stressful on the vocals). Axl's voice can only take so much strain each night, would the crowd "in general" rather hear ISO or Catcher? I would say the majority of the crowd would rather hear ISO. Now why doesnt Axl switch out SOD and say Catcher, wish I knew. As for OMG or Silkworms, these are 2 terrible songs IMO... some of the worse ive ever heard especially SW. OMG seemed to have potential then somewhere lost its way. I'll never understand the message board banter dying to hear these songs. i just hope Axl is smart enough to know OMG didnt go over well previously and wont now.

[Voodoochild]

Just let me know one thing: when the band played Civil War, didn't we all got happy as fuck? So why not ask for more of it?

The classics will stay there, the regular audience won't care that much, but the diehard fans will and they are the ones who keep struggling for years by loving this band. The other ones are more than happy to just hear SCOM again on some radio station.

As for OMG or Silkworms, these are 2 terrible songs IMO... some of the worse ive ever heard especially SW. OMG seemed to have potential then somewhere lost its way. I'll never understand the message board banter dying to hear these songs. i just hope Axl is smart enough to know OMG didnt go over well previously and wont now.

Did you listen to the current band playing those two songs with its current arrangement and all?

Thing is people are dying to hear new material, be it a rehashed "new" song, an old track from Illusions or, better yet, a brand new one. Throw anything and we all will be happy.

[Ali]

If you're not at the show, you're not a part of the show. The shows are played for those in attendance.

Ali

LOL, so when I watch a sporting event on TV, or even read about it in the paper, I can't have an opinion about it? that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard!!!! Stop swinging on Axl's nutsack. Anyone who is following these shows has the right to an opinion, whether they attended in person or via the internet. This is 2012, get with the times dude.

What kind of asinine straw man argument is that? Who said you "can't have an opinion"? Not me. All I said was unless you are at the show, you aren't a part of the show. This isn't like football where games are intended for broadcast. Concerts are not intended for broadcast on the internet unless specifically arranged to do so by the artists.

Like I said, the shows are played for those in attendance. If you aren't there, you aren't a "part of the show".

Ali

[Ali]

If you're not at the show, you're not a part of the show. The shows are played for those in attendance.

Ali

LOL, so when I watch a sporting event on TV, or even read about it in the paper, I can't have an opinion about it? that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard!!!! Stop swinging on Axl's nutsack. Anyone who is following these shows has the right to an opinion, whether they attended in person or via the internet. This is 2012, get with the times dude.

You hit the nail right on the head. Just because a person does not go to a show, doesn't mean you aren't allowed to have a opinion on it. Using sports is a very good example, I've never been to a Philadelphia Eagle game in my life, so does that mean I can't criticize them when they do bad? Nope.

I can't stand the people who out-right bash the GN'R today and never have anything decent to say about the band. Than there's the people who want the band to move on and be able to be at their full potential, I see nothing wrong there. I want to see how the band is in the studio, what they can bring to the table as far as writing and talents.

Again, who said you "aren't allowed an opinion"? No one. The sports analogy is completely an apples to oranges comparison because an Eagles game is INTENDED for broadcast by either Fox, ESPN, NBC or CBS. A GN'R concert, unless otherwise arranged by the band, is not intended for broadcast. It is intended for the enjoyment of those who are in attendance at the venue. Simply put, if you're not at the show, you're not a part of it. Or, if you prefer, you were never INTENDED to be a part of the show.

Ali

[nonlinear]

^^that's stupid, every performer knows that the entire show is going to end up on the internet the next day. they also know that there are fans following live updates from the concert. they know there is an audience outside the venue.

the internet is relatively new, but written concert reviews have a long history. certinaly, performers know written reviews will be published, right? (recall Axl thanking Loder for one review?) So, concerts are in fact INTENDED (your caps, not mine) for outside audiences. even more so now with the internet.

Edited May 14, 2012 by nonlinear

[ARX77]

Just let me know one thing: when the band played Civil War, didn't we all got happy as fuck? So why not ask for more of it?

The classics will stay there, the regular audience won't care that much, but the diehard fans will and they are the ones who keep struggling for years by loving this band. The other ones are more than happy to just hear SCOM again on some radio station.

As for OMG or Silkworms, these are 2 terrible songs IMO... some of the worse ive ever heard especially SW. OMG seemed to have potential then somewhere lost its way. I'll never understand the message board banter dying to hear these songs. i just hope Axl is smart enough to know OMG didnt go over well previously and wont now.

Did you listen to the current band playing those two songs with its current arrangement and all?

Thing is people are dying to hear new material, be it a rehashed "new" song, an old track from Illusions or, better yet, a brand new one. Throw anything and we all will be happy.

Well you're right i guess these guys haven't played SW or OMG but IMO the Chin Dem songs we first heard at RIR 3 didn't sound much different than what we got on the actual record. But I agree new songs are always refreshing. I saw GNR twice on the USA tour and the. UCAP and it was cool hearing songs like CW, YC, and UTLH for the first time. I will agree the setlist so far has been stale I can't believe they're not playing CW and YC they were nice additions

[Guest gunns5]

I don't understand why people wouldn't want to hear omg live, the song is a different kettle of fish live, like IRS and Chinese

[Ali]

^^that's stupid, every performer knows that the entire show is going to end up on the internet the next day. they also know that there are fans following live updates from the concert. they know there is an audience outside the venue.

the internet is relatively new, but written concert reviews have a long history. certinaly, performers know written reviews will be published, right? (recall Axl thanking Loder for one review?) So, concerts are in fact INTENDED (your caps, not mine) for outside audiences. even more so now with the internet.

Written reviews are completely different and are irrelevant to this topic. You're not part of the audience if you're reading a written review.

What's stupid is confusing an audience member using a camera phone to record a poor quality video of a some songs or parts of songs, or sometimes all songs, with an intent on the band's part to include people outside the venue in the viewing of the show (i.e. by a PPV stream). If you aren't there, you're not intended to be part of the show. If we were intended to be part of the show, there would've been an offer for PPV streaming.

Ali

[Cosmo]

Just saw two of the videos... Looks like Axl's still Mickey Mouse but he's not going out breath as much as he did in the last tour.

[Eu4ic]

I guarantee if Axl starts losing money because people stop coming to see the same show again and again, or if people like myself never go to the show because they've seen it all on the internet already, I guarantee Axl would move people watching on the internet higher on the priority list. He'd be forced to change it up a bit, in effect acknowledging 'people at home' to be as important as the people there the night of the show, and that the audience/performer dynamic is more complex that just who's in the building the night of the performance.

Bottom line is he needs to consider the people not in the audience who are watching the show. Why would you care just about the fans in the audience anyway? Sure it's a great gauge for how you're performing, but in another way it isnt: People at home watching arent being influenced by the excitement and atmosphere and the social element. They're less likely to be drunk or high. People at home, in important ways, are capable of giving a more objective assessment of what the hell is actually going on.

Edited May 14, 2012 by Eu4ic

[Ali]

I guarantee if Axl starts losing money because people stop coming to see the same show again and again, or if people like myself never go to the show because they've seen it all on the internet already, I guarantee Axl would move people watching on the internet higher on the priority list. He'd be forced to change it up a bit, in effect acknowledging 'people at home' to be as important as the people there the night of the show, and that the audience/performer dynamic is more complex that just who's in the building the night of the performance.

Bottom line is he needs to consider the people not in the audience who are watching the show. Why would you care just about the fans in the audience anyway? Sure it's a great gauge for how you're performing, but in another way it isnt: People at home watching arent being influenced by the excitement and atmosphere and the social element. They're less likely to be drunk or high. People at home, in important ways, are capable of giving a more objective assessment of what the hell is actually going on.

No, no, no and no on all points. In order to be a part of a live music performance, you need to be witnessing the show live. If you think watching some shitty YouTube clip is the same as actually being at a show, more power to you.

People at home could be drunk or high, too, and depending on the quality of the recording they are hearing, they may not be able to see or hear what the hell is going on. So, they're hardly in a better place to make an objective assessment about the show.

A live show is always about the people at the show, the paying audience members, with the exception of recording for a live album/DVD/Blu-ray or a PPV stream. That's how it is

Ali

[chevelle]

i just hope Axl is smart enough to know OMG didnt go over well previously and wont now.

Maybe because of the fact that it was a soundtrack song attached to a not-so-successful movie.

[Haters Gonna Hate]

Just saw two of the videos... Looks like Axl's still Mickey Mouse but he's not going out breath as much as he did in the last tour.

One good thing hopefully it gets better

[ARX77]

i just hope Axl is smart enough to know OMG didnt go over well previously and wont now.

Maybe because of the fact that it was a soundtrack song attached to a not-so-successful movie.

That song could have been on the Avatar soundtrack and it still would have tanked because the song was/ isn't that good. The movie had nothing to do with the fact that people didn't like listening to it on the radio

[Cosmo]

Just saw two of the videos... Looks like Axl's still Mickey Mouse but he's not going out breath as much as he did in the last tour.

One good thing hopefully it gets better

Hope so... Like I said before, if Axl had his 2006 voice again, it'd make up for the same ol' same for sure.

[Guest gunns5]

how was the ycbm performance?

[Eu4ic]

I guarantee if Axl starts losing money because people stop coming to see the same show again and again, or if people like myself never go to the show because they've seen it all on the internet already, I guarantee Axl would move people watching on the internet higher on the priority list. He'd be forced to change it up a bit, in effect acknowledging 'people at home' to be as important as the people there the night of the show, and that the audience/performer dynamic is more complex that just who's in the building the night of the performance.

Bottom line is he needs to consider the people not in the audience who are watching the show. Why would you care just about the fans in the audience anyway? Sure it's a great gauge for how you're performing, but in another way it isnt: People at home watching arent being influenced by the excitement and atmosphere and the social element. They're less likely to be drunk or high. People at home, in important ways, are capable of giving a more objective assessment of what the hell is actually going on.

No, no, no and no on all points. In order to be a part of a live music performance, you need to be witnessing the show live. If you think watching some shitty YouTube clip is the same as actually being at a show, more power to you.

People at home could be drunk or high, too, and depending on the quality of the recording they are hearing, they may not be able to see or hear what the hell is going on. So, they're hardly in a better place to make an objective assessment about the show.

A live show is always about the people at the show, the paying audience members, with the exception of recording for a live album/DVD/Blu-ray or a PPV stream. That's how it is

Ali

Ali, it would be great if you actually responded to my points instead of just repeating your same weak points and throwing around your own red herring and straw men arguments. Judging by your customary ways, there's probably little chance of that happening. Sure, people at home could be drunk or high. But unfortunately for your weak counter-argument, I SAID THEY'RE LESS LIKELY to be that way, or influenced by external causes. See the difference? And, sure, there are such things as poor recordings of shows, but it is highly unlikely I hear things on a youtube clip that simply aren't there, especially when we're talking about the quality of Axl's voice. And, I dont care about 'being part of a live music audience' - what I was saying is that because I, at home, see GNR is playing the same shit every show, I am therefore less likely to attend a GNR gig than I would otherwise, and therefore Axl loses money. If there are enough people like me, then Axl loses substantial money. When he asks "Why are people not coming to the shows?" and finds out the answer (that we know they're going to play the same set every night), I am sure he would make changes to the setlist, and therefore it becomes obvious that people watching the show on youtube matter more than you seem to think. The performer/audience dynamic is more complex than you think. Perhaps your views shouldnt be so rigid, and you should read a book on the philosophy of art.

Edited May 15, 2012 by Eu4ic

[Haters Gonna Hate]

Just saw two of the videos... Looks like Axl's still Mickey Mouse but he's not going out breath as much as he did in the last tour.

One good thing hopefully it gets better

Hope so... Like I said before, if Axl had his 2006 voice again, it'd make up for the same ol' same for sure.

Or his 91 voice

[Nosaj Thing]

how was the ycbm performance?

The band great, Axl awful.

[Flayer]

because I, at home, see GNR is playing the same shit every show, I am therefore less likely to attend a GNR gig than I would otherwise, and therefore Axl loses money. If there are enough people like me, then Axl loses substantial money. When he asks "Why are people not coming to the shows?" and finds out the answer (that we know they're going to play the same set every night), I am sure he would make changes to the setlist, and therefore it becomes obvious that people watching the show on youtube matter more than you seem to think. The performer/audience dynamic is more complex than you think. Perhaps your views shouldnt be so rigid, and you should read a book on the philosophy of art.

Here's the thing though...how many people do you think this actually happens to? It's a subset of a subset - there's a very limited circle of people who actually follow the updates on every concert setlist, in the single digit thousands. And then there's only a fraction of those people who will actually decide they are not going to see shows anymore. It's a sound theoretical argument you're making but in reality the numbers who stop buying tickets for setlist reasons hardly even constitute a drop in the bucket.

I'm eagerly awaiting setlist changes too but the reality is that if and when they happen, it's not gonna be driven by ticket sales.

Edited May 15, 2012 by Flayer

[Eu4ic]

because I, at home, see GNR is playing the same shit every show, I am therefore less likely to attend a GNR gig than I would otherwise, and therefore Axl loses money. If there are enough people like me, then Axl loses substantial money. When he asks "Why are people not coming to the shows?" and finds out the answer (that we know they're going to play the same set every night), I am sure he would make changes to the setlist, and therefore it becomes obvious that people watching the show on youtube matter more than you seem to think. The performer/audience dynamic is more complex than you think. Perhaps your views shouldnt be so rigid, and you should read a book on the philosophy of art.

Here's the thing though...how many people do you think this actually happens to? It's a subset of a subset - there's a very limited circle of people who actually follow the updates on every concert setlist, in the single digit thousands. And then there's only a fraction of those people who will actually decide they are not going to see shows anymore. It's a sound theoretical argument you're making but in reality the numbers who stop buying tickets for setlist reasons hardly even constitute a drop in the bucket.

I'm eagerly awaiting setlist changes too but the reality is that if and when they happen, it's not gonna be driven by ticket sales.

Basically my concern is that for people who love VR or Slash or simply hate Axl or whatever, a legit criticism of GNR today is that they're simply playing stuff from Slash era, like AFD material. I think this could become a real problem for the band. If not in terms of money (which I think could become a problem), then at least in terms of tarnishing their legacy. "How can the band really be legit if they're just playing other peoples' stuff?" the argument will go. Axl and GNR were shocking 10 years ago even though they were playing AFD stuff, but that appeal is no longer there and they must develop their own identity or suffer the consequences. Also, those thousand people or so represent the core of core audience, arguably, and so they have a particular kind of power. Perhaps its because they tell their friends, then they tell their friends or whatever, I dunno.

Edited May 15, 2012 by Eu4ic

[Flayer]

i just hope Axl is smart enough to know OMG didnt go over well previously and wont now.

Maybe because of the fact that it was a soundtrack song attached to a not-so-successful movie.

That song could have been on the Avatar soundtrack and it still would have tanked because the song was/ isn't that good. The movie had nothing to do with the fact that people didn't like listening to it on the radio

What makes it a bad song? It's a good song that was sold to the wrong audience. It obviously can't make it on pop radio (fucking Welcome to the Jungle couldn't break out if it was written today because the whole scene is so bad), it's not a fit for nostalgia rock AC/DC Zeppelin stations, it's not a fit for a soft alternative station.

It belongs on the stations that play Avenged Sevenfold and heavier stuff like that. The screamed vocals, the dark lyrics, the wall of guitar, everything that makes it out of place on those other stations would help it fit in with the audience on these.

Edited May 15, 2012 by Flayer

[Patience 4 Axl]

i just hope Axl is smart enough to know OMG didnt go over well previously and wont now.

Maybe because of the fact that it was a soundtrack song attached to a not-so-successful movie.

That song could have been on the Avatar soundtrack and it still would have tanked because the song was/ isn't that good. The movie had nothing to do with the fact that people didn't like listening to it on the radio

Asolutely. That song has taken on some mythical form. Maybe because a lot of todays fans weren't fans yet back then, so it's something new to them. The truth is it tanked miserably. And for good reason. It wasn't for lack of trying as I remember llistening to Howrd Stern play it and then asking callers to weigh in if they liked it. It was an overwhelming no. I think people are so hungry now for something "new" that they'd be happy with a decade old mediocre song.