"Talking about music is like dancing about architecture" - Frank Zappa or Elvis Costello
Dancing About Architecture
July 20, 2018, 01:28:55 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to SMF For Free
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

80's radio's influence on music

Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
  Print  
Author Topic: 80's radio's influence on music  (Read 4213 times)
Hourman
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 58


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: August 03, 2010, 09:46:34 am »

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."
Report Spam   Logged
Poem58
Administrator
Jr. Member
*****
Posts: 64



View Profile
« Reply #46 on: August 03, 2010, 02:11:58 pm »

Except you said they were the hard rocking ballad band. Which in my mind was part of the problem. They were more ballad than hard rocking and we blame radio for this, except radio was playing hard rock. Chicago wasn't. They had the capability, of course to play and be more. Except most of the hard rocking was watered down as compared to the early days and the ballads are the only song to really feel they were given any TLC. SOS just goes to show that when left to their own devices, they just no longer had that magic, likely due to letting others control them so long.

So yeah it seems we are all pretty much in agreement. even if we look at them slightly different as to why, and with that we are all speculating based on observations so we are all likely correct. To me it was their giving in to what others wanted that gave them the success of 17, but completely destroyed the very foundation of what the were, not what they were capable of, but what they became. Pride, desire for money and fame, whatever it was redirected their desires.
Maybe Terry's death as Robert stated was the end of Chicago. Maybe it would have been best for them to change the name, as it seems clear now that no matter what they were nothing of the former band, they weren't the rock band with horns, but the ballad band that could still rock, and sometimes horns, but usually only on ballads or whatever. The innovation of Roberts writing was gone and sadly now that it looks like he has it back, there's still no Chicago willing to play it.

Walt said at one point it was like they could fart on record and it would be a hit, after awhile it seemed they were so desperate for a hit, they would do anything including selling their soul to do it, now it seems they have no desire to do anything because they can't have a hit. It seems like every decision they have made since Terry departed, is the we need to go right, so go left! kinda thing. That is what I believe had truly hurt the band the most. they like to blame the ballads for messing them up, but in those 15 wasted years they could have done whatever they wanted...and nothing. Like I've said before, they are now selling soundboard songs for $2 a pop, what is keeping them from pulling a HIP and making some songs they feel is what they want and having Keith mix em on his Laptop and sell them? Nothing but desire, in my book. gotta be a radio hit attempt or they don't bother? Seems they just say what they think we want to hear, and after so long even they buy into it.
Report Spam   Logged
Saxman
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 81


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: August 03, 2010, 05:48:18 pm »

Even Lamm now buys into "the concert crowd wants only the hits, we only program the hits, why make new band music unless it's another Xmas album which will be a hit?"

No it won't.  Even Kenny G finally stopped making Xmas albums after the third one totally bombed. A band has maybe one big Xmas hit album in it and that's it.  WIGBS didn't sell beans compared to XXV, because it was merely XXV with a few more tracks and yet ANOTHER holiday album. Loreena McKennitt did the same thing and expanded her second Xmas recording and that tanked, too.  I doubt this new Xmas album will sell at all.

SOS: a few nice moments, mostly more of the same 80s production with the horns a bit more to the fore.  Even that "back to basics" release is weighed down with the sappy ballads "Bigger Than Elvis," "Let's Take a Lifetime" and "Here With Me."  So much for hard rocking.  A laughable attempt at rap by Lamm ("Sleeping in the Middle of the Bed"), a couple of decent Champlin tunes and yeah, again, as Foster said, for the most part, the songs aren't any good.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2010, 06:57:04 pm by Saxman » Report Spam   Logged
Poem58
Administrator
Jr. Member
*****
Posts: 64



View Profile
« Reply #48 on: August 04, 2010, 10:36:47 am »

I must also say that in general I did like SOS. Maybe more so due to the fact that while the songs lacked that slick polished feel of the Foster Era, there was some raw, risky and down right odd stuff to that album. While it never made me think of the original band, I did think this was a unique attempt to be what that band currently was, right down to Lamm's floundering abilities. Yet, I do think "All The Years" sounds to me like the spark that got his mindset closer to the days of old (even using "the Whole Worlds Watching" again, (which could be interpreted kinda creepy as he technically was paying Homage to himself as if he was paying tribute to the him long since passed on...which most musical homages do.)) I think this might have been the mental reversal point that helped him find his way back to the level S&P proved. I know a lot to read into one song, but as before all my speculation is "a feeling, based on observation" so always keep that in mind about what I say Grin

I also think "All the Years" is the most solid song and maybe the most genuine "Chicago" song since the 70's. I may feel I am wrong later about this, but at this moment, admittedly not fully with it (Honestly and pun fully and unashamedly intended it's been: A Hard Risin' Morning Without Breakfast ) I believe this.
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum | Buy traffic for your forum/website

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy