Saw Kate last night and OH MY GOD! What a show! I was blown away! Her voice! HER VOICE! It was phenomenal! Really powerful and beautiful. The two stories played were fantastic. Ninth wave was really beautiful. I actually got a little teary in parts of NW. You'll see why if you are going. One of the best shows I have ever seen. So many standing ovations, so many cheers. OH and make sure you get a programme… Typical Kate, puts effort into everything!
Fantastic!! ... not to be contentious or anything but did you see any disgruntled fans as is being suggested here?
To see her perform the Ninth Wave would be awesome .. so many times I've listened and imagined all sorts but to actually see Kate's visuals come to life .. must have been brilliant. 'I put this moment .. here' I would have been in floods I'm sure.
It's so good too to hear that she's sounding good.
this tour being discussed had no info to anyone as to what would be played. so what bruce, ken, bob or jimmy did or didn't do is irrelevant. if they gave a warning and people didn't read, understand or whatever, it has nothing to do with this tour. if there was word of what this tour would include and exclude in advance of ticket sales and people didn't read, understand or follow, then that's a different matter. but that didn't happen in this case
Well several press previews that I saw indicated that she probably wouldn't be doing Wuthering Heights for starters. Anyway, whether or not there was any clear indication of what she would or wouldn't be playing, my point was made in a general context, regardless of the artist, that when there IS such an indication, people still complain when they don't hear a particular song despite being advised that it probably wouldn't be played.
Well several press previews that I saw indicated that she probably wouldn't be doing Wuthering Heights for starters.
was this before or after the tickets went on sale? the first indication i saw that she might (she did apparently played it in the rehearsal on monday) not play WH was seeing the tracklisting after tuesdays show. i'm personally not that fussed about hearing that particular track, rather than some others she hasn't played, but i had no idea she wouldn't play her most well known material and i'm certainly not alone in that respect
Anyway, whether or not there was any clear indication of what she would or wouldn't be playing, my point was made in a general context, regardless of the artist, that when there IS such an indication, people still complain when they don't hear a particular song despite being advised that it probably wouldn't be played.
if people are clearly warned of something and ignore the warning and complain about something they've been warned about, then that's a different story altogether. and if that was the case then as long as the warnings were reasonably clear i probably wouldn't sympathise much
however in this particular case there was no warning at all, and certainly not a clear one. people have spent hundreds of pounds on tickets, and will spend hundreds more on travel and accomodation to see the shows, so i think it's more than fair for them to be aggrieved if the show doesn't meet reasonable expectations of having the most well known songs to be played
if an artist wants to put on something unusual and different to the norm to which the customer has to be a reasonably high price for it, then i think it's only reasonable for them to warn customers before they buy. it's neither fair to the people who bought tickets expecting "hits" (i use this more as a shorter term to describe her most well known material as opposed to chart/sales), nor is it fair to the hardcore fans who will miss the chance of seeing the show due to casual fans buying tickets for something that they may not have bought if they knew what to expect
at the end of the day it's a lot of money that some people are paying out to go to the shows, so the have a right to voice concerns about the show they've paid for
it's great she's doing something different and something that the hardcore fans seem to be really enjoying, but at the same time she could satisfy the expectations of the casual fans who more than likely make up the majority of ticket holders, by simply adding a small number of well known songs. either making the show a little bit longer, or removing some lesser known songs that won't affect the narrative(s) of 9th and sky. i don't see any reasonable reason as to why that can't be accomplished nor why some fans would disagree with this. after all, surely even the most hardcore fans would enjoy those tracks too
i don't understand in this specific case why the artist doesn't want to play that material considering the first few albums are the reason she has a fanbase and can perform these shows. it's not like these were early albums that weren't very good, so the reason for avoiding tracks from them is for simple quality control reasons. many bands will avoid some of their earliest material if it's not particulaly good or completely different in style to what become famous for, but in this case the material is not significantly different to that on later albums. the issue of voice/key change is a simple one to amend. i doubt very much that had she played the most well known tracks from those albums that many people would be complaining about it, whereas some people are justifiably upset at paying large sums of money to see her for the first time ever, and aren't going to get to hear some the most well known songs in her career that they had been looking forward to hearing for such a long time
and why anyone would want to argue against this is beyond me. especially those who never even bought a ticket
was this before or after the tickets went on sale? the first indication i saw that she might (she did apparently played it in the rehearsal on monday) not play WH was seeing the tracklisting after tuesdays show. i'm personally not that fussed about hearing that particular track, rather than some others she hasn't played, but i had no idea she wouldn't play her most well known material and i'm certainly not alone in that respect
if people are clearly warned of something and ignore the warning and complain about something they've been warned about, then that's a different story altogether. and if that was the case then as long as the warnings were reasonably clear i probably wouldn't sympathise much
however in this particular case there was no warning at all, and certainly not a clear one. people have spent hundreds of pounds on tickets, and will spend hundreds more on travel and accomodation to see the shows, so i think it's more than fair for them to be aggrieved if the show doesn't meet reasonable expectations of having the most well known songs to be played
if an artist wants to put on something unusual and different to the norm to which the customer has to be a reasonably high price for it, then i think it's only reasonable for them to warn customers before they buy. it's neither fair to the people who bought tickets expecting "hits" (i use this more as a shorter term to describe her most well known material as opposed to chart/sales), nor is it fair to the hardcore fans who will miss the chance of seeing the show due to casual fans buying tickets for something that they may not have bought if they knew what to expect
at the end of the day it's a lot of money that some people are paying out to go to the shows, so the have a right to voice concerns about the show they've paid for
it's great she's doing something different and something that the hardcore fans seem to be really enjoying, but at the same time she could satisfy the expectations of the casual fans who more than likely make up the majority of ticket holders, by simply adding a small number of well known songs. either making the show a little bit longer, or removing some lesser known songs that won't affect the narrative(s) of 9th and sky. i don't see any reasonable reason as to why that can't be accomplished nor why some fans would disagree with this. after all, surely even the most hardcore fans would enjoy those tracks too
i don't understand in this specific case why the artist doesn't want to play that material considering the first few albums are the reason she has a fanbase and can perform these shows. it's not like these were early albums that weren't very good, so the reason for avoiding tracks from them is for simple quality control reasons. many bands will avoid some of their earliest material if it's not particulaly good or completely different in style to what become famous for, but in this case the material is not significantly different to that on later albums. the issue of voice/key change is a simple one to amend. i doubt very much that had she played the most well known tracks from those albums that many people would be complaining about it, whereas some people are justifiably upset at paying large sums of money to see her for the first time ever, and aren't going to get to hear some the most well known songs in her career that they had been looking forward to hearing for such a long time
and why anyone would want to argue against this is beyond me. especially those who never even bought a ticket
At least we can be a little objective. I think the Kate fans here know that we are completely right about the fact that she gave zero advance warning that she wasn't going to play all of her most well known songs.
They cannot excuse this,so they take pot shots at us and at George Michael,who was only used as an example of how a different kind of gig can be advertised and still work just as well.
They cannot bring it upon themselves to say "yes,you guys have a point,Kate could have made a lot more effort to make it perfectly clear that it wasn't going to a hits based show".
Still,with 35 years of excuses about why a singer refuses to actually sing in front of them,I guess they are quite well conditioned to make excuses for Kate Bush.
Sarcastic,yes,but this is what happens when they deliberately choose to ignore the truth about something Kate Bush could have done a lot better.
i'm not a hardcore fan but i like kate and i'd be happy with the setlist. to be fair i only own hounds of love and aeriel on cd but i love those albums so it would suit me.
anyway from what i've heard the show sounds great and it might be the only thing she does live, don't see what all the moaning's about on here to be honest
I don't always agree with unique, but I do think he makes some fair points here. I think it was natural that some people would assume Kate would be doing her best known songs given the fact that she doesn't have an album out currently. Now when an artist does a tour at the same time they release a new album, people do assume that they will be doing a lot of songs from the new album to promote it with maybe a few older songs thrown in.
Also it was a good point is this will probably her only tour so people will never get a chance to hear their favourite better known Kate Bush song. I think she could have easily fit in a few more better known songs and still did the slightly more obscure arty stuff she wanted to do given it was a three hour concert and she really doesn't have that many all huge "hits" as some other artists that she couldn't fit them in without doing nothing but "hits" and not doing the artistic stuff she wants to do. I think the best performers find a way to balance what their more casual fans want with their artistic vision.
A lot of artists tour every two to three years so if they don't do your favorite older song on this tour, there is a good chance you might hear it in the future. Madonna is a good example of this. I know people criticize her for not doing enough of her older stuff too, but she does do some older hits and she often does different ones on each tour. So you do get to hear most of the older songs you like although not on the same tour.
I don't always agree with unique, but I do think he makes some fair points here. I think it was natural that some people would assume Kate would be doing her best known songs given the fact that she doesn't have an album out currently. Now when an artist does a tour at the same time they release a new album, people do assume that they will be doing a lot of songs from the new album to promote it with maybe a few older songs thrown in.
Also it was a good point is this will probably her only tour so people will never get a chance to hear their favourite better known Kate Bush song. I think she could have easily fit in a few more better known songs and still did the slightly more obscure arty stuff she wanted to do given it was a three hour concert and she really doesn't have that many all huge "hits" as some other artists that she couldn't fit them in without doing nothing but "hits" and not doing the artistic stuff she wants to do. I think the best performers find a way to balance what their more casual fans want with their artistic vision.
A lot of artists tour every two to three years so if they don't do your favorite older song on this tour, there is a good chance you might hear it in the future. Madonna is a good example of this. I know people criticize her for not doing enough of her older stuff too, but she does do some older hits and she often does different ones on each tour. So you do get to hear most of the older songs you like although not on the same tour.
Unique and I will have a new cell mate in the "How dare you criticise Kate Bush" armchair warrior witch hunt ;-)
Comments
LOL I completely forgot about that! Oh well, seems like poor Kate will continue scraping by ;-)
I LOVED the extended Prologue! I really hope for a DVD or a live album… Maybe both. The crowd adored her last night. Truly amazing!
To see her perform the Ninth Wave would be awesome .. so many times I've listened and imagined all sorts but to actually see Kate's visuals come to life .. must have been brilliant. 'I put this moment .. here'
It's so good too to hear that she's sounding good.
That started when someone compared the promotion of his concerts to Kate's.
Well several press previews that I saw indicated that she probably wouldn't be doing Wuthering Heights for starters. Anyway, whether or not there was any clear indication of what she would or wouldn't be playing, my point was made in a general context, regardless of the artist, that when there IS such an indication, people still complain when they don't hear a particular song despite being advised that it probably wouldn't be played.
was this before or after the tickets went on sale? the first indication i saw that she might (she did apparently played it in the rehearsal on monday) not play WH was seeing the tracklisting after tuesdays show. i'm personally not that fussed about hearing that particular track, rather than some others she hasn't played, but i had no idea she wouldn't play her most well known material and i'm certainly not alone in that respect
if people are clearly warned of something and ignore the warning and complain about something they've been warned about, then that's a different story altogether. and if that was the case then as long as the warnings were reasonably clear i probably wouldn't sympathise much
however in this particular case there was no warning at all, and certainly not a clear one. people have spent hundreds of pounds on tickets, and will spend hundreds more on travel and accomodation to see the shows, so i think it's more than fair for them to be aggrieved if the show doesn't meet reasonable expectations of having the most well known songs to be played
if an artist wants to put on something unusual and different to the norm to which the customer has to be a reasonably high price for it, then i think it's only reasonable for them to warn customers before they buy. it's neither fair to the people who bought tickets expecting "hits" (i use this more as a shorter term to describe her most well known material as opposed to chart/sales), nor is it fair to the hardcore fans who will miss the chance of seeing the show due to casual fans buying tickets for something that they may not have bought if they knew what to expect
at the end of the day it's a lot of money that some people are paying out to go to the shows, so the have a right to voice concerns about the show they've paid for
it's great she's doing something different and something that the hardcore fans seem to be really enjoying, but at the same time she could satisfy the expectations of the casual fans who more than likely make up the majority of ticket holders, by simply adding a small number of well known songs. either making the show a little bit longer, or removing some lesser known songs that won't affect the narrative(s) of 9th and sky. i don't see any reasonable reason as to why that can't be accomplished nor why some fans would disagree with this. after all, surely even the most hardcore fans would enjoy those tracks too
i don't understand in this specific case why the artist doesn't want to play that material considering the first few albums are the reason she has a fanbase and can perform these shows. it's not like these were early albums that weren't very good, so the reason for avoiding tracks from them is for simple quality control reasons. many bands will avoid some of their earliest material if it's not particulaly good or completely different in style to what become famous for, but in this case the material is not significantly different to that on later albums. the issue of voice/key change is a simple one to amend. i doubt very much that had she played the most well known tracks from those albums that many people would be complaining about it, whereas some people are justifiably upset at paying large sums of money to see her for the first time ever, and aren't going to get to hear some the most well known songs in her career that they had been looking forward to hearing for such a long time
and why anyone would want to argue against this is beyond me. especially those who never even bought a ticket
At least we can be a little objective. I think the Kate fans here know that we are completely right about the fact that she gave zero advance warning that she wasn't going to play all of her most well known songs.
They cannot excuse this,so they take pot shots at us and at George Michael,who was only used as an example of how a different kind of gig can be advertised and still work just as well.
They cannot bring it upon themselves to say "yes,you guys have a point,Kate could have made a lot more effort to make it perfectly clear that it wasn't going to a hits based show".
Still,with 35 years of excuses about why a singer refuses to actually sing in front of them,I guess they are quite well conditioned to make excuses for Kate Bush.
Sarcastic,yes,but this is what happens when they deliberately choose to ignore the truth about something Kate Bush could have done a lot better.
Wow....unbelievable.
Amazing. Last record was Madonna with 3.
8 Top 40 albums- everyone a round of applause please for this momentous achievement.
Can't wait until Tuesday.
Yes, the Doomsters, who live with a black cloud permanently above their nappers
Brilliant.
This set list thingreally isn't an issue.
And I'm glad to see all the albums back in the top 40.
Kate is something of a national treasure.
The critics eviews of the show are much more interesting and relevant as they suggest why Kate has put on the show she has.
I was expecting a lot more reviews by posters on here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-28947830
anyway from what i've heard the show sounds great and it might be the only thing she does live, don't see what all the moaning's about on here to be honest
One of the experts will soon pop along to tell us they just know it's actually the name of the chippy she had to set up when EMI let her go!
I would love a live album or DVD too! Oh God I want to go again!
I believe so. I found this.
http://business.highbeam.com/411456/article-1G1-256759055/interview-andria-vidler-never-say-never-ever
Great stuff!
Phew looks like 'washed up' Kate can call off the Rita Ora collaboration then!
George Michael must be glad too....
Also it was a good point is this will probably her only tour so people will never get a chance to hear their favourite better known Kate Bush song. I think she could have easily fit in a few more better known songs and still did the slightly more obscure arty stuff she wanted to do given it was a three hour concert and she really doesn't have that many all huge "hits" as some other artists that she couldn't fit them in without doing nothing but "hits" and not doing the artistic stuff she wants to do. I think the best performers find a way to balance what their more casual fans want with their artistic vision.
A lot of artists tour every two to three years so if they don't do your favorite older song on this tour, there is a good chance you might hear it in the future. Madonna is a good example of this. I know people criticize her for not doing enough of her older stuff too, but she does do some older hits and she often does different ones on each tour. So you do get to hear most of the older songs you like although not on the same tour.
i love this review, takes me back to last tuedsay. a wonderfull evening:)
Unique and I will have a new cell mate in the "How dare you criticise Kate Bush" armchair warrior witch hunt ;-)