Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics](cilekagaci.com)
cilekagaci.com
Metallica Concerts, 1982-2012 [Infographics]
http://cilekagaci.com/2011/11/30/metallica-on-stage/
"This is an examination of Metallica’s concert history from 1982 to 2012 with a focus on the numbers of songs played live and the albums that they belong to. We took the raw data from Setlist.fm (plus Last.fm in the last part), groomed it and visualized it with our own tools."
40 comments
Cool idea, but I'm going to quibble a bit on the Audience vs. Band Chart. Suppose for simplicity that a band has four songs A, B, C, and D that respectively 40% 20% 20% and 20% of people would prefer to hear at a concert. Now suppose the band can only play one song.
Which song should they play?
I don't think the answer to that question is a random mix of the songs with 40% song A, I think the answer is 100% song A. If you play any of the other songs, you make 20% of the audience happy, if you play A you make 40% happy, it strictly dominates. In other words, I don't think playing the songs at a concert in proportion to their last.fm statistics makes sense since at home listeners have as much time as they want but concert time is a limited resource that should be used on the best songs.
So I would be interested in the rank order of listening stats vs. rank order of concert songs and look for anomalies. Unforgiven (I, II, III?) are probably going to make that list since I've actually heard of that one and I am definitely not a Metallica fan.
Which song should they play?
I don't think the answer to that question is a random mix of the songs with 40% song A, I think the answer is 100% song A. If you play any of the other songs, you make 20% of the audience happy, if you play A you make 40% happy, it strictly dominates. In other words, I don't think playing the songs at a concert in proportion to their last.fm statistics makes sense since at home listeners have as much time as they want but concert time is a limited resource that should be used on the best songs.
So I would be interested in the rank order of listening stats vs. rank order of concert songs and look for anomalies. Unforgiven (I, II, III?) are probably going to make that list since I've actually heard of that one and I am definitely not a Metallica fan.
The graphic brought up these same kind of questions for me. If you're a band with a new album out, how much from that album should you play? Would you rather boost demand for it, or keep long-time fans happy so they come back to the show next year?
The answer may vary by band. My favorite band, Reel Big Fish, recently did a tour with lots of "deep cuts" and few A-side hits. I loved it, and I think lots of long-time fans did too. But was it economically optimal?
The answer may vary by band. My favorite band, Reel Big Fish, recently did a tour with lots of "deep cuts" and few A-side hits. I loved it, and I think lots of long-time fans did too. But was it economically optimal?
Makes me wonder if artists with some history couldn't double up on gigs in a given city, playing classics in one show and favouring newer material in the other. Of course, hardcore fans would attend both.
Steely Dan does a similar thing. Last time they were in Boston they did some along the lines of two shows that were specific albums from start to finish, plus a random collection of songs to finish up the show. Then there was a third show that offered an online-vote for the entire setlist.
Some artists alternate tours that way. The last two Iron Maiden tours, for instance.
This is pretty cool.
A few interesting observations:
1. Metallica seems to have realized themselves that St Anger wasn't something they wanted to play after that tour. The Load album seems to have been similarly dropped pretty hard.
2. It appears they never even tried playing the majority of Reload live. This is interesting to me as a musician, because I'd have thought that Metallica would be the type of band to try a lot of their songs live before recording them, but it doesn't seem to be the case.
3. Very shocked that they never played Unforgiven II live, since it was a single and everything.
4. I really liked the Audience vs Band chart.
A few interesting observations:
1. Metallica seems to have realized themselves that St Anger wasn't something they wanted to play after that tour. The Load album seems to have been similarly dropped pretty hard.
2. It appears they never even tried playing the majority of Reload live. This is interesting to me as a musician, because I'd have thought that Metallica would be the type of band to try a lot of their songs live before recording them, but it doesn't seem to be the case.
3. Very shocked that they never played Unforgiven II live, since it was a single and everything.
4. I really liked the Audience vs Band chart.
They stopped playing St Anger material after that tour because that album/tour almost broke them up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Some_Kind_of_Monster_(film)
But probably also because it's awful.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Some_Kind_of_Monster_(film)
But probably also because it's awful.
Am I only the person ever to like Load? I know it's not their best, but I still enjoyed it.
I didn't mind it, despite a couple of weaker tracks. Don't think I bought Reload though and barely listened to St Anger.
At some point, I reckon Hetfield lost the magic and was forcing things from that point.
At some point, I reckon Hetfield lost the magic and was forcing things from that point.
I enjoyed Load and Reload, gave up after buying St Anger.
Favourite album is S&M.
Favourite album is S&M.
My observations were similar, but more generally: notice that everything until the Black Album gets played at concerts, while everything after that just tapers off quickly.
Which doesn't surprise me, as I think their work used to be much better in the past.
Which doesn't surprise me, as I think their work used to be much better in the past.
I would imagine they don't play The Unforgiven trilogy live much because they seem to be more mainstream than what their fans (at the concerts) would like.
They've played Unforgiven II once live. Check the graphic again. I think the video is on youtube.
In general, they didn't play new stuff live.
Here's to hoping they play fixxxer live one day.
In general, they didn't play new stuff live.
Here's to hoping they play fixxxer live one day.
Amen to that.
From the same album, I was really shocked they'd never played Prince Charming live. Can really imagine that going down a storm, it's just the right pace for a good gig song.
Throw in them and 2x4 for your next setlist please :-) Bit of variety's good and I can imagine them all going down well.
From the same album, I was really shocked they'd never played Prince Charming live. Can really imagine that going down a storm, it's just the right pace for a good gig song.
Throw in them and 2x4 for your next setlist please :-) Bit of variety's good and I can imagine them all going down well.
I am happy that is actually an infographic: original analysis presented graphically. Too often, an “infographic” is just a list that someone did in Illustrator.
This is great, but the low contrast between the text and the background makes it very hard to read.
With no evidence I feel that this is something of a trend at the moment; I've recently battled our designers when they have sacrificed readability.
I'm 29 and have excellent vision, I can't imagine how hard this could be to read for people who don't.
With no evidence I feel that this is something of a trend at the moment; I've recently battled our designers when they have sacrificed readability.
I'm 29 and have excellent vision, I can't imagine how hard this could be to read for people who don't.
My eyes are still bugging out from the 55 seconds I spent on jwz's site. Arg!
I gave up on Metallica years ago after they went on their tirade against Napster. Band that becomes famous because of people sharing garage-band tapes with each other bitches about people for sharing their music after they become famous; it's the ultimate hypocrisy.
I am so glad that some people have a lot of time on their hands. This is awesome.
I'm sure Tufte would approve.
I know! Now, imagine if those same people also had good taste in music... That would be so cool!
Clearly they do, because they were smart enough to know that Load and everything from there until Death Magnetic should be looked at separately, since it sucked. But yes, I need to see a Tool version of this immediately.
It's actually surprising how much time has passed since Metallica used to be good. Looking at the infographic, they've now spend nearly 2/3 of their career in the "play the songs from this album on its release tour, then never again" phase.
I still distinctly recall the day in 2003 when I first uttered the previously unthinkable phrase "more crappy Metallica" on hearing their new release.
I actually downloaded their latest album when it so publicly got leaked on the internet. Then, with dashed hopes, deleted it an hour later.
Shame.
I still distinctly recall the day in 2003 when I first uttered the previously unthinkable phrase "more crappy Metallica" on hearing their new release.
I actually downloaded their latest album when it so publicly got leaked on the internet. Then, with dashed hopes, deleted it an hour later.
Shame.
I don't think this is unique to Metallica. I'm a big McCartney fan, and he too will play a few from the new album, a couple from mid career, but mostly "oldies" hits. There's little he can do to please everyone, so the hardcore fans realize there's just no way he's likely ever to do "Girls School" or "Morse Moose" live. :/
I think Metallica is in a similar place with the amount of history they have, and yet I'm not sure anyone would ever slap the label "oldies" on their work. :)
I think Metallica is in a similar place with the amount of history they have, and yet I'm not sure anyone would ever slap the label "oldies" on their work. :)
Is that such a bad thing, though?
I've seen Radiohead live a few times and I'm always very sad that I never saw them in The Bends/OK Computer era- they barely ever play songs that far back any more. It's a huge deal when they play Creep, too.
I'm not saying that every band should just play crowd-pleasers, of course, but it's nice to hear the stuff that made the band every now and then.
I've seen Radiohead live a few times and I'm always very sad that I never saw them in The Bends/OK Computer era- they barely ever play songs that far back any more. It's a huge deal when they play Creep, too.
I'm not saying that every band should just play crowd-pleasers, of course, but it's nice to hear the stuff that made the band every now and then.
No, it's not bad. It just "is".
As someone else mentioned, some gigs where artists did the deep cuts, and others where they focused on "big hits" would be ideal.
Macca's plumbed the depths of his Beatles stuff - only a handful of 'his' that I think he's never done live. There's loads of Wings stuff he could do live, and loads of 80s stuff that he never touches. A couple of "deep cuts" shows would be great. "Hey Jude" is great and all, but give me "Magneto and Titatnium Man" one more time :)
I saw the Beach Boys (well, most of them) in 1993(?), and they were doing some 'deep cut' stuff - Vegetables(!), Wind Chimes (IIRC), etc. A couple people booed - WTF! I was the only one in the upper deck singing along with this stuff, so maybe that was an issue - there's just not enough people at a 30k seat arena who want to hear the deep tracks to make it worthwhile to do there. Smaller venues would be great though.
As someone else mentioned, some gigs where artists did the deep cuts, and others where they focused on "big hits" would be ideal.
Macca's plumbed the depths of his Beatles stuff - only a handful of 'his' that I think he's never done live. There's loads of Wings stuff he could do live, and loads of 80s stuff that he never touches. A couple of "deep cuts" shows would be great. "Hey Jude" is great and all, but give me "Magneto and Titatnium Man" one more time :)
I saw the Beach Boys (well, most of them) in 1993(?), and they were doing some 'deep cut' stuff - Vegetables(!), Wind Chimes (IIRC), etc. A couple people booed - WTF! I was the only one in the upper deck singing along with this stuff, so maybe that was an issue - there's just not enough people at a 30k seat arena who want to hear the deep tracks to make it worthwhile to do there. Smaller venues would be great though.
Pretty well reflects the quality of the Albums. Thank god for Death Magnetic.
Yes a good reflection. Looks like Lulu has never been played.
They'd need to drag Lou Reed out for that, right?
http://www.theworldsbestever.com/2011/11/29/makes-sense-2/
http://www.theworldsbestever.com/2011/11/29/makes-sense-2/
No one would go. At least their post-Black Album albums have some fans, no one likes Lulu.
About Audience vs Band Chart
When I am home listening to Metallica I might prefer the lighter songs like Unforgiven II. Whereas a concert is not just 'music', it is a whole performance! An energetic song definitely makes a difference. Thus, the chart is partly right saying that the songs from the extreme left would make people more happy, but how would playing those set the mood for the concert which determines the overall experience?
When I am home listening to Metallica I might prefer the lighter songs like Unforgiven II. Whereas a concert is not just 'music', it is a whole performance! An energetic song definitely makes a difference. Thus, the chart is partly right saying that the songs from the extreme left would make people more happy, but how would playing those set the mood for the concert which determines the overall experience?
I'd like to see an infographic on how badly Lars' ability to maintain tempo live has degraded over time. I love their pre-Black studio work and LSB&P, but live it's just tough to listen to them bludgeon their songs to death at 110-200BPM.
I don't know when you last saw them live, but I've seen them last year in Zagreb and I thought they ware great (admittedly that was my first Metallica concert so I really can't compare).
They still put on a good show, no doubt. You don't walk out disappointed in their ability to entertain.
What I'm saying is that from a musicianship perspective they're a disaster in a live setting. Lars can't maintain a steady tempo and is constantly pushing and pulling the beat...I'm sure he refuses to use a click track, but he should as he's just not talented enough to stay on tempo. I don't know how Rob stays with him other than the fact that he's just really a great bassist.
They blast right through the breaks in their songs without taking a breath. For example, watch Harvester of Sorrow in Seattle from Live Sh!t, recorded in the 1992. They take a break after one of the mesaures and walk around for a few seconds and then come in hard with "All have said their prayers...". It was an amazing effect and man, we'd go nuts in the pits, freezing during the break and then just smashing sh!t up when they came back in. It was, to use a word that has sadly lost its meaning, epic.
These days they don't even pause between songs, much less breaking at the end of a measure for effect. They just bleed one song right into the other. For a guy who's been going to shows for over 20 years it's been tough to watch them stop caring about how they play.
What I'm saying is that from a musicianship perspective they're a disaster in a live setting. Lars can't maintain a steady tempo and is constantly pushing and pulling the beat...I'm sure he refuses to use a click track, but he should as he's just not talented enough to stay on tempo. I don't know how Rob stays with him other than the fact that he's just really a great bassist.
They blast right through the breaks in their songs without taking a breath. For example, watch Harvester of Sorrow in Seattle from Live Sh!t, recorded in the 1992. They take a break after one of the mesaures and walk around for a few seconds and then come in hard with "All have said their prayers...". It was an amazing effect and man, we'd go nuts in the pits, freezing during the break and then just smashing sh!t up when they came back in. It was, to use a word that has sadly lost its meaning, epic.
These days they don't even pause between songs, much less breaking at the end of a measure for effect. They just bleed one song right into the other. For a guy who's been going to shows for over 20 years it's been tough to watch them stop caring about how they play.
Metallica before the black album is the Metallica I like, anything since then I can't simply listen to it.
For the love of god where is the PNG?
The Black album wins. Obviously.
Is this what happens when a Metallica fanatic takes Adderall?