hmm... you're the first person i've heard from that didn't think the show was amazing...

they actually changed up their songs quite a bit if you'd listen more closely (they added onto a number of songs, including the Cyndi Lauper and LCD Soundsystem tags on Windowsill)

i've seen them 13 times now and didn't find the "awkward pauses" between songs that long or distracting whatsoever. they were at most like a minute. it's not like they're changing instruments just for the sake of it, they change instruments when it's needed.

also, i'm pretty sure Win said "Drive Safe" after Wake Up, the last song of the night... but even if he didn't, what's wrong with saying that?

kj, some clarifications:

I disagree that they changed their songs that much. Obviously they're not going to play ninety minutes note-for-note, beat-for-beat exactly the same as they have before. What I'm referring to are those enticing-an-audience-call-back, steam-roll-over-the-original-arrangement-and-bring-it-back moments you expect from a bigtime show like this.

And of course there's nothing wrong with saying "drive safely" to your audience. The part that was odd was saying "bye" and then playing some more.

if Win did say "drive safely, bye" before Wake Up, as you say (like i said, my friend and I recall it being after Wake Up), i'd say it was more as a send off and the fact that he didn't want to say it or anything after the final song. just my thought.

as for changing it up, there weren't as many extended singalongs as the Red Rocks show, no, but i didn't find the crowd as loud as that show either (they were more energetic however).

i guess that's valid if you found it to not really change it up enough for you, i just don't hear it is all. they didn't even have horns on the first album, so those parts alone change the dynamic of the Funeral songs quite a bit. as for those moments you described, they do them sometimes (trust me on that), but only when they're feeling it. if they were to do it every night it would feel scripted, like a U2 show.

just a bit surprised is all. i don't expect everyone to gush (although everyone i talked to after the show and this morning were gushing, despite the usually crap venue and sound), but just didn't really find the 2 sticking points you chose to single out as an issue or distraction personally.

Hmmm the only reason I can think of that would make you feel like the gaps were too long is that you have a short attention span. I'm sorry I don't like being rude. But thats the first time I've ever heard that. Well, I wouldn't mind if there were no gaps but that would mean everyone has to play the same instrument. And thats even worse than the gaps! Again, I don't want to be rude, but next time listen a little closer to the band's music if you're going to be criticising their show the next day. Oh, and I think Win did say "bye" before Wake Up. If he did thats kind of a weird thing to complain about. Anyway, carry on. I can tell you're at least positive about the group itself but like kj originally brought out, those 2 points aren't exactly valid (other than being your own opinion of course!).

it's pretty common for artists to say "bye" or "goodnight" before the final song. what a silly thing for a reviewer to get hung up on.

also, many of Arcade Fire's live arrangements are quite different from the album recordings.

i don't even think she is using the word "arrangements" correctly. sounds like she's asking for improvised song breaks.

I'm completely shocked at this review as well. We went to see LCD Soundsystem and just decided to stay for "a few" Arcade songs. We thought they totally brought the house! We stayed for the whole show and were very impressed. Not being that familiar with their albums, I can't comment on the note-for-note observation, but I do know that the experience of seeing them live is completely different from hearing their songs on a stereo. In fact, I can't think of a band that I would more highly recommend seeing in concert after seeing them on Sunday. It was more visual, kinetic, and musical energy than I've experienced at any other show ever. I guess critics are supposed to find things to be critical about and it's hard to feel transcendent when you're in critic mode.

i was at this show and agree with the reviewer that this band is inherently more powerful in smaller, better-sounding rooms where they connect more personally to an audience. they aren't on the level of a U2 or flaming lips yet as far as big conceptual concerts. those bands have developed the ability to connect with huge audiences in a way that a.f. is obviously still working on. i recently read an article on them where the drummer explicitly mentions the difficult transition its been for them to play large halls as opposed to multiple nights in smaller rooms. the roy wilkins auditorium is a notoriously horrible-sounding venue and nuanced-based music like a.f.'s suffers under those circumstances. there were moments where it seemed win butler wanted to break through the wall dividing the fans from the band but obviously couldn't and it was awkward. i believe the reviewer gave props when called for and stated a few important points that even rabid fans when giving pause can discuss less defensively. how does a band make the transition from 1,000-seat rooms to 4,000-seat rooms? it takes a lot of thought and control over aesthetic. tom waits for example won't play rooms bigger than 2,000 seats for the most part based on his inability to feel connected to larger crowds. he takes a financial loss in the name of aesthetic control. something arcade fire might want to consider. thanks for your insight megan. i can tell you are a supporter of arcade fire and also someone who doesn't let sycophantic blindness affect your critical eye. bravo.