Wilco rocked sold-out Hill Auditorium, but style sometimes overshadowed substance
Jeff Tweedy and co. spanned the band’s 14-year career with a set that, while not necessarily mailed in, seemed to be lacking some energy, despite its two-hour, 27-song duration.
It might be that the former country-rock band of modest abilities and enormous heart has become just the opposite: enormously talented, but left wanting in the inspiration department.
There’s no question that Wilco can turn on the pyrotechnics at will. With avant-jazz wizard Nels Cline on guitar and Glenn Kotche on drums, the band has an extra gear that it employs perhaps too regularly, rendering even the best-intentioned feedback freakout almost boring when it seems to infuse every song.
It's kind of a shame, because Jeff Tweedy, despite a limited vocal range and awkward frontman persona, writes engaging songs that don’t require a lot of embellishment.
At their best, on records like “Yankee Hotel Foxtrot,” Wilco uses unique electronic effects to complement Tweedy’s songs. But on Friday, the wall of effects became the message, drowning out the tunes’ subtleties.
None of which seemed to matter to most of the audience, who appeared to eat up each and every one of Cline’s overwrought solos and body contortions and auxiliary guitarist Pat Sansone’s guitar-god poses.
But it’s impossible not to love Tweedy. And, thanks to him, the show had some genuinely touching moments, as when he led the audience through a singalong version of his gorgeous “Jesus, Etc.” and on a lovely reading of “California Stars,” the unfinished Woody Guthrie song that the band set to music.
Wilco performing “California Stars” earlier this year in Los Angeles:
And longtime fans were treated to a rocking rendition of “Box Full of Letters,” the power-pop nugget from the band’s debut record, “A.M.”
But these moments, when the band backed away from the bombast, only seemed to underscore how much overkill was present during the majority of the show. And kind of made us long for the days when Wilco was able to accomplish a lot more with a lot less.
Will Stewart is a free-lance writer for AnnArbor.com.
Comments
AndyYpsilanti
Thu, Oct 22, 2009 : 11:16 a.m.
I never said you hate the new Wilco, Recordhound. I said you like the old Wilco. By your own admission, you like them much more than the new Wilco. My arguement is with the review. I'll say it again; it was less about this singular show and more about the band. As far as what I listened to when Wilco was at their peak? Yes, I listend to ICP a litte. And Nirvana, Sublime, Neil Young, CSN, Seeger, Blind Melon, Pearl Jam, Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Hank William, George Jones; I could go on and on. But this isn't about who's got the biggest.....record collection. No offense, and none taken. We could probably have a lively conversation if we ever met,recordhound. If we havn't already.
recordhound
Wed, Oct 21, 2009 : 5:28 p.m.
First of all, I never claimed to hate the new Wilco. They still make better records than almost any pop band out there. I go back with Jeff Tweedy to the early days of Uncle Tupelo and even spent a fair amount of time with him back in the olden days. Like Neil Young, and Tweedy might be the Neil of his generation, he will always be worth paying attention to. But like Neil, he is restless and difficult. Not every experiment pays off. I personally hope the Nels Cline era of Jeff's catalog passes like the Shocking Pinks or the Stray Gators. Wilco may be more popular since the post YHF band came together, but brother, it isn't his best work. Sorry you guys who got on the Wilco train after watching the documentary can't be objective. Forget who's technically a better musician. Are you really going to compare AM, Being There, Summerteeth, Mermaid Ave 1&2, & YHF (not to mention Anodyne really) up against A Ghost is Born, Sky Blue Sky & the new one? No, you really can't. I'm dying to know what you were into when they were at their peak. Hopefully you weren't up to your cargo pants in Faygo at some gathering of the Juggalos.
AndyYpsilanti
Wed, Oct 21, 2009 : 1:47 p.m.
Wow Recordhound, right back to the name calling and belittling huh? Where was the positive part of the review? Where Mr. Stewart said he liked Jeff Tweedy but the band ruined his songs? Or the line where he says the band can turn on pyrotechnics but over uses them? Or was it the part when Mr. Stewart says, in effect "I didn't like this, I can't belive the crowd liked it" Even the AA.com photog posted a totaly different, and positive, reaction to the show. AND YOU DIDN'T EVEN ATTEND THE SHOW, RECORDHOUND! And then we mention the good old days again. I think you're stuck in them. I have been reading rock journalism for most of my life; current and classic. This is one of the worst review of a show I have ever read. There, I said it. It is more of a complaint about the style of band that Wilco has become than a review of the show. It is a nearly entirely negative review of a show that really had no major faults. No train wrecks. No breakdowns. No storming off the stage or being short with the audience. ALL OF THE COMPLAINTS MADE ARE ABOUT THE BAND'S NEW SOUND AND NEW DIRECTION. That is not in any way a valid criticism of this one show. This was supposed to be a review of a concert, not the author's opinion of the band. Read it again. There are only about four paragraphs that even partialy relate to this one show. The rest is the authors opinion of the newest version of the band. If this was listed as a review of the band itself, not this one show, then I would have no qualms with it, even if I dissagree with the opinion. We get it. You and Mr. Stewart like the old days and the old Wilco. The rest of us, that do like the new Wilco, we enjoyed the show. It was good. It was fun. The best Wilco show I've ever seen? Maybe not. But certainly not worthy of the entirely negative review that it got here.
recordhound
Tue, Oct 20, 2009 : 6:30 p.m.
A band can be tight and polished to a fault. It's called Bon Jovi. Only a truly thin-skinned fan could possibly read this original review and take away the feeling that it was all negative. If you bother to read it again you will notice that it has compliments as well as reasoned criticisms. This is what music JOURNALISM used to look like back in the good old days. Have you guys just grown up watching Entertainment Tonight and reading slightly reworked press releases passing for news? At least Andy finally said something I agree with. Yes, your standards are too low.
A2Native
Tue, Oct 20, 2009 : 11:54 a.m.
The reviewer is clearly entitled to his opinion (that's his job), but I'll respectfully disagree with the bulk of his reflections. How can a band be tight and polished -- TO A FAULT? The beauty of Wilco is that they lay down straightforward classic rock tracks like Box Full of Letters with the same ease that they pull off avant-garde pieces like Impossible Germany that feature screaming guitar harmonies and feedback in perfect balance. The entire band was rock solid from start to finish and the sound level/mix in the balcony was perfectly fine. And for those of you so concerned about Tweedy's nod to Royal Oak...relax...they didn't play a four-hour show...they only played three more songs than they did in A2 on Friday.
AndyYpsilanti
Tue, Oct 20, 2009 : 10:33 a.m.
I'm aware that what I said is the "the oldest criticism of a review in the book" Sometimes it's apt. Especialy when you had nothing positive to say about what was, to most, a good show. The review sounds like you look down on all who liked the show. Like you look down on the mere mortals who couldn't possibly know as much about music as you, so they must have been wrong to like the show, and the band has become too good for their own good. That is the tone of your review. Yes, reviews are an opinion. The point to the response is that most of the folks wo attended seem to dissagree with you. You sound like you are talking down to the audience. Your "overkill" is most other's fun rock concert. Maybe your standards are too high. Maybee mine are too low. Or maybe you've just forgotten that music, especialy rock music, is supposed to be fun. And the Wilco concert, if nothing else, was just that.
Will Stewart
Mon, Oct 19, 2009 : 3:26 p.m.
At the risk of fanning the flames too much, I'd like to weigh in with a few comments. First, to address Andy Ypsilanti's question: yes, I was at the concert. And by the way, that's the oldest criticism of a performance review in the book... I should also state that I'm a longtime Wilco fan. I've seen them at least a dozen times and they are one of the few first-generation "alt.country" bands that still hold my interest. I've interviewed Jeff Tweedy. I've interviewed John Stirrat and former-member Max Johnston is an old friend of mine. I like Wilco. I want to see them do well and I'll always be pulling for them. Now that we have that out of the way, I'd just like to point that a concert review is, by its very nature, a subjective thing. Some people are going to agree with it; others aren't. And that's how it should be. That's what opinions are. I'm only one voice and, obviously, I like to make it heard. But I also enjoy reading what other people think of my reviews. Suffice it to say that I try to be fair and balanced in my analysis and always make every attempt to hedge against being (or being perceived to be) mean spirited. Which brings me to my next point. Diversity of opinion is a great thing. One of the reasons why we publish concert reviews is to generate discussion among people who were at the shows. But just because you don't like someone's opinion -- mine or anyone else's -- doesn't mean they're dumb. It doesn't mean they have no musical taste. It doesn't mean their band stinks or that they have ugly shoes or that they aren't qualified to even listen to the same music you do. All it means is that they have a different opinion than you have. So let's keep the debate lively and vigorous. But let's keep it clean, too, okay? And by all means, if you see me at a show, come over and introduce yourself. There's nothing I'd rather talk about than music... even if it means defending my unpopular opinions.
discgolfgeek
Mon, Oct 19, 2009 : 1:49 p.m.
recordhound, you have no clue as to what I have listened or when I listened to it. You simply make assumptions from somewhere up on a high horse looking down on all the people who you perceive to have little or no musical taste. I am sure you know what's best for everybody. The bottom line, is the reviewer did not like the show nearly as much as I (and as he disdainfully pointed out, the rest of the audience) did and it appeared to be mainly because he didn't like that type of music. We can argue all day as to whether someone who doesn't like a certain type of music should be reviewing it -- I expressed my opinion on that, get over it.
recordhound
Mon, Oct 19, 2009 : 1:03 p.m.
Sorry discgolfdude. You didn't namecall but you suggested the reviewer needed to appreciate different kinds of music without having a clue about whats in his own record collection. I looked back a few weeks and found that Mr. Stewart reviewed everything from Edgefest shows to Ravi Shankar, to some hack band called Grizzly Bear (whoever they are), along with Wilco. Each of the reviews were interesting and insightful from my perspective. Also, I don't think I responded to the show I didn't attend. I responded to the boneheaded criticism of the review, followed by my own feelings about the progression of Wilco shows I have seen since the beginning. You are free to blindly love anything you want, but if you never even saw the band with Jay Bennett, let alone the original post-Uncle Tupelo lineup of the band...how informed can you really be?
A2 Nicko
Mon, Oct 19, 2009 : 10:57 a.m.
"Former Country-Rock band of modest abilities" describes your band - not Wilco. I saw Son Volt a couple of weeks ago and, though the show was good, my friends and I kept commenting on how the Son Volt show lead us to further admire the more evolved sound of current Wilco and their entire body of work. Instead of appreciating where they come from and what they have become, the reviewer gives us "polished to a fault." I challenge the reviewer to present me with a band that gives you more for your recession dollar than Wilco. My advice for the reviewer is to get a better night sleep before you go see them again.
Suki
Mon, Oct 19, 2009 : 10:32 a.m.
I'm not a reviewer because all I would be able to say after this show was it was fantastic, wonderful, great, etc. I've been to many Wilco shows and each one offers something different. Perhaps the comments on lacking energy related to the band playing some of their quieter songs, but from my vantage point, which was up close, they appeared to be full of energy and enjoying themselves more and more as the night went on. I've never seen them "phone it in" yet. I do agree with the comments on the sound in the auditorium. I was disappointed with it -- something was very off. I've been to many shows at Hill, including classical, rock, country and the Folk Festival, and it has never been this bad.
discgolfgeek
Mon, Oct 19, 2009 : 10:07 a.m.
Recordhound, why the namecalling? That just plain infantile. I disagreed with the review but I never called anybody any names. So you and the reviewer don't like the new Wilco stuff. We get it. Let's all go back to the good old days.
AndyYpsilanti
Sun, Oct 18, 2009 : 6 p.m.
Recordhound, so what you're saying is change is bad and bands should all stay just as they were when they started out, not striving to improve or further develop their sound and songwriting? That a band still capable of blasting out their older simpler catalog, must now be left for dead because they have become better instrumentalists? And how do you go about judging a review of a show you didn't attend? I started following Wilco just before Yankee-Hotel-Foxtrot. I've seen several shows with several configurations in a couple states. This show was great. Could they have done better? Maybe. Could they have played longer? Sure, but then, they could have played longer in Royal Oak, too. I didn't feel like Tweedy was insulting anyone in the crowd, he was making jokes based on how bands treat an audience ("last nights crowd always sucks at the next show")and I found it funny. Chris, a two plus hour show is not cutting it short, it's average. The show in Royal Oak was above and beyond. And yes folks, I know it sounds clich, but the availability of booze and the "looseness" of a show usualy have something to do with each other. My point is that this was a great rock'n'roll show. It could have been longer. It could have been higher energy. But it was still fantastic. And the fact that you don't like the new sound of a band has absolutly no influence on how good the show was. If you don't like the band any more, please just go hole up with AM and let the rest of us enjoy the new Wilco.
chris
Sat, Oct 17, 2009 : 7:57 p.m.
Tweedy and friends sounded great last night, but what a blow to cut the show off early and infer to the crowd several times the were "no royal oak" (a party atmosphere venue nearby location for their July show). I love these guys and they sounded great, but they seemed uninspired and disrespected a great, albeit mellower, crowd at this no-booze campus locale.
recordhound
Sat, Oct 17, 2009 : 6:58 p.m.
It's increasingly rare to read smart, informed criticism. If you want blind and gushing affirmation of your own narrow opinion, tweet it to your own stupid blog. While I don't always agree with his opinion, Will Stewart is easily the best arts critic the Ann Arbor News has featured in many years. I can't vouch for this particular Wilco show, cuz I skipped it. I have seen them many times, including their first Michigan shows at Repeat the Beat Records in Royal Oak, and the Pontiac House. I don't remember Beth W. or Discgolfdick at those shows. Anyone who thinks the slick, faceless Wilco of recent years is even close to the ragged but right, heart-on-their-sleeve band of old needs to get their hearing checked. Great review.
AndyYpsilanti
Sat, Oct 17, 2009 : 1:37 p.m.
I thought the opener was fun, though I only saw the last few songs. And clearly Wilco likes them, judging by the mini dance party that many of the band members had during their final number. Musical genius no. Fun, yes,
redtruck70
Sat, Oct 17, 2009 : 12:26 p.m.
This was a fantastic show, though I agree that the acoustics in Hill were a little sour where I was sitting...way up in the balcony..row K. But I love Wilco, and Jeff Tweedy exceeded my expectations with warm, humorous interaction with the audience. Part of Wilco's charm is the chaotic mix of sound that complement the harmony of Jeff Tweedy's vocals. Not overdone at all in my view. The opening act was pretty pathetic however. I would expect a band of Wilco's caliber to have a more substantial opener....Leslie Feist perhaps?? Getting to see Wilco was great....I can cross it off my bucket list.
AndyYpsilanti
Sat, Oct 17, 2009 : 10:01 a.m.
Wow, that's a pretty nit-picky review of a fantastic show. The sound was a little funky at times, but Hill is not really built to house high volume rock bands. How can you knock a show that was over two hours with no real set break and contained great readings of some of the band's best songs. They were dynamic and fun, and put on fantastic show. For style to overshadow substance, you would need a stage show, not a well rehearsed band practicing their craft with a minimum ligth show. A great band in a small room is all substance! That's the point of playing places like Hill! The songs were great, the banter was funny but minimal(Tweedy actualy talked to the audience members in front of him) and the pace about perfect. Back off the technical dress down (what's that they say about music critics?) and recognize a great rock'n'roll show! Oh, and you totaly neglected to mention he called out Matt Smith of Detroit Powerhouse OUTRAGEOUS CHERRY as being out in the audience. Tweedy sited Matt as an influence of his for years and offered to dedicate "a song or this whole set, whatever you want" to him and admonished the crowd to check out Matt's Music. Were you at the same show?
Beth W.
Sat, Oct 17, 2009 : 9:51 a.m.
Obviously this reviewer is stuck in some rut. Wilco are known for deconstructing their beautiful tunes, the tension, the harmony, the resolution, is about leaving room for the chaos, this is part of the message. Sheeesh, I couldn't write a review because I am way too biased. The Wilcos are one of the best signs that the music hasn't died. Great concert. The quiet parts of the music in Hill were so substantial it almost made me cry. The freak outs were just mind blowing. Nels Cline always adds a little something to his solos to let you know he's still searching. And Tweedy was funny and sweet all night, even foregoing the rote run off stage for the second encore so they could keep playing. Great night, great venue, great band. Let your photographer do the reviews in the future!
discgolfgeek
Sat, Oct 17, 2009 : 8:12 a.m.
Loved the show -- true, the sound wasn't perfect where I was (Row U Main Floor) but it mattered not, these guys were hot. "accomplish a lot more with a lot less"? Puleeeze, next time send someone to the show who can appreciate different styles of music.
Ryan J. Stanton
Sat, Oct 17, 2009 : 2:54 a.m.
All I can say is what a talented bunch of guys. I was up front and I have to say it was hands down the best concert I've ever been at. I talked to friends who were in the back and they said the sound levels were off. Not a problem up front, though. Maybe that's the difference between those who enjoyed it and those who didn't. It was a great showing of talent from six very versatile musicians. How many guitars were there on stage tonight? Maybe close to 20? Sheesh!