Setlists - were they less static before?

[Pierre]

 

It's quite strange to expect drastic setlist changes from a man who answers to questions in interviews the same way for 40 years or something
For Mark to answer different questions there should be other questions, for him to play different setlists there should be another audience.
And sure enough, on more intimate shows (Boothbay, 09/09/09, Private Bank show, Volkswagen premiere, etc.) you get a new setlist

People don't ask for drastic changes, not many bands do that anyway, people just want mere changes. Just shuffling the usual suspects would make my day, I remember in 2013 when instead of Sultans he played Gator Blood, it felt like the earth was shaking... litteraly. 

The way I see it, the set changes wouldn't have to be big to provoke a big response from fans. A song swap, more song from the last record, nothing extraordinary. 

The second problem is when a setlist is established, as most of us here go to more than one concert (me not really) we expect minor but repeated changes to keep the concert fresh. It used to happen more in the past, in 2013, in 2001: Then you could have two or three rotating songs and the occasionnal "new" song :5.15 Am, Back to Tupelo, Dream of the..., I dug up a diamond, etc

Now it's quite repetitive and after the excitement of the first dates (if your lucky enough to have been to those) the show loses songs and settles in a routine. If you are among the one attending later show you  supposedly get the best Mark and Band musicwise, which remains to be proven, but you don't have the few surprises, namely silvertown which would have been more than enough to make me happy,  Heart full of holes, Brothers in arms, Telegraph, Nobody does that... Some people got 3 or 4 of those, other none and nothing else instead

rant over
I'm fine

[the visitor]

I think Love Over Gold tours and Brothers in Arms tours were very static indeed. On the latter they played pretty much the same set for a year. So Far Away and Man's Too Strong the only variations after the very very early shows (six blade and Portobello played).  OES was a different matter

[ds1984]

I think Love Over Gold tours and Brothers in Arms tours were very static indeed. On the latter they played pretty much the same set for a year. So Far Away and Man's Too Strong the only variations after the very very early shows (six blade and Portobello played).  OES was a different matter

The Aussie tour in 1986 featured a nice variation for SFA, plus the inclusion of Industrial Disease and Your Latest Trick without speaking of TR during a very limited number of shows.

[the visitor]

That's true

[Jules]

Yes, the LOG and BIA tours were statics but the set they were playing were just amazing with all the classic hits you want to listen to, just perfect sets.

The DTRW set has some songs like Corned beed city or Bonaparte that are overplayed and doesn't mean too much when you think about all the MK repertoire that he could play that are as good or better than those two, for example. Even Bacon Roll is not better than some of the new songs that are not being played, I can't believe than anyone here would choose the bacon roll instead of "One song at a time", "trapper" or "back on the dancefloor"

[vr46mk]

Yes, the LOG and BIA tours were statics but the set they were playing were just amazing with all the classic hits you want to listen to, just perfect sets.

The DTRW set has some songs like Corned beed city or Bonaparte that are overplayed and doesn't mean too much when you think about all the MK repertoire that he could play that are as good or better than those two, for example. Even Bacon Roll is not better than some of the new songs that are not being played, I can't believe than anyone here would choose the bacon roll instead of "One song at a time", "trapper" or "back on the dancefloor"

Agree on this 

[goon525]

Also agreed.

[hunter]

But remember that, for the LOG and BIA tours, Mark had a lot fewer songs to choose from. Roughly 40? And many of them were played to death during the first two tours when they had only two albums to draw songs from. So it seems that the setlist was always fairly static, but maybe for different reasons? Nowadays, with a lot larger catalog, it's all down to Mark's preferences (and abilities maybe?) and whatever works for him.

[Jules]

But remember that, for the LOG and BIA tours, Mark had a lot fewer songs to choose from. Roughly 40? And many of them were played to death during the first two tours when they had only two albums to draw songs from. So it seems that the setlist was always fairly static, but maybe for different reasons? Nowadays, with a lot larger catalog, it's all down to Mark's preferences (and abilities maybe?) and whatever works for him.

And despite having a lot of more stuff to play, he always play the same. So it doesn't matter really how much stuff he has to choose.

[hunter]

But remember that, for the LOG and BIA tours, Mark had a lot fewer songs to choose from. Roughly 40? And many of them were played to death during the first two tours when they had only two albums to draw songs from. So it seems that the setlist was always fairly static, but maybe for different reasons? Nowadays, with a lot larger catalog, it's all down to Mark's preferences (and abilities maybe?) and whatever works for him.

And despite having a lot of more stuff to play, he always play the same. So it doesn't matter really how much stuff he has to choose.

Yeah, it's really strange. Obviously, not all songs are great for live performance, but he has so many, old and new, that would be fantastic live. And they are not particularly guitar heavy either. I wish someone who interviews him would try to pick his brain on what his philosophy is on this. Immediately he would get into the old "I can only please me" thing, but a good journalist who asks the right questions would be able to pry some more information out of him I think.

[qjamesfloyd]

As I have mentioned else where, journalists just don't seem capable of asking Mark intelligent questions!!!

But, I just don't get why we have the same conversations about the set list all the time. Just accept, Mark can and does play what he wants to, what is the big deal with the songs he plays? every single tour he has played he has added different songs not played on the previous tour, isn't that enough? don't forget, he has a liking for certain songs that we all may not have, but that applies to fans too. Mark clearly likes Corned Beef City, which is an ok song, but not great, but from an album that has 20 songs (24 if you include bonus songs) that is the one he seems to like playing more than the other 19. That's he prerogative. I really love the songs True Love Will Never Fade and Golden Heart, other people are not so keen, but that is because we all get different things from songs, Mark clearly gets something from the songs he is playing, would we want him playing songs he doesn't like? Les Boys for example.

[Robson]

As I have mentioned else where, journalists just don't seem capable of asking Mark intelligent questions!!!

But, I just don't get why we have the same conversations about the set list all the time. Just accept, Mark can and does play what he wants to, what is the big deal with the songs he plays? every single tour he has played he has added different songs not played on the previous tour, isn't that enough? don't forget, he has a liking for certain songs that we all may not have, but that applies to fans too. Mark clearly likes Corned Beef City, which is an ok song, but not great, but from an album that has 20 songs (24 if you include bonus songs) that is the one he seems to like playing more than the other 19. That's he prerogative. I really love the songs True Love Will Never Fade and Golden Heart, other people are not so keen, but that is because we all get different things from songs, Mark clearly gets something from the songs he is playing, would we want him playing songs he doesn't like? Les Boys for example.

I agree with it