[face of glass]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Perhaps you'd care to share what this so-called reputation is?

“Reputation” was a wrong word there. I’ve just been reading these boards for a year now and you’ve never seemed like the friendliest guy on the planet to me. But I guess it’s my problem mostly; one may get along with 99% of the people in the universe just fine but then there’s always that particular one percent. No offense meant with any of this, though. I’m not the friendliest person around when it comes to it either.

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
I would have rather seen them plug "Big Love" back in, and unplug "Gypsy."

I agree. It is the song they play before the acoustic set anyway, so why not?

Originally posted by fleetfootmike
I think most folks' reaction when he first did it was... slightly hysterical laughter (if you were a guitarist).

FleetfootMike, I’m not a guitarist myself so could you specify this for me, please? Does it violate the “finger-picking laws” or something like that?

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
Similar sentiments have been expressed in regards to just about every song in the current setlist, and "Big Love" isn't immune to that.

I agree with everything in your post, except that I beg to differ somewhat on this particular bit. “Big Love” as an acoustic number irks me the most in the set list at this point. I guess it’s mainly because that number was one of the first things I heard from this band. The impact was such that I had to throw all my preconceptions of FM being a washed-out ‘70s soft-rock mafia away. At that point I had become weary of the current music scene, of how it was supposedly “innovating” all the time, when I felt like it was largely recycling the ideas of the past. The acoustic “Big Love” hit me like a thunderbolt; here was a relatively new approach that had all the intensity and fire I could ever hope for.

During The Dance Lindsey presented the acoustic version as a new thing; he wanted to show all those thousands of people who didn’t buy Out Of The Cradle that he hadn’t been laying low, that he had something new to say. That’s why featuring that song (and “Go Insane”) as a solo thing was important; he basically lifted his middle finger in the air to those who had ignored him; he showed that he may be doing the same old songs with FM but as a solo act he was trying to do something new.

When he now does it, it doesn’t have the same impact. So that’s where my problem is; this number that was supposed to be “something new” has now become "something old". He may have taken the finger-picking to almost ridiculous extremes with Gift Of Screws material but the fact that he is still playing this old arrangement shows that he really isn’t willing to show people his “progress” any longer. It is now a nostalgia piece, just like most others in the set.

So basically it’s just an ideological question; the tune is the same masterpiece it’s ever been but I liked it better when it represented "something new", not "something old".