Expecting Rain

Rubbish. Both audiences booed both the audio and the going electric. If you want to counter that, you could start by quoting Levon's biography, and his memories of working Gulf of Mexico oil rigs, while Dylan was performing with The Hawks. Do you seriously believe that Levon quit because the booing was directed at the audio, and not the band? Sheesh

insolent

56-27, but It should be 83-0 of course.

I've read Levon's bio. He had a lotta reasons for leaving the tour. He didn't like getting booed, whatever the reason. He also disagreed with the Band's direction, believing that they should be recording & carving out their own identity rather than being content to be somebody's back-up band, even if that somebody was Bob Dylan. And Levon didn't get along with Albert Grossman. These are what I believe to be his reasons for leaving the tour.

They will use whatever footage is handy, so MTV Unplugged is certainly a choice.

Then let people respond to why they feel the same for other eras without turning the thread into a snotfest. I didn't remove a cyanide and hand grande post but, by the sounds of it, I probably would have.

My husband prefer the 2012 Leonard Cohen to the 35-years-old Cohen. And i don't find it strange or anormal. This is a question of personal preferences... we are growing old, and our dear ones, too.
"If i could to go to the 1966 show..." I just can't. If Bob had died in that accident... so we could have only "the good Bob" without "the old bad Bob". But I'm so happy that he didn't!

What a breath of fresh air you are, Sonia.

But the difference is that 2012 Leonard Cohen is still performing and recording at an extremely high level. 'Old Ideas' is a solidly good album in the way that most of his albums are solidly good, and his concert performances are superb. Dylan, on the other hand, can no longer (or no longer chooses to) carry a melody on stage, and he (probably intentionally to some degree) sings in a way that robs very emotional songs of their emotion. I think if Dylan actually wanted to put together a great concert tour, he could. He seems content just to go out there and bark staccato, though. I don't begrudge him for it, but I also don't consider it to be engaging. The most interesting thing about Dylan is that he still actively tours as much as he does. The idea of ModBob is far more fascinating than the music ModBob has churned out in concert. I believe Dylan has a great album in him, and I am not giving up on him as an artist, but if I have the choice between watching a strung out Dylan snarling on the warpath on the edge of burning out completely, or watching an old Dylan who is completely secure in his place in music history, I'm going with the young guy without a second thought.

Good that you can still see strengths and hope in an active 70-year-old songwriter musician. Do a quick scan around and see who else is in this category and has been pushing it this hard for this long and is worth following. Ride those strengths like a freakin' train and enjoy the heck out of 'em! The dude's tough as nails and continues not to give a shit about what others want from him. Although I wonder if he feels as secure as you make it out to be. There seems to be a lot of unrealistic pressure put on him to be the old Bob, or one of the old Bobs, or even last night's Bob. Expectations will get ya every time. Beware!

...Drop me a note when you're in your 70's and let me know how well your keeping up with your 20's and 30's self...

Md23Rewls makes some excellent points. Dylan has arrived at a place, artistically and professionally, where he can get away with it, where he knows that he can perform as limitedly (or badly) as he does, and it doesn't really matter. He's a legend, and as wincingly bad as he very often performs, he's Bob Dylan, and as such, is untouchable. In fact it's almost expected that he should sound dreadful. If it were Paul McCartney sounding that bad, we'd soon hear about it, but because it's Dylan, who has diluted what little left he has to offer across 100+ concerts a year, no-one really cares. He's now reached the point where sounding dreadful is almost integral to the performance, and he, above all others, has the insouciance to not give two figs about it, knowing that his 2012 audience are there simply to fawn, adore and lap up the legend, regardless of the performance. What wicked irony: booed at incessantly throughout the greatest live performances of his career, yet cheered to the rafters for present-day concerts that repeatedly perpetrate the carefree annihilation of his back catalogue.

Absolutely but apparently 56 people don't have speakers or head phones plugged in... which of course, is the only way I know to make it through that '60s stuff without throwing up.

Nobody is questioning Bob Dylan's motives as an artist these days. The collective public LOVES Bob Dylan. That's how a completely forgettable album like 'Together Through Life' still manages to score high reviews. And while people question his concert skills, nobody is booing him out of venues. In 1966, people were openly questioning him as an artist, calling him a "sell-out," yelling crap at his concerts. Dylan in 1966 had everything to prove, and Dylan today has almost literally nothing to prove. He's a consensus all-timer in music history. He could release five bad albums in a row and his place in history would not change.

This isn't, and shouldn't, be an age thing. It's a music thing. All I have to ask myself when it comes to this question is, "Will a single concert in 2012 be better than a single concert in 1966?" And the answer to that, unless Dylan does some mindblowing reinvention of himself this year, is no. Those 1966 concerts are one of the best examples of why I love Bob Dylan. They are staggering in their atmosphere and electricity. They represent Dylan in complete control of himself and his music. Fifty years from now, those concerts are still going to be titanic achievements. Fifty years from now, nobody is going to pull up a 2012 concert, and if they did, they wouldn't think, "This sounds spectacular." Or to put it another way, if the only thing we could ever judge Dylan on was his 1966 live work or his 2012 live work, Dylan's 1966 stuff STILL would sound spectacular. Wheras the 2012 stuff would give no clue whatsoever that Dylan could blow away a live audience or have any reason to be relevant. The only reason Bob Dylan in 2012 is interesting is because we know it's Bob Dylan. 1966 Dylan would be interesting if he had no history or context attached to him. There's just something there that's impossible to find anywhere else. Even 1975 Dylan (probably his second best live era, though the early acoustic concerts are great, too) doesn't have that same aura.

That sounds a lot like preconceived wisdom to me. By now, it's literally the history books that tell us how great Dylan used to be back in the day. Well, I'll tell you that, I didn't have a single 1960s recording, live or studio, when I went to see my first NET show. It was his live work at that point in time that convinced me and keeps me coming back.

Between '66 and 2012 I'd have to go with 1966. Though I would still go see him now. Of course though if I were to handpick the year, the answer is 1975. The greatest Dylan performances the world ever heard, and therefore...the greatest musical performances ever.

Speaking only for myself, I'm much mote concerned with whether I'll be lucky enough to have the chance to see him again in 2012 than with how this poll comes out.

Me too. Definitely ONE of the best examples among SO many.


Maybe for you, it's the only reason. Be careful not to assume and make the mistake of thinking that you know what drives others just because that something is driving YOU.

glory, hallelujah! I'm with you, smoke.

----------------------------------------------------

My daughter (a musician) who did not have any Bob albums prior to this November when I gave her Christmas In The Heart, absolutely loves it. Her four month old daughter stops crying and listens intently when I put in "Love and Theft".

I think it's a pretty decent assumption to make. If you stumbled upon a Youtube clip of a random artist you had never heard of and they were performing the way Dylan performs, I am hard pressed to believe that you would think, "Dear God, that is amazing." I'm not saying there's no value in Dylan's current performances--I'm saying that the value comes largely from the fact that he's one of the greatest recording artists in the history of popular music and there's an emotional attachment Dylan fans feel toward the dude. That attachment has nothing to do with Dylan's current performances. If people listen to 2011 Dylan and enjoy it, more power to them, but let's not pretend that that same interest would apply if it was John Alabaster (name invented at this very moment) singing and performing that way. I tuned in to the VH1 performance and didn't care for it, but I was looking forward to it because it was Bob Dylan. If he starts doing new things musically, I'll be interested. If he comes out with a new album, I'll be excited. You know what doesn't excite me? Hearing Dylan go through the motions on the 80,000th live performance of "Blowing in the Wind" or "Like a Rolling Stone."

I guess a more fitful question if relating the answer in terms of quality would be, "1966 or 2011", leaving out the philosophical aspect of wanting to see what hasn't happened and being satisfied with what has. The poll would most likely be closer to 88-0... I think. Right?

No, the same interest level wouldn't apply to ANYONE else for me. That's just me though. For someone else it might, and it looks like it does. I can't help it if I'm lucky. I got to grow up with Bob and follow the trials and tribulations and metamorphoses and re-emergences and I LOVED every step of the way. Each twist gets better and challenges me to not be so ridiculous as to ever have any expectations. Especially about wanting whatever was. Bring on the new, I'm ready and willing. 'Live music is better, bumper stickers should be issued...'

..you know - i was thinking stuff. All kinds of stuff as i was listening to you guys.
- fortunately none of us (Me ESP.) - care to endure it... BUT! That last thing what
you put there - really helps me ... understand those who follow the tours or go
to concerts .. it ain't like i don't know that from the 'other side' ....
.. i think i'll just leave that there. It ain't really where i was going
- but .......
.................... the LIVE Music Experience is Better -
.. Still Barefoot = could i ... use that- not to change your words..
.. umm - is that really the Deal? .. or do you think the Music ITSELF ..
---------- is better? .................... i don't know if i think that, but..
.. i ... am from another place. .. .. and to be clearer me=1966
.........................................................................Absolutely.
- i love Bob like a Father NOW
- i Dig Bob like a NEW FORREST 1966

Hey Grumps, you can say whatever you want. The reason I put it in quotes is because someone else said it. It's from the guy you call Unkle Neil in that other thread over yonder. I think it might be from that album with 'Homegrown' on it, American Stars and Bars'. If not, then maybe 'Hawks and Doves'.

Anyhow, for me, it's all about the live music experience and all that surrounds it, including figuring out how to get there, how to get in, running into fun crazy people and enjoying life. Live music around a fire brings just as much joy. Any live music. I always give to street musicians for spreading such vibes. Regarding Bob, the constant reinventing of his own material is enthralling. It's basic survival when you think about it. I'd go bonkers playing the same thing over and over for years, months, days...

1... you might wanna put up a Barricade
- there's a bunch of Angry Folk on their way to see you
wondering why you'd encourage me along those lines....

2. .. this is what i (personally) need to remember when
discussing this stuff w/ people - because i've not attended many concerts as an
audience member (or a member of this planet, really...) so - it's different - just
like you are saying - and it is such an obvious different perspective - but i forget.
- Thanks for reminding me.......
- and furthermore and further furthermore... .. are those #1 people there yet?

That 1966 poll is a real temptation. And I can't allow myself to yield to that temptation.
Do you want to go to a 1966 show? Of course. I hunger for it. But, even there are the time mashine round the corner... what shell i do there? A 37-years-old woman, squeezed by the crowd of booing teenagers, listening to a 25-years-old musician who just told in a press-conference what do he was thinking about the 30-years-old people... It's awful, isn't it?