2010/2011 Australian Tour

[Hat]

Discussing "which rarities are the best" to try and determine if Muse played a better setlist one night is just silly.

 

They both got an equal amount of non-regulars, and that's all that should matter. It's not like Muse can start calculating exactly how rare a song is and how many people like it.

[Frakkles]

Discussing "which rarities are the best" to try and determine if Muse played a better setlist one night is just silly.

 

They both got an equal amount of non-regulars, and that's all that should matter. It's not like Muse can start calculating exactly how rare a song is and how many people like it.

 

It will always come down to opinion. One show could get Dead Star and one show could get Fury. Person A goes to the show with Dead Star but their favourite Muse song is Fury. They might prefer to have the other set list because of Fury. It's all down to taste.

 

Equal amount of non-regulars is the way to go. Though Muse really SHOULD know which songs they do and don't play that often.

[Dee3Dee]

Either way this change in the setlists is good, but way too late.

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

The point that has been missed is that what's in the setlist shouldn't be a problem as most people will enjoy whatever Muse play. The issue is the length of the setlist. It'd be much better if they added 3 more songs minimum to what they play. The arguing over why someone shouldn't enjoy a setlist because it doesn't contain *insert song here* is an entirely subjective one and isn't the argument to be vocal about.

[Hat]

The point that has been missed is that what's in the setlist shouldn't be a problem as most people will enjoy whatever Muse play. The issue is the length of the setlist. It'd be much better if they added 3 more songs minimum to what they play. The arguing over why someone shouldn't enjoy a setlist because it doesn't contain *insert song here* is an entirely subjective one and isn't the argument to be vocal about.

You seem to be the one who have missed a few points.

 

I think most of the people here are aware and not pleased with the length of the set. But the argument about setlist songs has nothing to do with not playing *insert song here*.

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

You seem to be the one who have missed a few points.

 

I think most of the people here are aware and not pleased with the length of the set. But the argument about setlist songs has nothing to do with not playing *insert song here*.

 

The problem is that whatever Muse play they're not going to be able to please everyone.

[Hat]

The problem is that whatever Muse play they're not going to be able to please everyone.

The problem is that they aren't even trying. it's not hard to MIX things.

 

If someone complains when they got Bliss and B&H instead of Sunburn and CE, they are just whiners.

 

if someone complains when they didn't get ANY non-regular songs, I think that's okay. Maybe that's just me.

[dead-duck]

I think Muse may be getting better.

I agree that things certainly improved with Sydney as far as second-night syndrome goes *and* managing to vary the setlist while still keeping the regulars.

 

I'm not sure if I want to be optimistic, though. They started playing Dead Star and Space Demential on the SA tour in '08, added in CE randomly once and seemed to be doing well. While that did manage to carry over to the Dublin and VFest shows the next month, it didn't in any way impact this tour. It's like they forgot during the break...

 

My worry is that they're going to forget again

The problem is that whatever Muse play they're not going to be able to please everyone.

It's not about being able to please everyone, it's about trying your hardest to please as many people as possible at once. The fact that there will always be someone complaining doesn't mean you shouldn't try nor does it mean that no complaint is ever valid.

 

A setlist that contains a bunch of singles and new songs may please most of the new/casual fans, but won't please very many of the older/die hard fans.

 

A setlist that contains a bunch of album tracks and bsides but skips the big singles will please most of the older/diehard fans but will not please very many of the new/casual fans.

 

The way to try to please the maximum number of people in both groups is to play new album songs, big singles and the occasional album track/b-side/fan favorite. It's not about playing my favorite song, it's about balance.

 

I do agree that the setlists should be longer - and that also plays into the song selection argument. If the setlist had 2-3 more slots, that would make it much easier to balance between showcasing new songs, playing hit singles and playing fan favorites. By playing so few songs, they're making it harder to swap things out because every song that's left is a "must have" as far as new material and singles go, so there's no room to add in the random song.

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

It's not about being able to please everyone, it's about trying your hardest to please as many people as possible at once. The fact that there will always be someone complaining doesn't mean you shouldn't try nor does it mean that no complaint is ever valid.

 

A setlist that contains a bunch of singles and new songs may please most of the new/casual fans, but won't please very many of the older/die hard fans.

 

A setlist that contains a bunch of album tracks and bsides but skips the big singles will please most of the older/diehard fans but will not please very many of the new/casual fans.

 

The way to try to please the maximum number of people in both groups is to play new album songs, big singles and the occasional album track/b-side/fan favorite. It's not about playing my favorite song, it's about balance.

 

I do agree that the setlists should be longer - and that also plays into the song selection argument. If the setlist had 2-3 more slots, that would make it much easier to balance between showcasing new songs, playing hit singles and playing fan favorites. By playing so few songs, they're making it harder to swap things out because every song that's left is a "must have" as far as new material and singles go, so there's no room to add in the random song.

 

I see complaints in individual gig threads from people who weren't even at the gig in question - I also see lots and lots of people posting saying they loved the show, people who DID go to those gigs. I don't see many people who go to those shows who complain. Yes, there are some who are disappointed, but as they went to that show they have the right to be disappointed.

 

The problem comes when we have hundreds of people watching threads for setlist updates. On paper it's never going to look as good as being there. Why should we care if they vary the setlists or not, we're not at them gigs...it's the setlists at the gigs you DO go to that counts, surely?

 

Set length should be more of an issue, if Muse finally got round to adding two or three more songs to the set they play then there wouldn't be a problem. But all I see is "rotate this, rotate that". Unless you're going to loads of different gigs then it shouldn't be a problem.

 

That's just my viewpoint on things, anyway. It should be the length of the setlist rather than what's in it that is the issue.

[Hat]

I don't see people coming back complaining about the set length either.

 

And being disappointed isn't really the problem.

 

The problem is that we all know Muse can do so much better.

[dead-duck]

I see complaints in individual gig threads from people who weren't even at the gig in question - I also see lots and lots of people posting saying they loved the show, people who DID go to those gigs. I don't see many people who go to those shows who complain. Yes, there are some who are disappointed, but as they went to that show they have the right to be disappointed.

 

The problem comes when we have hundreds of people watching threads for setlist updates. On paper it's never going to look as good as being there. Why should we care if they vary the setlists or not, we're not at them gigs...it's the setlists at the gigs you DO go to that counts, surely?

 

Set length should be more of an issue, if Muse finally got round to adding two or three more songs to the set they play then there wouldn't be a problem. But all I see is "rotate this, rotate that". Unless you're going to loads of different gigs then it shouldn't be a problem.

 

That's just my viewpoint on things, anyway. It should be the length of the setlist rather than what's in it that is the issue.

Sure, it's almost always better when you're there, and I've been at a gig and then seen people later on here saying the gig seemed boring when I know it wasn't.

 

So, when you say that the setlist is much more boring over twitter than it is in person, I agree - but the same can be said for length.

 

I remember for one of the UK gigs people who followed along insisted that the gig was barely 1hr30mins. I wasn't at the gig, but checked twitter and looking at when things were sent, found that the gig was more like 1hr40mins.

 

So, in the same way as the setlist can seem boring while following along from home, the show can seem shorter when you're sitting on your couch with the laptop than it is when you're in the thick of it jumping around and having a great time.

 

I don't think we really disagree all that much. My point is I don't see why it has to be one or the other. I think both issues are contributing to the problem (as I said at the end of my last post)

 

My last gig was the 15song greatest hits w/feeling good setlist. I'd have appreciated more songs,of course, but I have to say that even the 15song set would have been better if it had something "special" in it, so I could feel like there was some effort put into the song selection rather than just playing the bare minimum.

 

As a thought, maybe one of the reasons that people focus on the song selections rather than length is that we've resigned ourselves to the fact that they're not going to play longer than 1hr45mins avg on this tour. So, rather than emphasizing the thing we can't change, we're focusing on the one we can....? (i.e.assuming the band cared what we had to say, it would be much easier to convince them that they should be more even handed between the two nights than it is to say "play two more songs!!")

[dead-duck]

I don't see people coming back complaining about the set length either.

 

And being disappointed isn't really the problem.

 

The problem is that we all know Muse can do so much better.

Well, thinking/knowing they can do better than they do would imply that you're disappointed in what they're doing wouldn't it?

[Frakkles]

Well, thinking/knowing they can do better than they do would imply that you're disappointed in what they're doing wouldn't it?

 

There's a difference between knowing something and being disappointed in something. You can know Manchester United are capable of beating Sunderland but that doesn't mean you're disappointed when they don't.

[Hat]

Well, thinking/knowing they can do better than they do would imply that you're disappointed in what they're doing wouldn't it?

Well, if you're seeing Muse for the first time, how are you supposed to know what they are capable of?

[dead-duck]

There's a difference between knowing something and being disappointed in something. You can know Manchester United are capable of beating Sunderland but that doesn't mean you're disappointed when they don't.

I suppose possibly, but I'd have to wonder why you'd take the initiative to complain about it and want to change it if you weren't bothered by the fact that what you "know" can happen isn't happening...

 

I'd say I'm disappointed in them for not doing better. That doesn't mean that I get disappointed every time they play a 15song setlist or screw over the 1st night people, I basically expect that. But I'm still disappointed by their choices and to some extent in the tour in general.

 

Well, if you're seeing Muse for the first time, how are you supposed to know what they are capable of?

huh?

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

Well, if you're seeing Muse for the first time, how are you supposed to know what they are capable of?

 

People like you telling them?

[Hat]

huh?

My point is, just because people aren't disappointed doesn't mean that Muse aren't doing anything wrong.

 

Muse may be a lot better than *random shit band* that you have seen live, but that doesn't mean they couldn't do a lot better.

 

People like you telling them?

Well, they can say that Muse are amazing, that's their opinion. But that doesn't mean they couldn't have been better.

 

That's one of the most used arguments, "people enjoyed it". It makes no sense when the people aren't aware of what they COULD have gotten.

 

I just don't settle for 50%, but maybe that's just me.

[dead-duck]

My point is, just because people aren't disappointed doesn't mean that Muse aren't doing anything wrong.

 

Muse may be a lot better than *random shit band* that you have seen live, but that doesn't mean they couldn't do a lot better.

ah, ok, I didn't get that when I first read it.

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

My point is, just because people aren't disappointed doesn't mean that Muse aren't doing anything wrong.

 

Muse may be a lot better than *random shit band* that you have seen live, but that doesn't mean they couldn't do a lot better.

 

 

Well, they can say that Muse are amazing, that's their opinion. But that doesn't mean they couldn't have been better.

 

That's one of the most used arguments, "people enjoyed it". It makes no sense when the people aren't aware of what they COULD have gotten.

 

I just don't settle for 50%, but maybe that's just me.

 

That's all fair enough...but arguing in the gig threads does make those that went to the gig feel like their opinion doesn't matter because all they see is the beef...could you not agree to take the setlist talk to this thread instead and leave those threads for people that actually went to the gigs?

[Hat]

That's all fair enough...but arguing in the gig threads does make those that went to the gig feel like their opinion doesn't matter because all they see is the beef...could you not agree to take the setlist talk to this thread instead and leave those threads for people that actually went to the gigs?

Their opinion DOESN'T matter. Everyone has their opinion, and sometimes there will be negative ones. Just because you might have a positive one isn't gonna change anything, but it doesn't make it any less valuable than negative one.

 

Where I am trying to go with this is, what are people really hoping to achieve by writing that "I liked this"? To who should their opinion matter more than any other?

 

I'm not saying they shouldn't post obviously, but I'm just saying that "feel like their opinion doesn't matter" is a rather weird statement. It's an opinion, if you can't handle not being the majority, then that's not really my problem. And the arguing starts because people tend to try and defend Muse when people say something bad about them.

 

"This was shit, this could have been better", why not just leave it at that? There is nor reason for people to start arguing about it, which is what eventually fills the whole threads. People have different opinions, "they" need to realize it just as much as "us".

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

Their opinion DOESN'T matter. Everyone has their opinion, and sometimes there will be negative ones. Just because you might have a positive one isn't gonna change anything, but it doesn't make it any less valuable than negative one.

 

Where I am trying to go with this is, what are people really hoping to achieve by writing that "I liked this"? To who should their opinion matter more than any other?

 

I'm not saying they shouldn't post obviously, but I'm just saying that "feel like their opinion doesn't matter" is a rather weird statement. It's an opinion, if you can't handle not being the majority, then that's not really my problem. And the arguing starts because people tend to try and defend Muse when people say something bad about them.

 

"This was shit, this could have been better", why not just leave it at that? There is nor reason for people to start arguing about it, which is what eventually fills the whole threads. People have different opinions, "they" need to realize it just as much as "us".

 

I would say their opinion matters more than the people who aren't at the gig, wouldn't you?

[Hat]

I would say their opinion matters more than the people who aren't at the gig, wouldn't you?

Not when we are talking about setlists.

 

Performances? ofc.

 

I can't judge a concert by the setlist, but I can judge the setlist by the setlist.

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

Not when we are talking about setlists.

 

Performances? ofc.

 

I can't judge a concert by the setlist, but I can judge the setlist by the setlist.

 

So do it in this thread, or the setlist discussion thread, and not the individual gig threads. That's what I'm saying would be the best solution, so the people that went to the gigs can talk about the gig they saw, and the people who want to beef about the setlist can do so also, and then there's no cross-over of setlist/performance arguing.

 

I think that would be the fairest way to do things.

[Hat]

So do it in this thread, or the setlist discussion thread, and not the individual gig threads. That's what I'm saying would be the best solution, so the people that went to the gigs can talk about the gig they saw, and the people who want to beef about the setlist can do so also, and then there's no cross-over of setlist/performance arguing.

 

I think that would be the fairest way to do things.

Well, there was just as much beef here before because people didn't want setlist complains here either.

 

I don't think people want negativity anywhere

[Zaphod Chizzlebrox]

Well, there was just as much beef here before because people didn't want setlist complains here either.

 

I don't think people want negativity anywhere

 

There's always going to be negativity, it's unfortunate but that's the way things are these days...I suppose as long as people don't take differing opinions as a personal affront, then things will be cool. As long as you keep the negative stuff in the right places then they haven't got a leg to stand on with telling you not to be negative (and when I say "you" I mean everyone who wants to talk about the negatives!)