Roxy Music Live - S/D

I'd love it if this show moved out of the Chase in SF. haven't paid attention to how the sales have been but they've probably been fairly good.

oh wow there are a ton of tickets left for SF. floor basically gone, first several rows in the risers gone, everything else still available. yikes. There's even 2nd row tix available, but they run $600.

It's a vicious cycle, isn't it? Price a show too high and no one goes. Lower the price, and people learn to wait for the price to be lowered. My friend in the concert industry seems to think everything's a bit overheated, too active, everyone touring at once, too many big shows to go around. I wonder.

there are too many, several things I'm skipping on (kendrick lamar, roger waters, probably skipping new order/pet shop boys) because I just can't afford it

Yeah, exactly. And two of those things (NO/PSB, Roger Waters) are more or less strictly nostalgia/never ending tour propositions. Kendrick ... at least he is a major contemporary artist, which makes the show seem like more of an event, and not just another year, another Kendrick tour.

Saw them on the 2001 reunion tour in Boston and it was one of the best shows I've ever seen. Perfect weather... incredible setlist... lots of energy. Brilliant.

As for this tour, it's really wild that they thought they could fill that venue (the Garden) here, especially at those prices. It never made any sense.

I remember when I saw them on their Avalon tour, forty years ago, I was thinking about how I wished I could've seen them "in their prime."

ya I mean all respect to Roxy Music but when I saw the venues and ticket prices I was like "god damn they must think they're Genesis"

lol I skipped the Genesis farewell tour, too, because I'd seen them before and knew that even if they managed to be OK there was no way they'd be better than they were the last time I saw them, or the time before that, or the time before that, etc. These groups, they can still be good but they'll never be *better*, not really. And rather than make things at least more interesting by playing smaller venues, say, or shaking up setlists, they typically make things worse (or more boring/rote) by touring arenas and playing the same ol' setlists the same way.

I mean, I'm planning to go, but I'm not going to pay piles of cash to see a band decades past its prime from a great distance. If I'm going to stare at a performance on a screen, I can do that at home.

That's what happened with me and Springsteen & The E Street Band. I already missed Federici, but when Clemons died (who I did see on the 2009 tour), I actually lost interest in seeing them in 2012, thinking it would be too much of a loss. Regretting that now because I actually think Wrecking Ball is his best album since his colossal run from 1973-1987. And now he's audibly older (I kept thinking that when I heard him a couple of months ago) which kind of reinforced my belief that if you want to see someone, go - yeah, they're older, but they're only going to get older and it's not going to sound better if you go to an even later tour just to see them while you can.

For sure if you've never seen an act, add them to the bucket list. That justifies the cost a bit more, because suddenly you're getting exactly what you pay for: just a chance to say you've seen a favorite act live.

I feel lucky that I've gotten to see most of the top tier and a lot of my favorite acts at least once, so a different calculation comes into play. For example, I've seen the Afghan Whigs a bunch, and they're responsible for a couple of my favorite shows of all time. So, counter-intuitive though it may be, do I need to see them again when I've already gotten anything I'd ever want from them and more? Especially once line-up changes and deaths come into play. What am I actually seeing, you know? At what point is the band you're watching not the band you're there to watch, even accounting for the passage of time? (Not talking about the Whigs, specifically, though they're down to two key members.)

Curious how far a lot of these acts can push it. Leonard Cohen made it to 82. Mick is 79. Paul is 80. Dylan is 81. Bryan Ferry is a mere 76, four years older than Bruce.

yeah, they're older, but they're only going to get older and it's not going to sound better if you go to an even later tour just to see them while you can.

When I saw the Who at MSG this past May not only was Townshend's soloing as brilliant as ever (even though the physicality of his chording was a little diminished), but Daltrey sounded better than when I saw them in 2012, and in 2006...and in 1989. I don't know what he's doing to keep his voice in shape, but he was hitting notes that he couldn't hit 30+ years ago. Hell, I'd go see Daltrey solo in a heartbeat if he got within driving distance.

The best I've ever heard Daltrey was a solo show.

xp Wow, I was actually at that MSG show! I agree, it sounded like Townshend was doing some amazing improvisations on his solos...but I had to really strain to hear him because they really buried him in the mix. (I was on the floor, right in front of the mixing board.) Someone else told me they heard him clearly, but they were also in the front row and might've heard him through some monitors on the stage.

I was insanely lucky enough to get a 3rd row ticket to that show, and Pete was clear as a bell; I was definitely hearing him from his stage rig, rather than the PA. But just about every report I've heard from this tour echoed your experience. It's bizarre that the PA mix wouldn't have Pete higher in the mix (unless someone in the Who camp is thinking, "Pete's old, he may hit some clams, better not turn him up").

Weird, when I saw them last Pete's playing was definitely not really up to par, with Simon (and someone else, too? I can't remember) helping out a lot with the trickier guitar stuff. Cool to hear he's picked up a bit. Maybe better arthritis meds?

Maybe it has something to do with his hearing? I imagine it's still a struggle for him to hear correctly. Would having the PA sound on top of his stage rig throw him off?

Nah, these guys all have perfectly calibrated in-ear monitors. I once saw Garbage, and this guy leans over and tells me he made Butch Vig's in-ear monitors, and that if you were on stage behind the PA there's very little up there actually making much noise at all, relative to the house volume. Vs. AC/DC, who if I understand correctly did have all the speakers and monitors blasting full on, because Angus wanted it to sound and feel the same no matter where he was standing.

i would absolutely have seen Genesis on this tour had they been able to come to the west coast. but look: I paid a shit ton of money to see McCartney this year, assuming it's the last time. (admittedly I have done that twice with him already in the past 10 years); for bands that are winding down or getting older, if I haven't seen them yet, I'll spring for it. Hence, yeah, I paid probably too much for this Roxy Music concert but I can't imagine I'm going to be disappointed. I will be happy if it relocates to the Warfield though.

I remember when I saw them on their Avalon tour, forty years ago, I was thinking about how I wished I could've seen them "in their prime."

I saw that tour too (1983 at SDSU) and pretty much feel the same now.

Nah, these guys all have perfectly calibrated in-ear monitors.

I’m not certain, but I believe Townshend doesn’t use in-ear monitors, opting for the usual wedges. His amp rig, though, had lots of black cylinders around it, presumably to both keep the volume reasonable and to prevent leakage. As for perfectly calibrated, on each of the last four Who shows I saw, Daltrey angrily ripped out his in-ear monitors and shouted curses at their soundperson.

lol my friend and I always joke that the singers who do things like angrily rip out their in-ear monitors or point to their microphones and yell at the sound guy are the singers that are fucking up. Or, in Daltrey's case, possibly just can't hear!

Revealing he now relies on lip-reading and in-ear monitors at live shows, Roger said: “The trouble with the​se ear things that I wear is that I am very, very deaf. And I advise you all – all you rock-and-roll fans – take your f***ing ear plugs to the gigs.

Anyway as for Pete https://www.musicianshearingservices.co.uk/2019/02/28/pete-townshend/

I bet he does have some stage wedges, but probably to augment the ears.

Ah, didn’t realize that about Pete. It makes sense, since the volume and bothersome frequencies can be perfectly regulated.

tickets for Roxy in SF are now being sold via Goldstar, which is like Groupon for events; $25 tix available. Yikes.

Same in NY - maybe that's a sign they won't be moving to a smaller venue?

Same here, it appears. Lowest price is $40 for the nosebleeds, $80 for the next level, $110 or so for floor. Plus fees, of course. Unless I'm doing something wrong, though, it does not show specific seat assignments here, at least not through the first few steps of checkout, just the general level.

Yeah, I really wish I waited - I could've gotten floor for what I paid.

lol i paid regular price for my half-decent seats, not sure if Goldstar is selling tix for the Toronto show but either way, not too upset, i'd be even less upset if they moved the show to a smaller venue

update: they're not but damn this website is janky looking

goldstar fuckin rules i saw alice cooper for $8 earlier this year!

So, 50% off?

(sorry, Alice Cooper, I couldn't help it)

have to assume this tour is a massive money looser, but whatever, it's not like it's going to impact their ability to tour again, because I know they won't.

I can't tell whether the seats they moved me to are better or not because the alternative venue (MGM at Fenway) is new and they don't have a virtual view up yet. But I did get moved to the floor (even if it's kind of jammed off to the site). Regardless, I, too, am stoked they are playing in a smaller spot.

Tour starts tonight, right? I guess pretty soon we'll find out what they're playing and how they sound.

yeah, starts tonight in Toronto. i'm going. never seen Bryan Ferry live or anything so i have no previous standard. anyway, will report back. if i remember.

Should we post setlists? I'm kind of hoping it will be a surprise, but understand others may not feel the same way ...

I mean, I'm going to look it up whether it's posted here or not. but I would be shocked if the set list was remarkably different from the last time they toured. there's no new material, obviously. and this is a farewell tour of sorts, so you kind of know what you're going to get.

just look it up on setlist.fm

I got a copy of tonight's setlist... they're just going to jam on "Bitters End" for 75 minutes and then leave the stage one by one.

Encore: "The Paw-Paw Negro Blowtorch".

https://preview.redd.it/v84sdc8ivcy71.png?width=613&format=png&auto=webp&s=24d68106b19d43822c89e2da7539f9492fd1a42f

you kind of know what you're going to get.

I don’t. I’ve never seen them, never seen Ferry, never even looked up past setlists. I’m looking forward to going in not knowing what they’ll play.

One Word: "Sultanesque".

Interesting setlist - a lot of stuff from the two Eno albums, a lot of stuff from Avalon, and only a handful from in-between! I wonder if they're going to change it up with each show?

I was pleased with the Avalon representation but no “Take a Chance With Me” or “True To Life” which I def was hoping to hear tonight

regardless, fantastic show, Bryan can’t hit the high notes anymore but they can all still put on a hell of a show

I’m vicariously checking this thread for reports/set lists, although realizing that some wouldn’t want those lists to spoil their surprise. I do think that, given Ferry’s perfectionism, the sets won’t change much, if at all, on the tour. They’re not The Grateful Dead.

Setlist.fm has Toronto's set list up if you want spoilers.

Cool! Thx

who is playing bass? fingers crossed for Michael Dempsey! (i know this is not real likely)