50th Anniversary Setlist?

[Palais23]

I have seen a few clips of current tour and am avoiding looking at whole set as I want a surprise in Portsmouth, maybe a Stripper waiting in my Hotel room would be good joking,but the weak point is definitely the vocals of Baz,on some songs it's ok,but Hallow was great musically but his vocals let it down,but it's as it is,he sounds ok on WWTW,then I saw a recent clip of Hugh doing it and it was reality check.Major Eilish Ray Styles Adele Murrs Kudu.

I too am looking forward to your in depth review of the Portsmouth gig. As you are a regular gig goer (like myself), just a kind reminder that YouTube phone videos don't give justice to the actual attendance at the gig. Live at the gig, at volume, Baz's vocals are fine. That's the curse we live with these days when everything is videoed rather than fans living in the moment.

[toilerinblack]

Just watched some footage of the gigs with Baz and whilst singing Golden Brown on cue goes to the front of the stage mid song and holds his hands out like the messiah of stranglers song writing egging the crowd on to adore him and cheer.

Indeed. It's always been painfully grating to see the former bass player of Toy Dolls acting like he's a huge reason why The Stranglers were so successful. Now they're trying to rope the former keyboard player of Rialto into literally replacing Dave Greenfield in every way, right down to awkwardly singing his songs when his voice doesn't have the right personality or character for it. Just as well it wasn't "Peasant in the Big Shitty", because that would have been even more cringeworthy. Total cabaret.

Painfully grating is exactly how it feels.
I thought Genetix was shocking. I bet JJ couldn't believe his luck he's well and truly tested replacement singers now and could be confident now that anyone will do, he could even use Vic Reeves singing in the style of a club singer and know the fans would support it.

When you look back how great they were It's very sad to see what the Stranglers have become today

My moto with anthing has always been......praise where praise is due.
I for one has been really impressed with what they are dojng and giving on this 50th,the fans response has been amazing with such a great set list and visual props and lights.
I thought the opener from the Gospel was perfect....what a choice and this band are playing and sounding as good as ever and that's pretty dam good for a band on their 50th tour.
All bands going on 50 years would of all on the whole have had member changes over such a long period of time that's life but as they say in general life......nothing ever stays the same....fact.
But this line up for me are as good musically as ever...no there not mk1 that can't be that ceased 34 years and I've excepted that.
But from only they get a big 50th thumbs up so far on their early startings of the tour.....excellent!

[BankMan]

Just a few opinions on what’s been said

Toby’s performance on Genetix and should he be doing it? Of course it’s not going to sound like Dave, how could it. Just as Paul Roberts and John Ellis were never going to be like Hugh (or sounding like JJ on JJ’s originally sung songs). Ditto Baz and Jim for Jet. Should he be doing it? Well why not, for all the same reasons. If you adopt the “he/they shouldn’t be doing it out of respect for Dave” argument, the same surely applies to PR, JE, BW and Jim replacing Hugh and Jet. And then there wouldn’t be any songs left to play.

Hugh was the main man. No he wasn’t. There’s never been a main man in The Stranglers, that’s why they were and are such a great and unique band. The sum being greater than the parts. JJ and Dave wrote and sang stuff - a significant amount

Tribute band? Don’t be daft. Bands evolve and adapt when people depart for whatever reason. Hasn’t stopped The Damned, The Pretenders, The Who, The Stones etc..carrying on. Same with the Banshees way back. Is it the same? Of course not, but everyone makes their choice. It’ll be interesting to see where Killing Joke go next and if they do carry on, I’ll go and see them and decide, but it won’t be a tribute act

Hugh calling the current line up a tribute act. Pipe down old son. Can’t take seriously someone who plasters his involvement in a band he left 34 years ago to promote his material and live performances, more so now than he ever did. If your output and live performance was any good, it should stand up on its own merits without the need to remind everyone what you did half a lifetime ago. Obviously not in the class of, for example, Peter Gabriel and Bryan Ferry, whose solo material and performances don’t have to highlight the bands they play or played in.

Current setlist. Looks good, nice to see some songs I thought would never get an airing again, delivered by a band that has changed and evolved over time. Shame Shah isn’t on the list, yet

Very valid points,but must correct you on Hugh,on his last tour he performed more solo songs than Stranglers.Major Kudu.

I’m sure he did, and so he should. But that’s not what I said. It’s that he plasters his promotional media heavily with his past involvement, which is different to playing the songs (and which I have no issue with). It’s a shame he has to do this as his solo output should stand on its own without it

[toilerinblack]

Just a few opinions on what’s been said

Toby’s performance on Genetix and should he be doing it? Of course it’s not going to sound like Dave, how could it. Just as Paul Roberts and John Ellis were never going to be like Hugh (or sounding like JJ on JJ’s originally sung songs). Ditto Baz and Jim for Jet. Should he be doing it? Well why not, for all the same reasons. If you adopt the “he/they shouldn’t be doing it out of respect for Dave” argument, the same surely applies to PR, JE, BW and Jim replacing Hugh and Jet. And then there wouldn’t be any songs left to play.

Hugh was the main man. No he wasn’t. There’s never been a main man in The Stranglers, that’s why they were and are such a great and unique band. The sum being greater than the parts. JJ and Dave wrote and sang stuff - a significant amount

Tribute band? Don’t be daft. Bands evolve and adapt when people depart for whatever reason. Hasn’t stopped The Damned, The Pretenders, The Who, The Stones etc..carrying on. Same with the Banshees way back. Is it the same? Of course not, but everyone makes their choice. It’ll be interesting to see where Killing Joke go next and if they do carry on, I’ll go and see them and decide, but it won’t be a tribute act

Hugh calling the current line up a tribute act. Pipe down old son. Can’t take seriously someone who plasters his involvement in a band he left 34 years ago to promote his material and live performances, more so now than he ever did. If your output and live performance was any good, it should stand up on its own merits without the need to remind everyone what you did half a lifetime ago. Obviously not in the class of, for example, Peter Gabriel and Bryan Ferry, whose solo material and performances don’t have to highlight the bands they play or played in.

Current setlist. Looks good, nice to see some songs I thought would never get an airing again, delivered by a band that has changed and evolved over time. Shame Shah isn’t on the list, yet

Very valid points,but must correct you on Hugh,on his last tour he performed more solo songs than Stranglers.Major Kudu.

I’m sure he did, and so he should. But that’s not what I said. It’s that he plasters his promotional media heavily with his past involvement, which is different to playing the songs (and which I have no issue with). It’s a shame he has to do this as his solo output should stand on its own without it

Tough one that...
He sure doesn't need to after 10 solo studio albums....but he has the right to.
It probably helps with ticket sales and it's all good CV so to speak to sell yourself as an artist just like we would with a work CV... but they are the facts that's on there so why shouldn't he be proud of his successful 16 year past that he's the original frontman/guitarist and main songwriter.
But yes I think it doesn't need to keep saying what he was in print but he has tickets to sell and a living to make j suppose so I get it.

[markorbit]

I don't know - his actual singing seemed fine, it was all the extra "Yeah, well " between all the lines, instead of just singing the actual lyrics. The odd bit, sure, but it was all the time.

Vanian's done that for donkeys years. Probably since the 80s. Sometimes it's a bit OTT.

Back on topic... Toby singing Genetix can't be compared with playing an instrument. As was pointed out earlier, vocals are the most unique.

I think they've been VERY adventurous this tour:

• Revisiting the Gospel (a divisive album) and using it as the stage entrance. (Great idea IMO)

• Losing the long established STRANGLERS backdrop

• The stage set with net curtains and chandeliers is not what one would expect on a Stranglers tour

• Wearing suits

• Gold painted instruments

• Toby singing Genetix

I'm all for new approaches each tour. Surprisingly a few of those disregard the established 'brand'. Not normally what you would want to do when you have some accusations of it not being the real thing. So yeah, a few bold decisions there and two fingers to expectations.

[StanInBlack]

Toby’s performance on Genetix and should he be doing it? Of course it’s not going to sound like Dave, how could it.

Not that he didn't try, judging by the video footage. Not only is his voice completely unsuitable for the track (and therefore, we can assume all other Dave-sung songs too), but he tries to incorporate some of Dave's vocal tics when he and Dave are totally different characters/personalities. It comes off as comical and ridiculous as a subpar Youtube cover.

Hugh was the main man. No he wasn’t.

Which of course explains why the band calling itself The Stranglers is still, multiple decades later, performing a lot of his work.

Tribute band? Don’t be daft. Bands evolve and adapt when people depart for whatever reason.

Well, you implied as much yourself that The Stranglers (talking about Black/Burnel/Cornwell/Greenfield) had a particular type of musical chemistry when they performed and recorded together. This chemistry was so finely balanced that, as time as shown, if any one of them was replaced then it'd mess with the sound, feel and identity of the band. With only JJ left, sonically and visually it's barely recognisable as The Stranglers. Yeah, they can play all the notes in the right order, but they don't have the same feel or personality or chemistry.

As for bands evolving, what exactly have they evolved into? (Hint: a tribute band) ... Doesn't evolution also imply improvement? It's difficult to consider whatever this is an improvement on Black/Burnel/Cornwell/Greenfield.

Hugh calling the current line up a tribute act. Pipe down old son.

He's not wrong. He has every right to draw attention to his involvement in The Stranglers, as he put an incredible amount of work and creative energy into making that band a success and he's proud of that work. You don't get to take that away from him because he decided - correctly - that the band were a spent force creatively and to leave. Hugh still has his identity, though. Baz has still yet to develop an identity beyond "Hugh Cornwell impersonator" after over two decades. JJ Burnel & Friends? Becoming ever more anonymous and faceless identity-wise with each member change.

Let's remind ourselves of what The Stranglers look like:

[Yanders]

I’m sure he did, and so he should. But that’s not what I said. It’s that he plasters his promotional media heavily with his past involvement, which is different to playing the songs (and which I have no issue with). It’s a shame he has to do this as his solo output should stand on its own without it

The stranglers are doing that too - they are propping themselves up with the past. There's never been a bit of promotion that doesn't rely heavily on mk 1. When they promoted DM, they didnt talk about it in relation to giants - it was mk1 albums.

Loads of established artists who arent megastars do it. Its usually driven by management and PR rather than the acts themselves.

[theraven1979]

This is no different to the last 15 years of "Greatest Hits" tours and "anniversaries". It's a nostalgia fest and it tops up the pension. Appreciate I am stating the ruddy obvious but I think some people feel the band are doing something ground-breaking, new or experimental.

At best you've got some old MKI songs that haven't been played for a while.

Every tour they do it seems the ratio of Hugh era songs to new stuff gets watered down. What is it currently 5 post MKI songs out of 28?

Jim

[Palais23]

Toby’s performance on Genetix and should he be doing it? Of course it’s not going to sound like Dave, how could it.

Not that he didn't try, judging by the video footage. Not only is his voice completely unsuitable for the track (and therefore, we can assume all other Dave-sung songs too), but he tries to incorporate some of Dave's vocal tics when he and Dave are totally different characters/personalities. It comes off as comical and ridiculous as a subpar Youtube cover.

Hugh was the main man. No he wasn’t.

Which of course explains why the band calling itself The Stranglers is still, multiple decades later, performing a lot of his work.

Tribute band? Don’t be daft. Bands evolve and adapt when people depart for whatever reason.

Well, you implied as much yourself that The Stranglers (talking about Black/Burnel/Cornwell/Greenfield) had a particular type of musical chemistry when they performed and recorded together. This chemistry was so finely balanced that, as time as shown, if any one of them was replaced then it'd mess with the sound, feel and identity of the band. With only JJ left, sonically and visually it's barely recognisable as The Stranglers. Yeah, they can play all the notes in the right order, but they don't have the same feel or personality or chemistry.

As for bands evolving, what exactly have they evolved into? (Hint: a tribute band) ... Doesn't evolution also imply improvement? It's difficult to consider whatever this is an improvement on Black/Burnel/Cornwell/Greenfield.

Hugh calling the current line up a tribute act. Pipe down old son.

He's not wrong. He has every right to draw attention to his involvement in The Stranglers, as he put an incredible amount of work and creative energy into making that band a success and he's proud of that work. You don't get to take that away from him because he decided - correctly - that the band were a spent force creatively and to leave. Hugh still has his identity, though. Baz has still yet to develop an identity beyond "Hugh Cornwell impersonator" after over two decades. JJ Burnel & Friends? Becoming ever more anonymous and faceless identity-wise with each member change.

Let's remind ourselves of what The Stranglers look like:

I have got to hand it to to you Stan, not only written eloquent arguments, but you now provide a collage as reinforcement. What next, a sound clip?

[gizzard]

The big question that has yet to be answered is has Stan ever seen the band or indeed Hugh live?

I have followed the band since 1978 and have seen all incarnations of the band multiple times, I am very much looking forward to seeing the Bristol and RAH gigs.

Hope to see Stan at one of them for a good chinwag.

[Palais23]

Stan - genuinely interested in your view of the band that wrote Norfolk Coast. Do you consider that it was the Stranglers because they had 3 original members or that it was not the Stranglers because there was no Hugh? Or is it more nuanced from your perspective e.g. that it is easier for you to describe the current band as not the Stranglers because only 1 original member remains? Or does the style of the band's albums since Hugh left count towards your viewpoint?

[StanInBlack]

The big question that has yet to be answered is has Stan ever seen the band or indeed Hugh live?

Yes. It's totally irrelevant, though. Whether or not I've seen 1 gig or 10 gigs or 100 gigs or even 0 gigs doesn't change anything. It's a totally moot point. Besides, most people judge an artist on their recorded legacy anyway.