Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

cilekagaci.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 41 posts

Re: Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

#31

Post by philwelch »

prawn wrote: post #24
Bo102010 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The graphic brought up these same kind of questions for me. If you're a band with a new album out, how much from that album should you play? Would you rather boost demand for it, or keep long-time fans happy so they come back to the show next year? The answer may vary by band. My favorite band, Reel Big Fish, recently did a tour with lots of "deep cuts" and few A-side hits. I loved it, and I think lots of long-time f…

Makes me wonder if artists with some history couldn't double up on gigs in a given city, playing classics in one show and favouring newer material in the other. Of course, hardcore fans would attend both.

Some artists alternate tours that way. The last two Iron Maiden tours, for instance.

Re: Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

#32

Post by jamesbkel »

prawn wrote: post #24
Bo102010 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The graphic brought up these same kind of questions for me. If you're a band with a new album out, how much from that album should you play? Would you rather boost demand for it, or keep long-time fans happy so they come back to the show next year? The answer may vary by band. My favorite band, Reel Big Fish, recently did a tour with lots of "deep cuts" and few A-side hits. I loved it, and I think lots of long-time f…

Makes me wonder if artists with some history couldn't double up on gigs in a given city, playing classics in one show and favouring newer material in the other. Of course, hardcore fans would attend both.

Steely Dan does a similar thing. Last time they were in Boston they did some along the lines of two shows that were specific albums from start to finish, plus a random collection of songs to finish up the show. Then there was a third show that offered an online-vote for the entire setlist.

Re: Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

#33

Post by jwr »

tibbon wrote: post #5

This is pretty cool. A few interesting observations: 1. Metallica seems to have realized themselves that St Anger wasn't something they wanted to play after that tour. The Load album seems to have been similarly dropped pretty hard. 2. It appears they never even tried playing the majority of Reload live. This is interesting to me as a musician, because I'd have thought that Metallica would be the type of band to try…

My observations were similar, but more generally: notice that everything until the Black Album gets played at concerts, while everything after that just tapers off quickly.

Which doesn't surprise me, as I think their work used to be much better in the past.

Re: Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

#34

Post by eftpotrm »

quaristice wrote: post #10
tibbon wrote: post #5

This is pretty cool. A few interesting observations: 1. Metallica seems to have realized themselves that St Anger wasn't something they wanted to play after that tour. The Load album seems to have been similarly dropped pretty hard. 2. It appears they never even tried playing the majority of Reload live. This is interesting to me as a musician, because I'd have thought that Metallica would be the type of band to try…

They've played Unforgiven II once live. Check the graphic again. I think the video is on youtube. In general, they didn't play new stuff live. Here's to hoping they play fixxxer live one day.

Amen to that.

From the same album, I was really shocked they'd never played Prince Charming live. Can really imagine that going down a storm, it's just the right pace for a good gig song.

Throw in them and 2x4 for your next setlist please :-) Bit of variety's good and I can imagine them all going down well.

Re: Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

#36

Post by kang »

About Audience vs Band Chart

When I am home listening to Metallica I might prefer the lighter songs like Unforgiven II. Whereas a concert is not just 'music', it is a whole performance! An energetic song definitely makes a difference. Thus, the chart is partly right saying that the songs from the extreme left would make people more happy, but how would playing those set the mood for the concert which determines the overall experience?

Re: Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

#37

Post by jasonkester »

It's actually surprising how much time has passed since Metallica used to be good. Looking at the infographic, they've now spend nearly 2/3 of their career in the "play the songs from this album on its release tour, then never again" phase.

I still distinctly recall the day in 2003 when I first uttered the previously unthinkable phrase "more crappy Metallica" on hearing their new release.

I actually downloaded their latest album when it so publicly got leaked on the internet. Then, with dashed hopes, deleted it an hour later.

Shame.

Re: Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

#38

Post by mgkimsal »

jasonkester wrote: post #37

It's actually surprising how much time has passed since Metallica used to be good. Looking at the infographic, they've now spend nearly 2/3 of their career in the "play the songs from this album on its release tour, then never again" phase. I still distinctly recall the day in 2003 when I first uttered the previously unthinkable phrase "more crappy Metallica" on hearing their new release. I actually downloaded their…

I don't think this is unique to Metallica. I'm a big McCartney fan, and he too will play a few from the new album, a couple from mid career, but mostly "oldies" hits. There's little he can do to please everyone, so the hardcore fans realize there's just no way he's likely ever to do "Girls School" or "Morse Moose" live. :/

I think Metallica is in a similar place with the amount of history they have, and yet I'm not sure anyone would ever slap the label "oldies" on their work. :)

Re: Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

#39

Post by untog »

mgkimsal wrote: post #38
jasonkester wrote: post #37

It's actually surprising how much time has passed since Metallica used to be good. Looking at the infographic, they've now spend nearly 2/3 of their career in the "play the songs from this album on its release tour, then never again" phase. I still distinctly recall the day in 2003 when I first uttered the previously unthinkable phrase "more crappy Metallica" on hearing their new release. I actually downloaded their…

I don't think this is unique to Metallica. I'm a big McCartney fan, and he too will play a few from the new album, a couple from mid career, but mostly "oldies" hits. There's little he can do to please everyone, so the hardcore fans realize there's just no way he's likely ever to do "Girls School" or "Morse Moose" live. :/ I think Metallica is in a similar place with the amount of history they have, and yet I'm not s…

Is that such a bad thing, though?

I've seen Radiohead live a few times and I'm always very sad that I never saw them in The Bends/OK Computer era- they barely ever play songs that far back any more. It's a huge deal when they play Creep, too.

I'm not saying that every band should just play crowd-pleasers, of course, but it's nice to hear the stuff that made the band every now and then.

Re: Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]

#40

Post by mgkimsal »

untog wrote: post #39
mgkimsal wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is unique to Metallica. I'm a big McCartney fan, and he too will play a few from the new album, a couple from mid career, but mostly "oldies" hits. There's little he can do to please everyone, so the hardcore fans realize there's just no way he's likely ever to do "Girls School" or "Morse Moose" live. :/ I think Metallica is in a similar place with the amount of history they have, and yet I'm not s…

Is that such a bad thing, though? I've seen Radiohead live a few times and I'm always very sad that I never saw them in The Bends/OK Computer era- they barely ever play songs that far back any more. It's a huge deal when they play Creep, too. I'm not saying that every band should just play crowd-pleasers, of course, but it's nice to hear the stuff that made the band every now and then.

No, it's not bad. It just "is".

As someone else mentioned, some gigs where artists did the deep cuts, and others where they focused on "big hits" would be ideal.

Macca's plumbed the depths of his Beatles stuff - only a handful of 'his' that I think he's never done live. There's loads of Wings stuff he could do live, and loads of 80s stuff that he never touches. A couple of "deep cuts" shows would be great. "Hey Jude" is great and all, but give me "Magneto and Titatnium Man" one more time :)

I saw the Beach Boys (well, most of them) in 1993(?), and they were doing some 'deep cut' stuff - Vegetables(!), Wind Chimes (IIRC), etc. A couple people booed - WTF! I was the only one in the upper deck singing along with this stuff, so maybe that was an issue - there's just not enough people at a 30k seat arena who want to hear the deep tracks to make it worthwhile to do there. Smaller venues would be great though.

Post reply on HN