Feelings about the tour...

Now I appreciate I only have 6 posts to my name here and I have no doubt this will have been discussed before (plenty of times) but I was wondering what people are thinking of the tour and, I guess, the band in general. Let me explain why I ask...

I've been a fan for over 10 years and been to most of the London shows in that period but I'm just not excited by the band anymore. At all. I haven't even got myself tickets for Wembley this time around because I just don't want to hear the guys play the same songs in the same fashion as they have been doing for over 15 years. Now, I know it is being mixed up a bit in terms of how some of the songs are being presented but, in my opinion, it really isn't enough on a few levels.

Firstly, the rotation of songs is really poor. Look at the last four tours. The songs on the setlists are very similar, which is forgiveable for a new band but not one that is 20 years in with 9 studio albums behind them. Is it really so difficult to brush off the cobwebs and play some of the rarer stuff from time to time. I think it is kind of lazy to have played so many of the same songs time and time again. Look at Springsteen: the guy plays around 150 different songs on each tour. Recently, he played tracks that he has never played live before or last played 30 years ago. That is rewarding the fans who go to see him over and over. And he doesn't play all the classics either so really allows for variety: Born to Run and Thunder Road were only played once each on the last tour for example. Do Bon Jovi do the same? I'm not saying drop all the "Greatest Hits", just mix it up a bit. Plenty of good songs on These Days that could see the light of day! Again, I'm thinking back over the last 4 tours here and thinking about them as a whole rather than just making a statement about the HAND tour... I can only speak for me but I want to go to concerts where I think there might be one or two surprises along the way.

Secondly, if it really is necessary to play so many of the same songs then I really think it shouldn't be too much to ask for a bit of variety in how they are played. Shout seems to have fallen off the end of Bad Medicine at last but I think we are still doing the acapella at the start of LOAP and Bad Name still appears to get the same treatment it has for the last 15 years. There is nothing wrong with that necessarily but it just feels really stale. That is what it felt like for me when I last saw them at Hyde Park. I'm not talking about giving everything the TLFR treatment but, maybe, just play it straight. Just something we haven't all seen a billion times before. Now, I am sure it remains great if you've only seem them once or twice but I just feel the band could give a little bit more in this regard.

I know this is very negative but I just watched the broadcast from Amsterdam late last year and it just didn't do anything for me. At all. And I just felt really disappointed that a band I used to really like seem to have got a bit "lazy". Even with the issues surrounding Jon's voice, which are of his own making I should add, I just think we should expect more.

But just my opinion... so flame away.

I'm sort of commenting on your post, but also going off in my own semi-related thoughts about boredom with shows, so this isn't really a direct reply to your post, but just what I started thinking after reading it.

I think bootlegs contribute to fans boredom with setlists and I say that as someone with a vast collection. I also think bootlegs are one reason people think the band doesn't sound as good or Jon doesn't sound as good because when you're there in person, the sound is incredible. Jon sounded great at the show I attended and the poor non-professional sound of bootlegs and webcasts have contributed to the negativity about his voice. Three of the people I attended that show with were not the kind of fans who have bootlegs or even have all the CDs and they all couldn't comment highly enough on how great they thought Jon sounded and how they appreciated singers who really sing. Two of them have since decided to go on road trips to see Bon Jovi because they enjoyed the show so much. You just will not get the same feeling from a recorded show as you will from the real thing and if you pick apart every set list, you'll be disappointed. I get that way. I think, "Why don't they do this and stop doing that for a change?" BUT... if you're only going to a couple of shows a tour, then it really doesn't matter that much. I heard new songs, songs I hadn't heard in 10 years, and old favorites in new ways. They HAVE improved the monotony of the last few tours. I think we can all agree they could still do more rotation, but at least they're doing more than they were which is a step in the right direction.

Thinking about it makes me question whether I really want to watch webcasts because they always sound less than stellar and whether or not I want to get a ton of bootlegs and ruin my own excitement and expectations.

I think that Becky made an excellent point about Bon Jovi concerts. I just went to the Madison show and am soon going to the Milwaukee show. I took a friend of mine with me who liked Bon Jovi but was not really into them. The show completely made her into a big fan - she even insisted that we sit outside in the cold for an hour trying to see if we could meet them - it was fun to see how much the show changed her enthusiasm for Bon Jovi. This will be my 4th Bon Jovi show since I was 12 and I think that this time could have been the best show yet. I do wish that I could hear a lot of my favorite songs and that they could rotate, but also appreciate the they understand that many people want to hear a few of the classics. I would find it difficult to understand how "Dead or Alive" or "Bed of Roses" could get boring at the concert live because their energy and style is contagious. Even Jon joked before singing "Living on a Prayer" saying "Lets get this song out of the way" but that song live was very different than hearing it on the radio or on a webcast in my opinion. I agree that bootlegs can wreck enthusiasm sometimes because they do not capture 1/10 of the experience of being at a concert.

I think a lot of us feel that way but we are afraid to admit it. I have been to 4 shows on this tour during the second Philly show something come over me once or twice that I wasn't as excited like I have been at past shows. I didn't want to admit to myself that my favorite band for 20 years has bored me and not to mention that it was an incredible show! Each show I went with someone different and with each song I was telling them what song they would do next. Thinking of that now it was sad that I knew almost every song was coming. I guess I would like more surprises at the shows. I just wanted to let you guys know that you are not alone with the way you feel but it doesn't make us any less of fans.

I wonder why Jon would consider Prayer a song to be gotten out of the way...didnt it do alot for them? I mean, I think of it as like theyre trademark song. Now, I better say this. For a band or singer I'm into, in a way I consider several of their songs as trademark songs. Meaning that I don't necesserily think there is one song that "defines" them and that's it, and that's who they are from that point on. And I actually do consider alot of Bon Jovi songs as their "trademark" song. Meaning that there were several big hit songs that were great and Prayer was one of them. Seriously, I can't really specifically explain why, but Livin' On A Prayer is probably almost my favorite. Well, it would be if I actually admitted that I had one favorite and not several. My point with all this is that I remember when Jon was on Oprah and she was saying something to the effect of how so many people have used BJ songs as book marks or sound tracks to the chapters of their lives. And it made me think that of all the songs to name for that, Livin' On A Prayer, I'm betting would be at the top of the list. Maybe I'm just crazy, but I think it seems strange that Jon thinks Prayer should be gotten out of the way. And yes, I know, you said he was joking, but still, I just thought I had to comment. I guess I am crazy then.

yes, I guess you are crazy.

I figured someone would say that. Don't worry, it's funny. Or atleast I think it is. I think it's the good crazy when everyone thinks you're crazy, you know they think it, you know you are too and you don't really care.
Now, everyone thinking you're crazy and you being the only one not knowing that you are is another thing.

I have to agree with Becky on the bootlegs, webcasts and video clips . Part of me really likes watching and hearing all this stuff, but a part of me would rather avoid it during a tour because somehow it seems to make it all less special.

With that said, BJ is still the most fun band ever for me to see live. Songs like Prayer and Wanted never get old to me and while there are times I think why don't they toss that and put in this because well I' would like to hear and see this song I haven't in 10 or 15 years, all I have to do is look around at a show and I realize that while I have seen the band many many times and do multiple shows every tour, most of the audience with me on any given night has not.

Bj does tend to play it safe on the road, although I have seen a bit more change up in order and songs on this tour than I have in a long while.

I do think it's very possible to outgrow a band. By that I mean you can connect with a band completely for a very long time but at some point you and your life go in one direction and the band goes in another. Two bands that come to mind for me are U2 and Journey.

I think it is an interesting point about the effect listening to and watching bootlegs can have on your experience. I think that is right... but if I had only ever watched Live in London, Zurich and One Last Wild Night then I would still be well aware of how most of the songs are played. I am not sure the songs have changed that much at all. Maybe one or two. But, yes, obsessively listening to bootlegs might affect how you feel about the shows, although I think the feeling that came over me at Hyde Park was really me comparing it to previous shows I had been at. It made me quite sad and I really didn't want to pay £75 for a Wembley ticket just to experience the same stuff (albeit the ocassion will be massive).

It's also interesting that a couple of people have commented how much their friends enjoyed the show. That's good, and very enjoyable seeing that in itself, but it is also a bit sad that a newbie has a better time than a long-term fan. I think there are genuinely ways to accommodate both in terms of rotation etc. Going back to the Springsteen example, I just checked and he did 138 songs across 71 shows in 2005, with 30 of them only being played once. Obviously Springsteen and Bon Jovi are different artists, at different stages in their careers, with different back catalogues but it does show what can be achieved with a bit of hard work. And Pearl Jam have been known to completely change a setlist from one night to the next. Completely change it with no repeats whatsoever. Can you imagine Bon Jovi doing that?! They seem to follow the lead taken by the more Rolling Stones with minimal changes and more emphasis on the stageshow. The Stones are very successful of course and are attracting huge audiences but they are 60+ years old so it is a little more understandable. Nothing wrong with that if you tour rarely but Bon Jovi have done 4 tours in 6 years! I appreciate Bon Jovi are not meant to be the most demanding rock band or be trailblazers but I do think they could offer more artistically and shouldn't be relying on gimmicks like walking through the crowd to mix things up.

As for the point about LOAP, I think that is very revealing. I would not suggest they don't play it or shouldn't play it but Jon's comments reflect, perhaps, a certain boredom and that there is a feeling there are songs they HAVE to play. I was listening to Farenheit last week and thought how great it would be to be at a concert when "Only Lonely", "Silent Night" or "The Hardest Part Is The Night" were played. Just one of them amongst all the other usual stuff. We'd be talking about if for weeks!

And, yes, definitely possible to outgrow bands. I think that is what might have happened here to be honest and I find myself listening to artists who have more to say and have shown a "progression" in the material. I guess that progression helps sustain a fanbase over a long time. Always be room for Bon Jovi on my Ipod but I just don't get much of a kick out of the live shows anymore

I've been to 14 shows this tour. For me the show is more than just the set list. It's the crowd, it's how the guys are on stage (meaning how they are sounding and interact with each other and the crowd), it's the atmosphere of the venue itself that all contribute to a great show. Would I like to hear some rare stuff , oh yea sure I would. I've been a fan since 1985 and the number of shows I've seen have increased, for the most part, with every tour. But there were a few tours that I saw NO shows, KTF and These Days, because I had no money. I don't know for me, it just never gets old.

Having Jon pull out I Wish Everyday Could Be Like Christmas made the CAA shows for me. And I do agree with Becky in that I think watching webcasts and listening to bootlegs does contribute more to the boredom of the set lists, at least for some. You are never going to have a Bon Jovi show where they have a completely different set list from night to night, a la, Pearl Jam, because Bon Jovi is committed to playing the songs off their new record, whether that record is successful or not. For this tour, they are playing around 7 HAND songs.

You make valid points. I hope you reconsider going to Wembley. I think it's going to be a great show. I still need a ticket, lol!!

deb