Possible Forum residency

[VAisForEagleLovers]

Does Billy Joel do other tours and concert dates in addition to this?
If that's the model, you know do one a month somewhere, and then tour and promote and do other things, I wouldn't have the same issues.
I just don't want to see the Eagles stoop to being a Vegas act.

Yes, he did a rather extensive tour at the beginning of his 'residency' at MSG. I saw him here in Louisville last spring. It was the usual amount of shows, and now he's on a regular break except for the MSG shows that are planned through November. He'll probably tour more, but it's hard to say. What it would mean for the Eagles and their fans is hard to say, but it's obvious that it's working for BJ.

[sodascouts]

Joel seems to have given up touring in favour of playing these endless Madison Square Garden shows.

BB, I am with you. I don't want to see them do this either. I would rather they went their separate ways & created some new individual music if they don't want to make another band album.

I see it a bit differently. I'm hoping that a residency as opposed to a tour where they have to travel would enable them to have more time to do studio projects while not neglecting live performances entirely. It's the best of both worlds!

However, if it was an either / or situation, I admit I would prefer new studio music to a residency. I just believe they can do both. After all, a residency entails just a few nights a month typically.

The only thing I fear about a residency is that they'll give us a short set like the ones they pulled out for Vegas a couple years ago and it will be the exact same set for the entirety of their residency, no matter how long it lasts. That would be disappointing.

[tjh532]

From a different fan point of view, I would love to know that they were playing at a specific place and when. Being on a very tight budget, I need time to plan and save up, even for a concert ticket. To be able to count on them performing at a certain place and time with plenty of time to plan would be tremendous.

And I know that none of us like to think about it, but our guys are getting older. Touring is taxing, even when you are younger. If they had a residency somewhere, they could still perform, and then do shorter tours in between dates when they feel like it and stay home when they don't. The best of both worlds for them, and we continue to get (some) live performances.

[BillBailey1976]

I'm not sure that for a group like the Eagles, who have every amenity imaginable, that touring is that taxing for them. Now, back in the days of tour buses and dragging your own equipment, or in the days of all night parties after the shows, yes, I would agree that would really take it out of you.
Being driven to the airport, walking to the plane, a very luxurious, comfortable plane, flying to the city, being driven from the airport to the arena, where your dressing room is filled with everything you want or need, playing the show, then doing it all in reverse, or staying in a 5 star hotel, then doing it all in reverse, not too taxing.
The most taxing part would be playing the show, which I'm sure takes it out of you.
That part would be no different, no matter where you played.

I would say that touring gets "old" alot faster than it would be taxing.

[Ive always been a dreamer]

I hear what you're saying, BB1976, but I would have to disagree with you somewhat here. No matter what the accommodations are, I think traveling can be exhausting. I used to travel extensively in my job, and, although there were definitely some fringe benefits, it could get very old and tiresome. Not only that, but there are other lots of other factors that add to the stress, such as being away from your family at times when they may need or want you to be there for them.

As I mentioned in another thread, I'll take whatever I can get from the band at this point. I don't think the residency idea would be a horrible thing. The only things I would hope for if they decide to do it is to take up residency in several different cities - maybe not 12 cities, but maybe one on the east coast (NYC), one on the west coast (LA), and a couple in between. In addition, I cross my fingers that they don't cut back to a 90-minute set list as Soda suggested. I can say for sure that I personally would not attend as many shows if they do that.

[Glennsallnighter]

I would find it hard to justify the travel too for a 90m setlist. At least with the HOTE I was guaranteed over 3 hours, and I got two shows the weekend I went to NY in 2013. Thats 7 hours and much more worth it. I would do 90m for a Glenn solo show because obviously to expect any more from a solo singer is unrealistic.

But they are the bosses and will control their own destiny and as Soda says we will have to take what we get.

[Roey]

I didn't mean to imply a free for all. A plethora would be messy and you are right, the band would not allow messy. Of the 20 something songs they perform at each concert, maybe 3 or so could feature guest musicians. In lieu of guest musicians at some of the concerts, the special set could feature old and/or new recordings from the band members' individual projects. It could also be the set where the band debuts new material for audience reactions. The time they save traveling could be spent in the studio. The fans have access to great Eagles music plus a little surprise sweetener at each concert. Just a thought.

[Freypower]

I didn't mean to imply a free for all. A plethora would be messy and you are right, the band would not allow messy. Of the 20 something songs they perform at each concert, maybe 3 or so could feature guest musicians. In lieu of guest musicians at some of the concerts, the special set could feature old and/or new recordings from the band members' individual projects. It could also be the set where the band debuts new material for audience reactions. The time they save traveling could be spent in the studio. The fans have access to great Eagles music plus a little surprise sweetener at each concert. Just a thought.

First of all we have no idea whether they ever plan to record together again. If they did, they wouldn't perform any new material while they were recording it. Think of their horror of bootlegs. It's a bit late in their career for that.

The idea that after all these years they would suddenly be amenable to playing each other's solo material and suddenly start featuring guest musicians....why? They have their solo shows for that. People expect to see the Eagles. There are already some fans who think they should cut down on the solo material (which in fact they have; they only do Joe's songs now).

I am sorry but you are crediting them with flexibility & willingness to take risks with unfamiliar material that they have rarely, if ever, shown.

[sodascouts]

Of course, one never knows what could happen, and there's no harm in speculating!