bruce just broke his own usa record for longest show and included 2 of my favorite early sprinsteen tunes. tracks 11 and 12


1. New York City Serenade
(with string section)

2. Does This Bus Stop at 82nd Street?

3. It's Hard to Be a Saint in the City

4. Growin' Up

5. Spirit in the Night

6. Lost in the Flood

7. Kitty's Back

8. The E Street Shuffle

9. Incident on 57th Street

10. Rosalita (Come Out Tonight)

11. The Fever
(sign request, tour debut)

12. Thundercrack
(tour debut)

13. Night

14. No Surrender

15. The Ties That Bind

16. My Love Will Not Let You Down

17. Death to My Hometown

18. Jack of All Trades
(with string section)

19. American Skin (41 Shots)

20. The Promised Land

21. Hungry Heart

22. Darlington County

23. Working on the Highway

24. Downbound Train

25. Because the Night


26. The Rising

27. Badlands

28. Encore:
29. Streets of Philadelphia
(tour debut)

30. Jungleland

31. Born to Run

32. Dancing in the Dark

33. Tenth Avenue Freeze-Out

34. Shout
(The Isley Brothers cover)

35. Bobby Jean



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-09-08 09:47 by keefriffhard4life.

I'm sure you know Bruce wrote Because The Night. My favorite version is from 10,000 Maniacs on their unplugged album in the early 90's.

Quote
DGA35
I'm sure you know Bruce wrote Because The Night. My favorite version is from 10,000 Maniacs on their unplugged album in the early 90's.

I copied that from another site. i'll edit the mistake. yes I know he wrote it



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-09-08 09:47 by keefriffhard4life.

Quote
Sighunt

I just don't get what the animosity is all about on this site when it comes to Bruce. Yes, this is a board about the Stones who I love first and foremost, but Bruce is also right up there with them as far as great albums and memorable concerts. The man puts himself out there and appears to actually give a shit about his audiences (still touring, playing long shows, continuing to challenge himself-taking risks/releasing new material, etc). As fans, we need to cherish that these artists (including our beloved Stones) are still touring. There will come a time when these trail -blazers will not grace the stage and then we will all be bitching and moaning about it.

I agree completely with you.
Of course it's different music and differences in taste are not disputable.
But one can not deny the talents of Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band, the
great effort they put into every show and the entertainment they provide to so many
people.
It is surprising that the few bands and artists that are still playing rock 'n roll
at this day and age, receive so much cynism on this board, the place we visit to celebrate
that rock 'n roll showed us the way to escape from the burdens of every day's life.
I think that's exactly what Bruce is all about. He earns some respect for that.

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

Quote
keefriffhard4life
bruce just broke his own usa record for longest show and included 2 of my favorite early sprinsteen tunes. tracks 11 and 12


1. New York City Serenade
(with string section)

2. Does This Bus Stop at 82nd Street?

3. It's Hard to Be a Saint in the City

4. Growin' Up

5. Spirit in the Night

6. Lost in the Flood

7. Kitty's Back

8. The E Street Shuffle

9. Incident on 57th Street

10. Rosalita (Come Out Tonight)

11. The Fever
(sign request, tour debut)

12. Thundercrack
(tour debut)

13. Night

14. No Surrender

15. The Ties That Bind

16. My Love Will Not Let You Down

17. Death to My Hometown

18. Jack of All Trades
(with string section)

19. American Skin (41 Shots)

20. The Promised Land

21. Hungry Heart

22. Darlington County

23. Working on the Highway

24. Downbound Train

25. Because the Night


26. The Rising

27. Badlands

28. Encore:
29. Streets of Philadelphia
(tour debut)

30. Jungleland

31. Born to Run

32. Dancing in the Dark

33. Tenth Avenue Freeze-Out

34. Shout
(The Isley Brothers cover)

35. Bobby Jean

That's a great setlist.

Quote
DGA35
I'm sure you know Bruce wrote Because The Night. My favorite version is from 10,000 Maniacs on their unplugged album in the early 90's.

Patti Smith

Quote
reg thorpe

Quote
DGA35
I'm sure you know Bruce wrote Because The Night. My favorite version is from 10,000 Maniacs on their unplugged album in the early 90's.

Patti Smith

Both. The rules of the website setlist.fm are that a song is called a cover if it was
published by another artist before. That way Wild Horses should be called a flying Burrito Brothers cover



Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

But does Setlist.fm make those rules?

Quote
keefriff99

I think it comes down to two different and distinct things:

1. The Stones are all about sex, drugs, sleaze, and cynicism. They revel and wallow in it. Bruce is the opposite: he's earnest and heartfelt and tender. The tone in their music and lyrics couldn't be more different.

...secondly, and more importantly...

2. Pure jealousy. Let's face it: the Stones have been coasting for decades by riding largely the same goddamned 10-15 greatest hits for all they're worth. Springsteen still puts out relevant material and takes his audiences on an unpredictable rollercoaster of a journey EVERY show.
.

Bruce's act is a shtick, the working class/folkie hero routine. I'm sure he believes in it, his audience does, too, but it's sentimental claptrap. He became big just at the time the industrial base in this country began to erode and working class people began to go to college and move into white collar jobs. He tapped into that nostalgia for what they grew up with. They have a shared memory of something that really didn't happen quite that way.
Yes, he is earnest, but he has absolutely no sense of humour.
The Stones are different, yes -- unsentimental and cynical and funny and real.
Springsteen is, like Keith wrote, overblown and contrived.
So that's how I see this depression reveal. He was a 60-year-old man going through the normal ups and downs of life, maybe bummed about some things, but instead of calling it what it was, he has to play it as part of the heroic struggle with his father/past history nonsense.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
But does Setlist.fm make those rules?

They make the rules about what is published on their website, I guess.
That's where keefriffhard4life took his information from.

I think it is rather funny to call Because the night a Patti Smith cover.
And they broke their own rule by not calling Wild Horses a cover.

But in the end, who cares? It's a brilliant website with loads of interesting facts.

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

If you record or perform other people's work, you are covering their work. It should be as simple as that, imo.

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
keefriff99

I think it comes down to two different and distinct things:

1. The Stones are all about sex, drugs, sleaze, and cynicism. They revel and wallow in it. Bruce is the opposite: he's earnest and heartfelt and tender. The tone in their music and lyrics couldn't be more different.

...secondly, and more importantly...

2. Pure jealousy. Let's face it: the Stones have been coasting for decades by riding largely the same goddamned 10-15 greatest hits for all they're worth. Springsteen still puts out relevant material and takes his audiences on an unpredictable rollercoaster of a journey EVERY show.
.

Bruce's act is a shtick, the working class/folkie hero routine. I'm sure he believes in it, his audience does, too, but it's sentimental claptrap. He became big just at the time the industrial base in this country began to erode and working class people began to go to college and move into white collar jobs. He tapped into that nostalgia for what they grew up with. They have a shared memory of something that really didn't happen quite that way.
Yes, he is earnest, but he has absolutely no sense of humour.
The Stones are different, yes -- unsentimental and cynical and funny and real.
Springsteen is, like Keith wrote, overblown and contrived.
So that's how I see this depression reveal. He was a 60-year-old man going through the normal ups and downs of life, maybe bummed about some things, but instead of calling it what it was, he has to play it as part of the heroic struggle with his father/past history nonsense.

You're clearly ignorant of Springsteen's history.

His struggle with depression dates back to the '80s and his use of antidepressants since 2003 has been documented, so there was no "reveal" to people who actually know what they're talking about. He's simply discussing it in a different forum.

[www.rollingstone.com]

[www.subchat.com]

But again, if one is ignorant and simply running one's mouth, then it would certainly seem like Springsteen is only now discussing this for the first time, because we all know chronic depression is such a hot, fun topic for a rock star to discuss.

Quote
DGA35
I'm sure you know Bruce wrote Because The Night. My favorite version is from 10,000 Maniacs on their unplugged album in the early 90's.

That's by far my favorite version. In fact, when I sing along to it at a Springsteen show, I usually end up singing the Maniacs version of the lyrics.

Maybe Bruce would feel better staying in his 60 million dollar LA estate.
Maybe all his long concerts are for him, self therapy. Good luck to you BS.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If you record or perform other people's work, you are covering their work. It should be as simple as that, imo.

Bruce wrote and recorded Because the Night during the Darkness sessions (1977/1978), but letf it off the record and gave it to Patti because it was "too poppy". she changed part of the lyrics to a more sexy/female POV, that's why the shared writing credit. she recorded it and had a huge hit (the only one of her career).
Bruce's awsome studio version remained unreleased until 2010.

Quote
superglen

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If you record or perform other people's work, you are covering their work. It should be as simple as that, imo.

Bruce wrote and recorded Because the Night during the Darkness sessions (1977/1978), but letf it off the record and gave it to Patti because it was "too poppy". she changed part of the lyrics to a more sexy/female POV, that's why the shared writing credit. she recorded it and had a huge hit (the only one of her career).
Bruce's awsome studio version remained unreleased until 2010.

I know that

Wonderboy...get over yourself...you're talking total and utter bollocks.

Sounds like you have a deep suspicion (and envy) of anyone who doesn't have to play their greatest hits every single night on a fancy stage; unlike some other so-called "artists" that come to mind. You know, the ones who people go to see just to tick a box or because they feel nostalgic.

Springsteen is nothing of the sort and is still, to this day, many things to many different people.

Talent and relevance is NOT a gimmick.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-09-09 02:22 by Mainman.

Quote
marcovandereijk

Quote
DandelionPowderman
But does Setlist.fm make those rules?

They make the rules about what is published on their website, I guess.
That's where keefriffhard4life took his information from.

I think it is rather funny to call Because the night a Patti Smith cover.
And they broke their own rule by not calling Wild Horses a cover.

But in the end, who cares? It's a brilliant website with loads of interesting facts.

yes I did take it from setlist.fm

Quote
wonderboy

Quote
keefriff99

I think it comes down to two different and distinct things:

1. The Stones are all about sex, drugs, sleaze, and cynicism. They revel and wallow in it. Bruce is the opposite: he's earnest and heartfelt and tender. The tone in their music and lyrics couldn't be more different.

...secondly, and more importantly...

2. Pure jealousy. Let's face it: the Stones have been coasting for decades by riding largely the same goddamned 10-15 greatest hits for all they're worth. Springsteen still puts out relevant material and takes his audiences on an unpredictable rollercoaster of a journey EVERY show.
.

Bruce's act is a shtick, the working class/folkie hero routine. I'm sure he believes in it, his audience does, too, but it's sentimental claptrap. He became big just at the time the industrial base in this country began to erode and working class people began to go to college and move into white collar jobs. He tapped into that nostalgia for what they grew up with. They have a shared memory of something that really didn't happen quite that way.
Yes, he is earnest, but he has absolutely no sense of humour.
The Stones are different, yes -- unsentimental and cynical and funny and real.
Springsteen is, like Keith wrote, overblown and contrived.
So that's how I see this depression reveal. He was a 60-year-old man going through the normal ups and downs of life, maybe bummed about some things, but instead of calling it what it was, he has to play it as part of the heroic struggle with his father/past history nonsense.

Wonderboy,
I am glad Mick never wrote an autobiography.
Keith's 'Life' I immensly enjoyed, because reading Richards is like reading poetry, humor and wit, and as such, I devour any new written word from him, no matter I heard particular stories before, because there will be a slight variance
in words, which I find art.
I am sure the book publisher's who forwarded Bruce $10 million dollars, get to have an editorial say- such as, we need hooks to sell the sad Kardashian public. So he probably had to choose- speak about raising a child who got in trouble with heroin, speak about an affair carried out over NJ town,
or speak about.... see? Something for a headline to sell. Business profit.
And maybe he thought depression sharing would help others. There is me, giving him the benefit of the doubt.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-09-09 16:16 by 35love.

Any big Bruce fan is likely already familiar with this, but this is pretty much the iorr equivalent for Springsteen if you are interested and haven't seen it:
[backstreets.com]

I'm going to see him again next week near Boston (Gillette Stadium - one of my least favorite places to see a show). I thought I was done seeing Da Boss, but the recent set lists just look too great.

Quote
wonderboy
[
Bruce's act is a shtick, the working class/folkie hero routine. I'm sure he believes in it, his audience does, too, but it's sentimental claptrap. He became big just at the time the industrial base in this country began to erode and working class people began to go to college and move into white collar jobs.

Yeah like it or not Bruce's status as a cultural figure (just not a rock figure) started to grow exactly when Reagan was shipping American jobs to China and Mexico.

Said differently Bruce glorified the American worker just when he was slowly being put to death by globalization and Reaganomics.

Loot at the extremely interesting "Glory Days" video : it's a joyful celebration of the average "Joe USA" who was right at that time (the mid-80's) starting to be exterminated.

Dylan who's far more intelligent than Brooce did feel the danger. As soon as 1983 he wrote "Union Sundown" which described the war on American workers.
[www.google.fr]

Bob's smart, Brooce is a naive genial idiot.

...more laughable bollocks from dcba...talking utter shite.

"Dylan who's far more intelligent than Brooce did feel the danger...." Who's (Bob) Dylan? Does anyone know who he really is or like, how intelligent? I guess this is a subject for another thread, similar to, who's Mick Jagger? Marianne once said the public persona Mick is nothing like the private person.

Anyway, yeah, Union Sundown is a great tune about how the working class was (and still is) getting screwed. We can explore this theme in all kinds of peoples work. Because Dylan released this song on an album before Glory Days doesn't make him more intelligent than Springsteen. All a matter of timing and the way they write a song.

If we're gonna talk about working class songs related to Dylan, Springsteen and others, we'll have to go back to Woody Guthrie, Pete Seeger, maybe further back to trace who was there first and how smart they were. Regarding working class songs, don't forget John Lennon, Merle Haggard and others who wrote songs about the working stiffs of this world. And, in this vein, here's a little ditty about the working class.

[www.youtube.com]

Quote
Mainman
...more laughable bollocks from dcba...talking utter shite.

No kidding. Sorry dcba, but you're absolutely full of it on this point.

Springsteen was singing about working-class issues pre-Reagan. HE'S the one who had to fend off the right-wing trying to coopt Born in the USA at the height of his popularity.

Don't tell me that didn't take massive balls, and don't call him an idiot for ACTUAL idiots misinterpreting his anti-war song for a patriotic beer commercial.

Quote
keefriff99

Quote
Mainman
...more laughable bollocks from dcba...talking utter shite.

No kidding. Sorry dcba, but you're absolutely full of it on this point.

Springsteen was singing about working-class issues pre-Reagan. HE'S the one who had to fend off the right-wing trying to coopt Born in the USA at the height of his popularity.

Don't tell me that didn't take massive balls, and don't call him an idiot for ACTUAL idiots misinterpreting his anti-war song for a patriotic beer commercial.

Springsteen is a sentimentalist. He deals with feelings in a self-indulgent manner. He doesn't write about the real thing, just some mawkish thing we the audience can agree on.
I grew up working class right when he came on the scene and I don't think he gets it right. I don't feel we got screwed. AS he sang (correctly) we knew those jobs were going fast ... we didn't want those jobs anyway, we wanted something better and we got it. A lot of my family identifies with him, but I think he puts a fake, gauzy spin on things.

FM radio and Bruce. Always liked this one:

[www.youtube.com]

From Wonderboy: "I grew up working class right when he came on the scene and I don't think he gets it right. I don't feel we got screwed. As he sang (correctly) we knew those jobs were going fast ... we didn't want those jobs anyway, we wanted something better and we got it."

Hmmm...far away from music, but, just curious, what jobs didn't we want and what did we - you - get instead? I don't find sentimentalism in Springsteen's songs, but questions and reflection on how what and where the life we envisioned went wrong and where are we now and where might we be going. This is the beauty of well done songs, like any form of art, they make us question what is.

Quote
dcba

Quote
wonderboy
[
Bruce's act is a shtick, the working class/folkie hero routine. I'm sure he believes in it, his audience does, too, but it's sentimental claptrap. He became big just at the time the industrial base in this country began to erode and working class people began to go to college and move into white collar jobs.

Yeah like it or not Bruce's status as a cultural figure (just not a rock figure) started to grow exactly when Reagan was shipping American jobs to China and Mexico.

Said differently Bruce glorified the American worker just when he was slowly being put to death by globalization and Reaganomics.

Loot at the extremely interesting "Glory Days" video : it's a joyful celebration of the average "Joe USA" who was right at that time (the mid-80's) starting to be exterminated.

Dylan who's far more intelligent than Brooce did feel the danger. As soon as 1983 he wrote "Union Sundown" which described the war on American workers.
[www.google.fr]

Bob's smart, Brooce is a naive genial idiot.

Glory Days, My Hometown...1984. SO MUCH later than Dylan's 1983 song.

Bruce's Factory from 1978, the WHOLE Nebraska album from 1982, they all talk to, and about, these themes. Dylan does not have a mortgage on them. Neither does Bruce.

Rod

I advocate that he continues touring after the Holidays as choice of material is endless. Unfortunately, Stones do not reach with any effort for earlier material such as Flowers or December's Children, etc... Recently - Bruce revisited Asbury Park in latest concerts-

Of course, the argument will be that the Stones played umpteen songs. True, but from an era standpoint -issue holds no ground.

I feel sorry for the people who "don't get" Bruce. Even more so for those who actually bad mouth him. Most in that group who I've spoken with have never actually seen him live, but probably would not like it anyway with their preconceived bias.

I've been going to concerts of all the great bands for almost 50 years. The ones I still don't get are the Grateful Dead or U2. So maybe I'm missing out on something too.

I saw Bruce in Philly Sep 7 and look forward to seeing both Stones shows in LV

HBK