Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community


  • Posts

  • Joined

Everything posted by NoneButTheBrave

  1. Right? Fits in pretty well with the struggles of the working man
  2. I post this everytime one of these threads comes up. Studio version of Prove it all Night: "I been wipin' real hard/trying to get my ass clean." Put it on and tell me it ain't in there...
  3. The whole schtick surrounding BITUSA was a conscious marketing decision. It's not like he came up with this version out of nowhere, not to mention the cover shot, the Rambo-with-a-guitar looks, the fist in the air, the giant flag on stage, particularly in that era...as for the song as such, he could have set the record straight (and kind of half-assed his way around it in his reaction to Reagan) in a heartbeat...but chose not to. Of course, the BITUSA songs are his most famous. It was his pre-planned super smash hit. And, of course, he has/had a massive body of work as well as a career spanning five decades, so I guess that's only natural. Most people know only the hits by most artists.
  4. True, but how much bigger could he get or have gotten? He consciously threw out potential super hits if he felt they they didn't fit on a particular record. Hell, he didn't put out BITUSA 2 in 86/87. He could have had 4 more BITUSA type records after the original one...did he always make the right decision? Putting Crush on You on The River answers that question. But I do believe his decisions are informed by his vision and his artistic integrity rather than chasing hits. In the long run, it resulted in his being one of the biggest rock stars of all time and an American cultural icon with global (universal) appeal.
  5. This. I'm sure Bruce appreciates his good friend's input - and may or may not go with it, but he calls the shots...hence all the comments from Steve about "lost arguments". And...going by the result, Bruce's decisions turned out to be good ones. Also, you could argue that Steve's solo career never really took off in the first place. The first two records were moderately successful because he still had the E Street connection (and MwW had E Street all over it, even Bruce sang on the record), but as soon as that was gone, the whole thing pretty much tanked. He came back only when the combined E Street reunion/Sopranos thing started. I love Steve's stage persona, but here, he comes across as rather self-indulged and full of himself. To think Sun City ended Apartheid is like saying Hasselhoff tore down the Berlin Wall. With all due respect...but no.
  6. This was a mixing issue - Bruce bent a note a half step up, but the bend itself got buried in the mix, which would have made the note in question part of an E minor scale for a riff in played in E major.
  7. I apologize for the multiple entries. I can't seem to delete them on my phone. Would any mod be so kind as to delete the last two for me? Thank you very much in advance.
  8. This was my original review...and nothing much has changed. Still listen to it a lot, mostly in the car. So…after a couple of listens about a week early (:-P), here’s my take on LTY. Generally, I think it’s a strong late-career album, though not on par with Western Stars. While there’s not a "bad song“ on the record and it’s sequenced very well, I believe there were some less-than-good-choices being made that actually deteriorated the album’s quality. One Minute: Really good opener, particularly in conjunction with the closer – sets the frame for the transitoriness of existence and the question of life and mortality in general. LTY – solid first single, but far from being the best song on the record, as usual for Springsteen singles. Establishes the second theme of the album (his reflections on being a musician) quite effectively. Burnin‘ Train – the first true rocker, nice guitars and rather emblematic lyrics typical of latter-day Bruce, though they’re pretty good. One of those songs that you could release on almost any Bruce record post Joad, but well done, played and sung. Janey – sounds like the famously raucous rehearsal take from 1979 that I suppose everybody knows. I wonder if they re-recorded the entire song, as the guitars sound just as out-of-tune as on the bootleg. It’s a good song with E Street all over and actually pretty creepy lyrics, but it’s about a minute too long. That "knows her style thing“ at the end is too long and just drags…It's one of those decisions... Last Man – one of my highlights. This one is close to the man’s heart. Strong lyrics, catchy tune, once again, E Street all over on this. The line about "counting off the missing as you count off time“ is brilliant. Power: Very similar to Last Man, classic Bruce inasmuch as it tries to find grandeur and even divinity in the mundane/everyday. Not so well-received on here, it seems, but I’m quite fond of it. Very catchy, and superbly sung. If they truly cut this live, I’m not worried about his voice at all. 1000 Guitars: Where are the guitars on this fucker? I like the sentiment, the lyrics, all that is fine with me. But goddammit, in the words of the man himself, "turn that motherfucker up as loud as she’ll go“. It's one of those decisions... Plods too much, though I understand its placement in the context of album and specifically the two preceding songs. Reflection, motivation, action – I believe that is the narrative this three-pack tries to tell. Rainmaker – strong, not too subtle lyrics, refreshingly different musical approach reminiscent of The Rising (the album). My only beef with this is the overly elongated „rainmakerrrrrrrr“. Not sure what he was going for here. Priest – this is amazing. Lyrics are hilarious and the recording is just brilliant. Ghosts - my favorite. Sounds like Stevie and Bruce told Aniello to go get fries from Mickey D’s and stay the fuck out of this song. This is so much fun and, apart from Janey, the most classic-sounding song on the record - it’s got everything a great Springsteen/ESB song needs – heartfelt lyrics, a rousing chorus, count-ins, sax, piano, guitar…and just lots of FUN! If this is not an instant classic, I don’t know what is. Orphans: I’ve always loved this song and this version is great, but the 2005 acoustic version is the absolute gold standard to my ears. Full band works fine, but maybe arrange it as a real ballad (something the record does not have) in the pace of the 2005 version. The third decision I that kind of steals some potential from the song. Lyrically, it sets up the end. He’s looking back on his bar-band, hand-to-mouth days and those left behind by the wayside before he closes with Dreams – nice enough song, but a tad schmaltzy, sounds like it could have been on WOAD. Wonder if that last „I’ll see you in my dreams“ holds any special significance…however, I gotta say this doesn’t hit me emotionally, even though it is the perfectly logical closer. All in all, I really do enjoy the record…it sounds like Bruce and the E Street Band sound today. When people refer to the „classic E Street sound“, they typically refer to BTR, Darkness and maybe The River, and there are elements of all them. We do have the Wall of Sound, there’s a certain rawness and also the live element that, for instance, defines The River. But, people, he has already written those three records. He will never try to copy them, and in fact, no two Bruce Springsteen albums have ever sounded the same. Lots of time has passed, and you can hear a lot of influences that have shaped Bruce and the current ESB over the past 4 decades. So yeah, it does capture E Street – but not what appears to be its constructed imagination and, I would argue, semi-fictional version that lots of people seem to be yearning for. As I said in the beginning, it is a strong late-career album, but I firmly believe his late-career masterpiece is Western Stars. That one will be hard to top. I would give this one about 8 out of 10 points (for reference, Magic and WS are 9 out of 10)
  9. I remember being sent a link to the title track a while before they had the AOL first listening thing...and was blown away. I pretty much wore out that mp3 file. The chorus, the lilis, that amazing guitar solo...exciting times to be a Springsteen fan, considering I'd only jumped on the bandwagon in 99/2000... Hard to believe it'll have been 20 years next year. Now "I'm 35/We got a boy of our own now"...how time flies...
  10. In Europe, I think I was in the 20s or 30s in Ludwigshafen in 2003. Stateside, I was no. 10 in Albany 2009...and the lucky number drawn from the lottery was...10! Have to say that was amazing.
  11. Yep. I never listened to the original record again after this. It is brilliant from start to finish and blows the old recording completely out of the water. Actually, pretty much every Bruce recording. Makes you wonder why didn't/don't record like that all the time.
  12. Don't get me wrong - the songs are great (well, mostly), but sound flat and dull for the most part. Conversely, the studio records of the modern era grab me a lot more, though the live versions are still almost always better to my ears.
  13. I would phrase the question the other way around. Pretty much all of 'em gain a lot when played live. There are few studio records (particularly the classics) that grab me. BTR, Darkness, The River, even Born in the USA, all sound like the band is on a leash and Bruce sings a lot of times like's he's constipated - esp. on Darkness and River. I got hooked on Bruce listening to Live 75/85 in my best friend's room about a good 20 years ago. When we dug up his dad's studio records, we were pretty much disappointed.
  14. Maybe it's just me, but I always thought these long, slow Ramrod versions were terrible. Roy's playing is great, but it always is. Plain and simple. Ramrod is not a good song in the first place and to stretch a song with no dynamic whatsoever to 10 Minutes+ was a terrible choice IMO. Slowing it down didn't help either. Ramrod, if necessary at all, works best in its short, poignant and fast-paced incarnation.
  15. Mönchengladbach 2013. If that was my last one, I'm completely fine with it. Consciously skipped The River 16 - boring setlists (until the last US leg), River is far from being my favorite album (his most overrated record in my book) and the shows just felt noticeably different, also because Bruce had virtually stopped moving.
  16. Hamburg 2008 - he kicked out Downbound Train for Hungry friggin' Heart. Granted, it turned out to be a nice rendition, but yikes...
  17. What I'd really love is the guitar album that Bruce has talked about repeatedly. Then take that on the road with only Bruce, Max, Steve, Garry and Roy....never gonna happen, but one can dream...
  18. Yup, what you call "tone" is a player's style - that goes for just about every guitar player out there, and especially the really good ones - they should be instantly recognizable, and typically are. And yes, Bruce doesn't fool around too much with effects/effect boards (unlike, for instance, Nils, who seems to be stepping on pedals more than actually playing). He uses a three-step foot switch. In his own words, "I've got one button to make it loud, one to make it even louder and one to make it really f*cking loud". The effect in use would be an overdrive, I guess. Any other effects (let's say a delay, a flanger, chorus...) that are only very rarely used by Bruce are operated by Kevin Buell from underneath the stage.
  19. I agree, I should have included that. Also on the 92/93 tour - things went downhill ever since 99.
  20. Why chauvinistic? I've been up front a number of times and have NEVER been able to hear her guitar, while being able to clearly identify the other three on stage. She basically strums a couple of very basic chords. Whether you hear that or not doesn't make a difference at all with three other, mostly electric, guitars in the mix. Now, if they actually turned off her mic.. And before I get accused of being a chauvinist: I like her voice and her solo stuff a lot. She just feels totally out of place on E Street.
  21. On recordings, I have a hard time hearing distinct guitars in the first place (obvious exceptions excluded) because the guitars on his records and live albums are often way down in the mix. On stage, telling them apart is no problem. Pretty much all the guitar you will often hear is Bruce because his telecaster friggin' dominates. I never conceived of Bruce/ESB as a guitar band. Until I saw them live. The guitar-heaviness blew me away, and whenever Bruce would stop playing, even if only for a second, the whole band lost its driving force.
  22. At 35, I'm not sure if my fandom wavers, but I simply don't feel the urge to do this anymore...I've seen him and the band up close more than enough times. It's been an amazing ride, but it's not a priority for me anymore. I'm not even sure I'd go see a show on the next tour at all. I already skipped the last one, even though I could have easily attended a few shows.
  23. I think they should consider stopping touring. Don't get me wrong, I love the ESB, but the last tour (five!! years ago) already showed a very considerable slow-down on part of the band and, specifically, Bruce. Springsteen/ESB concerts are high-octane, balls-to the-wall events. Physicality is such a large part of the show that it really does take away from the performance when missing. Standing still behind the mic doesn't matter for, say, Mark Knopfler, but it sure does for Bruce. Bottom line: Better to remember a great thing as it was (and 2016 was already borderline...) than clinging to something for the sake of nostalgia.
  • Create New...