Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

902 profile views

Floom2's Achievements

  1. I love an acoustic The Rising. Of all of the 9-11 cultural creations, that, for me remains the most moving.
  2. For reasons passing understanding, or maybe just given that I am feeling every bit of my age this afternoon, this concert is precisely what I need. I intend to immerse myself in mid 80's Springsteen for the rest of the day. 36 years burning down the road, still standing.
  3. Cartoon Bruce and a throwback to the Summer of When I Was Younger. love this.
  4. Re: the shushing. he’s just trying to get his music heard. Maybe you’re right in that rock and roll is better as ROCK AND ROLL and he’s spent years wasting his time trying to convey something more profound than womp bop a loo bomp a womp bam boom.
  5. Because they are human. Humans do terrible things. All the time. Every day. Terrible things are happening to humans. There are artists who dare to attempt to convey the entire scope of the human experience. Every opinion counts but I never thought The Rising was supposed to life anyone up. The title song is about doomed firemen. While the music is seemingly uplifting, the story, nonetheless, is about a bunch of guys who were moments from death. Sure, the song underscores the bravery of these men, but the end is the same. And like it or not, the firemen were dead before the end of the first verse. Come on up for The Rising. The chains that bind me, indeed. They had no choice. It's really a brilliant song, but uplifting? It's tragic from beginning to end. The Rising is the trick that Springsteen talked about in his first Broadway show. That record is filled with ghosts. as far as Springsteen shushing the crowd: Shush. You were probably the guy yelling for Glory Days (and missing the point) when he was playing One Step Up. There are plenty of musicians that play tunes that require nothing of you. Lotsa those country bumpkins sing about the never ending glory of america and the blessed purpose of it's fab citizens. Listen to them. Lee Greenwood...there's a guy who could blow coke with the best of them and suckered every patriotic american in the country to buy his ridiculous record. Happy Independence Day everyone. At least you know you're free, if you're the right sort.
  6. The sound was too muddy, the vocals typically were not great. Many reasons. I've heard some pretty terrible audience boots.
  7. Yup. I can remember hearing Boston Breaker (that vinyl boot, one of the Boston shows) for the first time in the early 80’s. I hate audience boots but that show...wow. ‘77 was something indeed. Springsteen has been legendary forever ‘74, ‘75 (where is that pristine sounding Bottom Line box set, dammit) and every year since. we are all, I believe, fortunate to have seen the guy at all, anywhere, anytime
  8. If I may continue: Context matters. So, while we can hear (for example) Highway 61 with 2021 ears, context tell us that Like A Rolling Stone reached a peak of number 2 on the Hot 100 the week of September 4, 1965 flanked by Help (The Beatles at #1) and California Girls (The Beach Boys at #3) both excellent songs but of quite a few degrees less than Like A Rolling Stone. The rest of the Hot 100 that week was filled with rock and roll pap. Excellent music, for sure, but nothing that changed the landscape like Dylan. So is Highway 61 "better"? Hmmm... I can understand your position, and I love Time Out of Mind but those three foundational recordings (BIABH, HWY61 and BOB) are stand alone examples of Bob Dylan. Thankfully Dylan has had other splendid recordings (BOTT, for one). I will always prefer sloppy rock and roll to whatever the other alternative is, so while Springsteen et al may have been playing at a higher level with better stage gear over the last 10-15 years, give me that desperate We Have Everything To Lose We Have To Blow The Roof Off The Joint attitude that was Springsteen in '78. He was playing for his life, like there was no tomorrow. Certainly by 1984 the game was over and he was the clear winner. It's the fight to get to the top that gets it done for me. Good discussion. Thanks. Dylan in '76 was pretty excellent.
  9. I think this is a fair argument. The good news is that there are tons of simply stunning shows to listen to so we can really nail down the best 60 or 70 performances
  10. I saw that tour in Philly and in Frankfurt, Germany and was brought to tears both times. Especially in Philly. That version of She's The One was like an atomic bomb going off in the Spectrum. And in Frankfurt, outside, a beautiful afternoon and the band killing it. Loved that tour. He's is arguably the single greatest live performer in rock history. I'm pretty sure Bruce himself doesn't view '78 as his best tour, he's been pretty clear about how much he's loved his bands' playing within the last 15 years or so.
  11. Hmm... Fair points. But you're not exactly correct. We cannot discount the complete career of an artist. Whether a particular listener (let's use you as our example) is fully aware of an artists history matters not a bit. You could appear in full form at the age of 20 in 1985 and fall in love with 1985 Bruce Springsteen, and that's great You, as having appeared magically, fully formed, would have no prior knowledge of Springsteen But Springsteen existed in 1985 as a result of all that he did before that. His records, his tours, his place within American culture was a result of all that he did to get to BITUSA and that tour in '85. The 1978 tour, within the scope of Bruce Springsteen's career, led to everything else. Just because you weren't there doesn't mean it wasn't foundational to his myth and place in our culture. In short: '85 doesn't happen without '78. Regarding your comments on Dylan: ??? Hmmm... Dylan doesn't get to make Time Out Of Mind without first having made Highway 61. Dylan is Dylan on Time Out Of Mind because of all that he did before. Most music obsessives (Tramps like us) are very possessive of the artists they love. It's tough to realize that we may have missed an artists' peak. Every artist has one. Sure there are stones fans that like Steel Wheels more than they like Exile, or Sticky Fingers. And that's fine. it's crazy, of course, but it's fine. If some 12 year old kid suddenly discovers REM because his neighbor plays Shiny Happy People one day and the kid hears it and loves it doesn't mean that Shiny Happy People is the pinnacle of REM's career. The foundational record for REM is not Out of Time, a record I happen to love. I've always felt an obligation to trace the artists I'm interested in back to their beginning. As an aside, this Berkeley show is stellar. A '78 version of Night, a second set Adam Raised A Cain, The Promise. This is a brilliant show. Racing in the Street is particularly excellent. Our man was dead on point for this show. A great performance by one of the most important American artists that ever lived on the most important and best tour of his career. And you guys complain.
  12. Well, the argument isn't that '78 is great and '80-'81 is terrible. Every band has a peak. I could go into greater detail about this, but I don't have the time right now. Suffice it to say: The Stones peak was '69 to '72. This doesn't mean that the Stones in '81 weren't worth seeing, just that they were more 'Stones' between '69-'72. Springsteen is Springsteen because of BTR, Darkness, The River and BITUSA. That's the heart of it. Argue if you want to but you're wrong. The '78 tour was revelatory and generally recognized as one of the greatest rock tours by any artist ever. The idea that a show from the 2000's (given that many more of these shows will be released anyway) is preferable in any way to this show is just silly. I get that we all have opinions, but you guys are arguing that Sinatra in '72 is better than Sinatra in '65 and that's just crazy. Sure, Sinatra in '72 is worth a listen but Sinatra in '65 was the peak. Springsteen is, obviously, always worth seeing. I've seen him throughout the years. But '78 was Bruce Springsteen at his peak. As excellent as 80-81 was, '78 was raw and brutal. I actually think he lost a step during the BITUSA tour. Anyway, this is a great release. You guys are spoiled beyond all reason. Peace folks, it's a great day.
  13. You guys that are down on '78 and hip to 2013 (seriously?) are like Stones' fans ripping '69 and wanting to hear more from the '90's.
  • Create New...