how's the tour going?

[JOEinPHX]

You really think there has been a lot of negativity? I probably won't see any of the shows but I have followed the tour threads with interest and some of the mainstream reviews and it seems overall people are fairly happy with how its going. I mean it seems ANRers are being optimistic, but maybe I am just censoring out the bad comments.

The only guys that are overwhelmingly negative are 6767 (who posts a lot) -

I give credit where credit is due. Just yesterday i praised the new album and Perry's singing on that video of the kid onstage.

What more do you want from me? We're here to discuss every instance of what Jane's is up to, and I give my opinion for each situation.

[Hokahey]

I have no problem with people being negative, it just seems on the whole people have been really positive about this tour. That is the only reason I was surprised Hokahey seemed to be saying people were negative towards it, unless I missed some sarcasm on his part.

It's been scattered throughout various threads in various forums on the board. Yes, the tour reviews from people that have actually gone to a show thus far are generally positive.

I'm not trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill. I like that we're not afraid to hold the band's feet to the fire, but we should also be capable of acknolwedging when they're doing things right. And I think they're getting more things right than wrong lately, which is a welcome development in my book. It's kind of weird how many people I know went to the St. Louis show and talked about Jane's with great reverence. That was not the case during most of the past decade.

I think most of us wouldn't have been surprised if the new album had been called "Perry Farrell presents Jane'z Addiction", and the tour featured Etty on guitar and Carl Restivo on bass.

That doesn't mean anything they do better than that is golden, but I applaud them for putting on as proper a Jane's Addiction show as they could probably muster.

[Warped]

I still think there is a difference to NINJA - the reviews were far more "wow" which does not mean that this tour isn't good.
I did not attend any show - i just read and notice. And the videos i watched were so and so.

Also i am pretty pissed that they did not say a single word about Europe until now. It just would be nice to know whether they will come here this year or if i can already bury my hopes. What's the problem with saying yes or no. Even with no exact dates.

[Hokahey]

I probably liked this show better than NINJA. Eric being at NINJA was something so special it almost has to be removed from the conversation in my opinion. You almost have to like any show where Eric was on bass better than one with Chaney. But NINJA felt a little sterile. A little too straight forward. No frills except Perry's outfit which was bad. I can't help but think Eric influenced that. Now, the Lolla 03 show would have been much better served had Eric influenced a no frills approach. That stage was awful, and it makes me wonder who designed it or approved it considering this show feels more like when I saw P4P. Perry's bat-shit vision on display.

Take out the new songs, add Avery and invite a more raucus crowd and this would have been the best Jane's show I've ever seen.

[bman]

The Strays era janes was awful. Probably still to much cocaine being used. with all those outfits and hats, that lolla 03 was a bore! Ninja era was great b/c Eric brought some balls back and you could actually see him on stage into the music! This new era is excellent in its own way. The Vibes show, Irving Plaza album release show, and the Huntington show all were absolutely awesome in my opinion. I hope tonight is great too! I think tonight is my 20th or 21st show! Later. Counted wrong! Tonight is my 17th JA show.

[ant]

Take out the new songs, add Avery and invite a more raucus crowd and this would have been the best Jane's show I've ever seen.

So basically... seeing Jane's 1.0 would've been the best JA show you've ever seen.

[Pandemonium]

I thought the '97 Enit show was vastly superior to at least 2 Avery shows I saw ('91 Lollapalooza + '09 NINJA).

[Jasper]

I thought the '97 Enit show was vastly superior to at least 2 Avery shows I saw ('91 Lollapalooza + '09 NINJA).

Yeah, you know, I thought the '97 Halloween show was better than one of the original Jane's shows I saw, but that had nothing to do with Eric's performance, and everything to do with Perry having a spectacularly bad night in 1990. NINJA saw Eric playing with a passion and intensity that was more than worthy of the Relapse period. I thought Flea did well, but I'm kind of baffled at the odd times Eric's importance as a live player seems to be minimized. He was a key component to that live machine. That's when true perfection was achieved - with Eric. That's not the "cult of Eric," (Hoka's words) because it was all four of them, equally nailing it in a way that, at its best, couldn't be met or surpassed.

[Hokahey]

Take out the new songs, add Avery and invite a more raucus crowd and this would have been the best Jane's show I've ever seen.

So basically... seeing Jane's 1.0 would've been the best JA show you've ever seen.

[SR]

I've seen 1.0 ('91 and Scream), Relapse, Jubilee, Hammerstein (Halloween), NINJA, and a small club here on the pre NINJA tour.

Nothing, I mean nothing compared to 1.0 in '91. In fact, no one I have ever seen compared to 1.0 back in the day, and I've been to many, many concerts. Prince came close, but I still give the nod to Jane's.

[JOEinPHX]

I've seen 1.0 ('91 and Scream), Relapse, Jubilee, Hammerstein (Halloween), NINJA, and a small club here on the pre NINJA tour.

Nothing, I mean nothing compared to 1.0 in '91. In fact, no one I have ever seen compared to 1.0 back in the day, and I've been to many, many concerts. Prince came close, but I still give the nod to Jane's.

How long did they play?

[SR]

Didn't time it.....I'd say 70-90 minutes. Scream is a total blur, which was just part of it for me.

[Pandemonium]

I've seen 1.0 ('91 and Scream), Relapse, Jubilee, Hammerstein (Halloween), NINJA, and a small club here on the pre NINJA tour.

Nothing, I mean nothing compared to 1.0 in '91. In fact, no one I have ever seen compared to 1.0 back in the day, and I've been to many, many concerts. Prince came close, but I still give the nod to Jane's.

I will say the 12/19/90 Hollywood Palladium show I saw was by far the best Janes show I ever saw and ranks way up around the top 10 or so shows I've ever seen.

[Matz]

please post that top 10 one day, it would be interesting to check out

[sonny]

I probably liked this show better than NINJA. Eric being at NINJA was something so special it almost has to be removed from the conversation in my opinion. You almost have to like any show where Eric was on bass better than one with Chaney. But NINJA felt a little sterile. A little too straight forward. No frills except Perry's outfit which was bad. I can't help but think Eric influenced that. Now, the Lolla 03 show would have been much better served had Eric influenced a no frills approach. That stage was awful, and it makes me wonder who designed it or approved it considering this show feels more like when I saw P4P. Perry's bat-shit vision on display.

Take out the new songs, add Avery and invite a more raucus crowd and this would have been the best Jane's show I've ever seen.

i like no frills jane's addiction, i also like eric avery jane's addiction. i think the four guys, whether it's avery or chaney, playing a theater should be enough. the rest is clutter. i enjoyed the pfp '96 tour much more than the '93 tour.

[Hokahey]

I probably liked this show better than NINJA. Eric being at NINJA was something so special it almost has to be removed from the conversation in my opinion. You almost have to like any show where Eric was on bass better than one with Chaney. But NINJA felt a little sterile. A little too straight forward. No frills except Perry's outfit which was bad. I can't help but think Eric influenced that. Now, the Lolla 03 show would have been much better served had Eric influenced a no frills approach. That stage was awful, and it makes me wonder who designed it or approved it considering this show feels more like when I saw P4P. Perry's bat-shit vision on display.

Take out the new songs, add Avery and invite a more raucus crowd and this would have been the best Jane's show I've ever seen.

i like no frills jane's addiction, i also like eric avery jane's addiction. i think the four guys, whether it's avery or chaney, playing a theater should be enough. the rest is clutter. i enjoyed the pfp '96 tour much more than the '93 tour.

I'm not sure I follow you. Jane's Addiction on the Ritual tour had a stage decorated with all kinds of religious paraphenalia akin to the album cover.

P4P in '96 had dancers and the band was all in togas. Perry threw flowers from the stage in to the crowd. It was a visually stimulating experience. I haven't been as reminded of that as I was on this tour since.

[Matz]

I miss that aspect of the band as well. I just watched the Enit show from the Relapse tour and if you compare that stage wise and outfit wise with what they're doing now, they've really scaled down a lot. Those outfits of Dave's and Perry's especially on the Relapse tour were legendary. Wear a feather boa once and a while Dave for old times sake!

[sonny]

I probably liked this show better than NINJA. Eric being at NINJA was something so special it almost has to be removed from the conversation in my opinion. You almost have to like any show where Eric was on bass better than one with Chaney. But NINJA felt a little sterile. A little too straight forward. No frills except Perry's outfit which was bad. I can't help but think Eric influenced that. Now, the Lolla 03 show would have been much better served had Eric influenced a no frills approach. That stage was awful, and it makes me wonder who designed it or approved it considering this show feels more like when I saw P4P. Perry's bat-shit vision on display.

Take out the new songs, add Avery and invite a more raucus crowd and this would have been the best Jane's show I've ever seen.

i like no frills jane's addiction, i also like eric avery jane's addiction. i think the four guys, whether it's avery or chaney, playing a theater should be enough. the rest is clutter. i enjoyed the pfp '96 tour much more than the '93 tour.

I'm not sure I follow you. Jane's Addiction on the Ritual tour had a stage decorated with all kinds of religious paraphenalia akin to the album cover.

P4P in '96 had dancers and the band was all in togas. Perry threw flowers from the stage in to the crowd. It was a visually stimulating experience. I haven't been as reminded of that as I was on this tour since.

they don't need that, any of it. the ritual decorations were just shit from perry's house. at some point this stuff becomes the show, rather than jane's addiction. as in "oh man did you see jane's addiction, they had dancers, and they put a lamp on stage for the acoustic set".

who cares about that shit. the '96 tour had the ballet dancer for maybe one song or two. the flowers were nothing special, but either way, none of that made the show. perry, pete, mike,stephen, made the show. you weren't distracted by some lame theme, dancers, or a stuffed bear.

like i said i prefer the no frills jane's addiction. you want them to wear robes or throw flowers, fine, but i'd rather they just play the songs, engage the audience, put on a show from their hearts.

surely, you see the difference in the '96 pfp tour, compared to the '93 tour? maybe you didn't see the '93 tour? it was all this silly stuff distracting from the band people came to see.

i was just expressing my preference. the less bullshit on stage, the better the show in my experience with jane's addiction.

[Pandemonium]

I miss that aspect of the band as well. I just watched the Enit show from the Relapse tour and if you compare that stage wise and outfit wise with what they're doing now, they've really scaled down a lot. Those outfits of Dave's and Perry's especially on the Relapse tour were legendary. Wear a feather boa once and a while Dave for old times sake!

As far as stage presentations go, that '97 ENIT show had the best stage production of any Janes tour/show I've ever seen. The key thing was, even though they had a big two level stage all jungle tiki roomed out with dancers n' shit, it ENHANCED and COMPLEMENTED the show, it didn't distract from it. On an esthetic level, it made sense with the music and vibe the band wanted to project to the audience. I can't comment with any authority on the current tour's stage production but based on the clips I've seen, it all looks rather random and disjointed like a blind person was given a shopping list of items to pick up at a Pawn Shop.

Another thing - does anyone remember that big Iron Maiden-like Frankenstein guy they used when they played "Had A Dad" during the '91 Lollapalooza run? That was probably the goofiest thing I saw during the Janes 1.0 era.

[Jasper]

I miss that aspect of the band as well. I just watched the Enit show from the Relapse tour and if you compare that stage wise and outfit wise with what they're doing now, they've really scaled down a lot. Those outfits of Dave's and Perry's especially on the Relapse tour were legendary. Wear a feather boa once and a while Dave for old times sake!

As far as stage presentations go, that '97 ENIT show had the best stage production of any Janes tour/show I've ever seen. The key thing was, even though they had a big two level stage all jungle tiki roomed out with dancers n' shit, it ENHANCED and COMPLEMENTED the show, it didn't distract from it. On an esthetic level, it made sense with the music and vibe the band wanted to project to the audience. I can't comment with any authority on the current tour's stage production but based on the clips I've seen, it all looks rather random and disjointed like a blind person was given a shopping list of items to pick up at a Pawn Shop.

Another thing - does anyone remember that big Iron Maiden-like Frankenstein guy they used when they played "Had A Dad" during the '91 Lollapalooza run? That was probably the goofiest thing I saw during the Janes 1.0 era.

I brought that up shortly before sonny torched xiola.org, don't you remember? I'm pretty sure we talked about it. It was a monster on stilts. I think it was more like a muppet, but it was big and chasing Perry around the stage. There are absolutely no pictures or video of it, like a lot of things from lolla '91. There's no record of their psychedelic movie screen either. Nobody who didn't see a Lolla show has any idea what a complete show was like, and that bothers me a lot.

Anyway, Lolla Jane's was the best Jane's show I saw, and it was a maximal show. There was way more stuff going on than the Relapse, though Relapse had some stuff, most notably the second stage and the scaffolding/confetti thing when they did Summertime, and of course the dancers strippers on multiple poles throughout the place. I mean the Hammerstein strippers. I don't think the strippers had the same setup at the other Relapse show I saw.

[CaseyContrarian]

It's been so long that I don't remember the monster. Or maybe I blocked it out. Or I thought it was the acid.

I do recall some dancing girls, though. On "Three Days," if I'm not mistaken. Dave seemed annoyed by them. But then again, Dave just seemed annoyed in general at hat point in time. Still, brilliant show.

[Jasper]

It's been so long that I don't remember the monster. Or maybe I blocked it out. Or I thought it was the acid.

I do recall some dancing girls, though. On "Three Days," if I'm not mistaken. Dave seemed annoyed by them. But then again, Dave just seemed annoyed in general at hat point in time. Still, brilliant show.

I was peaking hard while Jane's was on, and that monster was great, imo. Mr. No-Acid Buzzkill doesn't know what he was missing.

At least one of the dancing girls things was during Ted, and there's actually footage of them from the side of the stage:

[creep]

There are absolutely no pictures or video of it

There's no record of their psychedelic movie screen either.

[Japhy]

the ritual decorations were just shit from perry's house. at some point this stuff becomes the show, rather than jane's addiction. as in "oh man did you see jane's addiction, they had dancers, and they put a lamp on stage for the acoustic set".

who cares about that shit. the '96 tour had the ballet dancer for maybe one song or two. the flowers were nothing special, but either way, none of that made the show. perry, pete, mike,stephen, made the show. you weren't distracted by some lame theme, dancers, or a stuffed bear.

like i said i prefer the no frills jane's addiction. you want them to wear robes or throw flowers, fine, but i'd rather they just play the songs, engage the audience, put on a show from their hearts.

surely, you see the difference in the '96 pfp tour, compared to the '93 tour? maybe you didn't see the '93 tour? it was all this silly stuff distracting from the band people came to see.

i was just expressing my preference. the less bullshit on stage, the better the show in my experience with jane's addiction.

This just shows how they will never please everyone. To me, it's all about the paraphenalia... the more the better. They could release a coffee table book with pictures of ritual era stage set-ups and i'd lap it up!!! That said, i want the "show from the hearts" performance that Sonny mentions too... a cool looking stage isn't the whole deal for sure.

[bman]

Yep. I love the shot on stage with them. Janes is a VISUAL band...period. That's why the more jumping around Perry does, the better show it is. Jane's is band that needs to be watched. Wilco is a band that just stands there, and that's fine for the,. Jane's needs to have visual show. That's who they are.