Skip to main content

Bigger doesn't always mean better. Comparing tours - The Resistance vs. The 2nd Law

For the second time in the past week, I read a Muse concert review which lauded the band's musical performance and light show, yet showed disappointment in the band's stage set-up.

In both these reviews, the critics claimed that this tour's stage set-up lacked in comparison to the band's 2009-2011 Resistance Tour, in honor of their 2009 album The Resistance. While I'd agree that the stage set-up for that tour was visually impressive at times, it was limiting, and the overall spectacle of the shows on that tour, while still great, were inferior to those on this - the 2nd Law Tour.

During the Resistance Tour, the three band members were situated in the middle of giant skyscrapers for the first couple songs or so, before being lowered to the stage. This was visually striking, especially at first, however, it limited the mobility of the band members, and while drummer Dominic Howard and bassist Chris Wolstenholme don't move around a great deal, singer and guitarist Matthew Bellamy is known to do so. The light show was visually stunning, and the music was spot-on, as usual.

In the band's current tour, there isn't that visually striking component at the outset of their shows. However, the light show is just as, if not more visually stunning than that displayed during the Resistance Tour. Also, just preceding the band's third song in their set - "Supermassive Black Hole" - what appears to be a UFO of some kind drops down from the ceiling, with red lights cast all around it. Once the opening riff of the song is played, the UFO lights up as an inverted pyramid, displaying a vast array of changing colors and images, before altering its shape at times during the remaining 17-18 songs as well. To me, this was the more visually impressive of the two set-ups. It allowed more flexibility for the band members, which is of vital importance, especially in Bellamy's case. It also provided more flexibility as far as colors, images, shapes, and lights go. The Resistance Tour may have been visually more striking at first, but the 2nd Law Tour was more visually striking throughout the course of a full set. What American critics (people in general) sometimes forget, I think, is that bigger doesn't always mean better.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"