Originally Posted by TonyD
Well I'm saying that because of the intensity of their music. They might be able to do a 90-105 minute set here or there but there's no way in hell they could do more than 75 minutes night after night the way that they tour.
The nature of the internet gets us thinking in terms of black and white. It's great that Rush does 2 sets a night and that Zeppelin or GnR have done 3+ hour sets. But that's 2-3 hours of ebb and flow, light and shade, Welcome to the Jungle and Patience. Not 2-3 hours of PERMAGLAZE REFLECTS THIS WORLD DISTANT TO THE THAWED LIFE, FROST CLAN BLOWS THE WAR HORN WITHOUT A FEAR OR GUISE.
Asking for anything more is like complaining that Usain Bolt doesn't do marathons.
I can't speak for High on Fire, but I agree so damn much with this.
For example, I saw Roger Waters perform The Wall live. I think that was two 90 minute sets? Every second of that was amazing. On the flipside, I saw Rotten Sound last month and they played for barely 35 minutes. Every second of that was amazing. Had it been the other way around both would have sucked majorly (especially since they wouldn't be playing all of The Wall like they said they would, but you get my point
Unless they're one of my all-time favorites, the more intense a band is the less they should play. I mean, at some point the energy is going to take a nose dive and it just kind of kills the mood.