Winner and Still Champion: At the United Center, Arcade Fire Retains Its Title as the World’s Best Rock Band -- Chicago Concert Review

Concert Review

Arcade Fire
w/ opening act The Breeders
United Center, Chicago
October 30, 2017
@@@@@

With all the concerts I go to, plus dozens of theatrical performances, it could be easy--in theory--to regard Arcade Fire as just another show.

No big deal.

A random entry on a busy calendar.

And even in finding the Canadian ensemble outstanding once again—as I had in 2011 and 2014–coming among seeing such legends & heroes as Paul McCartney, Brian Wilson, Bob Dylan, Aretha Franklin, Paul Weller, U2, Metallica, Midnight Oil, Radiohead, Green Day, Billy Corgan, the late great Tom Petty and more, Monday's Arcade Fire gig at the UC couldn't have been all that significant, right?

Wrong.

This concert not only rocked and delighted from beginning to end, it mattered.

This isn’t just because Arcade Fire has great depth to its music and lyrics, pulled from all five of its
good-to-great albums, imaginatively put together a truly scintillating audiovisual blast or even that—at a time when all too few artists dare to speak out—lead singer Win Butler yelled, “Fuck Trump!” disregarding any career risks even as the band fails to sell as many tickets as it should. (My friend Paolo & I got upgraded to the 200-level upon arrival as much of the 300-level was closed, and I’ve repeatedly read about weak ticket sales in other markets.)

The truth is, as I see it, that Arcade Fire is simply the best rock band in the world right now, and it was important for me to bear witness to their live power remaining as blistering as ever.

...at a time when there are far too few modern rock acts I know and care about, and amid a stretch when several of my musical heroes have passed on. 

Now before you start picking on my dubbing them the World's Best Band, and get all “But what about...?,” I, of course, give them that title with some caveats, though none diminish how good I think they are.

With the Rolling Stones having played several concerts (in Europe) over just the past few weeks, Arcade Fire can’t be considered the Greatest Rock Band That Still Exists.

I last saw the Stones in 2015, and still love them live, but they, like most venerated veteran acts--e.g. The Who--can’t match Arcade Fire’s recorded output over the past dozen years. 

This too is why somewhat younger yet already legendary bands still putting out decent new music—Pearl Jam, Radiohead, Foo Fighters, Green Day, etc.—and still delivering outstanding concerts come up short as “The Best Current Rock Band.”

It's worth noting that the nine performing members of Arcade Fire make them more an ensemble than a band such as U2, with just its 4 original members, but though I still love Bono, Edge & co., their recent material doesn't much thrill.

I’m also not counting Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band as a band.

Or caring that Arcade Fire is a rock band whose sound of late is largely infused by dance.

For after beginning their show by walking—to a Michael Buffer-like introduction—into a boxing ring in the middle of the United Center, over the course of 2+ hours Arcade Fire retained their belt. 

And then some. 

Even with a much closer vantage point, the show didn’t seem quite as all-encompassing loud as at the same place in 2014, but from the opening “Everything Now”—the gleefully ABBAesque title track of the band’s new album—it was plenty thunderous. 

As the band, led by husband & wife Win Butler and Régine Chassagne, rampaged through "Signs of Life," "Rebellion (Lies)," "Here Comes the Night Time," and "No Cars Go," accompanied by dazzling lighting effects, the sonic force was so potent it almost felt dangerous.

As in if the pace kept up, something--my head, my heart, the roof, etc.--was bound to explode. 

So it was almost welcome—if not as viscerally thrilling—when a series of relatively slower songs ("Electric Blue," "Put Your Money on Me," "Neon Bible") quelled the pace a bit. 

But things were soon back to full-tilt, and though harder rocking tunes like "Ready to Start" and the set-closing "Neighborhood #3 (Power Out)" were inherently dynamic, the imaginative lighting displays--including those suggesting a boxing ring long after the real ropes had been removed from the stage--amped up everything else that was played.

So renditions of songs like "The Suburbs," the Chassagne-sung "Sprawl II (Mountains Beyond Mountains)," "Reflector" and the propulsive new "Creature Comfort" were also highlights on a night full of them, as part of what has been dubbed the Infinite Content tour.

I also appreciate that Arcade Fire mixes up their setlists a bit from city-to-city--see the Chicago setlist here--and was happy to hear "Intervention" and "We Used to Wait," which aren't constant staples.

Speaking of staples, I had just seen the legendary Mavis Staples open for Bob Dylan the previous Friday in Chicago--her hometown--and as she and Arcade Fire had collaborated on the single, "I Give You Power" earlier this year, I was hoping she was on hand to sing that song with them. But I'm guessing her tour commitments with the great Dylan precluded an appearance (and the song went unplayed).

But the closing "Wake Up" sent presumably everyone home to bed on a high note.

Everything phenomenal feels transcendentally so in the moment, but five days later--when I've found time to write a review after a busy week--this Arcade Fire show still feels like the best concert I've seen in 2017 (and there are 10 others I've given @@@@@).

For those who remain dubious--and probably weren't there--it has repeatedly been true that I have found Arcade Fire's power and prowess something you have to experience in person to truly appreciate.

Their live potency--which goes well beyond the songs to include the visuals, volume and even a bunch of cheeky graphics thematically mocking modern day materialism in the guise of the "Everything Now" brand--does not nearly translate on screen, even in concert videos.

The Breeders

So with tickets starting at just $25--and great seats remained at that price up through showtime--for, at the very least, one of the best bands in the world at the moment, it's a shame Arcade Fire came well short of filling the United Center.

Although rather sparse for a fine opening set--including the ever delectable "Cannonball"--from the Breeders (with Kim and Kelley Deal on hand; I wasn't sure if both sisters were still active), the crowd filled in enough to be far from embarrassing for the headliners.

But in 2014, Arcade Fire played two shows at the UC that if not quite sold out, were far closer to it.

Granted the band just headlined Lollapalooza here in early August, but articles about meager crowds elsewhere have seemed pretty common.

So as Arcade Fire is providing living proof that rock 'n roll--in the present tense, including both recording and touring--isn't yet dead, and actually still at times amazingly enthralling, it's a bit disheartening to note that nobody cares anymore.

Relatively speaking, of course.

Recognizing that the band's debut album, Funeral, garnered rave reviews upon its 2005 release and--though I liked it--I didn't get around to seeing the band until 2011, I fully understand being late to the party.

But if you're a rock 'n roll fan who grew up loving David Bowie, Bruce Springsteen, Talking Heads, U2, R.E.M., etc., and believe that the type of music you relish has passed you by as a live entertainment option from non-geezers, let me say this:

Literally a winner in the ring the other night, Arcade Fire proved they are still champion of what great rock 'n roll is all about.

Perfectly Incendiary: Arcade Fire Puts On A Faith-Rekindling Performance -- Concert Review

Concert Review

Arcade Fire
with The National
April 25, 2011
UIC Pavilion, Chicago
@@@@@

Throughout my life, I have attended almost 500 rock concerts. Most have been acutely enjoyable but among the ones that stand out as most distinctly memorable are those that represent the first time I saw some of my favorite artists.

For the enjoyment that any great show can provide is amplified when accompanied by the thrill of discovery upon first experiencing just how phenomenal--dare I say life-changing--a certain act can be on a concert stage.

I can still vividly recall the first time I saw Bruce Springsteen, R.E.M., U2 and Nirvana (actually the only time on that one). But with the pool of rock artists I really want to see for a "first time" having largely dwindled, in the past decade only initial concerts by Coldplay (who I've never liked as much since) and The Killers stand out as "Holy F*ck!" virgin musical moments (although LCD Soundsystem was also really good last October). 

So for reasons beyond simply having taken in a terrific show on Monday night, I am thrilled to add Arcade Fire to the list of acts that truly blew me away on a first exploration.

How good was their show--the third of three at Chicago's UIC Pavilion? Well, even semi-regular (and who isn't?) readers of this blog have probably picked up by now that even when I really like a performance, I usually have some quibbles. It is a very rare rock show when I don't gripe somewhat about the setlist or the show's length or the energy of the crowd or the acoustics in the venue or something. (OK, so the Pavilion's squashedtogetherseats were seemingly designed to fit small children, but I can't hold that against the band.)

Get ready to faint and start making snowballs in hell because I have absolutely no complaints with what I saw and heard from Arcade Fire, a band whose three albums I have liked more than loved, but who did what a great concert act should in elevating their recorded material in a live setting.

It was, quite simply, a perfect 97 minutes; all killer, no filler. And although the 8-member band played largely the same songs as the first two nights, they changed the sequencing and swapped in a couple different tunes--including "Empty Room," one of my favorites from their Grammy-winning album, The Suburbs--so we got our own show (and any repeat attendees got a different one). In the vein of Springsteen, Pearl Jam, Radiohead and other favorites, I like when bands do that, rather than follow the exact same script night after night. (Here's Monday's setlist, with easy access to all others).

And everything they played--led by lead singer Win Butler and his multi-instrumentalist & occasional vocalist wife, Régine Chassagne--sounded great, from the perfect opener, "Ready to Start" to a sublime "The Suburbs" to first-album, late-in-the-show powerhouses like "Neighborhood #3 (Power Out)" and "Wake Up."

Sure, Butler comes off a bit more intensely gracious than affably personable, but it's clear that this isn't a band from which one expects stage patter.

But when the music is this good, accompanied by some striking visuals, who needs it? Although opening act The National could themselves likely headline decent-sized theaters and were enjoyable in their hourlong set--even it was about twice as much as I needed--Arcade Fire was light years better than their relative contemporaries in the modern alt-rock strata.

By this point, I  imagine there are two types of readers of this article: those who have seen Arcade Fire and fully agree and those who haven't and remain skeptical. I don't blame anyone in the latter camp; I was there myself over the past 6 years and even through Sunday night when their concert broadcast on WXRT sounded good, but nothing all that transcendent.

And who knows, maybe Monday was a confluence of a great show and my needing to hear one. But after having been in a bit of a malaise lately, Arcade Fire's emotionally-charged, perfectly-paced performance was not only a treat for my eyes and ears; in reminding me of the redemptive power of rock 'n roll at its most potent, it was truly galvanizing for my soul as well.

As much as the first time can be phenomenal, looking forward to the next time isn't a bad feeling either.

Following Up on Arcade Fire's Album Sales

On Sunday, I posted a long piece praising Arcade Fire's new album, The Suburbs, while pontificating on whether they really seem destined--at least in the short term--for rock 'n' roll megastardom in the realm of U2, Radiohead, Coldplay and other groups to whom they've been compared.

I pointed out that hitting #1 on the Billboard charts in the first week out for their third album was an impressive feat for an indie band, but that the 156,000 copies sold was not all that earth-shattering for a record that was accompanied by lots of hype, press, rave reviews, a YouTube streaming event, a Lollapalooza headlining gig and deep discounts ($3.99 for an Amazon download, now upped to $7.99). And the first-week sales figures were well shy of those for comparable albums in the career progression of proven rock superstars like Radiohead and Coldplay.

In case, like me, you were curious how the album would do in its second week, Billboard reports that it fell to #2 on the charts while experiencing a precipitous drop in volume, selling 52,000 copies, or 1/3 of its first week tally. And in doing so, it saw a real music superstar [please] stand up, as Eminem's Recovery album recovered the #1 spot by selling 133,000 albums.

I haven't heard Recovery and have never been a big Eminem fan, but at a time when album sales are in steep decline and seemingly 8-10 years beyond his peak buzz, his success is really quite impressive. Yes, he's been a big star for quite awhile, but in just 8 weeks Recovery has sold 2.1 million copies, opening with 741,000 in the first week, never selling less than 100,000 in any week and topping the charts for 6 of the weeks.

I am also a bit surprised that in announcing a new string of U.S. dates (though unfortunately not one back through Chicago, as I'm still waiting to seem them live), Arcade Fire avoided basketball arenas in markets like St. Paul and especially Los Angeles. After selling out two dates at Madison Square Garden, I would have to imagine they could fill the Staples Center, or at least the L.A. Forum, but either they really aren't all that huge yet or they're trying to play down their popularity and stay more true to their roots. Or perhaps most likely, a little bit of both.

Either way, The Suburbs will really have to extend its sales sprawl around Christmas, and well beyond, to ever hope to reach the neighborhood of total sales achieved by the best-selling albums of previous alt-rock superstars.

Arcade Fire Burns (Relatively) Bright

Album Review and Artist Analysis

Arcade Fire
The Suburbs
@@@@1/2

In many respects, Arcade Fire seem to be poised on the precipice of--or may have already made the jump into--rock 'n' roll mega-stardom.

A level of popularity achieved by relatively few rock  acts, especially at a time when musical tastes are more fragmented than ever and mainstream success is often transient at best, it is defined by multi-platinum album sales and sold out arena shows, high-profile slots headlining major festivals and ultimately, for the biggest of the big, concert tours that fill football stadiums. More intangibly, it is about becoming seemingly ubiquitous in the modern zeitgeist, as likely to be playing on the iPhones of thirtysomethings on their way to work as displayed on t-shirts in high school hallways. And while mass success and critical favor are often mutually exclusive, or at least not achieved in unison, many of the acts who have reached the strata that Arcade Fire may now be entering--U2, Radiohead, Coldplay--have similarly enjoyed both respect and riches.

The Montreal-based band's excellent third album, The Suburbs, was preceded by a considerable amount of hype and dozens of rave reviews. The album currently has a composite Metacritic score of 86 that I feel is about right; I've been wavering between @@@@ and the @@@@1/2 that I awarded. It is an extremely accomplished album, and one that I've enjoyed listening to several times over the past two weeks, but perhaps akin to my infrequent revisiting of their first two albums, it may not be a work compelling enough to long remain in my regular rotation. It's quite good, but I don't think it's near the level of The Joshua Tree, Nevermind or Born to Run, although it can't fairly judged in those terms this soon.

I'll get back to some subjective commentary in a bit, but as evidence of Arcade Fire's escalation in popularity, within the same week that the new album was released, the band played two sold-out shows at New York City's famed Madison Square Garden--the second of which was streamed live on YouTube-- and according to friends, attracted a crowd on the closing Sunday night of Lollapalooza that was as big if not bigger than a reunited Soundgarden.

In its first week of release, The Suburbs went straight to number one on the Billboard charts, selling 156,000 copies in the United States. It was also #1 in Canada--not surprising for a Montreal-based band, although lead singer Win Butler and his guitarist brother Will's upbringing in the suburbs of Houston prompted the album's theme--and the United Kingdom, where the band just announced a December arena tour.

But while going to #1 is impressive for anyone, particularly a band that still officially qualifies as "indie"--it's signed to Merge Records--and it doesn't appear anyone will have to "pass the hat" for Arcade Fire anytime soon, a closer look at the sales figures shows that the band may not be quite so mega just yet, and that perhaps as a corollary, "mainstream popularity" may largely be a pinnacle of the past for modern artists of a rock ilk (still my personal preference).

Keeping in mind that album sales are not the only barometer of popularity, and that until now Arcade Fire has been bigger in terms of press and buzz than in units shipped or downloaded--their first two albums have sold only 1 million copies combined--the reality is that 156,000 in first week sales is 7,000 copies short of the preceding week's #1 debut by Avenged Sevenfold, an album that didn't received the type of adoring press that preceded The Suburbs. It it also only about 20% of 2010's top first week sales leader, Eminem's Recovery, which sold 741,000 (it has eclipsed 2 million in 8 weeks and per some reports, is likely to overtake Arcade Fire this week by a 3-to-1 margin).

Against the "break really, really big" album of other bands seemingly at similar points in their careers, The Suburbs also comes up somewhat surprisingly short in initial week sales. Coldplay's X&Y, likewise their third album, sold 737,000 week one copies in the U.S. The Killers' second album, Sam's Town, sold 315,000 and though their next one, Day & Age only debuted at #6, it sold 193,000 copies in week one. Radiohead's Kid A, which followed OK Computer but was relatively experimental, sold 210,000 units in the U.S. in its first week, and back in 1995, The Smashing Pumpkins double CD set, Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness, opened with 246,000 albums sold.

Certainly, times are different than they were even a few years ago. In a recent Time magazine article, Pitchfork.com editor Scott Plagenhoef is quoted as saying, "There isn't really such a thing as mainstream rock anymore." The same article reveals that in 2009, only 11 artists released new albums that received a platinum certification (representing 1 million albums sold) from the Recording Industry Association of America; as recently as 2006, there were 56. It also states that whereas 50,000 albums were released in the U.S. in 2005, that number had risen to nearly 100,000 in 2009.

But though it would seemingly be easy to say that the segmentation of today's music purchasers--coupled with the increased prominence of people buying only single songs from iTunes and a good number undoubtedly still downloading music for free--readily explains the relatively low sales burst for The Suburbs, the album also benefited a great deal from modern technology, including an Amazon promotion offering digital downloads for $3.99. Nielsen SoundScan reveals that 62 percent, or 97,000 copies, of Suburbs sales came from digital purchases.

Also, though few purveyors of the lyrical, guitar-driven rock that I most relish have established, built and maintained mainstream American relevance in the '00s--to varying degrees of success and personal preference, I think only Coldplay, The Killers, The White Stripes, Kings of Leon and Muse really qualify; album & concert sales show Nickelback to be rather huge, but I've never heard a single person, whether friend or critic, who claims to like them--acts like Lady Gaga, Taylor Swift and the Black Eyed Peas have clearly broken through to mega-stardom. And beyond Eminem's huge sales, artists as disparate as rapper Drake and country band Lady Antebellum have sold over 450,000 albums in their first week out over the past few months. Album sales may be way down, but some acts still sell them in bunches. 

I'm not saying any of this should be held against Arcade Fire. Although I don't yet consider them a historically great band--I didn't include them in a recent ranking of My 100 All-Time Favorite Artists of Popular Music--and probably don't like any of their three albums quite as much as many others do, I consider them not only one of the best of today's bands, but probably the one on the biggest upswing. Unlike years back, not many artists build from one album to the next the way Arcade Fire has; most get some pub for a critical lauded album in a given year, but don't manage to maintain popular interest (or particularly my own) one or two more records down the road.

In terms of looking forward to seeing them live--I never have, other than the recent YouTube stream--, anticipating future albums and following their ascent to super-stardom, no matter how high or low its apex, The Arcade Fire excite me more than The National, MGMT, Phoenix, LCD Soundsystem, The Hold Steady, Death Cab for Cutie or other relatively recent quasi-rock acts that have garnered some acclaim and popularity (and these are among those that I somewhat like). I don't think they're as good as The Killers, in terms of the best bands of current vintage, and I even prefer some smaller acts that I've heard out of England (this year, the Len Price 3; Maximo Park over the last five).

So I suggest you give The Suburbs a listen; if you don't want to buy it you can hear it in full on MySpace Music. It probably won't be the best album you've ever heard; at an hour in length it can drag in spots, and even after listening while reading through the lyrics, any great profundity about growing up in the suburbs is largely lost on me (although "We Used To Wait" makes an observational statement that I endorse). But especially if you give it some time, you may agree that it's one of few new things in a rock 'n' roll vein worth tapping into.

And that's saying something, for if one looks at the chart at left, of the top concert tours of the first half of 2010, not only is it largely devoid of any new rock acts (except Muse), one really has to wonder who will be filling arenas 10 years from now. Maybe it will be Arcade Fire, but even that seems like an uncertain bet.

(The video below is Ready To Start, my pick as the best song on The Suburbs, taken from the recent concert streamed from New York, where it opened the show.)