Because We Can Tour, 2013 - Song Tally

And another 20 covers or so?

Well - the bands I mention only play about [give or take] 25 different songs per tour, so yeah - even 56 is pretty good I think. Not sure what U2 does. Or Metallica or Guns N' Roses. But most big bands have very static setlists to be fair.

But not this band. This band is known for being one of the best live acts over the years because they never used to repeat a setlist. I couldn't care less about covers, especially snippets in the medley. For a band with a 30 year catalog to draw from, 56 songs in over 100 shows is sad.

That is a decent set list. But Jon needs to stop playing 3 ballads in a row. He said it's hard to get the energy back up after a slow song, but 2 or 3 back-to-back creates way too much of a lull. It's like he wants to get them out the way all at once. It would be far more effective to spread them out. The crowd would enjoy them more, and appreciate the break, in between the big sing-along anthems.

Some facts:

Aerosmith has been playing 40 to 50 different songs on every tour in the past 10 years.

Scorpions was playing about 50 different songs during their last tour.

Iron Maiden (one of the worst bands in the world IMO) is hardly playing 20 different songs during their tours.

The same goes with AC/DC.

So I think the amount of different songs Bon Jovi is playing is pretty ok. The problem is that the songs they chooses to play are bad and the same tour after tour. You don't have to play 100 different songs on every tour. Just bring some new songs in on every tour to keep it fresh.

I gotta disagree with this, they've always had setlists that didn't change much its just people liked the songs they chose more than now.

That statement renders your opinions irrelevant as far as I'm concerned, you can't honestly believe that, and you must just be trolling. You might not like that type of music, fair enough, but to say one of the most hard working, successful, influential, and entertaining bands of the past 30 odd years is one of the worst in the world? You fail.

As for Bon Jovi, I don't care too much - I would be happy with a solid well composed 30 song list for each tour, give or take a few encore changes depending on the night. I only go to a couple of shows per tour, so why should I care too much what other shows on the other side of the world get if I'm not there? Yes, maybe a passing interest in hearing new stuff, especially in this age of youtube, but again why should I worry what others are getting? Only the armchair keyboard warrior type fans who follow and analyse everything worry about that kind of thing. A setlist should be Quality not quantity.
If anything, the playing of more songs is more for the artist themselves than the fans, it keeps long tours interesting for them. The average fan goes doesn't care about tour stats and setlists too much, they just want their show to be good.

Andi

Okay. What was the last tour they only played 56 different band songs?

I fail cause im saying my opinion about some band? C'moon grow up. My opinion of music is not related to the popularity or how hard working the band is. That music is crap to my ears, whether they've sold one hundred or one hundred million albums. Dont make a fool out of yourself by saying what opinions other people should or should not have..

Are we talking pre 2000 or the entire history?

EDIT: The Bounce tour had 38 band songs and very very similar setlists. My point was more they were known as a great live act but their big selling point was never "The setlists always change". It was something the band would say in interviews but it was never accurate.

I'm sickened by it. The song is one of the worst of their entire career. Is Jon actually deluded enough to think that people LIKE it since it was a minor radio hit? (I still hear it regularly on Sirius.) I wish that song had never been written.