Did Frankie Take the Wrong Approach?

Back on August 5th, Allyson published a post about Frankie Banali of Quiet Riot, and his online campaign seeking to raise funds to produce a Quiet Riot documentary. From what I can tell, his efforts were successful, as he appears to have raised $23,691, and the fund raising goal was $20,000. I kept my opinions to myself when the fund raising efforts were underway, as I did not want my personal opinion to sway anyone's decision to donate their money toward this project. However, now that the campaign has ended and Frankie has the funds he needs, I feel free to voice my dissatisfaction with this entire concept. To me, this campaign reeks of a band member taking advantage of the fans. If Frankie wants to make a biography of his life and his band, then let him go about it though the conventional methods (i.e. self-funded or get financial backing elsewhere, but not from the fans). To me, it seems to be the height of arrogance to think that you are so important that your fans - those who made you famous - should pay you to make a movie about yourself. Without the presence of the fans, no one would be interested in this documentary. These are the people who, over the years, spent money on your albums, concert tickets, merchandise, etc. They made you famous. If anything, this movie should be a way in which you say "thank you" to those that made you successful, and not as another avenue to get them to contribute funds to your band. And then, even after the movie has been produced, those fans who donated less than $50 would still have to pay to buy the film that they helped fund, as their donations did not even include a copy of the documentary. Quite honestly, I was offended that such an idea would even be suggested.

I am not saying those who donated money were wrong or that they should not have done so, and I am also not saying that I would not be interested in a Quiet Riot documentary. I am just getting so tired of the constant cash grabs that bands keep making these days. It is almost as if fans are seen by some bands as banks from which they can make withdrawals whenever a whim strikes them. Perhaps, as I get older, I just get more cynical, but it seems that all too often bands that I have always admired are constantly looking for handouts from their fans. By supporting them for so many years, I feel as though I have already given plenty and do not appreciate being asked for more.

The Wrong Path for Jetboy?

The news has been circulating for a while now, but for those that are unaware, Mickey Finn has left Jetboy. Based on online reports, Mickey was unwilling to go forward with the European tour that Jetboy is currently on, "discussions" were had between Mickey and the other founding members, Fernie Rod and Billy Rowe, which ultimately led to Mickey quitting the band and Jetboy making the decision to carry on with the tour with a replacement singer, D.K. Revelle (formerly of Beggars Ball).

This news was shocking and disappointing to me. Jetboy never achieved the level of commercial success that I always thought they were capable of, but I do admire how they continued to move forward as a band, even though the demand for new music from them was not great.

The first time I saw Jetboy, I was 16 years old (I'm 35 now), when they were a support act on the Vixen "Rev It Up" tour, along with the Electric Boys. This is one of my favorite concerts from my youth, as it was just an amazing show by all three bands. The next time I saw Jetboy was this past summer at M3, and I was front and center when they took the stage around noon. Almost 20 years later, and the band was still amazing. The classic songs sounded great, and the new material was fresh and they seemed to be getting a great crowd response (from those that were there early).

To be honest, I am not sure how to take the news of the new singer. I watched the YouTube videos of the band with the new singer, and while he sounds alright, he just is not Mickey. I think - if Jetboy came nearby - I would still go see the show, but I think this is a move that is ultimately going to drive many of the remaining fans away. This is a band that I am pulling for, but just do not see this working out well for the band. Am I way off base or do you all agree?

Check out D.K. here

Bands That Defeat the Sophomore Slump

A few weeks ago, I was driving along in my car, and I was scrolling through my MP3 player (not an iPod, but rather a Creative Zen X-fi2, as I did not want to buy into the iPod marketing campaign), and I decided upon Hellacious Acres by Dangerous Toys...which was an awesome choice. Listening to this album got me thinking about how, in my opinion, Dangerous Toys totally overcame the "sophomore slump" that many bands suffer when they put out their second album. The theory is that most bands have years to craft the 10 - 14 songs that make up their first album, so they put forth their best possible effort on that album, and then the follow-up album (the "sophomore" album) is lackluster compared to the first, as it is rushed and the band just does not have the material. Hellacious Acres is just an amazing rock album, and I think is actually a better effort than the self-titled debut.

Unfortunately, Dangerous Toys never reached the level of popularity with any of their follow-up albums than they did with their debut, so the tragedy is that many fans of the first album are probably not aware of how great the second album was. So this got me thinking of how many great sophomore albums are out there that I am not aware of. Two more that I can think of, off the top of my head, are Sixes, Sevens & Nines by Junkyard and Freakshow by the BulletBoys.

So what else is out there that I may be missing? What overlooked sophomore albums are out there that actually blow away the debut album, but never got the recognition they deserve? I have a long drive back and forth to work, so any new suggestions are definitely appreciated!

KISS Still Delivers A Rock 'n' Roll Show Like No One Else

Back on August 1st, I wrote a column about KISS and my decision to purchase tickets to the August 7th show in Mansfield, Massachusetts. I feel it is proper, as a follow-up, to provide my review of the show.

Bottom line, KISS is still an amazing live show!

I timed my arrival at the venue (the Comcast Center) just right, as I arrived just as the last opening band was finishing their set, so I can offer no opinion on either "Envy" or "The Academy Is." I grabbed two beers for a mere $23.00 (one for me and one for my wife) and went off to find our seats, which were dead center in the middle of the pavilion, about 10 rows behind Paul Stanley's 'small stage.' My wife is not really a fan of the band, so I was explaining all of the nuances that KISS fans expect from the show. For example, all fans know to start paying attention when they hear "The Who" over the P.A., because the curtain is about to drop...and believe it or not, when it drops (even though you are expecting it), you still get goose bumps. Minutes after the curtain drops, the lights go dim and you hear the famous introduction. However, apparently no one informed the announcer where they were that day because we got, "Alright....[uncomfortable pause]....ALL. You wanted the best, you got the best..." I found humor in the error.

KISS doesn't just take the stage, they own it. They hit all the high spots that would be expected. Synchronized moves during "Let Me Go, Rock 'n' Roll" and "Deuce;" blood spitting, fire breathing, levitating drum set, Gene Simmons flying to the rafters, Paul Stanley flying into the audience, guitars shooting rockets and of course insane pyrotechnics and confetti. No one can deny that a KISS show is truly a visual spectacle. As for the set list, it was a varied mix that covered their entire career, including "Lick it Up" and "Crazy, Crazy Nights" (from the non-make-up era). They did three songs from Sonic Boom, but to be honest, two would have been enough, as "I'm an Animal" went over like a lead balloon. No matter though, as I left the concert satisfied in my decision to attend and thinking it was well worth the cost of the tickets and the drive to the show.

Now, the most discussed KISS issue these days is the presence of Eric Singer and Tommy Thayer in the band (both performing in the make-up and costumes of Peter Criss and Ace Frehley, respectively). I have to admit that I was one of the many that thought it tarnished the legacy of the band to have replacement members in the make-up of the originals. However, Paul Stanley recently summed up the situation in such a way that I no longer object to what KISS is doing (and unfortunately, it was broadcast during that awful KISSteria special). Paul essentially said that Tommy and Eric are, in some ways, more important to the band right now than Peter and Ace, because they have the ability to recreate the shows from the earlier days that the fans are still expecting to see when they attend a KISS concert. Paul is 100% correct. I am sorry to say, but I do not think that Ace and Peter could deliver a show like the one I just saw.

As for Paul and Gene, both put on amazing performances, and in particular, Gene was a highlight for me. Gene still has his 'character' down, and plays the part perfectly. I remember noting that at several points during the show, he was making facial expressions and moving in the exact same way as he did back in the 70s, and his voice sounded as strong as ever. However, when it comes to Paul, everyone in the venue could tell he is having great difficulty in singing his songs. His voice is clearly strained. Even when he was addressing the crowd in-between songs (in his ever so annoying, but lovable manner..."People...I know that you love Rock 'n' Roll..." etc.), his voice was cracking and he was struggling. It reminded me of the Cinderella tour a few years back when Tom Keifer was having vocal difficulties. Nonetheless, just like Tom, Paul did not let his problems slow the show at all, and I give him all the credit in the world for doing everything he could to deliver an amazing performance. For a show like I saw that night, I will look past the minor flaws. Unfortunately, though, I think Paul may be nearing the end of the line with KISS. He has been alluding to this possibility in interviews as of late, so I think he may be packing it up sooner than many of us would care to see or expect...but hopefully I am wrong.

Finally, the last thing that really stood out to me was the crowd, and more specifically, how many kids were there. Just in my immediate area, I must have seen about 15 or 20 kids there with their parents. If my girls were a little bit older, I would have had them there with me as well. It was just a great sight to see so many kids enjoying a rock 'n' roll show.

So all the haters can say what they want about KISS, when it comes to putting on a rock show...they are untouchable.

A Sucker Born Every Minute?

Have you ever made one of those decisions that is so completely opposite of every common sense instinct your body is telling you? I just made one of those the other day and I am still not totally able to justify my choice.

Here's the deal...I watched the recent KISSteria special on A&E, and I was appalled at what I saw. What was advertised as essentially being a one hour documentary of the KISS tour of Australia was nothing more than a scripted performance based on a concept so ridiculous that any notion of reality was lost. The premise of the show was that Gene and Paul were talking one night in Paul's kitchen, and they made a spur of the moment decision that KISS should perform in Australia the next week, and then it showed them working with their manager to pull it all together and make it happen. The very notion was so unbelievable and poorly scripted that I was almost embarrassed for the band as I was watching it. It was an insult to the intelligence of the viewing audience.

Please know that I am a huge fan of KISS. I have been for 22 years. I actually stood in line for 9 hours (in on-again-off-again rain) in New York City to get a picture with the band in full make-up (see picture above which they took before I turned to look forward, but just before it was taken, Gene and I were nose-to-nose with our tongues out...a surreal moment for me). However, lately, it has become more difficult to be fan. The television shows, the obscene amounts of merchandise, the Dr. Pepper commercials are all so cheesy, that even I have to look away. But, then they will redeem themselves with a quality album (Sonic Boom) and the amazing KISSology dvds that they have released. So, as a fan, I am constantly torn between loving them and hating them.

Now, to the inexplicable decision. I finished watching the KISSteria special and was repulsed at what I had just seen, but then I went online and bought a pair of tickets to their August 7th show in Massachusetts. The bottom line was, even as hokey as the show was, the clips of the live performance sold me on going to see them once again. I just could not pass on the opportunity to see their live show again.

So who watched the KISSteria special, and who liked it or hated it? Would it influence your decision to go see KISS live? And more importantly, who was a fan, but has backed off of the band in recent years due to the over exposure and merchandising of the name?

A Hot Night with Dream Theater

On July 10, 2010, the Dream Theater tour came to the Palladium in Worcester, Massachusetts with Charred Walls of the Damned and Don Jamieson opening.  Now, I am not a big Dream Theater fan, but since I was home in Connecticut and my wife and kids were visiting family in California, I decided to join my friends and go to the show.  Now, please do not misunderstand my statement regarding Dream Theater...I certainly appreciate their ability as musicians, and considering I am a drummer, watching the phenom known as Mike Portnoy was intriguing, but I just would not call myself a "fan." I had seen Dream Theater in Hartford years ago, but walked out half way through their set, as the sound was terrible at the club and it destroyed the ability to fully appreciate what they were doing as musicians.  I was hoping for better this time.

 

My review here on BBG! is more a review of the venue than the show, as that is what stood out to me most at the end of the night. The Palladium is a large, general admission venue (probably about 2500 total capacity), with a tiered main floor and a balcony above. By the time I made my way in (we had a few beers across the street beforehand and hung out with Don Jamieson for a while at the bar), the place was packed. Make no mistake about it...the "music nerds" come out of the woodwork for Dream Theater.  I would estimate that the show was close to a sell out (as there was plenty of room on the balcony). So, in a word, here is my review...HOT!  Upon entering the venue, I went down to the floor where it was overcrowded and about 20 degrees hotter than it was in the lobby. It was so crowded and uncomfortable, that I decided to check out the balcony, but since heat rises, it was just as hot up there. I stayed up there for Don Jamieson's act and the first couple of CWOTD songs, but then could not stand the heat any longer, so I went back to the floor.  I suffered through the rest of the CWOTD set on the floor, and then waited for Dream Theatre to take the stage. Here is where the story gets sad. I could only stand the heat through about four songs and then made the decision to duck out the show and go back to the bar across the street to wait for my friends. Honestly, at this stage in my life, I am not inclined to be completely uncomfortable and miserable just because I paid for a ticket.

 

I left completely baffled, as I do not understand why the Palladium would not keep their venue at a tolerable temperature. It was perhaps the worst concert experience of my life, and I am not inclined to ever return to that venue (unless it is a show I NEED to see and would willingly suffer through the heat).  Bottom line, I have now walked out on two Dream Theater shows.  I do not think I will ever witness a full set, which is a shame, because they were putting on a great show.

 

So my brief show "review" is as follows:  Don Jamieson was funny and is a great guy; CWOTD was not very memorable and their songs were average (and I am a huge Stern fan, so I was looking forward to watching Christy drum); and Dream Theater were technically amazing and were putting on a great show.

 

The silver lining of leaving the show early was that I went back across to the street to the bar I was at earlier that day, and stumbled upon a cover band playing. While the majority of the band was good, there was one player who was exceptional.  The band is called "Under the Coverz" and their guitar-player (Darlene) was phenomenal. I spent the rest of my night in Worcester amazed by her ability to both shred on the guitar and to nail the songs on which she was singing lead. 

 

So am I just being too much of a wuss, leaving a show because it was too hot? Have you done the same thing?

Poison - Thieves or Geniuses?

Sometimes, you hear or read stories that just seem a little to absurd to be true. You hear the same tale told time and time again, and it seems as if it is more folklore than fact.

For years, I have read various people online state that "Poison stole their stage show from Kix." To be honest, I never quite believed it, but the story was that Poison used to open for Kix before relocating to Los Angeles, and that when they moved, they essentially incorporated the Kix stage show into their own. It seemed a little bit too much of a stretch for me. I mean, a stage show is a stage show, as far as I was concerned, and I just thought that some bands put more energy into their shows than others. But then something happened last month...I saw Kix live.

I had never seen Kix live before, but they were on the M3 bill, and based upon all the hype I had heard about their live performances, I made sure I was in my seat when they started. I was amazed at what I saw! From the choreographed moves placed perfectly into the songs, to the funky walk that Steve Whiteman does across the stage, to the confetti-filled balloons at the end of the show... I felt like I was watching the "I Want Action" video, but with a different song playing! The resemblance was uncanny and it really made me wonder if the stories I have read over the past few years were just stories... or if there was some fact behind them.

I cannot expressly say this is true, but would it shock anyone to think that the guys in Poison are not 100% creative geniuses? I do give Poison credit, as they are (and were) extremely hard workers and they do put on a great show. Poison made it big and they continue to force some form of relevance in today's changed music scene. That said, I cannot get the recurring thought out of my head, "Did Poison become successful musicians based upon someone else's tried and tested stage show?"

Do any readers know more about this, or have I just been too influenced on random online posts by misinformed people? Help a brother out and leave a comment.

Kix, live in 1989

Poison live in 1991