Message #320

[Hourman]

Poem:

They were that hard rocking ballad band, which worked until Chicago Twenty-1... then tastes abruptly changed on radio, and Chicago was unable to adapt to the change -mainly because of management and the desires of the record label.

I'm sure you've read the interviews where the band complained about being driven out of their niche by younger, newer artists (who have since fallen by the wayside as well).

I think the biggest weakness was that Chicago's primary songwriters were coming up empty, or if they had anything, management/the decision makers thought it wasn't any good.

I know a lot of fans like Stone of Sisyphus, but I'm not one of them. I thought it had some promise -and it does have some good stuff on it- but to me it sounds like what someone does after they have just come out of rehab. It's a step back to normalcy, (so that effort should be applauded) but they still are a mess, and fall back into a lot of their old tricks (Here With Me/Candle For The Dark). Songs like "Gimmie Gimmie" and "Intensity" are much more of Chicago's sound  "clean and sober".

When I listen to SOS, David Foster's quote keeps coming to mind regarding the band c.1980: "I'm listening to them play, and the music is incredible... but the songs aren't any good."