i know i'm super late. just picked up a used copy of the live 1975-1985 3 cd boxset in very good condition for $20

The show at Valle Hovin Arena clocked in at 3:44. Here is a picture from Valle Hovin, Oslo:

Quote
Gazza
Dublin was an outrageous couple of shows. Great to see you again, mate.

Hi Gazza,

Right on both counts, hah-hah! Maybe Bruce'll be back...

Cheers,

Simon.

I was at the Valle Hovin show in Oslo, and was disappointed.

This WAS Vegas, but let´s not dwell with that.

It took 90 minutes before it started to swing, mainly because of huge problems with getting the sound right. The sound came in waves; no treble, way too much treble - and I was standing just beside the mixing desk.

The worst thing, however, was that the show was not guitar-driven at all. During the 3 hr. 45 min.-show, we couldn´t hear what Lofgren and Van Zandt were playing more than 4 or 5 times! Springsteen took the first two solos himself, and altogether there were 4 or 5 solos.

That could have been fine, too, if you´re into brass and keyboards.

The setlist was probably great for hard core fans, but 10 minute versions of Twist And Shout or other soul covers were a bit too much.

The acoustic opening (with Springsteen alone on stage), the Born In The USA-songs and a couple of the hits were great, though. 10th Avenue Freeze-Out worked fantastically as well.

3/6

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I was at the Valle Hovin show in Oslo, and was disappointed.

This WAS Vegas, but let´s not dwell with that.

It was Vegas, indeed, Dandelion

To say something positive....Bruce really has something real - which can't be duplicated. Whether one likes it or not is a different thing.

At least he's trying his best. It's just not something that "speak to me". But I won't be speaking any bad words about Bruce. He's probably terrific for others.To me.....it just doesn't does it , anymore. Wish it did - but it didn't.

Well.....Bruce is not Rolling Stones or Bob Dylan who's just "absolutely lost" on stage, without any direction or power. He has a lot of power.
But I don't "get" that power.
So I'm being diplomatic here. Have respect for Bruce though....no doubt. He is an authentic guy

Quote
Erik_Snow
Hey DandelionPowderman; are you reading this thread? You're in Oslo, just like me, aren't you?
I got a spare ticket for Bruce on Saturday. If you're not reading this thread....then you probably don't care for the concert anyway. But if you do read it; give a shout out, and you'll get a free ticket from me.

[ EDIT: A good "torrent-friend" of mine contacted me - and he's dying for a ticket. So he'll get it. Sorry, DandelionPowderman ]

Hi Erik,

I didn´t see your post before now

I was offered a free ticket, and went to the show.

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I was at the Valle Hovin show in Oslo, and was disappointed.

This WAS Vegas, but let´s not dwell with that.

It was Vegas, indeed, Dandelion

To say something positive....Bruce really has something real - which can't be duplicated. Whether one likes it or not is a different thing.

At least he's trying his best. It's just not something that "speak to me". But I won't be speaking any bad words about Bruce. He's probably terrific for others.To me.....it just doesn't does it , anymore. Wish it did - but it didn't.

Well.....Bruce is not Rolling Stones or Bob Dylan who's just "absolutely lost" on stage, without any direction or power. He has a lot of power.
But I don't "get" that power.
So I'm being diplomatic here. Have respect for Bruce though....no doubt. He is an authentic guy

I fully agree, Erik. I wouldn´t have attended the show is I didn´t know what Bruce is all about. He can be excellent, as he was in 1988, when I catched him at the Tunnel Of Love-tour.

This time, however, there were too many horns and too long rests in between the magic (which is always there, in some form on Bruce-shows).

@happy24 great review. as you know, i was there in vienna

Quote
Massimo68
We Shall Overcome - Memorial Concert - July 22nd 2012, Oslo :

what was the memorial for? something in oslo? the people who died in the theater shootong here in colorado?

Quote
keefriffhard4life
what was the memorial for? something in oslo? the people who died in the theater shootong here in colorado?

Just click on "more info" in the video screen :

Bruce Springsteen and Little Steven performing «We Shall Overcome» In Oslo, Norway, in memory of the 77 people who got killed the 22nd of July 2011.

Quote
Massimo68

Quote
keefriffhard4life
what was the memorial for? something in oslo? the people who died in the theater shootong here in colorado?

Just click on "more info" in the video screen :

Bruce Springsteen and Little Steven performing «We Shall Overcome» In Oslo, Norway, in memory of the 77 people who got killed the 22nd of July 2011.

thank you

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I was at the Valle Hovin show in Oslo, and was disappointed.

This WAS Vegas, but let´s not dwell with that.

It took 90 minutes before it started to swing, mainly because of huge problems with getting the sound right. The sound came in waves; no treble, way too much treble - and I was standing just beside the mixing desk.

The worst thing, however, was that the show was not guitar-driven at all. During the 3 hr. 45 min.-show, we couldn´t hear what Lofgren and Van Zandt were playing more than 4 or 5 times! Springsteen took the first two solos himself, and altogether there were 4 or 5 solos.

That could have been fine, too, if you´re into brass and keyboards.

The setlist was probably great for hard core fans, but 10 minute versions of Twist And Shout or other soul covers were a bit too much.

The acoustic opening (with Springsteen alone on stage), the Born In The USA-songs and a couple of the hits were great, though. 10th Avenue Freeze-Out worked fantastically as well.

3/6

Vegas?? Okay, your opinion. But you must have been unlucky with the sound at your place 'cause down in the pit there was clear sound and lots of loud guitars, and that was not only Bruce:-)

Bruce's choice of "We shall overcome" at the memorial was not an original choice. The song was poorly executed. His "speech" hardly a speech at all. Maybe he should have stayed in his hotel suit?

Quote
bobo

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I was at the Valle Hovin show in Oslo, and was disappointed.

This WAS Vegas, but let´s not dwell with that.

It took 90 minutes before it started to swing, mainly because of huge problems with getting the sound right. The sound came in waves; no treble, way too much treble - and I was standing just beside the mixing desk.

The worst thing, however, was that the show was not guitar-driven at all. During the 3 hr. 45 min.-show, we couldn´t hear what Lofgren and Van Zandt were playing more than 4 or 5 times! Springsteen took the first two solos himself, and altogether there were 4 or 5 solos.

That could have been fine, too, if you´re into brass and keyboards.

The setlist was probably great for hard core fans, but 10 minute versions of Twist And Shout or other soul covers were a bit too much.

The acoustic opening (with Springsteen alone on stage), the Born In The USA-songs and a couple of the hits were great, though. 10th Avenue Freeze-Out worked fantastically as well.

3/6

Vegas?? Okay, your opinion. But you must have been unlucky with the sound at your place 'cause down in the pit there was clear sound and lots of loud guitars, and that was not only Bruce:-)

Good for you! I was standing beside the sound desk, a place where the sound is supposed to be a bit better than what we got.

The "Vegas-comment" was due to the brass-heavy sound Bruce had this time.

The show wasn´t bad, but as I´ve seen Bruce before, I expected more than this.

The sound was OK near the beer-tap! He,he

Per-Arne

ok i just listened to the live 1975-1985 3 cd boxset. a few things i want to say about it. why is there only 1 song from 1975? why is there only about 10 songs from the 70's and they are pretty much all from the same gig?

glad they left off "dancing in the dark" but too many songs from the BORN IN THE USA album. i would have liked a band version on "no surrender" instead of the acoustic solo bruce version.

Quote
keefriffhard4life
ok i just listened to the live 1975-1985 3 cd boxset. a few things i want to say about it. why is there only 1 song from 1975? why is there only about 10 songs from the 70's and they are pretty much all from the same gig?

glad they left off "dancing in the dark" but too many songs from the BORN IN THE USA album. i would have liked a band version on "no surrender" instead of the acoustic solo bruce version.

They played a band version in Oslo.

Funny reading a band being dscribed as having a 'Vegas' sound based solely on the fact that they have a brass section.

Even though they first toured with one as far back as 1977, the roots of the band from day one are entrenched firmly in 60's soul music, their signature instrument (if any) has always been a saxophone and the reason for the horn section being used on this tour was primarily so that they werent faced with the dilemma of replacing the band's recently deceased and most recognisable member with a single musician.

Quote
keefriffhard4life
ok i just listened to the live 1975-1985 3 cd boxset. a few things i want to say about it. why is there only 1 song from 1975?

Always wondered that myself. Still, we now have the Hammersmith Odeon' 75 release

Quote
keefriffhard4life
why is there only about 10 songs from the 70's and they are pretty much all from the same gig? .

This album came out in 1986. I think there's 40 songs on it. Its quite reasonable that most of them would have been taken from his most recent tours at the time, ie 1980-81 and 1984-85. There wasnt much touring done in 1977 and none at all in 1979. There was also never any intention to release a live album until 1985-86 so not that many shows were recorded for possible release peior to 1984. It was quite a surprise at the time that he chose to do a retrospective release instead of just a 1984-85 tour souvenir. And a 5-LP live album was simply unheard of.

Quote
keefriffhard4life

glad they left off "dancing in the dark" but too many songs from the BORN IN THE USA album. i would have liked a band version on "no surrender" instead of the acoustic solo bruce version.

Understandable. It was his current album and had sold in ridiculous quantities compared to previous releases.

The acoustic version of No Surrender is actually a good idea, as its an alternative to the parade of BITUSA songs that you reckon is a bit excessive.

Besides, its just 8 BITUSA songs out of 40. Its not that many. Just seems that way because theyre all on the last couple of discs as theyre from the 84-85 tour. Theres actually 6 songs each from The River and Darkness On the Edge of Town (plus 3 'Darkness' era songs that hadnt been released before)

He'd only released seven studio albums by this stage, dont forget.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-24 14:40 by Gazza.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
keefriffhard4life
ok i just listened to the live 1975-1985 3 cd boxset. a few things i want to say about it. why is there only 1 song from 1975?

Always wondered that myself. Still, we now have the Hammersmith Odeon' 75 release

Quote
keefriffhard4life
why is there only about 10 songs from the 70's and they are pretty much all from the same gig? .

This album came out in 1986. I think there's 40 songs on it. Its quite reasonable that most of them would have been taken from his most recent tours at the time, ie 1980-81 and 1984-85. There wasnt much touring done in 1977 and none at all in 1979. There was also never any intention to release a live album until 1985-86 so not that many shows were recorded for possible release peior to 1984. It was quite a surprise at the time that he chose to do a retrospective release instead of just a 1984-85 tour souvenir. And a 5-LP live album was simply unheard of.

Quote
keefriffhard4life

glad they left off "dancing in the dark" but too many songs from the BORN IN THE USA album. i would have liked a band version on "no surrender" instead of the acoustic solo bruce version.

Understandable. It was his current album and had sold in ridiculous quantities compared to previous releases.

The acoustic version of No Surrender is actually a good idea, as its an alternative to the parade of BITUSA songs that you reckon is a bit excessive.

Besides, its just 8 BITUSA songs out of 40. Its not that many. Just seems that way because theyre all on the last couple of discs as theyre from the 84-85 tour. Theres actually 6 songs each from The River and Darkness On the Edge of Town (plus 3 'Darkness' era songs that hadnt been released before)

He'd only released seven studio albums by this stage, dont forget.

yeah but still leaving off "the fever" and "the promise" and several other early favorites that were recorded live and released on the TRACKS boxset was probably pretty odd to the diehard springsteen fans

Leaving them off the live album?

Not really - not as I recall at the time, anyway. Those songs werent widely known and hadnt been played for a long time. Whereas other unreleased songs like 'Fire' and 'Because the night' certainly were and would have been more representative of his live act during that period.

Bruce and the ESB just played 2 consecutive nights in Bergen, Norway. they did 29 songs the first night (3 hours 15 minutes) and 31 the second night (3 hours 30 minutes).
on the second night, they did 17 songs not done the first night, including 4 tour-premieres and one world premiere, for a total of 46 different songs over the 2 nights.
out of the 31 songs done the second nights, 14 are from 2002 onwards (11 are from 2006 onwards and 7 are from his current record). remarkable for a guy who has recorded his first album in...1972, 40 years ago.
over the course of 52 nights on the current tour, 50 regular shows + 2 "rehearsal"/special shows, Bruce and the ESB so far have done 133 different songs, of which only 7 have been played every night.

PS: the guy is about to turn 63 in a couple of months...



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-25 16:02 by superglen.

thats quite an interesting stat, superglen.

Quote
mgguy
thats quite an interesting stat, superglen.

it is, especially the fact that, out of the 31 songs played last night, no less than 14 (nearly half the set) have been originally released in the current decade.

talk about an artist that is as creatively relevant, brave, meaningful and "current" today as he was when he started, 40 years back.

that's the exact opposite of a "nostalgia" and "greatest hits" act.

and mind, he's not playing clubs or theathers, but stadiums...

-



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-25 17:43 by dcba.

Quote
Gazza
Funny reading a band being dscribed as having a 'Vegas' sound based solely on the fact that they have a brass section.

Even though they first toured with one as far back as 1977, the roots of the band from day one are entrenched firmly in 60's soul music, their signature instrument (if any) has always been a saxophone and the reason for the horn section being used on this tour was primarily so that they werent faced with the dilemma of replacing the band's recently deceased and most recognisable member with a single musician.

I get that, but as a concert goer that haven´t seen Bruce since 1988, the change of sound was remarkable - not unlike another band we know well.

The problem wasn´t really the brass section. The problem was that we couldn´t hear what the guitars were doing during almost four hours of r&b music.

I was in the pit both nights in Dublin last week - standing just in front of the mixing desk each time - and the sound was too low and muddy for the first hour or so on the first night. Which is a bit strange, as the general consensus for this tour is that his sound has been MUCH improved. At the other show I attended - Manchester last month - I was in the same part of the stadium and the sound was great.

They did get it right eventually and the sound on the second night in Dublin was terrific.

To get back to the 'Vegas' thing - the definition of that to me is an act doing what is effectively a cabaret style nostalgia show packed with their greatest hits. The Beach Boys would be an example. A band who are rearranging their old material, playing largely random setlists and who are unafraid to play lots of new material is an evolving band, and a long way from being a 'Vegas' act.

horns = vegas. sorry, but that's just the way it is. and there's nothing wrong with it, either. nobody needs to defend vegas cos vegas can stand for itself...or something.

Quote
StonesTod
horns = vegas. sorry, but that's just the way it is. and there's nothing wrong with it, either. nobody needs to defend vegas cos vegas can stand for itself...or something.

so the studio version of "rocks off" is vegas? has horns. so does "heartbreaker"