Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Why are people complaining about the setlist?  I am totally blown away by this complaint.  I honestly don't get this. 

When you listen to Appetite For Destruction...is it different every time?  I've listened to that album about a 1000 times.  I get excited every time I hear it even though it's the same playlist.   I watch concert videos over and over and those have the exact same setlist...and even the same onstage banter and same crowd.  The good ones I don't get tired of.  Do you drink a different beer every night?  Do you eat differnet food every day of your life?  If you enjoy something, why is wrong to enjoy it multiple times?

How is playing the same playlist as the night before constitute as a bad show?  On broadway, actors perform the same musical every night....they can still have a great show every night.

IMO, GNR is getting better with every show.  I listened online to a show early in the 2006 tour...it was good, not great.  But then when I saw them in LA in December, they were amazing.  I was totally blown away.  A breath-taking show.  Even though it was the same setlist as previous shows...the concert still rocked.  I would see them again (with the exact same setlist) in a heartbeat.

GNR is up against a wall.  People are still bagging on this new version of the band.  Right now they are on a mission: To prove to the world that this new version of the band IS Guns 'N' Roses.  Playing the same setlist every night gives the abillity to hone the show so every fan in every city gets the best show possible.  They are trying to make every fan walk out of that arena and say "Guns N Roses is back!" and to forget about the old band.  They want this band to be the one they are dying to hear when the new CD comes out.  And so far...they are doing a fantastic job.

Maybe they're not playing a "great" show every night...they're playing a "fantastic" show.  Would it make you happier if we said that?

I have sent almost 23 emails to GNR Mgt about this, but they have yet to reply to my (legitimate) complaint about the above mentioned track list. I guess I'll just keep listening to it in the meantime.

Because those people complain about almost everything. When they play a different setlist every night, it's not different enough for them. ?:peace:

I have a feeling that most of those cry babies who complain just never get to go to the shows, and are stuck behind their monitors instead. Of all my GnR shows, I've never heard anybody complain about the set list, juts the nerds here.

very good point acompleteunknown : ok: good post

let me put it this way

are the shows good? no doubt


but is gnr is  a band that deserves to be followed while on tour?

NO

why?

cause the setlist is always the same


u have seen one show , u have seen them all

It is hard for me to accept I will never hear Civil War, Coma, Breakdown, or Dead Horse live - possibly ever again.   :'(  I think this is tragic because they are such great songs.  I am sure Axl knows the words, and the rest of the band should be able to play them if they want to be considered members of GNR.  So I really am not sure what the big deal would be.

Civil War gets played to this day on main stream rock stations, so it is not like people would not recognize it.


I saw GNR 4X's last year and had fun at every show - it just would be nice to throw in a UYI song or something.  Axl's philosphy on the setlist has changed for some reason.

I really don't care about the setlist I just really want the cd.  I don't think people will take them seriously til they put something out.

you have to look past the complaints

people are bitching about the setlist, because they want new songs, cause they are curious, and more new songs live can mean CD will come soon.

Anytime I post a thread like this defending the same setlist "issue" it gets deleted...but anyway...

I don't care personally, went 3 times last year and the only variation was Down on the Farm at one of the shows, other than that everything was the same except maybe I.R.S. was played in the encore once instead of the back end of the set.

Here is a legitimate argument though - old GN'R went onstage every night and played different songs. Look at old setlist archives - they would play 10 dates in two weeks and on the 7th date for no reason they'd throw in "Locomotive" or "Coma" just for the hell of it. When they played four nights at the L.A. forum, they opened with Perfect Crime every night and maybe had the same couple of songs after that, but for the rest of the night, all bets were off. In my opinion that's what made them "phenomenal" and not just "great" as a live act.

What I'm trying to say is they weren't afraid to take risks. Part of what made Guns N' Roses the biggest band in the world at the time is that they were dangerous, unscripted, you never knew when they'd play a three and a half hour show just for the hell of it and you never knew when Axl might tear into a 5 minute rant.

As far as your argument about listening to Appetite 1,000 times or drinking the same beer - it's a live concert. Would you watch the same movie in the theater 5 nights in a week if it cost $90 a pop?

Someone said they're not a band to 'follow around on tour' for most people anymore. I agree. Three times was enough until something changes. But, I'm a huge Tool fan, they play nearly the same identical set every night and they only give you a 90 minute show. Does that mean I hate Tool and will never see them again and think they're a terrible live act? No, hardly. Do I have a decent excuse in my mind for not seeing them again until they put out something new? Sure, that's fair I think.

Again, I don't care that the set is mostly the same these days. My theory is they have to go out and establish themselves all over the world so they're going with what they know works. Good for them and I wish them luck. I got my three shows already, I have no gripes with folks in Australia and Japan getting the same awesome experience I got.

I do hope that when (if) the album comes out they start to vary it up quite a bit though...especially if they do multiple nights in the same city.

people continue to bitch about the setlist but they fail to mention that EVERY song on the setlist is AWESOME....

to be taken seriously as a band and not just considered "hired guns" by the casual fans, the cd needs to be released and the entire disc needs to be played live.  i don't think more than 6 or 8 old songs should be played live by this version of the band, they did not have anything to do with the making of those songs.  the new songs are amazing and this band kicks some serious ass, but it's time for the cd to be unleashed and all new songs to be played instead of the band basically playing 15 cover tunes a night

Well stay tuned because there's NO indication that the CD is coming out any time soon.  Until then enjoy the fact that they're playing some fantastic shows.

Guns n Roses have 50 amazing songs. Yet they only ever chose to play 20 or so live.

Thats why we moan.

Fawking nerds.......I swear to gawd.  :no:

How many shows have YOU seen the new lineup play?  MOST people have only had the chance to see them once or twice.  I myself have seen them twice, once in '02 and once in '06.  And they didn't play the SAME setlist.  The fact is that at MOST of these shows people are seeing the band and hearing these songs live for the first time in many, many years.  What good would it do for you to read that the band played "Coma" in Budapest?  You're not there, so why would it matter?  Like the guy said who's seen them 3 times.  He saw basically the same set so he's choosing not to see them anymore.  That's his choice, for me it really doesn't matter what they play as long as they play it well, and that's pretty much a given.  People just love to complain, can't ever be truly satisfied, and obviously you can't expect to please everyone.  People seem to forget that back in the early 90's when GNR was varying their setlist on a nightly basis that they were "the most dangerous band in the world" at that time.  100,000's of fans were flocking to see them, many probably following them to multiple venues.  That's just not the case anymore.  It's a new lineup, minus Slash, no NEW material officially released in 16 years.  It's not 1991 anymore, I suggest you come to grips with that and enjoy the fact that the band is out there doing there thing, and doing it very well.

I personally dont mind the setlists.  Others think its a valid criticism.   (http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/board/index.php?topic=16619.0)

EXACTLY!!!! ?: ok:

To the poster who said they plaed locomotive and coma every 6 shows or whatever.. They played thos songs like 4 or 5 times max, EVER...

If you dont like the setlist, stay off the net and you wont know they're playing the same stuff each night... Yes it would be great to hear civil war but hey it dont get played then to bad...

Holy fuck.

If somebody else had made that post, it would just be sad, but since it's just you, it's just 100% Booker.


Velvet Revolver, the band who still says they're dangerous and unpredictable, play the same show every night which I pointed out and now you're trying to use that against me?

You're so petty Booker.



Why don't you go back to illegally downloading VR tracks and discussing their greatness even though the band is against that? Keep disrespecting the band and acting like it never happened.  :-*

Let the real GN'R fans post here.


Enjoy the warning.  : ok:


/jarmo

I think the setlist has a good flow to it-in the early days, I remember they said they kind of "winged" it, but if they did it now I just think it would ruin the flow of any band who did that.

What you say about Locomotive and Coma is simply not true. Those two songs were only played exceptionally: if I'm not wrong, ''Coma'' was played four times, one in 1991 (Richfield Coliseum), 2 in 1992 (Tokyo, Chicago) and one in 1993, which is the one allegedly included in the japanese version of Live Era. ''Locomotive'' was played just a few times, all in 1991 if I'm not wrong.

GNR setlists ALWAYS were very similar from one night to the next. Check 1993, for example. They were basically all the same, like now in 2007, that they are basically all the same: one night you have CD, one night you have Rocket Queen, one night you have madagascar...

I dont care about setlists. You will not find two identical ''Nightrains'' if you listen to all the 2006 boots. Every of them have something special, particular, different solos, Axl singing it different.

Of course I like ''surprises'' like in Madrid were TWAT was played, or in Detroit 2002 (or London 02) where Rhiad was played. But its a fact that only ''we, the nerds behind a monitor'' are the ones whining about setlists.

It would be cool to remind that Guns N' Roses dont do shows for us, the people sitting in a PC with a coffee with nothing better to do than that.

Seems like I hit a nerve.  I dont see what the problem is. 

I didnt bring VR up - this isnt about that band at all - I simply referenced your post criticizing a band for playing similar setlists during their tour. 







Nothing about "danger" or "unpredictability," just your honest wish to see a more varied setlist.  Some people here have the same feelings about GNR.  I saw GNR twice in 2006 and had no complaints about the setlist; Ive also defended their decision to not play any more new songs, so I disagree.  Im just pointing out that perhaps you can see where their coming from.  Your opinion on the issue is pretty clear from those quotes.  Why would that upset you?  Maybe you can explain?

I suppose being uninformed in this case would make everyone a little cooler, coffee or not.

Keep dreaming.

You're probably the most pathetic poster I've seen.

You keep quoting me to "prove" your point when the fact is I was talking about a different fucking band and a different situation, and you know it.

Or maybe you don't, after all you were the one who was gonna teach me about logical thinking.




Why didn't you quote this part then?




You're so fucking sad. You didn't even quote the post on the same page where I brought up the reason I posted that in the first place.


Keep digging that hole.



Let's see if you're man/woman enough to admit you were proven wrong.

Are you gonna do what you always do, hide and act like it never happened? Just like you never addressed why you would go against your lovely band's wishes by downloading the album and start hyping it before its official release.



/jarmo

I wonder what bookey will quote me on in 3 years.. then again... will he still be here in 3 years?

I think you said something about not liking coffee three years ago and now you're drinking a Coke.

So, you know, it means he proved you wrong since both contain caffeine.


BookerLogic - If it doesn't make sense, it really does!.




/jarmo

jesus, those multiquotes posts are turning really unbearable. The FBI is here with us...

I wouldn't say never.   They brought out old tunes in 2006 and 2007 that weren't played in 2001-2002 like Used to Love her, You're Crazy, Down on the Farm, and supposedly they have Perfect Crime in their options as well.   Who knows what they could add in the future.

don't forget nice boys

People often forget to mention the acoustic shows they did last year, the covers they played in Europe etc.

Or just like mentioned above, Nice Boys with Angry Anderson.





/jarmo

Hey what the hell... Ron does Don't Cry....

I didnt insult you, I dont think its fair to insult me.


I think Ive proven my point just fine...with your help of course.  Well, the 2004 you.  Apparently the 2007 you has a different opinion on bands playing similar playlists.  You were quite clear: you like bands to play varied playlists.  You thought it was a threadworthy complaint.  Now its no longer a concern of yours.  Im glad we agree on that now.  Again, Im just pointing out that you might understand when some posters make that complaint about a GNR show.  Do you not?



Because its ancillary to the broader points you made in the quotes Ive posted.  Those points had seemingly nothing to do with "proving" that the band isnt dangerous or unpredictable, they simply expressed your dissatisfaction with them playing similar lists. 


Maybe the 2007 you would like to answer that question.


Im sure youd like to think you "got" me, but the truth is that Im choosing to ignore most of your posts, especially ones that arent in response to mine.  Youve made a lot of posts with "Booker" in them lately. 

But since you brought it up: I downloaded the album because I have nothing against downloading, especially when one intends on buying the album.  I also have nothing against downloading bonus tracks.  Ive never expressed an opinion to the contrary.  As for discussing them against band managements/record labels wishes (because Ive seen nothing indicating that it was the bands decision, as youre stating), as long as its permitted on the board, Ill do so.  Pretty simple. 

But since you charged that I "hide" (again, Im sorry I gave you that impression, Im just ignoring most of your posts), you havent addressed how you heard VRs EP.  Are you hiding? 

Have you heard GNRs leaks?

If you fail to answer, Ill have to follow your example and assume youre hiding. 

That's a great post. ?I think people's minds get clouded rather easily around here. ?Like, if you want a new setlist, you must "hate the band."

You know what it is? ?I've been a fan since '88, and I'm spoiled, because I KNOW that they can be more unpredictable. ?

For example (I'm not posting the link, but you can find it online) take a look back at the setlists in '91, before the Illusions came out. ? I went to my first show at the CNE in '91. ?Look at that setlist, and tell me it wasn't amazing. ?People were yelling out songs that they only heard the titles of, and the band would play it. ?Think they'd do that now if you shouted out "The General" or "There was a Time?" ?

Like I said, the majority of the people who seem to be satisfied with this setlist probably didn't get a chance to see them back in the day. ?That's sad, because they truly were the most unpredictable band, and it was a real find to go to a cd show and find a boot of Indiana or Toronto or something because it was always different.

In Australia, a lot of the crowds, especially where second shows were added, were very much Greatest Hits crowds.. so one might argue that the crowd would have been disappointed if they added in tracks like Perfect Crime etc. at the expense of the 'classics'. A lot of the fans didn't even know My Michelle and Out Ta Get Me.

The show if for fans, both the strong followers and casual fans, who are attending a single show, not complainers reading it in front of a monitor. If you are attending multiples shows like I did, then that's your problem if you don't like the same set.

GN'R do not play for people following on tour. They play for people coming to see a show. If you want to follow them, be it on the computer screen or on tour, and you don't like the setlist, then that's your problem.

If you treat me like an idiot, you did.




Funny.

I asked a question "which would you prefer?" and I showed how this "unpredictable" band isn't so unpredictable.

Which is basically what you VR fan still accuse me of doing.






Of course you ignore them, it's more convenient for somebody like you.

People who are never wrong because when they are, they just change the subject!


You even said I said nothing about the whole unpredictability thing and there it was on the same page.



Yet you didn't quote that part.

Isn't that what some call a lie since there was a part about the unpredictability on the same page?

Maybe you could explain why you feel the need to lie about my posts?

Waiting for your explanation and apology for lying about me not saying anything about the unpredictability.


Maybe I won't insult you if you can actually keep from lying about me.



Somehow that's so typical of you. Only quoting one line at the time to prove your point.

Taking things out of context and ignoring other parts or posts.




Management represents the band. 



I did answer, I told you there are several ways to acquire the EP without actually spending money on that band.  You just need to figure it our because I'm not gonna help you.




Yes I have.




/jarmo

i agree, totally. we had a post about this a little while ago. i pretty much said the same thing you just said....here's the link... ? http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/board/index.php?topic=46594.msg946924#msg946924

OK - but do you understand how lazy this makes the band looks, when it comes to the setlist?

Back in '91, there was no internet.  You only knew what the setlist was by word of mouth, or from a newspaper review.  No one followed them "online," because there WASN'T an online.  Yet, they still changed their setlist every night, when no one would've known the difference!!

All I know is that the first time I saw them in '91 was the best.  You think those crowds knew "Civil War" or "November Rain," or anything else off of the Illusions?  No.  But we ate it up, because they were so damn unpredictable.

i wasnt even talking about playing new songs

they can perfect change lets see

out to get me , my michelle for other old songs

No, its just a misunderstanding on your part.  The points that I quoted were separate from your criticism about their "danger," so there was nothing about "danger" in those points.  In fact, some of the posts from which I quoted were made before you said anything about danger or unpredictability.   

You asked:


This has nothing to do with anything the band said about danger.  This is you asking a fan what they prefer.  You didnt answer it, so Ill ask you:

As a fan, which would you prefer? The current type of set lists or the kind where they mixed them up more?

You also avoided another question asked: as somebody who complained about similar setlists, do you not understand where somebody is coming from when they make the same exact complaint you did in the first post of that thread about GNR?


So management/record labels dont occasionally make decisions the band has nothing to do with?


Thats not an answer, thats hiding.


How did you hear them, out of curiosity?  Considering you do follow their every instruction, perhaps GNRs management gave you permission.  Is that the case?

How can you prove that my point wasn't that since they're so fucking unpredictable, maybe they should play more varied shows while asking the fans what they think?

Because, if you read those posts, you'll see how I mentioned the unpredictability issue.





As long as the show is great, I don't care what songs they play. I like them all.

I understand that most casual fans might get puzzled if they played something like Coma.

It's not the easiest song to get into.



Not really because I made the post because of what VR claimed they were.



Of course, but you went against the band's management's wishes.

No matter how you twist it, you did.



It's an answer. I don't need to answer to you about how I get music. Which albums I buy where, if I receive gifts etc. It's really none of your business.




It's really none of your business now is it?



/jarmo

What I said was, occasionally they gave great surprises like that.  They'd just randomly decide "Let's play this 8-10 minute monster of a tune that we've never played live before...in front of 40,000 people tonight...just because we're badass and want to try something new".  I didn't say they played those songs all the time.

I meant, if they were in the middle of a leg of a tour somewhere, you never knew when they'd pull a surprise like that.  They also only played Breakdown once or twice.  Same thing.  You never knew when you were going to be surprised.

I don't think they were 'similar' at all from night to night back in the day.  Maybe they'd have a steady opener for a few weeks at a time and always the same closer, and ISE and Brownstone would always be early on in the set...but they were always adding/taking out random tunes (for example - '91 you heard Izzy's tunes, Perfect Crime and occasionally Bad Apples, '92 you'd hear Move To The City, occasionally Coma or Locomotive, '93 you heard Dead Horse and The Garden, etc.) and if you go through the setlist archives you see a lot more variation than you do these days.

And again, I'm not bitching.  Read my whole post.  I said I understand their reasoning for playing pretty much the same show from night to night and I said I was happy with the three shows I went to and that I'm glad people in other parts of the world get the same awesome experience I did.

And whoever is saying 'the band needs time to learn the songs'....well, no, I'm pretty sure Axl decides what they play.  If he told them 'go learn Locomotive, we're playing it next week', I'm pretty sure it would happen.  He's going with what he knows works, he has a lot to prove, good for him.

My ONLY legitimate gripe is when they play the same set in the same venue two or three nights in a row with maybe one song switched out.  That's the only time I personally feel this band should be changing it up a bit.  And that's my opinion, it's not a big deal, it's not an insult to the band.  It's just an opinion.

I'm not insulting the band.  This is called a discussion, I gave my opinion on the subject, that's it.

First of all, you can't refer to old GNR and the way they played ?a show. ?Those guys created those songs. ?It was easier for them to jump into one of those songs on the fly. ?They could bounce around since they knew those songs intimately. ?The new band is still mastering the old songs into their own. ?The new band needs to make sure their style is flawless. ?No one is a harder critic than a GNR fan (just look at this thread). ?If the new band just played songs in an impromtu way...the same fans complaining about the setlist would be complaining about the quality of the songs and that there's no flow to the concert.

Secondly, the band can't play new songs. ?The second they play a new CD song, it will be all over the internet in moments. ?People will be downloading the track before they're even done playing it. ?There's already 10 news songs floating around the interent. ?I think the band would like their to be a few surprises on the new CD.

There's an old saying..."If it's not broke, don't fix it..." ?If this setlist is working and the fans are coming away having a fantastic time, then why change it up? ? ?Why should they appease some guy watching a setlist update at home on his computer?

I dont have to - your original post didnt make that an issue.  Your original post simply expressed your wish to see a more varied setlist.  Thats an indisputable fact. 


Yes, several posts later, you mentioned that you thought it was "funny."  Your original post didnt make mention of it.  The two posts after that didnt.  In those posts, you just wanted to see different setlists.   

Because I knew how'd you react if I made it clear in the first psot.  ::)



Because those guys are so unpredictable.......




Today I wouldn't use that phrase because I know what a great shows is.







See above.

The question is, when are you gonna admit that you lied when you said I never mentioned the unpredictability?

The idea of the thread was to see if others wanted the band to play longer. If they thought it was odd for them to keep playing the same sets especially since it was their second leg in North America.

I certainly found it odd to see the unpredictable band doing that.


Now, do I need to mention how this is different from GN'R playing shows with similar sets in Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand and Japan?




Oh, ok.




No I didn't.

I just don't feel like discussing certain things with you.


What's your real name and where can we see a picture of you online?

Are you gonna hide by not answering?

See? Same thing.




/jarmo

Never fear guys...it turns out that GNR just did a surprise show at a Starbucks in New Zealand.  They heard about how upset everyone was about the  setlist, so they totally mixed it up.  Check it out:

Reckless Life
Shadow of Your Love
Move To The City
Axl orders a venti frappucino
Don't Damn Me
Sorry
Coma
Catcher in the Rye
BBF solo (Don't Get Fooled Again/Thriller)
Shotgun Blues
Piano Jam (Smells Like Teen Spirit/Why Don't You Get A Job?)
Since I Don't Have You
Bad Apples
Right Next Door To Hell
You're Crazy

Encore 1

The General, Pretty Tied Up, The Garden, Ain't It Fun

Encore 2

Rhiad and the Bedouins, Get In the Ring

It was a great show.  And everyone there got a free vanilla latte!!!

Isn't today the same? For example, Guns N' Roses did almost the same setlist in all 2002. When they felt the need to ''be badass and want to try something new'' they played Rhiad (Osaka, Detroit). In 2006, the setlist was pretty similar night after night. And again, when they felt the need to try something new, they included TWAT (twice), ''Think About You'', ''Used To Love Her'', ''Down On The Farm'' (which is the best example of ''let's do it just because we're badass'').

The period of time between one ''Coma'' and the next was a lot larger than the period between the first TWAT and the second, same for Rhiad. Well, these are surprises: you cant call ''surprise'' Madagascar, because its played regularly.

Some people in this board want GNR to do a 50 song setlist, without solos and pauses, with Axl singing the 50 songs at 100%, with three or four diff special guests every night, and guess what: they also DEMAND surprises. That never happened, that is not happening and that's not going to happen. The day the whiners got everything they want from GNR, they will demand a newer thing, like Axl bringing Beta to sing ''Coma'' or something, because they CANT be happy with what GNR offers. Simple as that.

Anyway, its good to see GNR doing what they want to do. That is more ''unpredictable'' than doing what some whining nerds want them to do.

PS: under no circunstances I'm calling YOU a whiner, dont worry, but there were and there are lots of them in this forum, who are unable to be happy with GNR, no matter what GNR can do.

That setlist looks ridiculous without all the staple tunes on it, but I'm sure people sitting at home on their cpu's would be stoked at such a set.  On the other hand, for the people actually attending the show, I could only imagine the booing and riots.  No WTTJ, SCOM, PC?  WTF?

Funny post though, and quite the creative setlist.  I'd enjoy that set for an impromptu jam at my local Starbuck's, I just don't think it'd go over well in front of 15,000 fans.

You also have to think of the performers doing the doing. They must also ride the momentum of the live gig and adjust to the vibe of the audience. The guys on stage are not performing monkeys who can turn it on instantly, some songs are used as motivation for the next song.......

Apply the acting cliche "what's my motivation?" here (trick of the trade)........