Jump to content

What are the greatest swindles of Rock And Roll for you?


Carmen Smalley

Recommended Posts

For me are

Paul Anka,Neil Sedaka,Fabian...The industry inventing teen idols to make parents and sons/daughter happy.

The Monkees.Although their songs were good.They invented the competivity of USA and UK based on false musicians

Tom Scholz-Although I like first album by Boston.He invented the using or no using of synths or real instruments on records,so a musician can say he uses real instruments and he probably doesn¥t use them.

Punk Vs Prog.A real stupidity.I¥m sure lots of punk musicians can really play and lots of prog musicians can¥t.

Soft AC Music.If you put a subliminal message on this sort of songs you¥ll really make people doing what you want.I¥m sure the machiavelic big bosses of the soft AC radio stations do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carmen,

I have to take issue here with three of the artists you mentioned:

1) You can't really lump Neil Sedaka in that group. He wrote some killer hook filled tunes in his day. He was so admired by other musicians that Elton helped him make a comeback in the '70's and 10cc were his backing band on his first comeback album.

2) The Monkees did start out as a manufactured band. But, after the first two albums they got fed up with Don Kirscner's control, got him fired from the project and started playing their own instruments on thier records as playing live.

Also, Nesmith and Tork were full fledged musicians before they even joined The Monkees.

3)Tom Scholz did and still does advertise the fact that he uses no synths on the albums, but Queen were doing this a full year before on "A Night at the Opera" (Check the liner notes)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Sholtz is an amazing musician not only a great songwriter/guitarist but a helluva keyboard player as well.I don't really see your point Carmen.I think that all he was trying to say is, thatthe awesome sound that he achieved on his album was done through hard work and great producing sklls and not synthesis.This certainly is no scam but rather wanting to be acknowledged appropriatly for his work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When that first Boston album came out and I heard "More than A Feeling" on the radio, I was blown away by the sound that Tom Scholz captured with his "Rockman" - something that I did not think was possible. Scholz is a very talented musician, a very shrewd businessman, and a brilliant engineer.

Marvin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had the exact same feeling Marvin.That song knocked me out.And to think some record exec threw there demo into the trash can with smokin and more than a feeling on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey,guys.I¥m only telling that since Boston said they didn¥t use synths in his records people started to say they didn¥t use synths either,but it was obviout they used them!(I¥m not talking about Boston,but the rest of the people who stole Tom Scholz¥s idea to say they used a really organic sound and then it was a lie!(I like Boston¥s first album too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To this day, Tom Scholz uses no synths. In the liner notes for "Walk on" He says for the sound effects such as wind in the trees etc. he went out and recorded the actual wind. I saw them live last summer and I can tell you there were no synths on that stage whatsoever! Also, to get that layered vocal effect they use 3 other vocalists besides Brad Delp.He can still hit those high notes, it was amazing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Poor4Life, I saw Boston last year too. At one point during the show Tom Scholz announced that it is really them making the music, no synths,

what you are hearing is the real thing, real

instruments. The crowd Cheered!

You are so right, Brad Delp is amazing ! I wanted to hear more!

Gina

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think CarmenSmalley has a valid point, although Neil Sedaka wasn't really in the same boat as Fabian, Frankie Avalon, Adam Faith, Billy Fury etc... And the Monkees music, despite the manufactured side of it, was and still is better than most "original" '60s garage/folk/punk bands. Mainly because the songwriters hired (i.e. Neil Diamond, Carole King, Harry Nilsson, Boyce & Hart, Jeff Barry) were very good. And the Monkees themsleves were talented and had memorable voices and personalities.

BOSTON's stance about "No Synthesizers" does deserve a small slam because, like Queen, it's acting as if the synthesizer was an afront to musical credability, which it isn't. In truth it would be more impressive if BOSTON or Queen could use synthesizers to their advantage (i.e. Roxy Music, Eno, David Bowie) not their detrement. They made it seem like a badge of honor that they created certain sounds with a guitar instead of a keyboard. Either way, it's a creative process, what a musician/artist does in the studio... what holds up is the music itself, not what instrument they use. It is "swindle" to think that bands who use guitars instead of sythesizers are better or more credible than those who use don't. Boston is a good pop/rock band who are a one trick pony and are THE MOST overplayed band on American classic rock radio. There are zillion others who are markedly better who will never be heard (i.e. Dwight Twilley Band, Raspberries [HELLO!], Artful Dodger) in such a way. THAT'S A SWINDLE!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Artful Dodger's music is nowhere to be found. Those of you who own the albums, how about making us some copies?

Pierson you are entitled to your opinion as to who is "markedly better" than who, and I'll agree that Dwight Twilley and the 'berries never received the radio recognition that they deserved, but saying that Boston is "THE MOST overplayed band on American classic rock radio" insinuates that they don't deserve the airplay that they get. Don't blame Boston for writing the kind of songs which connected to an audience right away in the 1970's and continue to be popular to this day. Radio programmers never gave the 'berries and Twilley a shot otherwise maybe we'd be hearing "Overnight Sensation" or "I'm On Fire" on Classic Rock stations instead of "More Than A Feeling." The 'berries and Twilley were in the wrong place at the wrong time with not enough support to persevere. Check the history of R'n'R and you'll find hundreds of other bands/artists who have a similar story to tell.

Marvin

p.s. Twilley is still recording and releasing music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

saying that Boston is "THE MOST overplayed band on American classic rock radio" insinuates that they don't deserve the airplay that they get. Don't blame Boston for writing the kind of songs which connected to an audience right away in the 1970's and continue to be popular to this day.

Marvin

MARVIN, I don't blame Boston. Still, they don't deserve the airplay. All one has to do is look at their record collections to see the disservice. I know that mega-selling albums of the '70s make up the core for classic rock radio, but stations and programmers have made adjustments. Bruce Springsteen and The Grateful Dead are two examples. Stations also have shifted the focus of Led Zep's IV album (which was almost pummeled to the point of uselessness between 1977 and say, 1990) to countless other key tracks from all of their albums.

Boston, unlike Twilley or Raspberries showed no artistic growth (hence the "marked" difference) and unlike Artful Dodger, they weren't that spectacular of a live band (to back the BIG rock record). And of course they had that dreaded facial hair not to mention the faceless image which paved the way for countless boring corporate rock bands.

Their debut album is strong and sounds great on the radio, but what it lacks is an ineffable magic and pure rock and roll heart which bands like Aerosmith and Cheap Trick had. They may rock hard, but there's a safe predictable air to it. They were devoid of danger, a sense of humor and a sense of artistic purpose which, almost all classic rock artist who are played as much have. That's why it feels like it's undeserving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marvin and Pierson are titans of Pop Music knowledge and opinions. It is a pleasure to be persuaded back and forth by both of you. Though Marvin loses a little credibility with certain Carmen related issue biases...

Why do all MY heated music discussions turn into girlfights? frown

Yes, I know Michelle...But sometimes even when I'm not wearing a dress...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pierson I accept your point of view and will agree that Boston had a certain corporate feel to them that left a bad taste in your mouth. I used to feel the same way about Journey, although I'll give Journey credit for writing some songs that were well constructed and do not sound dated.

Bob what's wrong with Brad Delp's name? Also, you've got to give me your pop opinion on Bill Lloyd.

Marvin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...