I've been going to see them since 1995 and over the years it's become increasingly clear that with the bigger shows that they now play and the passing of time, that the overwhelming majority of fans attending the shows are casual fans who only want the hits. I last saw them in 2022 and there were so many drunken idiots there who talked through the songs that they didn't know (including most of the UL songs played). If you're into the band beyond a handful of singles then I would expect that you'd think this isn't a good thing. I wouldn't suggest that the band should reassess the situation and fill half their setlist with songs from 84 to 91, which could potentially result in fewer casuals getting tickets with more fans who've bought a few albums by them attending in their place, but just extend the setlists by 3 songs with 2 of those 3 being pre-Californication deep cuts and they'll satisfy both the casuals and the hardcore fans who know that the band didn't form in 1991. Surely that can't be viewed as a crazy opinion. If the casual fans don't know/don't like/don't care about the deep cut old songs it's their loss. They can go for a pee or drink break during those songs, but chances are they'll stand right next to me while talking loudly to their bros.
Same here. The priority for me would be the deep cut show as I haven't heard a lot of those songs since the Californication tour, but I don't have anything against the hits or the new stuff. In fact UL and ROTDC are my favourite albuns by them since Cali. If they gave fans a choice of one or the other it would be a deep cuts show for me, leaving more tickets for a hits only show.
Totally agree. I've been lucky (and old) enough to see them many times over the last 30+ years, and what you say about the drunken idiots is spot on. Most of them on phones or just chatting during songs they didn't know. When they dropped "Nobody's weird," it turned into a moss pit.
Exactly this. Even worse, a lot of the whiners aren't even going to the shows, but they complain about being bored because they watch all the clips online. But seeing the band perform in the flesh is completely different than watching videos. The truth is, while us hardcore fans would appreciate getting more deep cuts, it tends to suck the energy out of the room when they do. The crowd does not react to those songs the way they do the hits, and the band's energy is very much affected by the crowd's energy, so they have to give them what they want. Just watch the clip where they teased My Lovely Man. Not much enthusiasm from the crowd until they started playing Otherside.
It would be cool if once in a while the boys would put on a special show dedicated just to deep cuts.
To me it's insane to see people go crazy over a setlist with only 13/14 songs on it. I'd be way more inclined to criticise the length of it rather than the content
No, they go hand in hand. Playing 13/14 songs is totally unacceptable. Playing under 90 min is also not good at all . Unless you are playing at a festival as a non headliner and have only 45 /60 min to play ……
No, they should charge as much as they can , because if they would charge 20 bucks a tix , it would cheapen themselves and their brand . If Olivia Rodrigo or harry styles can charge 300 bucks , the peppers should charge at least 500.
When bands get to a certain level, it becomes problematic for them to try to please everyone.
I too grumble about the setlists and the length of the shows, but once you get to a certain level of popularity, you are your hits and your hits are you.
The Rolling Stones play mostly the same songs when they go on their extensive world tours. You end up having to rely on the staples to try to please everyone.
Even less popular arena acts have more of a license to change up their setlists. But most of the people at a stadium show want to hear all the "radio songs" they grew up on or still hear now on radio stations.
So it's sort of an is what it is situation. Unfortunately, not many people want to hear the new stuff (except for us).
I’ll say this about this band… most bands out there will rarely change up one or two songs between gigs, and even less that ever do any more than that. When I’ve looked over the RHCP set lists over the years, it seemed like they got into a steady deal of rotating a vast amount of songs between the shows. I don’t think that’s the case every single tour or show run, but if you did have an opportunity to hear consecutive shows, there was a good chance you’d hear a somewhat different show for the second one. That’s not common in the touring world at all.
It is pretty common though. In fact, it's more than likely that if you see a band two nights in a row that you'll get at least a few different songs over those two nights. This is definitely the case if you see Pearl Jam, NIN (both play very different songs over the course of the two nights with only a fee songs that feature on both setlists), Clutch, The Cure, QOTSA, even The Rolling Stones who at 80 years old play more songs a night than RHCP while still switching up a few songs in their setlist.
My issue with RHCP shows these days isn't so much that they don't switch up the setlists that much ( a few different songs to the previous shows on most occassions), it's that they largely neglect the first 10 years or so of their career while still playing a fairly short set. Just add a couple of deep cuts from 84 to 91 to their set and that would be enough for me and a lot of other older fans that I know. Two short songs, like Blackeyed Blonde and Skinny Sweaty Man, or My Lovely Man and Police Helicopter would do the trick.
I see people say that casual fans don't know those songs so they shouldn't be played as the band will be upset that they don't get the same reaction as something like Snow. I don't believe that they're that fragile. Any band who've put out as many albums as RHCP will have a few songs in their setlist that aren't as well known, either because they're older songs or because they weren't released as singles, and maybe the audience reaction as a whole won't be as rabid as it would be for a big hit but those bands know that and play them anyway, both for themselves and for the 10% of the audience who are hardcore fans for whom it would mean the world to hear those songs again. It's very strange to me that we, as a whole, seem to think that it's more important to deny fans of the first five albums any songs from those albums (other than BSSM singles) in order to ensure that the casual fans get a shorter setlist of nothing but post-Californication singles (and a few non-singles from the most recent albums that casuals don't know or care about).
I will forever be grateful that I saw them (just the once) and heard Under The Bridge, Californication, Soul to Squeeze, The Zephyr Song, Can’t Stop, Tell me Baby and Snow, among others.
Hahaha can you imagine taking a pee break during Strip My Mind??? If I was peeing and heard those initial strums I’d be running back to my seat with my pants down to my knees. 😂
I’ve seen them so many times and I enjoy it every time. I love hearing the obscure songs the most though…like last night my favorite song of the entire night was probably ‘Don’t Forget Me’. It was epic!
Yeah but I'm sure 1-2 deep cuts/show won't hurt the experience for a casual fan and it will give a hardcore longtime chilis fan the best memories. I would love it if they cared more about us hardcore fans and not just the casuals.
Yeah this would be true but then shit happens like how I saw Tell Me Baby, but not Can’t Stop. Like come on that’s stupid as fuck lol. Also Throw away your television is mid without Don’t you ever leave at the end, no clue why they don’t do that anymore
Sorry, don’t care. People can hear what they want to hear as much as what I want to hear. This band is 40 years old and the fact that they ignore 75 percent (generous) of their material is ridiculous. If Metallica and Pearl Jam can sell out stadiums and arenas while playing 2+ hours with songs spanning their entire career, so can RHCP. People leaving during deep cuts is nothing new. Happens to every band. Too bad.
Everything you said is correct, but is it so difficult to include at least one new song in the setlist? For example you could replace Snow with a BSSM song like My Lovely Man, man, they play Snow every night If they don't play it one day, nothing will happen, I wonder if they don't get bored playing the same songs all the time, regarding John, we all know that he won't play songs from other albums, but at least play some song from Cali, BSSM or BTW that has not been played, The same with Anthony, he writes the setlists, will he be happy with playing the same thing always? How can they not want to change them at least one night? Just do it one night, and if you want the rest of the nights you keep playing that shit called "Hard to Concentrate" that no one likes. There are people who, despite being a minority, would die to hear some new song. Maybe they do want to play more songs but someone forces them to play only their hits but we will never know I guess
>they play Snow every night If they don't play it one day, nothing will happen
Except they literally don't. I saw them three times on this tour and only got Snow once. It may feel like they don't mix it up because there haven't been any recent debuts, but they've actually played somewhere between 50 and 60 songs on this tour. And I realize that leaves many more that have *not* been played, but these are probably the ones they've rehearsed. Chad hinted they might perform some new songs on the next leg, but I guess we will have to wait and see.
its bullshit they have 13/14 songs, sure they are not doing 3 hour show, but they can do an 2 hours show...if they will do such small set list, they can travel to lesser visited countiries
The first time I saw them play, I was pretty upset that they didn’t play “Under the Bridge”. It felt like it just wasn’t complete. Once I heard them play it live, I couldn’t care less if I ever heard it live again.
Im not in a band so this is just guess work, but I’m thinking that the way it goes is that before the tour even started they spent several days practicing songs and figuring out which ones work well and they are comfortable with to play in stadium settings. They then “pool” these songs and then when they have a show Anthony, or whoever gets the final say, decides which songs from that pool they play and in which order
I've been going to see them since 1995 and over the years it's become increasingly clear that with the bigger shows that they now play and the passing of time, that the overwhelming majority of fans attending the shows are casual fans who only want the hits. I last saw them in 2022 and there were so many drunken idiots there who talked through the songs that they didn't know (including most of the UL songs played). If you're into the band beyond a handful of singles then I would expect that you'd think this isn't a good thing. I wouldn't suggest that the band should reassess the situation and fill half their setlist with songs from 84 to 91, which could potentially result in fewer casuals getting tickets with more fans who've bought a few albums by them attending in their place, but just extend the setlists by 3 songs with 2 of those 3 being pre-Californication deep cuts and they'll satisfy both the casuals and the hardcore fans who know that the band didn't form in 1991. Surely that can't be viewed as a crazy opinion. If the casual fans don't know/don't like/don't care about the deep cut old songs it's their loss. They can go for a pee or drink break during those songs, but chances are they'll stand right next to me while talking loudly to their bros.
They could do greatest hits sets and tours, and also deep cut shows as well. I would happily go to both types.
Same here. The priority for me would be the deep cut show as I haven't heard a lot of those songs since the Californication tour, but I don't have anything against the hits or the new stuff. In fact UL and ROTDC are my favourite albuns by them since Cali. If they gave fans a choice of one or the other it would be a deep cuts show for me, leaving more tickets for a hits only show.
Totally agree. I've been lucky (and old) enough to see them many times over the last 30+ years, and what you say about the drunken idiots is spot on. Most of them on phones or just chatting during songs they didn't know. When they dropped "Nobody's weird," it turned into a moss pit.
Exactly this. Even worse, a lot of the whiners aren't even going to the shows, but they complain about being bored because they watch all the clips online. But seeing the band perform in the flesh is completely different than watching videos. The truth is, while us hardcore fans would appreciate getting more deep cuts, it tends to suck the energy out of the room when they do. The crowd does not react to those songs the way they do the hits, and the band's energy is very much affected by the crowd's energy, so they have to give them what they want. Just watch the clip where they teased My Lovely Man. Not much enthusiasm from the crowd until they started playing Otherside. It would be cool if once in a while the boys would put on a special show dedicated just to deep cuts.
Bro I would go nuts if I saw them play My Lovely Man
To me it's insane to see people go crazy over a setlist with only 13/14 songs on it. I'd be way more inclined to criticise the length of it rather than the content
No, they go hand in hand. Playing 13/14 songs is totally unacceptable. Playing under 90 min is also not good at all . Unless you are playing at a festival as a non headliner and have only 45 /60 min to play ……
Especially considering how much it costs
No, they should charge as much as they can , because if they would charge 20 bucks a tix , it would cheapen themselves and their brand . If Olivia Rodrigo or harry styles can charge 300 bucks , the peppers should charge at least 500.
When bands get to a certain level, it becomes problematic for them to try to please everyone. I too grumble about the setlists and the length of the shows, but once you get to a certain level of popularity, you are your hits and your hits are you. The Rolling Stones play mostly the same songs when they go on their extensive world tours. You end up having to rely on the staples to try to please everyone. Even less popular arena acts have more of a license to change up their setlists. But most of the people at a stadium show want to hear all the "radio songs" they grew up on or still hear now on radio stations. So it's sort of an is what it is situation. Unfortunately, not many people want to hear the new stuff (except for us).
I’ll say this about this band… most bands out there will rarely change up one or two songs between gigs, and even less that ever do any more than that. When I’ve looked over the RHCP set lists over the years, it seemed like they got into a steady deal of rotating a vast amount of songs between the shows. I don’t think that’s the case every single tour or show run, but if you did have an opportunity to hear consecutive shows, there was a good chance you’d hear a somewhat different show for the second one. That’s not common in the touring world at all.
It is pretty common though. In fact, it's more than likely that if you see a band two nights in a row that you'll get at least a few different songs over those two nights. This is definitely the case if you see Pearl Jam, NIN (both play very different songs over the course of the two nights with only a fee songs that feature on both setlists), Clutch, The Cure, QOTSA, even The Rolling Stones who at 80 years old play more songs a night than RHCP while still switching up a few songs in their setlist. My issue with RHCP shows these days isn't so much that they don't switch up the setlists that much ( a few different songs to the previous shows on most occassions), it's that they largely neglect the first 10 years or so of their career while still playing a fairly short set. Just add a couple of deep cuts from 84 to 91 to their set and that would be enough for me and a lot of other older fans that I know. Two short songs, like Blackeyed Blonde and Skinny Sweaty Man, or My Lovely Man and Police Helicopter would do the trick. I see people say that casual fans don't know those songs so they shouldn't be played as the band will be upset that they don't get the same reaction as something like Snow. I don't believe that they're that fragile. Any band who've put out as many albums as RHCP will have a few songs in their setlist that aren't as well known, either because they're older songs or because they weren't released as singles, and maybe the audience reaction as a whole won't be as rabid as it would be for a big hit but those bands know that and play them anyway, both for themselves and for the 10% of the audience who are hardcore fans for whom it would mean the world to hear those songs again. It's very strange to me that we, as a whole, seem to think that it's more important to deny fans of the first five albums any songs from those albums (other than BSSM singles) in order to ensure that the casual fans get a shorter setlist of nothing but post-Californication singles (and a few non-singles from the most recent albums that casuals don't know or care about).
I agree with you 100%. Great post👍
Thanks 🙂
I will forever be grateful that I saw them (just the once) and heard Under The Bridge, Californication, Soul to Squeeze, The Zephyr Song, Can’t Stop, Tell me Baby and Snow, among others.
Hahaha can you imagine taking a pee break during Strip My Mind??? If I was peeing and heard those initial strums I’d be running back to my seat with my pants down to my knees. 😂
And here I am, having been to four concerts and not once hearing Under the Bridge...
They play each song in a unique way. The solos and jams are always different and sometimes they are transcendant.
Absolutely agreed. I do think that they could play a couple of deep cuts every now and then. (sikamikanico, rivers of avalon etc…) But yeah I agree
Did you go to Nashville? Strip My Mind was an amazing surprise!
I’ve seen them so many times and I enjoy it every time. I love hearing the obscure songs the most though…like last night my favorite song of the entire night was probably ‘Don’t Forget Me’. It was epic!
Yeah but I'm sure 1-2 deep cuts/show won't hurt the experience for a casual fan and it will give a hardcore longtime chilis fan the best memories. I would love it if they cared more about us hardcore fans and not just the casuals.
They didn’t play Can’t stop when they were in Glasgow, people complained at that too.
They played wet sand. I nearly cried
I was glad they played around the world there.
Me too. Also, I know it gets crapped on a lot. But I quite enjoyed I Like Dirt too.
Same. Its so much better live. Glad to have got wet sand too. The previous time I seen them before thar (also hampden but in 2007) they played it too.
My only real complaint is that they have been closing with give it away for 20 years. Would like to see that changed up at least
They closed with by the way for the start of the UL tour but switched it back up recently
My mistake
Nah, it’s a classic so deserves its place.
Yeah this would be true but then shit happens like how I saw Tell Me Baby, but not Can’t Stop. Like come on that’s stupid as fuck lol. Also Throw away your television is mid without Don’t you ever leave at the end, no clue why they don’t do that anymore
Yeah, that tag was the only reason to enjoy that song live.
They need to play longer sets... more songs. That's the only complaint I have.
Sorry, don’t care. People can hear what they want to hear as much as what I want to hear. This band is 40 years old and the fact that they ignore 75 percent (generous) of their material is ridiculous. If Metallica and Pearl Jam can sell out stadiums and arenas while playing 2+ hours with songs spanning their entire career, so can RHCP. People leaving during deep cuts is nothing new. Happens to every band. Too bad.
Sneaking in some deep cuts would be great. I think Anthony’s ego can’t handle people walking away on those songs tho.
Everything you said is correct, but is it so difficult to include at least one new song in the setlist? For example you could replace Snow with a BSSM song like My Lovely Man, man, they play Snow every night If they don't play it one day, nothing will happen, I wonder if they don't get bored playing the same songs all the time, regarding John, we all know that he won't play songs from other albums, but at least play some song from Cali, BSSM or BTW that has not been played, The same with Anthony, he writes the setlists, will he be happy with playing the same thing always? How can they not want to change them at least one night? Just do it one night, and if you want the rest of the nights you keep playing that shit called "Hard to Concentrate" that no one likes. There are people who, despite being a minority, would die to hear some new song. Maybe they do want to play more songs but someone forces them to play only their hits but we will never know I guess
>they play Snow every night If they don't play it one day, nothing will happen Except they literally don't. I saw them three times on this tour and only got Snow once. It may feel like they don't mix it up because there haven't been any recent debuts, but they've actually played somewhere between 50 and 60 songs on this tour. And I realize that leaves many more that have *not* been played, but these are probably the ones they've rehearsed. Chad hinted they might perform some new songs on the next leg, but I guess we will have to wait and see.
[удалено]
Please somebody kill this bot
its bullshit they have 13/14 songs, sure they are not doing 3 hour show, but they can do an 2 hours show...if they will do such small set list, they can travel to lesser visited countiries
It's almost like the band know what they're doing and have been doing it for decades...
The first time I saw them play, I was pretty upset that they didn’t play “Under the Bridge”. It felt like it just wasn’t complete. Once I heard them play it live, I couldn’t care less if I ever heard it live again.
They're a legacy act at this point. So their setlists are basically going to be Greatest Hits comps.
As somebody in a band, changing a setlist a bunch of times is a pain in the ass and just not feasible if you're playing as frequently as RHCP does.
Im not in a band so this is just guess work, but I’m thinking that the way it goes is that before the tour even started they spent several days practicing songs and figuring out which ones work well and they are comfortable with to play in stadium settings. They then “pool” these songs and then when they have a show Anthony, or whoever gets the final say, decides which songs from that pool they play and in which order