The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

Discuss all things about music other than Blind Guardian here.
Post Reply
Message
Author
TraneDeracs
Posts: 73
Joined: 04 Jan 2008 16:40

The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#1 Post by TraneDeracs » 30 Sep 2011 06:26

Okay. I get the point guys. You want to "branch out a bit", ease some of those influences into the sound, be a little more 70's with everything. You know what? I'm cool with you guys being experimental. Some of the songs on the album are good and fit the atmosphere for a band that wants to grow and stay consistent within the metal community. By all means, knock yourself out. Evolve in a way which is beneficial for all of us in the long run.

I liked Damnation, thought Ghost Reveries had its fair share of awesome moments (later on, first listen was rough), and genuinely thought Watershed was a positive step in the right direction.

You see, I was one of those unfortunate kids who, given my financial situation, could never make it to where they were playing at any point until this recent tour. I was geared up, excited. Finally, I thought. I get to see OPETH. So I log onto setlist.com to check out what songs they will be playing with a nice intermix of new prog and oldies...

Or so I thought.

Behold ladies and gentleman, the worst possible setlist that could ever be conceived by a band known for playing death metal:

The Devil's Orchard
I Feel the Dark
Face of Melinda
Porcelain Heart
Free Fallin' (Tom Petty Cover)
Nepenthe
The Throat of Winter
Credence
Patterns in the Ivy II
Closure
Slither
A Fair Judgement
Hex Omega
Folklore

...what the fucking hell? Do you guys know how unfortunate we are stateside here? We hardly EVER get any good metal bands, let alone a quality band such as Opeth. Finally, when they do arrive...it is not what I was expecting. Deliverance? Masters Apprentice at least? Bleak? Drapery Falls? Heir Apparent even? At least one song from EITHER Morningrise or Orchid?

Once again: I am for the evolution of a band...but this? This is not Opeth to me. Opeth is a mixture of beautiful dark, blackened atmospheric death metal with portions of prog, jazz, folk, acoustic, etc thrown in there. I skipped going to the show on account of having no recognizable songs that interest me. Why even throw in songs that are merely the slow pieces of entire concept albums? Yawnarama. And I thought the A Matter of Life and Death tour was a bad decision...at least they ended with three songs people wanted to hear. It's just a selfish decision in my eyes. I was planning on embarking on a two hour drive, paying good hard money, buying merch, and continuing to support one of my favorite bands.

Sigh. What a blow to my tour list.

Twister
Posts: 470
Joined: 06 Jan 2006 14:31
Location: Rome, Italy
Contact:

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#2 Post by Twister » 30 Sep 2011 10:24

I had seen that, and basically I expected something like that.
Still I would've thought they would just play the whole new album and a couple of "heavy numbers". Akerfeldt said in many occasions that he was tired and bored of the death metal part, but I could never expect THIS to happen.
I agree, what made Opeth so special was that mix of elements.
Seems this decision is for good, too. Plus, I got a listen to their last dvd, and, well, could it simply be that he cannot bear to sing in growl anymore? I know it's stupid to draw conclusions from a single night show, but...

Anyway, I was lucky enough to see them "before", too, but I mean to go to their gig in this tour too...

A bit of mocking, but a thought I had: if this leaving the death metal component is for good, should Akerfeldt drop the Opeth monicker and that a whole new project?

PS
Loving A Fair Judgement and Face of Melinda, though!
"Well, I was about to announce the next song, but I think we'll have to skip it...
Yeah, because we have a pretty sad song here, and you all seem so happy to me...!"

(Hansi Kursch)

Frozen within
Posts: 1717
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 21:41
Location: Somewhere between pure bliss and absolute horror
Contact:

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#3 Post by Frozen within » 30 Sep 2011 18:31

Yeah, I've read tons of such comments already. It's really a shame to see a great band throwing all overboard and starting over new. I kinda hate Mikael for taking this so far, I'm hoping it's just a phase he needs to get through and gets back to writing good music asap after what's certainly going to be a disappointing tour for them ...
Eat more vegetables !

User avatar
Bender B. Rodriguez
Posts: 1942
Joined: 06 Oct 2003 15:13
Location: Anywhere but the "Sanctuary"..because i'm banned from that place (Santiago de Chile)

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#4 Post by Bender B. Rodriguez » 30 Sep 2011 18:46

it sucks.i mean,a band with such an awesome catalogue ...
☢ ☢ ☢ all hail the deathweed ☢ ☢ ☢

TraneDeracs
Posts: 73
Joined: 04 Jan 2008 16:40

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#5 Post by TraneDeracs » 01 Oct 2011 18:19

Still...

They want to play songs from their newest album. I am for that. But where are at least a few classics that aren't snippets from their concept albums? Credence is a great song, but...it's missing the heavier, darker, more METAL songs overall.

I like Heritage as an album but it feels like they are trying to garner a broader audience with this newest release. Please Opeth, remember your fanbase. I know metal doesn't exactly pay all the bills, but you guys actually made it to high end festivals with your quality songs alone.

But yes, they have such an extensive history of incredible albums it's a shame to not give the fans any treats. Serenity Painted Death? In the Mist She Was Standing? Advent? The Apostle in Triumph?

Once again: Sigh.

Edit: Yes, they should change their name if they are going this route as this is not Opeth to some people. It's just the name, but nothing that made them a great band to me.

Twister
Posts: 470
Joined: 06 Jan 2006 14:31
Location: Rome, Italy
Contact:

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#6 Post by Twister » 02 Oct 2011 12:47

But even so, they could play more Damnation stuff, or a great song like To Bid You Farewell...
And next: they played The Drapery Falls... only the first part, though. :lol:
Now that's teasing... :twisted:

Loving the new album, anyway, so yeah, they should play it all.
By the way, isn't that setlist a little lenght-SHORT?
"Well, I was about to announce the next song, but I think we'll have to skip it...
Yeah, because we have a pretty sad song here, and you all seem so happy to me...!"

(Hansi Kursch)

User avatar
Desert_Storm
Posts: 784
Joined: 20 Jun 2004 13:13
Location: Zürich/Vienna
Contact:

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#7 Post by Desert_Storm » 04 Oct 2011 01:25

TraneDeracs wrote: I like Heritage as an album but it feels like they are trying to garner a broader audience with this newest release etc. etc. etc.
Did you actually listen to this album? You may love it or hate it, but that's certainly not the type of music that you "gain a broader audience" with. They are/were a quite successful death metal act with progressive (and later acoustic/folk) elements and they reached quite a big audience with that music, I highly doubt that they will be able to do the same thing when they turn around and try some seventies oriented prog rock with modern elements... Just for the reason that there is not much of an audience for that type of music. I mean I can't think of many bands who do that stuff and are successful at all, except PT.
I, too, am a neat guy. And I, too, am just a love machine
Also, a stupid europeoid with snake primitive language

TraneDeracs
Posts: 73
Joined: 04 Jan 2008 16:40

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#8 Post by TraneDeracs » 07 Oct 2011 00:59

Desert_Storm wrote:
TraneDeracs wrote: I like Heritage as an album but it feels like they are trying to garner a broader audience with this newest release etc. etc. etc.
Did you actually listen to this album? You may love it or hate it, but that's certainly not the type of music that you "gain a broader audience" with. They are/were a quite successful death metal act with progressive (and later acoustic/folk) elements and they reached quite a big audience with that music, I highly doubt that they will be able to do the same thing when they turn around and try some seventies oriented prog rock with modern elements... Just for the reason that there is not much of an audience for that type of music. I mean I can't think of many bands who do that stuff and are successful at all, except PT.
While I am all for the evolution and natural progression of the band, and even anticipated that there would be no death metal vocals in the future, I cannot help but think that since Mikael became "tired" of the death metal style that he wants to distance himself from it the older he gets. The setlist speaks for itself in this regard. Is it a good album? Undeniably. Is it something everyone expects and should get upon coming to an Opeth show (many of which become fans because of their first five to six albums)? Not really.

By all means. Intermix the songs, give us a good five or four of them that are worthy. But the encore being a new song? You know...that spot typically reserved for a classic or the heavy hitter of the album?

Still. No accusations of selling out or "pulling an In Flames on us" from my end, but overall...the band and Mikael seem to be trying to distance themselves from their old style. Did they do this with Damnation? Not really. Let's just hope that they will retain their original song structure and come back with the new elements thrown in with the classic style we all know and love from them.

Yet, let's face it in regards to the metal genre entirely, on a realistic scale:

1. Mikael and the guys are getting older. With age comes the need to secure oneself financially. Death metal doesn't exactly pay the bills.
2. Rock and the other cateogies are very distanced from metal within the mainstream mentality. It's a given. It's a sound which is easier to understand and relate to, since not everyone can "get into" or take the time to understand metal on a personal level.
3. "Getting tired of death metal vocals" when you are in a death metal band WITH progressive elements and influences of Rush, B.B. King, King Crimson, etc. thrown in there...says something about what direction they are headed in.

Once again: Good album. Not very Opethy in a sense. Very light, smooth, and good. If they had released a double disc with one side that is Heritage and another side which is more along the lines of Ghost Reveries, Still Life, Morningrise, etc...then it would have been a logical move.

User avatar
Desert_Storm
Posts: 784
Joined: 20 Jun 2004 13:13
Location: Zürich/Vienna
Contact:

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#9 Post by Desert_Storm » 07 Oct 2011 20:47

TraneDeracs wrote:
Desert_Storm wrote:
TraneDeracs wrote: I like Heritage as an album but it feels like they are trying to garner a broader audience with this newest release etc. etc. etc.
(...) but that's certainly not the type of music that you "gain a broader audience" with. (...) there is not much of an audience for that type of music. I mean I can't think of many bands who do that stuff and are successful at all, except PT.
(...)
Yet, let's face it in regards to the metal genre entirely, on a realistic scale:

1. Mikael and the guys are getting older. With age comes the need to secure oneself financially. Death metal doesn't exactly pay the bills.
2. Rock and the other cateogies are very distanced from metal within the mainstream mentality. It's a given. It's a sound which is easier to understand and relate to, since not everyone can "get into" or take the time to understand metal on a personal level.
(...)
Well I wasn't trying to "defend" them or anything. I mean it's not that I would consider this album to be exceptionally good at all, I've played it twice full length and I probably won't be putting it on much in the future, except for maybe one or two songs.
But like I said before, it's not the music you gain a broader audience with. Death Metal may be not very mainstreamy and popular, but neither is prog. And playing (co-)headliner shows at quite big metal festivals and touring the world is something that you can do with (melodic) (Death) Metal (and it will probably pay most bills), but hardly with progressive rock. I know tons of death metal fans but very few who like king crimson etc. I know of people who are considered to be "big players" in that genre and who still say that they don't get booked but have to rent the locations to gig in, and still pay more than they earn with their tours (or are satisfied if it's a zero outcome). How many prog fans do you know? How many prog bands that regularly tour your area? How many big prog festivals with tens of thousands of people? If I am to answer to those question the answer will be pretty much zero for all (ok, I know two or three guys who like that music, but its not that you run into people wearing transatlantic t-shirts on the streets, as opposed to death metal fans), for Death Metal (and metal in general much more), I can think of quite a lot of fans just from my (small)hometown, dozens of festivals within my reach (say, 500-1000 km around Vienna) and concerts maybe once a week (sometimes more).
Rock and "the other categories" are "very distanced from metal within the mainstream mentality"? Highly depends on what that other categories are. Gangsta Rap and Boybands? Probably - Free Jazz, contemporary classical music and Electro-Noise? I rather don't think so.
Porcupine Tree are probably more accessible to the average person on the streets, still they have a smaller following and play in smaller venues here than opeth and many bigger death metal acts (if they are booked at all). Also, they're probably not the best example for an average prog band. While some of their songs are quite accessible indeed, I don't think that you could say the same of songs like this, or that. Metal, in comparison to styles like jazz, contemporary classical etc. etc. etc. is more accessible than one might think anyway. You mostly get songs around four minutes, a triple or quadruple metre that mostly lasts throughout a song, a quite traditional song structure, harmonies and melodies in major or minor (mostly minor, though ;) ). That's all stuff that you are used to as a person "in the western part of the world", and makes it more likely for you to get into it, even though its more aggressive and stuff. And no, I'm not saying metal is mainstream or simple music or anything like that, it's just that it has much in common with traditional western music that is easily overlooked, and that other music does not have that, and therefor is sometimes much harder to get into, even if the performers don't scream like if they were about to die ;)
Be that as it may, I'm running off the track ;) Long story short, Opeth probably won't gain a much bigger following with that album, they will probably loose quite a lot of old fans with it, and that's not the music many people listen to :) Have a nice evening, I'm going for a beer!
I, too, am a neat guy. And I, too, am just a love machine
Also, a stupid europeoid with snake primitive language

ra me nivar
Posts: 45
Joined: 23 Aug 2002 18:58
Location: where The Game is lost
Contact:

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#10 Post by ra me nivar » 21 Oct 2011 09:59

TraneDeracs wrote:1. Mikael and the guys are getting older. With age comes the need to secure oneself financially. Death metal doesn't exactly pay the bills.
Oh man, that is one of the most flawed logical arguments ever.

If that logic were standing, all death metal bands would leave their style away, yet most they don't. The argument is the same as "they are aging. Age brings white hair and death. Thus now their hair is white, and they are dead".
TraneDeracs wrote:2. Rock and the other cateogies are very distanced from metal within the mainstream mentality. It's a given. It's a sound which is easier to understand and relate to, since not everyone can "get into" or take the time to understand metal on a personal level.
That's a huge and false generalization: the fact that there are rock bands that make easily listenable albums that they sell like chocolat cookies doesn't mean that all rock is mainstream or easy to get into. And definetively their last album isn't easy to grasp: in fact, I think it's their harder album to get into.
TraneDeracs wrote:3. "Getting tired of death metal vocals" when you are in a death metal band WITH progressive elements and influences of Rush, B.B. King, King Crimson, etc. thrown in there...says something about what direction they are headed in.
I think that the fact that they change direction is what says something there. You can pick a style and repeat it to death and be successful (just look at AC/DC: decades of the very same style), yet it's possible and perfectly honest to become bored of doing the same thing record after record. And hey, they don't have a contract signed with their usual style, it's their right as artists to do whatever they desire to try. Our right as their audience is to buy or not to buy the album, to go or pass to their show.

Because about the setlist, it's quite obvious that if they were wanting to try the old prog approach, as they had done, they obviously want to take it to the road, and they were obviously going to have a setlist like the above one, to be coherent with the new album, and well, to ease the packaging needs (if you are going to have two kind of sounds and you want them to sound nice, well, that's going to require more equipment trucked from one show to the next).

And you blame them because for once that you were going to see them you caught them in this let's-say-clean phase? It's just bad luck: if you wanted to see them touring the Blackwater Park album, as I would like too, we are late.

I saw them before a couple of times, anyway, and I really don't think that they are going to thow away all their previous work and about twenty years of their lifes. I would bet that their next album will have growls and harder sounds once again and that you will have more chances to hear let's say Deliverance alive.

Maybe the dude is bored of growling: the medicine when something that used to be fun bores you is not quit doing it, but doing it less or leaving it for a while, which is what they are doing, I think.
TraneDeracs wrote:Once again: Good album. Not very Opethy in a sense.
I absolutely disagree with that: the album is absolutely Opeth-ish.
TraneDeracs wrote:If they had released a double disc with one side that is Heritage and another side which is more along the lines of Ghost Reveries, Still Life, Morningrise, etc...then it would have been a logical move.
Efectively it would, if only they hadn't release Deliverance and Damnation with exactly that idea in mind.

User avatar
somnia
Posts: 237
Joined: 04 Jul 2009 20:16

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#11 Post by somnia » 21 Oct 2011 13:22

Desert_Storm wrote:Porcupine Tree are probably more accessible to the average person on the streets,
Yeah, one would think so but unfortunately not. Porcupine Tree is, in my experience, usually the band that people really like the songs of when they somehow listen to, but don't get caught up with the band fulltime. Even though PT isn't exactly prog or exactly metal, almost all their fans are prog metal fans.
TraneDeracs wrote:1. Mikael and the guys are getting older. With age comes the need to secure oneself financially. Death metal doesn't exactly pay the bills.
2. Rock and the other cateogies are very distanced from metal within the mainstream mentality. It's a given. It's a sound which is easier to understand and relate to, since not everyone can "get into" or take the time to understand metal on a personal level.
3. "Getting tired of death metal vocals" when you are in a death metal band WITH progressive elements and influences of Rush, B.B. King, King Crimson, etc. thrown in there...says something about what direction they are headed in.
I don't think they need to pay the bills after a bazillion of awesome albums that have sold really well. And death metal is much easier to get into than what Mikael is aiming for with Heritage. Consider this: Rush on Last.fm vs Opeth on Last.fm. Opeth has twice the number of plays, eight times the shouts, which tells us that in this day and age Rush isn't more profitable than Opeth. So Heritage is indeed a "fuck this shit I'll make something else" move, and it turned out really cool imho.
power progressive metal: polimat
game music and soundtrack: dogac yavuz

Led Guardian
Posts: 2440
Joined: 26 Mar 2008 21:08
Location: Somewhere less cliché than far beyond

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#12 Post by Led Guardian » 23 Oct 2011 08:25

somnia wrote:I don't think they need to pay the bills after a bazillion of awesome albums that have sold really well. And death metal is much easier to get into than what Mikael is aiming for with Heritage. Consider this: Rush on Last.fm vs Opeth on Last.fm. Opeth has twice the number of plays, eight times the shouts, which tells us that in this day and age Rush isn't more profitable than Opeth. So Heritage is indeed a "fuck this shit I'll make something else" move, and it turned out really cool imho.
I'm not sure I would take last.fm plays as evidence for who is more profitable. I'm not sure how large Opeth concerts get (non-festival), but when I saw Rush on their last tour they easily sold out a 25,000 capacity venue. They're pretty damn profitable I'd say.
'Nowhere has this renunciation of man's transience been more joyous or uplifting than in the medium of airport carpets.'

ra me nivar
Posts: 45
Joined: 23 Aug 2002 18:58
Location: where The Game is lost
Contact:

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#13 Post by ra me nivar » 23 Oct 2011 14:27

In fact the last.fm measure rule was a little flawed: what it comes from the comparison is that Rush fans are dinosaurs who don't know what the fuck the Internet is, not that they have less followers that Opeth.

Just look how high both reached the US billboard charts (hint: Rush is there, Opeth isn't).

But this wasn't about comparing Rush with Opeth but about Opeth's popularity, and whenever they came here to Madrid and I was there to see them, the place was full. And they weren't stadiums, but they weren't pubs either.

User avatar
Desert_Storm
Posts: 784
Joined: 20 Jun 2004 13:13
Location: Zürich/Vienna
Contact:

Re: The Opeth setlist for the American Tour is....rubbish.

#14 Post by Desert_Storm » 27 Oct 2011 22:36

somnia wrote:
Desert_Storm wrote:Porcupine Tree are probably more accessible to the average person on the streets,
Yeah, one would think so but unfortunately not. Porcupine Tree is, in my experience, usually the band that people really like the songs of when they somehow listen to, but don't get caught up with the band fulltime.
... and therefor the second part of my sentence above was
(...)still they have a smaller following and play in smaller venues here than opeth and many bigger death metal acts

It strikes me as odd that you chose to not quote the full sentence since it pretty much makes the same point that you made ;)
Even though PT isn't exactly prog or exactly metal, almost all their fans are prog metal fans.
I'll be bold here and say that this statement is wrong. Where PT clearly isn't metal (they used metal elements on maybe three albums which still where far away from metal, let alone the rest of their discography), they are certainly prog in the sense of the term that they are a progressive band who try out new stuff, write complicated songs with odd time signatures and elements from many other genres, just to name a few characteristics. That this doesn't sound like the bands who did the same thing (trying out new stuff, combining different genres etc.) in the 60's/70's doesn't make them less progressive, it just shows that they do a similar thing in a different time. In a way, it makes them even more progressive than a band who tries to sound like Yes or Genesis or King Crimson since they are doing stuff that is new nowadays instead of trying to sound like a band who did stuff that was new in the sixties.

For the fans, I don't know too many of them personally, but I doubt that too many of them are (prog) metal fans. Of the six guys that I went with to the Steven Wilson show last week (whose new album sounds a lot like PT) I was the only metalhead. I estimate the average age of the audience to thirty to forty, haven't seen a single Metal shirt and few guys with long hair. Of course, that doesn't say whether you like (prog) metal or not, but if you compare it to a typical Opeth or Dream Theater (two big prog metal bands that are very different from each other and both very successful) audience you get my point. What I get from the online community who follows PT over more than one album, most people seem to be older guys who are only marginally interested in metal, if at all, and listen more to the bands of the glorious old days ;)

Anyway, I think we can both agree with:
So Heritage is indeed a "fuck this shit I'll make something else" move, and it turned out really cool imho.
Which sums up my point pretty well.
I, too, am a neat guy. And I, too, am just a love machine
Also, a stupid europeoid with snake primitive language

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests