Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

Next Archive - Any Rumors?


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Sean McNeill said:

Well who knew, another FULL show for you to write one of your pointless reviews about.

Why so negative?

I always wait for his reviews before buying a show. I think they’re great and insightful, and far more detailed and less biased than the “official” Nugs and Backstreets ones.

Even though I won’t be buying this release, I look forward to reading about it!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we’re moaning about a Darkness show, available in quality we’ve never come that close to before (with apologies to the JEMS tape) *and* a second set that’s never been heard before, then INC might as well stop the series now.

Also, I await a similar reaction if/when Atlanta night two comes out in due course. 

  • Like 6
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, islaymalt said:

You don't have to buy it...

Haha. I don't buy the ones I don't want. 

It's also a tad arrogant to call this version of The Promise as definitive. That is clearly a sales pitch ( although, who buys this stuff outside of the die hards?) 

In summary, I only buy what I think is good value ( probably three in ten). Overall, I think this so called archive series is pretty much redundant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, I don’t like Bruce’s voice in ‘78. I’ll purchase anything after and including 1980, so I totally understand why people are excited. Multiple releases from the same era don’t bother me. It’s a necessity if the series is to continue. I just don’t enjoy ‘78 (and I’ve tried numerous times over the years) so I’ll wait for the next one.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Promise61 said:

Haha. I don't buy the ones I don't want. 

In summary, I only buy what I think is good value ( probably three in ten). Overall, I think this so called archive series is pretty much redundant.

Me, I just see these releases as a big bonus!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sean McNeill said:

Well who knew, another FULL show for you to write one of your pointless reviews about.

2 hours ago, sleepyjoe said:

Why so negative?

I always wait for his reviews before buying a show. I think they’re great and insightful, and far more detailed and less biased than the “official” Nugs and Backstreets ones.

Even though I won’t be buying this release, I look forward to reading about it!

Thank you both for your feedback. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/17/2021 at 4:35 PM, doesthisbusstop said:

If we get an archive tomorrow or next Friday then I’d say the chances of getting a first Friday one on-time on 2nd July are zero. 

I would certainly consider 9th July more likely than the 2nd.

Even if they have a show ready in time for the 2nd, they may prefer to hold it for a week to space releases out more evenly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Floom2 said:

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.  

As a new(er) fan, I wasn't around in '78 and feel like I must have missed its whole hype. For me, looking back, I consider 80-81 Bruce and the ESB's peak. Personally, I can't stand his voice on the '78 tour. And the pacing is a bit off to my ears (BTR and Thunder Road are a bit too fast imo), not to mention a lot of songs being 10x the length they should (She's the One, Prove It, Because the Night, etc. don't need to be that long).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Paolo's Circus Story said:

Thank you both for your feedback. 

I like your reviews, Paolo. You’re just offering your opinions on the music released. Not sure how that can be considered ‘pointless’ but you can’t please everybody.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Floom2 said:

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.  

Just because a tour is older, doesn’t inherently make it better. Just because there’s a general consensus that the ‘78 tour was a career peak, doesn’t mean everybody has to agree. Personally, I feel that both the ‘80 and ‘81 tours were superior. I love Bruce’s vocals on those tours, I think he really found his ‘live’ voice, whereas ‘78 grates on me. It’s music. It’s subjective. I’m not particularly a fan of 2013 either but if a fan has a fondness for that era, and prefers it to ‘78, or ‘81 or insert your own era, I’m always interested in hearing why. I don’t agree with the, ‘we don’t need any more releases from that era’ argument, as already stated that would mean a swift end to the Archive series, so I don’t express disappointment with that. If it’s a tour I’m not a fan of, I just don’t comment on that releases particular thread. On that note: when do people think we’ll get the next Archive? It surely can’t be a First Friday release, can it?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, sleepyjoe said:

As a new(er) fan, I wasn't around in '78 and feel like I must have missed its whole hype. For me, looking back, I consider 80-81 Bruce and the ESB's peak. Personally, I can't stand his voice on the '78 tour. And the pacing is a bit off to my ears (BTR and Thunder Road are a bit too fast imo), not to mention a lot of songs being 10x the length they should (She's the One, Prove It, Because the Night, etc. don't need to be that long).

That’s pretty much my take on ‘78. You’re the first fan, other than myself, who have said they don’t like the sound of Bruce’s voice on that tour!

  • Love Love Love! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bobfan1976 said:

That’s pretty much my take on ‘78. You’re the first fan, other than myself, who have said they don’t like the sound of Bruce’s voice on that tour!

Yep... there aren't too many of us haha. His voice and the pacing of some songs just irk me. Some are either too fast while others seem to go on forever and ever.

I don't know what changed in the 2 years between 78 and 80... but how I feel about the River tour is how I imagine most feel about 78.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sean McNeill said:

Well who knew, another FULL show for you to write one of your pointless reviews about.

Well you don’t have to read them or make your pointless comments, night 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, bobfan1976 said:

Just because a tour is older, doesn’t inherently make it better. Just because there’s a general consensus that the ‘78 tour was a career peak, doesn’t mean everybody has to agree. Personally, I feel that both the ‘80 and ‘81 tours were superior. I love Bruce’s vocals on those tours, I think he really found his ‘live’ voice, whereas ‘78 grates on me. It’s music. It’s subjective. I’m not particularly a fan of 2013 either but if a fan has a fondness for that era, and prefers it to ‘78, or ‘81 or insert your own era, I’m always interested in hearing why. I don’t agree with the, ‘we don’t need any more releases from that era’ argument, as already stated that would mean a swift end to the Archive series, so I don’t express disappointment with that. If it’s a tour I’m not a fan of, I just don’t comment on that releases particular thread. On that note: when do people think we’ll get the next Archive? It surely can’t be a First Friday release, can it?

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.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Floom2 said:

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.

Curious now what you think about the Tunnel Tour, did he win his step back? (Personally I think so but opinions are opinions, and I am a little (well...more than a little) biased about the Tunnel Tour).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, doesthisbusstop said:

My 3 all time favourite archives are Passaic ‘78 night 2, Nassau 31/12/80 and East Rutherford 06/08/84 and I consider these shows as definitive examples of Bruce’s peak period. 

I agree with your first two with out a doubt. but the 84-85 shows I find Bruce talking too much. I thick Bruce is legend for how long his shows were in 84-85. But if you take out all the talking we have a 2 hour show here! (I know that is exaggerated) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, doesthisbusstop said:

My 3 all time favourite archives are Passaic ‘78 night 2, Nassau 31/12/80 and East Rutherford 06/08/84 and I consider these shows as definitive examples of Bruce’s peak period. 

For me replace Passaic with Cleveland Agora (Passaic and Winterland are tied as a very close second).   Love the Summertime Blues opener on The Agora and it’s my favorite Darkness by far, plus the best version of Raise Your Hand, incredible Jungleland etc. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Floom2 said:

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

Darkness is one of my favorite albums of all time. Just don't like its tour.

I'd happily watch Live in NYC any day over listening to this... American Skin? Hope and Dreams? IMO Bruce doesn't have just one era that you can honestly say "this is what Bruce is about and nothing else will ever be as good." He's constantly evolving musically and vocally. I listen to a 78 show and think man, who would've thought this guy could pull off singing a song like Stones all these years later?

I would argue that the early TOL shows were his most raw and emotional. Love that tour, though it later strayed from its initial structure.

I'm also a huge fan of the 2012 WB shows, much more so than the 78 ones. I don't think he really perfected the art of structuring a setlist until the River Tour, and that skill is something he's honed in years since. Notably on those early WB shows. The core framework of the set was emotional, intense, and unlike the unfocused WOAD tour, was just the kind of music and lyrics we needed. And are still hella relevant. I also love the horns, the actual rehearsing and pre-planned integration of rarities, and not straying from the emotional punch of the record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think sound quality has also influenced my choices as well (obviously the 31/12/80 remastered version). The Clearmountain mix of Passaic 2 is unsurpassed and also the 06/08/84 East Rutherford is undoubtedly Altschillers best ever sound mix. I’m talking FLAC HD sound here. But even apart from the sound, I think they are three brilliant concerts in Bruce’s peak years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Floom2 said:

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.  

I love today’s release, but there are some damn good 2013 shows that deserve the light of day too. I’ve been ripped on BTX for asking for anything post-reunion, but shows like Omaha 2012, Cardiff 2013, Fenway 2012, Philly 2003, and plenty others are worthy to see the light of day.

Oh, and while we’re at it, it’s summer. River tour 80/81, please.

  • Like 2
  • Love Love Love! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sleepyjoe said:

Darkness is one of my favorite albums of all time. Just don't like its tour.

I'd happily watch Live in NYC any day over listening to this... American Skin? Hope and Dreams? IMO Bruce doesn't have just one era that you can honestly say "this is what Bruce is about and nothing else will ever be as good." He's constantly evolving musically and vocally. I listen to a 78 show and think man, who would've thought this guy could pull off singing a song like Stones all these years later?

I would argue that the early TOL shows were his most raw and emotional. Love that tour, though it later strayed from its initial structure.

I'm also a huge fan of the 2012 WB shows, much more so than the 78 ones. I don't think he really perfected the art of structuring a setlist until the River Tour, and that skill is something he's honed in years since. Notably on those early WB shows. The core framework of the set was emotional, intense, and unlike the unfocused WOAD tour, was just the kind of music and lyrics we needed. And are still hella relevant. I also love the horns, the actual rehearsing and pre-planned integration of rarities, and not straying from the emotional punch of the record.

IMO, Darkness is a better album than The River, but The River tour is a far better tour than the Darkness tour. Weird how it works out, but that’s how I feel.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, john_archer said:

IMO, Darkness is a better album than The River, but The River tour is a far better tour than the Darkness tour. Weird how it works out, but that’s how I feel.

Why weird? Devils & Dust is Bruce Springsteen's weakest album, but the 2005 tour is in very high esteem by fans. On the other hand, the D & D songs were not really the cornerstones of the shows, which could be an explanation for this.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...