To be a nostalgia act, or not to be ...

I saw Joe Jackson last night, at the Moore Theatre in Seattle. More on the show itself later.

This morning, I had a chat with a close friend, someone I've known since college. He's a fan from way back too, but he's given up paying to see Joe onstage in the past dozen years. His reason: he plays too much new stuff, tour after tour, and not enough of the fan favorites.

I told him that I can't blame JJ for wanting to keep writing & recording songs, and for wanting to play those songs when he goes on tour. To me, that's a big part of what's kept him interesting (and interested). It's a big reason why I've kept going to see him when he comes to town: he can be counted on to keep things fresh. If he didn't do that, he'd just be a nostalgia act.

My friend countered: "I understand the desire to make new music. What he has failed to understand, though, is that he IS a nostalgia act. He hasn't had a hit in this century. A lot of bands will play maybe three songs off their new album and then focus on making the crowd happy. He doesn't."

I didn't counter that, because I didn't have time to continue the discussion. But it was clear by then that my friend hasn't enjoyed Joe's later work as much as he still loves Look Sharp!, I'm the Man, Night and Day or Blaze of Glory. No denying that those albums are classics -- at least to Joe's fans -- but hey, I've found plenty to enjoy in his post-Eighties work. He's definitely not in the same league as, say, The B-52's. (I saw them last month, and I'm super-glad I did, but it's impossible to deny that they're treading the nostalgia circuit ... and doing it to increasingly diminishing returns.) And as for "making the crowd happy"? Well, I sure didn't hear anyone complaining about the show, on my way out of the venue or walking through the crowded Seattle sidewalks, or on the light rail heading back north.

Rush is another band that had been around for a long time, doing their best to produce new music that would measure up to their earlier fan favorites. Their best post-Seventies work may not have drawn huge cheers from the audience, and I have heard at least one longtime fan say, "Just for one night, I wish those guys would go totally retro." But their efforts kept them interested, as well as interesting. (And now, with Geddy and Alex going out on tour as Rush, with a new drummer but no new music? NOW they could be called a nostalgia act.)

So, does a band become a nostalgia act when they stop making the effort (or even going through the motions) to produce new music? Or does its audience decide the band's "fate," based on sheer popularity of their new music?

My two cents: It is better to NOT be a nostalgia act. If you dont have a new album, or if you're playing only 1-2 of the new songs.....dont even bother. I followed Guided By Voices around for a couple years, and I know they were at the end of the line, when they stopped playing much new material from their new albums and were just playing greatest hits. Its lazy. And, doesnt the audience want to hear songs that the performers excited to play? Why do they even want to hear tired old songs that the performers themselves are weary of playing. Give me the new stuff!

Very good point, Nose. A lot of the crowd may be buying tickets to hear their old favorites, sure. But for my money, the artist had better be able to bring those old favorites to life. I'm not nearly so jaded that I'll put up with a band that's phoning it in, no matter how much I might love their old songs.

I think that was driven home, for me, when I saw Lou Reed in 1989, when he was touring behind the New York album -- one of his strongest ever. It was clear that he was enthusiastic about playing his newer material. It was equally clear that he was tired of playing his older classics ... and thoroughly sick of playing Velvet Underground songs. It made me wish he'd left those VU classics out of his setlist altogether, no matter how much anyone in the audience may love them.

As Totaji said on this board, if you're in The Outfield, then yeah, for sure, you're gonna play the hits. But Lou Reed was pretty much the diametric opposite of a nostalgia act. It's all in what you have to offer ... and how you feel about offering it.

Sometimes you can balance the contemporary-vs-nostalgia act groove thang on a razor's edge. I saw Modern English on a retro festival tour two years ago and they were the only act on the bill of ten who had a new album [1,2,3,4] and they played two of six songs in their tight festival set from it! They had an in-store the next day and we went to Schoolkids in Raleigh to get the CD there. Never say never.

Former TP subscriber [81, 82, 83, 84]

[postpunkmonk.com]
For further rumination on the Fresh New Sound of Yesterday®

I think bands become nostalgia acts in direct proportion to the size and ferocity of their cult. A band that plays arenas where 88% of the people in the audience are there for the hits feel the need to play those hits. But a band/artist playing smaller venues to a very devoted audience can get away with playing a lot of new stuff with a handful of beloved older stuff thrown in.

Thus, people like Sparks or Jonathan Richman or Neko Case can come to town and do a show that's 70% new and 30% old and their audience won't grumble overmuch - the people who come to those shows are there because they love the artist and are happy to hear whatever they do.

But when the Cure toured for their self-titled album 20 some odd years ago and concentrated on that album, Robert Smith realized the audience was not into it, and Cure tours since have been largely greatest hits shows. Their audience had gotten too big to let them do whatever they wanted anymore.

Reno has hit on something I appreciate about Joe Jackson: he's still producing good records. Or at least, he's never stopped trying. And he hasn't accepted the status quo for his more famous songs either. There's a reason his first live album (whose four sides were selected from four different tours) includes three versions of "Is She Really Going Out with Him," none of which sounds like the original single: "They're all completely different from one another and I couldn't decide which ones to leave out."

In his autobiography, Elton John talks about how proud he was of the album Captain Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy — so proud that, the weekend following its release, he decided to debut the album onstage by playing all nine songs, in the same order, at the beginning of his show at Wembley Stadium. By halfway through this suite of songs, he could see loads of people in the sold-out crowd making their way to the exits. That's when he realized, no matter how much the fans loved it when he indulged himself sartorially, there was a limit to how much the pop audience would let Elton indulge himself musically.

This reminds me of the first time I saw Steely Dan. I caught them too late because Becker was actually ill and passed away a year later, but regardless, he announced at the very top that they were going to play all the hits. Setlist wasn't quite like that, but they were indeed playing the songs as you heard them on the records. Then they did a number (I forgot which) where they completely re-interpreted it - it was virtually a whole new arrangement and the one time where they really lived up to their jazz aspirations instead of settling for '70s nostalgia. As soon as it was over, I thought "wow, that was pretty awesome!" but before I could even finish that thought, this guy next to me started yelling "THAT SUCKED!" I can't tell you how startling that was because the same person kindly bought me some water when he offered to get anything I wanted after holding a spot for him and his wife. Suddenly he was genuinely enraged and he actually grabbed his wife and pulled her out of there. This would've been at PNC Bank Arts Center, Holmdel, NJ, in the lawn section, on July 6, 2016 just in case anyone might've been there.

I saw Steely Dan one more time three months later in October at the Beacon. A friend of mine was a big Aja fan and I was apparently the only friend willing to go with him to see them play the album in its entirety. At the end of that set, Fagen, with virtually no enthusiasm, said "and that's it, that's the album" while smothering his face in a towel. Later on, I found out he wrote a memoir where he complained about the audience members who only wanted them to re-create hits, so I don't think it's a stretch that he may have been bored playing Aja as-is.

Anyway, that's the definition of a nostalgia act for me, or at least what it's like when your audience demands it.

Two experiences, two different artists, two takes on the "legacy" act versus continued reinvention.

My wife and I saw Bruce Hornsby, an artist whom I generally like, but didn't follow, in a concert a few years ago. Did he do his hits? Absolutely, but he re-cast them into very different musical settings, with influences from jam bands, bluegrass, New Orleans jazz, and a vast array of other sonic touchstones. It was a genuinely great show and made me appreciate his pop hits from the 1980s in a very different way, alongside a lot of songs of his that I had never heard before, and a lot of half-covers or allusions to other musicians' works.
Setlist: [www.setlist.fm]

I saw Peter Gabriel, in his i/o tour, the record for which he had released each song over the course of a year, on full moon and new moons, in alternate versions. He did a whole lot of i/o songs in the first half of the show, testing the patience of his fans, before he did a truncated set of many of his best-known hits in the second act. I think that I and others probably felt a bit disappointed to miss a lot of his earlier (pre-So) singles, since the set was so heavy on i/o and his big pop records.
Setlist: [www.setlist.fm]

That makes me happy I've not paid a whit of attention to peter gabriel since the boring, thrown together "So" album. I've passed up chances to see him in the last 35 years that were completely justified by your reportage. I only have an interest in the pre-"So" material. And I can't imagine peter in his 70s performing the crucial third album material with the brio it demands in any case.

Former TP subscriber [81, 82, 83, 84]

[postpunkmonk.com]
For further rumination on the Fresh New Sound of Yesterday®

ByI remember reading about that Elton John concert Delvin, if memory serves, Ringo Starr was at that show with Elton John's mother and John was performing his new album track for track. Since they didn't know the new songs, Ringo and John's mum left the show after 3 songs. Ouch. Even his mum...

From my experience in concert -going, I enjoy hearing the artist's new material, and after all, it's a way for the artist to promote the new album, as well as hearing some of the classic songs delivered in a different style/medium. An example: I have heard a dozen live versions of Gary Numan's
"Down In The Park," but each version is quite distinct from the next, utilizing in some versions goth and industrial elements, which presaged his future musical direction, starting with 1998's Exile.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/12/2026 06:26AM by Fleeingbandit.

I was thinking back over the times I've seen Joe Jackson. He's never dropped "Is She Really Going Out with Him?" from his set. But from 1982 to the present, I've seen him & his various bands present it as:
• An a cappella number;
• An arrangement for violin, flute and piccolo;
• An arrangement with a brass section (sounding much like Chicago on a good night);
• A bossa nova track;
• A Salvation Army street corner band offering;
• A solo number on the piano;
• And, on more than one occasion — hold onto your socks — a hit song with a familiar arrangement that he & his band reproduced faithfully.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/09/2026 07:35AM by Delvin.

This is nearly exactly how I feel about Colin Hay, but in reverse - the guy's got so much solo stuff it's a shame he still plays Men at Work stuff at his shows. I realize that's what sells tickets but if I paid good money to see Colin Hay in concert specifically because of - not in spite of - his solo stuff, I would be awfully peeved. I can't ever imagine Robyn Hitchcock doing that (though I could be mistaken.)

I've seen Hitchcock a bunch and he generally includes songs from numerous phases of his career.

I've seen Robyn H. quite a few times, with the Egyptians, the Venus 3 and solo. And I don't think I've heard him play any song of his, from any phase of his career, in more than one show.

I can't think of that happening at the shows I've seen, either.

He's insanely prolific.

I've seen him probably 7 or 8 times over the years, including with the Egyptians in the 80s. And yes, hardly any overlap in setlists between tours that I've noticed. For years I was disappointed that he seemed to avoid doing Soft Boys songs, but I finally saw him do "Kingdom of Love" with the Venus 3 about 15 years ago (with Mike Mills on backup vox!). He's done it at least one other time that I've seem him too, along with a fair number of other Soft Boys songs on recent tours.

I am a bit puzzled because I've seen Robyn Hitchcock just twice, and he definitely has songs he's played in both of his concerts.

November 20, 2025: [www.setlist.fm]
October 25, 2024: [www.setlist.fm]

Zwirn, I admit I'm relying just on memory.

Come to think of it, now, I do remember hearing "Madonna of the Wasps" in at least two shows.

And I know I've heard him with the Venus 3 playing "The Queen of Eyes."

Musicians are a lot like farmers and their equipment. Stop and they turn to rust. NEVER STOP!

Excellent analogy, Steve.