Red Mosquito

I'm listening to Montreal 2000 right now and got to Betterman, and was shocked that the track length is 3:53. Unbelievable nowadays.

2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

oasisfan35 wrote:2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

Rough? I would confidently say this is the best show I have ever attended, including 21 other Pearl Jam shows and every other band I have seen. This show was incredible.

According to my set list.fm stats I am at 190 concerts by 104 different artists, but I know it is more than that because there are shows I couldn’t find there. Point is I must have seen some decent bands in there. None approach the magic of that night.

Might listen to the Midtown Music Festival set from 2012 next. For a festival, it was a good show.

oasisfan35 wrote:2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

2008 and 2010 are the two worst tours in my opinion.

liebzz wrote:

oasisfan35 wrote:2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

Rough? I would confidently say this is the best show I have ever attended, including 21 other Pearl Jam shows and every other band I have seen. This show was incredible.

According to my set list.fm stats I am at 190 concerts by 104 different artists, but I know it is more than that because there are shows I couldn’t find there. Point is I must have seen some decent bands in there. None approach the magic of that night.

A show which is amazing in person doesn't always translate particularly well to the recorded medium.

I find the 2010 bootlegs almost unlistenable in general because of the mixing, anyway.

Birds in Hell wrote:

liebzz wrote:

oasisfan35 wrote:2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

Rough? I would confidently say this is the best show I have ever attended, including 21 other Pearl Jam shows and every other band I have seen. This show was incredible.

According to my set list.fm stats I am at 190 concerts by 104 different artists, but I know it is more than that because there are shows I couldn’t find there. Point is I must have seen some decent bands in there. None approach the magic of that night.

A show which is amazing in person doesn't always translate particularly well to the recorded medium.

I find the 2010 bootlegs almost unlistenable in general because of the mixing, anyway.

Yes, which is super unfortunate because there were a few great shows. The mixing is atrocious though.

I'm currently doing the 2005 tour in chronological order, Kitchener is next. So far I liked Calgary the best. When they are good, they are REALLY good on that tour but almost every show has plenty of rough tracks, too. So I can't agree with all the people that say that they were so tight on that tour. Not really. Australia or Europe 2006, that's tight in comparison. I like the 2005 setlists better but performancewise it isn't even close...

Strat wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

liebzz wrote:

oasisfan35 wrote:2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

Rough? I would confidently say this is the best show I have ever attended, including 21 other Pearl Jam shows and every other band I have seen. This show was incredible.

According to my set list.fm stats I am at 190 concerts by 104 different artists, but I know it is more than that because there are shows I couldn’t find there. Point is I must have seen some decent bands in there. None approach the magic of that night.

A show which is amazing in person doesn't always translate particularly well to the recorded medium.

I find the 2010 bootlegs almost unlistenable in general because of the mixing, anyway.

Yes, which is super unfortunate because there were a few great shows. The mixing is atrocious though.

The mix definitely isn't helping as it really is quite poor. That said, I was at this show as well and wouldn't put it anywhere near the best PJ show I've seen let alone other artists. Different strokes I suppose though the fact that Ed sounds exhausted from the start is a fairly objective statement.

raven2001 wrote:I'm currently doing the 2005 tour in chronological order, Kitchener is next. So far I liked Calgary the best. When they are good, they are REALLY good on that tour but almost every show has plenty of rough tracks, too. So I can't agree with all the people that say that they were so tight on that tour. Not really. Australia or Europe 2006, that's tight in comparison. I like the 2005 setlists better but performancewise it isn't even close...

2006 were really tight, but in 2005 they really found a new live setting. Most of the tour is just great.

oasisfan35 wrote:

Strat wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

liebzz wrote:

oasisfan35 wrote:2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

Rough? I would confidently say this is the best show I have ever attended, including 21 other Pearl Jam shows and every other band I have seen. This show was incredible.

According to my set list.fm stats I am at 190 concerts by 104 different artists, but I know it is more than that because there are shows I couldn’t find there. Point is I must have seen some decent bands in there. None approach the magic of that night.

A show which is amazing in person doesn't always translate particularly well to the recorded medium.

I find the 2010 bootlegs almost unlistenable in general because of the mixing, anyway.

Yes, which is super unfortunate because there were a few great shows. The mixing is atrocious though.

The mix definitely isn't helping as it really is quite poor. That said, I was at this show as well and wouldn't put it anywhere near the best PJ show I've seen let alone other artists. Different strokes I suppose though the fact that Ed sounds exhausted from the start is a fairly objective statement.

I don’t think he sounded tired. I thought they were firing on all cylinders, the band was on fire much of the night, the energy in the room was phenomenal. It could have been my seat location that helped - seats close but side stage on Mike’s Side, but I cannot remember enjoying a show as much as this. I am not sure they e ever had a good recording at MSG and perhaps that makes the shows age poorly for folks, but this is the last show that I saw from them where I felt they were on a mission to tear the place down. I’ve seen them put in good shows since but this was quite special.

Simple Torture wrote:I'm listening to Montreal 2000 right now and got to Betterman, and was shocked that the track length is 3:53. Unbelievable nowadays.

And Ed still sang the first verse that tour.

liebzz wrote:

oasisfan35 wrote:

Strat wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

liebzz wrote:

oasisfan35 wrote:2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

Rough? I would confidently say this is the best show I have ever attended, including 21 other Pearl Jam shows and every other band I have seen. This show was incredible.

According to my set list.fm stats I am at 190 concerts by 104 different artists, but I know it is more than that because there are shows I couldn’t find there. Point is I must have seen some decent bands in there. None approach the magic of that night.

A show which is amazing in person doesn't always translate particularly well to the recorded medium.

I find the 2010 bootlegs almost unlistenable in general because of the mixing, anyway.

Yes, which is super unfortunate because there were a few great shows. The mixing is atrocious though.

The mix definitely isn't helping as it really is quite poor. That said, I was at this show as well and wouldn't put it anywhere near the best PJ show I've seen let alone other artists. Different strokes I suppose though the fact that Ed sounds exhausted from the start is a fairly objective statement.

I don’t think he sounded tired. I thought they were firing on all cylinders, the band was on fire much of the night, the energy in the room was phenomenal. It could have been my seat location that helped - seats close but side stage on Mike’s Side, but I cannot remember enjoying a show as much as this. I am not sure they e ever had a good recording at MSG and perhaps that makes the shows age poorly for folks, but this is the last show that I saw from them where I felt they were on a mission to tear the place down. I’ve seen them put in good shows since but this was quite special.

MSG is not a fantastic room acoustically by any means, bands affinity for it used to puzzle me until I equated it to money. I'm glad you had a good time and there is certainly an energy that can often come with the Garden.

raven2001 wrote:I'm currently doing the 2005 tour in chronological order, Kitchener is next. So far I liked Calgary the best. When they are good, they are REALLY good on that tour but almost every show has plenty of rough tracks, too. So I can't agree with all the people that say that they were so tight on that tour. Not really. Australia or Europe 2006, that's tight in comparison. I like the 2005 setlists better but performancewise it isn't even close...

I'm doing the same thing now and you're right. They are not super tight on this tour, and the mixing/sound quality of the boots is strange too. Not like I remembered. But I'm sure there is a good 2-CD comp here like the Europe 2000 one.

Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:

raven2001 wrote:I'm currently doing the 2005 tour in chronological order, Kitchener is next. So far I liked Calgary the best. When they are good, they are REALLY good on that tour but almost every show has plenty of rough tracks, too. So I can't agree with all the people that say that they were so tight on that tour. Not really. Australia or Europe 2006, that's tight in comparison. I like the 2005 setlists better but performancewise it isn't even close...

I'm doing the same thing now and you're right. They are not super tight on this tour, and the mixing/sound quality of the boots is strange too. Not like I remembered. But I'm sure there is a good 2-CD comp here like the Europe 2000 one.

I like the 2005 tour quite a bit, the band just seemed to be playing at a solid comfort level with all their material and the energy was there. The 2006 tour had the necessary inclusion of the new material, which certainly had its and peaks and valleys, but it forced the band to work and that paid off by the later Euro/Aussie legs.

VinylGuy wrote:

oasisfan35 wrote:2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

2008 and 2010 are the two worst tours in my opinion.

5/21/10 was one of the best shows I've ever seen. The bootlegs for 2008 and 2010 don't do the shows any favors.

lowlight79 wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:

oasisfan35 wrote:2010-05-21 New York
My lord is this a rough one.

2008 and 2010 are the two worst tours in my opinion.

5/21/10 was one of the best shows I've ever seen. The bootlegs for 2008 and 2010 don't do the shows any favors.

I had it my #7 In my latest attended show rankings.

Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:

raven2001 wrote:I'm currently doing the 2005 tour in chronological order, Kitchener is next. So far I liked Calgary the best. When they are good, they are REALLY good on that tour but almost every show has plenty of rough tracks, too. So I can't agree with all the people that say that they were so tight on that tour. Not really. Australia or Europe 2006, that's tight in comparison. I like the 2005 setlists better but performancewise it isn't even close...

I'm doing the same thing now and you're right. They are not super tight on this tour, and the mixing/sound quality of the boots is strange too. Not like I remembered. But I'm sure there is a good 2-CD comp here like the Europe 2000 one.

The mixing on the 2005 boots is really strange.

Birds in Hell wrote:

Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:

raven2001 wrote:I'm currently doing the 2005 tour in chronological order, Kitchener is next. So far I liked Calgary the best. When they are good, they are REALLY good on that tour but almost every show has plenty of rough tracks, too. So I can't agree with all the people that say that they were so tight on that tour. Not really. Australia or Europe 2006, that's tight in comparison. I like the 2005 setlists better but performancewise it isn't even close...

I'm doing the same thing now and you're right. They are not super tight on this tour, and the mixing/sound quality of the boots is strange too. Not like I remembered. But I'm sure there is a good 2-CD comp here like the Europe 2000 one.

The mixing on the 2005 boots is really strange.

My enjoyment of the 2005 tour has always been soured by the mixing on the boots. Matt's snare sound in particular really grates on me.

Birds in Hell wrote:

Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:

raven2001 wrote:I'm currently doing the 2005 tour in chronological order, Kitchener is next. So far I liked Calgary the best. When they are good, they are REALLY good on that tour but almost every show has plenty of rough tracks, too. So I can't agree with all the people that say that they were so tight on that tour. Not really. Australia or Europe 2006, that's tight in comparison. I like the 2005 setlists better but performancewise it isn't even close...

I'm doing the same thing now and you're right. They are not super tight on this tour, and the mixing/sound quality of the boots is strange too. Not like I remembered. But I'm sure there is a good 2-CD comp here like the Europe 2000 one.

The mixing on the 2005 boots is really strange.

IIRC, these ones were released the day after the show. In 2003 it was just a soundboard feed that they released immediately, pro mixes were a few weeks later.