Springsteen on Broadway

[tiger roach]

You can always tell the forumites who are prime for a live organ transplant.

Finalist, Most Creative Insult of the Month Competition.

I am a huge Dylan fanatic. I can see how he doesn't appeal to everyone though. He and Bruce have that in common at least.

 

[rickenvox]

This is a cliché statement and it’s not that black and white. He isn’t really a ‘performer’ — he has zero interest in theatrics, he has zero interest in stage banter, he has zero interest in connecting with the audience in the way that an actor or frontman is, and he’s got zero interest in pleasing casual fans with a greatest hits setlist. So if that’s what you’re into or looking for, then stay far far away.

But musically, he’s fucking awesome. And if you know the catalogue, he’s one of the few who’s really worth seeing over and over again. His band is amazingly tight. The songs evolve on a night-to-night basis in the kind of way that bands like the ‘great’ (or Grateful) jam bands never could. Structural improv vs wankery.

I agree although I'd say his Rolling Thunder Revue was somewhat theatrical with the makeup and all. He's always considered himself a minstrel. And yes his bands are always super tight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[vonbladet]

But musically, he’s fucking awesome. And if you know the catalogue, he’s one of the few who’s really worth seeing over and over again. His band is amazingly tight. The songs evolve on a night-to-night basis in the kind of way that bands like the ‘great’ (or Grateful) jam bands never could. Structural improv vs wankery.

Which is particularly amusing because he lifted that shtick wholesale *from* the Dead, after the tour recorded on Dylan and the Dead. He has the advantage of being able to shuffle his band at will, of course.

 

[rickenvox]

Which is particularly amusing because he lifted that shtick wholesale *from* the Dead, after the tour recorded on Dylan and the Dead. He has the advantage of being able to shuffle his band at will, of course.

What shtick? He's been touring since before the Grateful Dead existed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DdBob]

What shtick? He's been touring since before the Grateful Dead existed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep . I agree and as a fan of both though I don't really listen to the Grateful dead anymore I was way deep into both at one time. Having actively tape and cd traded before downloads existed or before torrents I can say Dylan definitely always evolved his songs, changed tempos, style, etc from day one. The dead just kinda jammed in a pre concieved sorta way, they was a systmatic approach to. If anything I'd say Dylans stuff was naturally improvised in that I'm not sure even if he wanted to that he could play a song twice the same exact...verbatim

 

[rhino]

yep . I agree and as a fan of both though I don't really listen to the Grateful dead anymore I was way deep into both at one time. Having actively tape and cd traded before downloads existed or before torrents I can say Dylan definitely always evolved his songs, changed tempos, style, etc from day one. The dead just kinda jammed in a pre concieved sorta way, they was a systmatic approach to. If anything I'd say Dylans stuff was naturally improvised in that I'm not sure even if he wanted to that he could play a song twice the same exact...verbatim

Yeah. He's really good about being in the moment and letting the song be what it is at any given time. Very much a jammy sort of guy but he's not thought of as a jammy sort of guy because he's such a good songwriter. I've always enjoyed that about his stuff.

Somebody earlier said his bands were always super tight. I don't disagree but it's a different sort of tight, then a Rush. Dylan's bands are tight because the individual parts aren't that complex and everybody has to listen because things could always change.