Jump to content

Vegas residency roundup

username

By username
in 2012

 Share

Vegas residency  

160 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

batman007 FRONTMAN

batman007

Posted
Posted (edited)

pwned.

Several people met Axl (not sure how many met him backstage though). I find it interesting that you'd 'bother' to spend money going to Vegas to see them.

You find it "interesting" that I'd go and see a band that I've been following for the past 25 years? Umm ..ok. *shrugs*

Umm ... I think this is one example of why she finds it interesting:

MyGNRForum.jpg

:rofl-lol:

:rofl-lol: :rofl-lol: :rofl-lol:

:rofl-lol: :rofl-lol: :rofl-lol:

and another. I myself find myself on the floor rolling in laughter!

The Vegas experience was fn awesome! Meeting band members roaming around the hotel was fn sweet. But, I mean REALLY meeting them! I really didn't expect so much media attention for the band. And most was very good! Sorry haters that the Vegas residency was a success!

Edited by batman007
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

SuperBlaine Full

SuperBlaine

Posted
Posted (edited)

I hope Axls saving his rasp for the studio.

TBH with you. Rasp is very overrated imo. Many many singers have been doing what axl is doing for years because it just sounds silly for a guy his age to try screaming imo. If he started going back to that on record i would also be disappointed. Clean vocals have always been better music imo again of course. Better singers than Axl like Rob Halford have been wailing clean vocals for decades not because its cooler or any dumb bs, but because it just sounds better. James hetfield did the exact same thing after the Black album in the 90`s, after he went through pro vocal lessons, he never went back to rasp. And guess what, only whiny Metallica fans, just like whiny GNR fans actually care about it! Trust me they all sound better with clean vocals :)

The only thing rasp really accomplishes is destroying vocals chords 4 sure.

Edited by SuperBlaine
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rabia DEMI-GOD

rabia

Posted
Posted

pwned.

Several people met Axl (not sure how many met him backstage though). I find it interesting that you'd 'bother' to spend money going to Vegas to see them.

You find it "interesting" that I'd go and see a band that I've been following for the past 25 years? Umm ..ok. *shrugs*

Umm ... I think this is one example of why she finds it interesting:

MyGNRForum.jpg

:rofl-lol:

:rofl-lol: :rofl-lol: :rofl-lol:

:rofl-lol: :rofl-lol: :rofl-lol:

Wow, its hard to come back from that one. So much bluster followed by a whimper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aussiegun Full

Aussiegun

Posted
Posted

They play the same thirteen-fourteen songs every show. More than half the setlist. The idea of a constantly revolving setlist is myth.

If you interpret "constantly revolving setlist" to mean "exchanging all songs gradually", then yes, it is a myth and you are a bit unrealistic :)

Why is it unrealistic?

IMO you have the popular singles (WTTJ, SCOM, PC, NR, DC, YCBM) , plus the solid tracks off CD (Better, SOD, Maddy, maybe CD) and rotate everything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SoulMonster LEGEND

SoulMonster

Posted
Posted

They play the same thirteen-fourteen songs every show. More than half the setlist. The idea of a constantly revolving setlist is myth.

If you interpret "constantly revolving setlist" to mean "exchanging all songs gradually", then yes, it is a myth and you are a bit unrealistic :)

Why is it unrealistic?

IMO you have the popular singles (WTTJ, SCOM, PC, NR, DC, YCBM) , plus the solid tracks off CD (Better, SOD, Maddy, maybe CD) and rotate everything else.

But then all songs aren't being exchanged.... What you are requesting is exactly what we have today: 10-14 songs that have remained stable since 2001 and every other song is gradually, slowly being exchanged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aussiegun Full

Aussiegun

Posted
Posted

They play the same thirteen-fourteen songs every show. More than half the setlist. The idea of a constantly revolving setlist is myth.

If you interpret "constantly revolving setlist" to mean "exchanging all songs gradually", then yes, it is a myth and you are a bit unrealistic :)

Why is it unrealistic?

IMO you have the popular singles (WTTJ, SCOM, PC, NR, DC, YCBM) , plus the solid tracks off CD (Better, SOD, Maddy, maybe CD) and rotate everything else.

But then all songs aren't being exchanged.... What you are requesting is exactly what we have today: 10-14 songs that have remained stable since 2001 and every other song is gradually, slowly being exchanged.

Very gradually, which is why if you've been to 2 different GNR shows in different years, they still feel like deja vu.

Not many artists can get away with not having their most popular songs played, so I don't think the hardcore fans begrudge the singles being played, it's just keeping things fresh. A core list of (not more than) 10 songs sound good, and rotate classic song for classic song, and CD song for CD song, and mix the order up. The band should know how to play nearly anything in the back catalogue when requested, and if not, it wouldn't take them too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SoulMonster LEGEND

SoulMonster

Posted
Posted

They play the same thirteen-fourteen songs every show. More than half the setlist. The idea of a constantly revolving setlist is myth.

If you interpret "constantly revolving setlist" to mean "exchanging all songs gradually", then yes, it is a myth and you are a bit unrealistic :)

Why is it unrealistic?

IMO you have the popular singles (WTTJ, SCOM, PC, NR, DC, YCBM) , plus the solid tracks off CD (Better, SOD, Maddy, maybe CD) and rotate everything else.

But then all songs aren't being exchanged.... What you are requesting is exactly what we have today: 10-14 songs that have remained stable since 2001 and every other song is gradually, slowly being exchanged.

Very gradually, which is why if you've been to 2 different GNR shows in different years, they still feel like deja vu.

Like the movement of a glacier :).

I think the deja vu aspect comes as much from the songs coming in the same order and the choreographed and highly unpredictable manner Axl behaves and moves during the shows. This combined with the fact that the majority of the set is core songs that won't be exchanged, results in a show that is less than spontaneous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PirateRadio Full

PirateRadio

Posted
Posted

Like the movement of a glacier :).

I think the deja vu aspect comes as much from the songs coming in the same order and the choreographed and highly unpredictable manner Axl behaves and moves during the shows. This combined with the fact that the majority of the set is core songs that won't be exchanged, results in a show that is less than spontaneous.

I've been to 4 shows since 12/21/11 and every one of them has been more or less predictable as far as the setlist is concerned. Don't get me wrong, it's an outstanding setlist for a 3 hour show. However, I'd be much inclined to go to Vegas twice (maybe book end trips) if they switched up the songs and the order...say they opened with Nightrain, etc. Regardless, I enjoy each show, but looking down at my phone at setlist.com to see what's up next takes a little air out of it. It's pretty memorize-able as it is.

I went to Vegas to see the 11/18 show, which was great. And when I heard that Izzy was going to be there for the final two shows, I was excited to head back. BUT, the only thing that killed it was the setlist, honestly. I've seen every song played, and a few they didn't play, except for 14 years.

Now, if Think About You, Perfect Crime, Bad Obsession, or Pretty Tied Up were played, I never would've forgiven myself, but alas, nothing of the like was anywhere to be found. I sleep with only slight twitches, not full on yank me out of bed spasms.

If Guns switches up the setlist for their shows, I would have gladly driven up to see them on at least three different occasions, and taken in 5 or more shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SoulMonster LEGEND

SoulMonster

Posted
Posted
Now, if Think About You, Perfect Crime, Bad Obsession, or Pretty Tied Up were played, I never would've forgiven myself, but alas, nothing of the like was anywhere to be found.

They might start playing them again, like they did with Estranged and Don't Cry. As I said, they change up the setlists slowly. You might not see much changes if you go to multiple shows in the same year (although no four shows will have identical setlists) but on a larger scale the changes are obvious. Like I said: glacial movement ;).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PirateRadio Full

PirateRadio

Posted
Posted

They might start playing them again, like they did with Estranged and Don't Cry. As I said, they change up the setlists slowly. You might not see much changes if you go to multiple shows in the same year (although no four shows will have identical setlists) but on a larger scale the changes are obvious. Like I said: glacial movement ;).

I can't argue that there have been changes. But here's the difference...they played LA in December of 2011, and I can understand the same setlist being played in Phoenix 6 days later (I went to both shows)...but coming back to LA to play the Hollywood Palladium--on a different tour, UCAP--and the setlist is very very similar.... Second time around in the same city, on a different tour, maybe a new setlist is in order...?

For Vegas, the setlists should have been different quite often. Per Axl Rose, and I'm paraphrasing, we want to create a unique experience for every show because we know there will be people that stay to see multiple shows. If putting in and taking out TWAT is what he has in mind, then that's disappointing imo.

I know the whole you can't believe him attitude...look how many release dates there were for Chinese...but I think Axl is a pretty dependable guy these days when it comes to live shows. He's always on or near on time, and every time he starts a show, it ends three hours (sometimes +) later. Why not expect him to be true to his word about Vegas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SoulMonster LEGEND

SoulMonster

Posted
Posted

They might start playing them again, like they did with Estranged and Don't Cry. As I said, they change up the setlists slowly. You might not see much changes if you go to multiple shows in the same year (although no four shows will have identical setlists) but on a larger scale the changes are obvious. Like I said: glacial movement ;).

I can't argue that there have been changes. But here's the difference...they played LA in December of 2011, and I can understand the same setlist being played in Phoenix 6 days later (I went to both shows)...

Well, they did play Liquor and Whores in Phoenix and not in LA. And that is common, even back-to-back shows usually have some differences in what songs are played.

but coming back to LA to play the Hollywood Palladium--on a different tour, UCAP--and the setlist is very very similar.... Second time around in the same city, on a different tour, maybe a new setlist is in order...?

I don't know how you define "setlist" but for the Palladium show they added UTLH, You're Crazy and Whole Lotta Rosie was not played (compared to the Forum gig). This is exactly what I am referring to as slow changes in setlists.

For Vegas, the setlists should have been different quite often. Per Axl Rose, and I'm paraphrasing, we want to create a unique experience for every show because we know there will be people that stay to see multiple shows. If putting in and taking out TWAT is what he has in mind, then that's disappointing imo.

I agree that the setlists ideally should have varied more, but it is a huge litote to say the only differences between the Vegas data was the presence or absence of TWAT ;). Other songs that came and went are 14 Years, Used To Love Her, Madagascar, Riff Raff, Whole Lotta Rosie, Dead Flowers, to name a few.... In fact, the variation of the setlists at the Vegas residency was higher than during previous, recent tours. But yeah, I expected more variation.

I know the whole you can't believe him attitude...look how many release dates there were for Chinese...but I think Axl is a pretty dependable guy these days when it comes to live shows. He's always on or near on time, and every time he starts a show, it ends three hours (sometimes +) later. Why not expect him to be true to his word about Vegas?

Again, the setlists in Vegas was a lot more varied than you make them out to be. That being said, I clearly see the discrepancy between Axl's statement and what happened. I guess it is just the usual inability to meet on targets, to actually follow through with plans, which has haunted GN'R always, combined with a little bit of false advertising which is almost standard practise in the entertainment world. But yes, just so I am clear, I wanted and expected more variation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Russel Nash SUPER GOD

Russel Nash

Posted
Posted

Only 33.944 people? Fuck! US market is really a shit market for RNR! In South America you can get that amount of people or more in 1 show.

That doesn't even make sense! The played a venue that holds 4,000 a night. Do the math.

He meant that when GNR went to SA they where doing sold out stadiums, 45.000-50.000 ppl per night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...