Page 1 of 1

Question

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:58 pm
by Kevin_Kjr
I may draw some heat for this, i've been a slip fan since 2004 when I heard them at College and feel i got to hear the slip too late. I think Eisenhower is cool and all but I love there old stuff. Its not that I dont mind hearing Eisenhower, its the fustration of going to see them night after night and hearing the same set lists. Eisenhower came out 3 years ago yet all they continue to do is play songs from that album. Im dying for anything off does or angels come on time. Obviously im not a band member and nor do i have the right to tell them what they need to play but I feel that there fans keep on dwindling because of the direction the band has taken. If they just played there old jazzier stuff I feel like the crowds would be a lot bigger and the band would really take off with the right exposure but it almost feels they are complacent with what there doing right now. Has anyone ever asked them why they dont like to play their old stuff at shows?

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 11:28 pm
by bear
my best answer is this band appreciates living in the moment, always pushing ahead wherever it may take them. they still drops old gems from time to time.

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 3:46 pm
by harrymcq
Well they just came off a 2 year hiatus, let's see what happens... they have a few new tunes now as well. (four?)

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:08 pm
by Kevin_Kjr
yeah we shall, but also why dont they ever play with any backing musicians, a lot of their studio stuff all has saxophone solos and trumpets or keyboards and what not, but yet they never go on tour with anyone playing with them besides random chime ins like the duo?

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:37 pm
by tyler
because then they would sound exactly like they do on record, and if that was the case then you could just sit at home with the CD and save yourself the cost of a ticket.

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 9:05 pm
by Kevin_Kjr
lol really? so automatically if u have a backing band your going to sound like you do on your studio albums? in fact if u look back at earlier set lists like in 99' you see them playing with a trumpet player... its called constructive criticism tyler

I'm in with Kevin

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:42 pm
by Phrazz
Yeah, having seen the Slip more than twice with sit-ins, I gotta say they sound nothing like the studio also when jamming live with Timo, Marco, et al. I'd also love to hear wider diversity...but I also see what Harry's saying and playing myself I know how much work it is to rehearse tunes (even ones you might think you know "down pat"...just as The Dead, who were considered the reigning kings of the live jam mix-up at more than a few points in time, or Phish, who were similarly nervous about getting their new tour underway after a much longer hiatus).

Did he just compare The Slip with The Dead and The Phish?

Did he just refer to himself in the third person (again)?

:lol:

Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2009 10:34 am
by tyler
Kevin_Kjr wrote:lol really? so automatically if u have a backing band your going to sound like you do on your studio albums? in fact if u look back at earlier set lists like in 99' you see them playing with a trumpet player... its called constructive criticism tyler
I've seen them play with guests with my own eyes, but thanks for the condescension. and it's cool and they switch things up that way. I really don't see why they need a "backing band" just because their studio stuff has saxophone solos. if they had a full-time backing band then they wouldn't really be The Slip anymore. I tend to think that much of the value of live performances for any good live band is to see how they can rework their songs from records to work in a live setting, sans studio overdubs. having a keyboardist or a horns guy or an extra percussionist is cool when they just make rare guest appearances...but I'm sure there's a reason The Slip is a trio (and why, when they add a fourth, they're a different band entirely). Wouldn't want to mess with that.

Plus the only bands I can think of that had extra backing bands when playing live are bad ones. Wilco and Radiohead and My Morning Jacket and Phish, etc. can play be great live with just their usual lineup. Green Day and circa-2000s Rolling Stones need backing bands. I think I'll go with the first group.

Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2009 11:24 am
by bear
They can't even afford a manager these days (I think its just the boys and rubio on the road) so how would they hire extra musicians? Plus with the benefit of looping pedals and samplers Im astonished at the sounds that band is able to create just as BAM. songs like suffocation keep still have the cello and nellie samples on Eisenhower when played live.... And they have done that in the past - horns at the Indy in 07. And they brought Timo to japan once... i think it depends on the gig and how much $ they have to throw around. I think they would benefit from hiring a lighting designer before bringing more musicians on the road.

new tunes

D'Gary
That Love Aint Enough (previously played at Brad solo shows)
England
Take the Bus
Motherwolf (ok, they debuted it last winter but still a newbie, no?)

any others? anything new played at HSMF?