Live "live At The Paradiso" Official Thread, All info here Options

[Liveman94]

I guess Nick is right, Ed's voice struggles as it is, so an extra 30mins would probably kill him.

Oh well, they should stick to your original "rotation setlist" idea then

[Pokey]

I have actually posted the idea before but no one took any notice of it

[SJN1279]

I think its funny that people who haven't seen Live in concert for 3 years are complaining about lack of variety in their setlist, instead of just being happy that the band is finally returning to Australia.

[Pokey]

And yet when they do return it's pretty much the same show as the last time they were here. What is great is bands that tour 3yrs apart and when they return its like seeing them for the first time again because everything is just so different. Like I said, in this current format I'm probably not going to bother seeing them next time they come out. 2-3 different songs (not counting new ones, for example, BOP songs were just replaced with SFBM songs) isnt worth a $80 ticket.
Plus different setlist means different recordings that get circulated around, just because you're not seeing them doesn't mean you can't hear them ... although that's not such a big deal anymore as no one seems to get good quality bootlegs of them anymore, they're barely worth recording as all the bootlegs are exactly the same.
3 years isn't that long really .. I almost couldn't believe it when I realised it was 2006 the last time they were here, felt like yesterday.

This post has been edited by Pokey: Feb 27 2009, 12:15 pm

[SJN1279]

And yet when they do return it's pretty much the same show as the last time they were here. What is great is bands that tour 3yrs apart and when they return its like seeing them for the first time again because everything is just so different. Like I said, in this current format I'm probably not going to bother seeing them next time they come out. 2-3 different songs (not counting new ones, for example, BOP songs were just replaced with SFBM songs) isnt worth a $80 ticket.
Plus different setlist means different recordings that get circulated around, just because you're not seeing them doesn't mean you can't hear them ... although that's not such a big deal anymore as no one seems to get good quality bootlegs of them anymore, they're barely worth recording as all the bootlegs are exactly the same.
3 years isn't that long really .. I almost couldn't believe it when I realised it was 2006 the last time they were here, felt like yesterday.

First off a bootleg is not a concert.

Second, I'm sure you will not be getting this setlist in 2009 outside of the hits(even though it was a damn good set!):


1) Mystery
2) The River
3) All Over You
4) Rattlesnake
5) Shit Towne
6) Sofia
7) Mirror Song
8) I Walk The Line [Johnny Cash]
9) Wings
10) Pain Lies On The Riverside
11) Iris (with "Bad" medley) [U2]
12) Selling The Drama
13) Heaven

ENCORE
14) Lakini's Juice
15) The Dolphin's Cry
16) I Alone
17) Run To The Water
18) Voodoo Lady
19) Lightning Crashes
20) White, Discussion
21) Dance With You

And third, spending 80 dollars(if it even will cost that much) after a 3 year hiatus, isn't really all that bad to see a kick ass concert from a great band. Especially when you have over 6 months time to save the money.

[Pokey]

I reckon we'd get about 17 of those songs there to be honest ... it's BS. We should only get about 4-5 of the same at the most, that's what band's who aren't utterly lazy do. And like I said, if they did back to back shows then they should make them totally different too rather than playing two identical shows. All they'll do is replace some of the newer/rarer songs in that setlist with other ones and the rest is the same old, same old which as I mentioned is really not worth $80 these days.
And yes it does cost $80 here, im sure it's different in the US but here that's what your average touring band will charge.
And it is a bit much to see a repeat of the same gig you've seen the past couple of times .. their performance on the last 3 tours, whilst still amazing at points really did feel like they were going through the motions and just lacked spontinaity ... not since probably V have I been blown away by one of their concerts from start to finish because I just know what to expect now.
Like I said with other bands, Ween for example, I paid $80 3 nights in a row because I knew that every night I was going to get something completely different and I couldn't afford NOT to miss out on a night because I'd have missed out on a good 20-30 songs that they didn't play on the other nights .. THAT is value, that's what Live should be doing and there's no reason why they shouldn't .... don't talk about fanbase/being more dedicated because it's smaller either because there were more people at those Ween concerts here than the last time Live toured here.

And no shit a bootleg isn't a concert, when did I say that it was? My point being just because they're not touring in my country doesn't mean I shouldn't give a damn about their setlist changes.

This post has been edited by Pokey: Feb 27 2009, 12:55 pm

[SJN1279]

I reckon we'd get about 17 of those songs there to be honest ... it's BS. We should only get about 4-5 of the same at the most, that's what band's who aren't utterly lazy do. And like I said, if they did back to back shows then they should make them totally different too rather than playing two identical shows. All they'll do is replace some of the newer/rarer songs in that setlist with other ones and the rest is the same old, same old which as I mentioned is really not worth $80 these days.
And yes it does cost $80 here, im sure it's different in the US but here that's what your average touring band will charge.
And it is a bit much to see a repeat of the same gig you've seen the past couple of times .. their performance on the last 3 tours, whilst still amazing at points really did feel like they were going through the motions and just lacked spontinaity ... not since probably V have I been blown away by one of their concerts from start to finish because I just know what to expect now.
Like I said with other bands, Ween for example, I paid $80 3 nights in a row because I knew that every night I was going to get something completely different and I couldn't afford NOT to miss out on a night because I'd have missed out on a good 20-30 songs that they didn't play on the other nights .. THAT is value, that's what Live should be doing and there's no reason why they shouldn't .... don't talk about fanbase/being more dedicated because it's smaller either because there were more people at those Ween concerts here than the last time Live toured here.

And no shit a bootleg isn't a concert, when did I say that it was? My point being just because they're not touring in my country doesn't mean I shouldn't give a damn about their setlist changes.

Anyway, you're right Live will usually only change 2-5 songs per night while on tour. If that keeps you from attending multiple shows, I understand. But to not see the band at all, I feel is short-sighted. But its your 80 dollars, spend it any way you like.

Ween?! I don't think that band has ever had a hit song in the US. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am. I checked Itunes and they did release a song to the Spongebob soundtrack. Sounds like some quality rock.



PS Ween played much smaller venues than Live did during their last Australian tour, so you can't say that they had more fans at the shows. One of Ween's venues at 700 person capacity and I don't think any venue's capacity hit 2000. Live may not sell out arenas in Australia anymore, but they are in much better shape than that.

[Pokey]

Anyway, you're right Live will usually only change 2-5 songs per night while on tour. If that keeps you from attending multiple shows, I understand. But to not see the band at all, I feel is short-sighted. But its your 80 dollars, spend it any way you like.

Ween?! I don't think that band has ever had a hit song in the US. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am. I checked Itunes and they did release a song to the Spongebob soundtrack. Sounds like some quality rock.

Per night? that's if we're lucky, they'll usually do the same setlist in a different order and hope no one notices.

They've had a few, obviously not as many as Live, but Push th' little daisies, Voodoo Lady, Gabrielle. They're successful in a different market and their fans are a hell of a lot more loyal and appreciative than Live's right now and that is all the band's doing. They have a lot more respect in the music industry than Live do ... but fuck how it sells, point is they drew more than Live did over 3 nights without barely advertising. They've carved a reputation with their fans of having shows you need to go to lest you miss out on something special. Live has got to the point where you figure if you miss out one time it's ok, you can just catch the repeat on the next tour. Ween would rock the fuck out of Live any night too by the way

My whole point is there just isn't that buzz that other bands have. Here we have a whole thread going nuts because they break out one song on a tour that they haven't played in a couple of years. Other bands have fans chomping at the bit with excitement before a tour starts because they can't wait to see what gems will be pulled out, the entire setlist is a surprise not just 1, 2 or 3 songs. How you can be excited about seeing the same thing over and over is beyond me.
It's sad that Live won't do it, because they easily could, they have a lot of material to choose from but it seems they're just prepared to do the bare minimum.

[aLIVEinNORWAY]

When Live pushed the show length to 2 hours plus, Ed's voice struggled a great deal. I don't think its an option.

It was whisful thinking

[SJN1279]

Per night? that's if we're lucky, they'll usually do the same setlist in a different order and hope no one notices.

They've had a few, obviously not as many as Live, but Push th' little daisies, Voodoo Lady, Gabrielle. They're successful in a different market and their fans are a hell of a lot more loyal and appreciative than Live's right now and that is all the band's doing. They have a lot more respect in the music industry than Live do ... but fuck how it sells, point is they drew more than Live did over 3 nights without barely advertising. They've carved a reputation with their fans of having shows you need to go to lest you miss out on something special. Live has got to the point where you figure if you miss out one time it's ok, you can just catch the repeat on the next tour. Ween would rock the fuck out of Live any night too by the way

My whole point is there just isn't that buzz that other bands have. Here we have a whole thread going nuts because they break out one song on a tour that they haven't played in a couple of years. Other bands have fans chomping at the bit with excitement before a tour starts because they can't wait to see what gems will be pulled out, the entire setlist is a surprise not just 1, 2 or 3 songs. How you can be excited about seeing the same thing over and over is beyond me.
It's sad that Live won't do it, because they easily could, they have a lot of material to choose from but it seems they're just prepared to do the bare minimum.

Ween did not draw more than Live during their Australian tour, because they played much smaller venues that Live did. Comparing Live to an indie band(actually two guys) who've been in the undustry for 25 years and never created a hit song, is totally ridiculous.

Pokey, if you don't want to see Live on tour this year, you shouldn't go. Simple as that.

[Pokey]

Ween did not draw more than Live during their Australian tour, because they played much smaller venues that Live did. Comparing Live to an indie band(actually two guys) who've been in the undustry for 25 years and never created a hit song, is totally ridiculous.

Pokey, if you don't want to see Live on tour this year, you shouldn't go. Simple as that.

I'm not gonna go if the setlist remains pretty much as is, it's simple.

Also the Ween gigs in Melbourne I went to had more people there than the Live shows in Melbourne on Live's last tour, the venues are pretty similar in size and the top level at Live's venue had plenty of space left at the shows, where as you could barely move at the Ween show, ergo Ween had a much bigger turn out.
They aren't two guys, they're a whole band now with oodles more talent than Live have, but like I say all you measure is commercial success, you should apply for a job at a record company or something.

You say they're not as successful as Live, im sure that the average Triple J radio listener in Melbourne knows little more than 4-5 Ween songs yet on any given night they only played 1 or 2 of those songs and everything else would have been brand new to some people but the fans absolutely loved it and talking to people afterwards some discovered so many more Ween songs they never knew existed and were gonna go out and buy the albums.
You can't say that just the diehard fans would turn up and dont care what is played because they love it all, because like I say, they had a bigger turn out than Live's Melbourne shows so in that sense Ween's loyal concert going fanbase is bigger than Live's casual and die hard fans combined here in Melbourne at least. I believe it's purely because fans know they will get a quality show every time from Ween with something new. With Live I am willing to bet there were a lot of people who didn't go simpley cos they were sick of seeing the same thing over and over, hell I even know of a few people who used to visit this forum that didn't go for that exact reason.

Anyways this isn't about comparing a specific band to Live, it's about saying how easily other bands can do things yet Live seem to really struggle to be creative now in any sense whether it be song writing, setlists or whatever.. Ween just happen to have a lot of comparisons to live being that they're from the same state, they're the same age, been around for the same amount of time and been playing together since high school and have families to factor into things.

What I don't understand now is that Ed seems to go on about how he doesn't care about commercial success anymore and that time has passed and now they're just doing things for the fans and so on .. yet they cant seem to let go of playing those same songs .. it reeks of BS. And if it is true, and these few songs are purely all they want to play and they dont give a damn about the rest of their work then that's really sad.

[aLIVEinNORWAY]

If Live come to Norway again, I go whatever the setlist is

This post has been edited by aLIVEinNORWAY: Feb 28 2009, 2:55 am

[Hoodstock]

That would be nice, and of course Lift me up and Flow
Why can't they just play 1/2 hour longer shows, then they can put in some other songs.

Look at Sprinsteens setlist two nights in a row in Sweden last year.

July 4, 2008
Göteborg, Sweden
Ullevy

Born In The U.S.A.
Radio Nowhere
Out In The Street
Two Hearts
The Promised Land
Spirit In The Night
Be True
4th of July, Asbury Park (Sandy)
Atlantic City
Prove It All Night
Darlington County
Because The Night
Cadillac Ranch
Livin' In The Future
Mary's Place
Independence Day
This Hard Land
The Rising
Last To Die
Long Walk Home
Badlands

Hungry Heart
Seven Nights To Rock
Born To Run
Rosalita
Dancing In The Dark
American Land

July 5, 2008
Göteborg, Sweden
Ullevy

Night
No Surrender
Lonesome Day
Hungry Heart
Summertime Blues
The Promised Land
Backstreets
Roulette
Darkness On The Edge Of Town
Janey Don't You Lose Heart
Waitin' On A Sunny Day
Working On The Highway
Because The Night
She's The One
Livin' In The Future
Mary's Place
I'm On Fire
Drive All Night Tour Premiere
The Rising
Last To Die
Long Walk Home
Badlands

Girls In Their Summer Clothes
Thunder Road
Born To Run
Bobby Jean
American Land
Twist And Shout

First of all, Springsteen rocks in studio and in concert and if you guys haven't heard his recent stuff go out and buy it. Sucks that he is skiping Detroit this tour.

Live opened with Simple Creed in Detroit last summer. If you look back at the reviews written by the people from this board they all agreed that Live rocked and owned the stage that night. When they open with that song it sets the tone for the rest of the evening, "we are hear to rock and kick ass in this show".

Even people who don't follow the band or don't know that song realize Live means buisiness with that riff. That is the hands down opener that they should use.

Secondly, finish with a fucking bang instead of the slow shit. Play White, Discussion every fucking night and then walk off the stage and pat yourself on the back for a job well done. Those two bookends, with a few hits sprinkled in, would make almost any show "filling" alright (not that Live needs to fill).

This post has been edited by Hoodstock: Feb 28 2009, 4:35 pm

[Liveman94]

From 'The Sunday Mail' - (Queensland's 'the courier mail').

By Sally Browne

February 28, 2009 11:00pm

FOR years people have been asking Pennsylvania band Live when they are going to release the Live "live" album. It's been something of a running joke.

"Live squared," is what lead singer Ed Kowalczyk calls it.

Well, now they've finally done it. March 1 saw the Australian release of their debut live album and DVD, Live at the Paradiso.

Filmed in an old converted church in Amsterdam, the release sees the band at their rock best, playing hits including I Alone, Lightning Crashes and Overcome.

It's the fans in the crowd who put in a performance, too. Often they can be seen wiping away tears and are heard singing along to many of the tracks.

Recalls Kowalczyk: "It was funny because we had a lot of trouble mixing the record because the fans were so loud. At one point in the night they had a decibel meter that was reading the crowd at 115 decibels and the PA system at 108. So the crowd was actually louder than the PA system."

The band's Dutch fans are a keen lot. And so are the Australians.

Australia helped put Live on the map when they released their breakthrough album Throwing Copper in 1994.

"From the very beginning, when we stepped out of the United States the two countries that just grabbed the band and gave it a really big bear hug, if you will, and haven't let go, are the Dutch and the Aussies," Kowalczyk says.

Although no firm dates have been set, Live promises that an Australian tour is on the cards for later in the year.

The band has also launched a competition for fans to edit a video clip of their new single Forever, a version of which appears on Live at the Paradiso. Details can be found on www.friendsoflive.com.

Ed says that one of the songs he most enjoyed performing on the live DVD was the track Overcome. Inside the former church, the crowd almost became a tabernacle choir as they sang along to the emotional song.

Kowalczyk originally wrote it as a personal hymn of gratitude, but it was embraced as an anthem of healing after the September 11 Twin Towers tragedy in New York.

The night of filming, Kowalczyk felt he repossessed the song.

"I was always in the back of my mind worried that I would never sing that song again without thinking of 9/11, and that night in Holland there was something about the energy in the crowd, also the election coming in the States, there was this whole feeling that kind of turned the song from a sad thing to a more hopeful song, which I always felt that it was."

After playing together for 15 or 20 years, Live have mellowed since their days as angst-ridden young men in the early '90s.

"We still go crazy on stage, but I think that we probably take things less seriously," Kowalczyk said.

[Liveman94]

Pretty cool what Ed was sayin about the audience being louder than the P.A - I did think LIVE was alot louder than 108 decibels though...