http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005 by the authors Sun, 6 Jun 2004 01:34:50 EDT http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/04/184418.php#comment-67581 First off, I'd like to extend a belated thank you to Amazon for finally printing my review of this album (I'm the "music fan from Oceanside, CA"). After giving this Aerosmith issue some thought (not a whole lot – I do have a life). I've seen a lot of reviewers (mostly from Amazon) criticize the likes of myself, including one who thinks that I have chips on my shoulder. They say that we're stuck in the past; that we're closed minded; that we're purists and self-proclaimed superiors – and on and on... Such people are probably open minded and progressive – which is a polite way of saying that they wouldn't know crap if it hit them in the face. What gives you the kind of expertise that would cause you to make such harsh judgment on us? I was first exposed to music when I was three. From that point on, I heard and enjoyed music from Jerry Lee Lewis, Buddy Holly, Souza, Bach, Schubert, Broadway Show Tunes, Beach Boys, Beatles, Stones, Zappa, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Steely Dan, Alice In Chains, Gin Blossoms, Joni Mitchell, The Limelighters, Nirvana, and lots of others which I doubt any you have even heard of. In other words, I've heard plenty of good ones – I've also heard some not so good and bad as well. Have any of you heard a song that makes you sit up and say, "wow – that's good" – when you weren't told who was performing it? These days, most music fans react with Pavlovian predictability whenever a radio station plays a new song – very seldom will they not tell them who is playing it, because they want to insure it's success (and by extension, their ratings). Would you have given the same praise for "Honkin' On Bobo" if you heard it without knowing who it was by? I'll bet half of you would say no. Anyone who has seen "American Idol" has witnessed the herd mentality of those so-called "fans" – who vote for reasons that have nothing to do with the music and it's merits (It can't be – not when they "stuff the ballot box" with their phone voting). Most of these reviewers are similar in that they hear the name "Aerosmith" and automatically assume that next release is going to be at least good – if not great. This album was promised quite a while ago as a return to the old sound. Most of their fans made up their minds that it was going to be great before hearing the first cut. Mine was always wait and see. I find it interesting that Rolling Stone also praises this album – but then, those articles that slammed Led Zeppelin are noticeably missing as well. Et Tu, Jann Wenner? I gave Aerosmith major credit when they released "Done With Mirrors"; didn't care for "Permanent Vacation"; but thought "Pump" was good. Back then, I felt that they still had it – but I think some exec at Geffen said, "I don't hear a single", and the boys had to, as Joe Perry put it, "make a deal with the devil". When given the choice between being a bunch of minimum wage has-beens or selling out to maintain the lifestyle they're accustom to, this was a no-brainer. Sure, they're successful now (how many of you would bulldoze your own house, like Joey Kramer?), but they paid for it with their rock n' roll souls. The Aerosmith I knew would never have even been ALLOWED in Disneyland, no less the Disney Channel – it would have been as unlikely as Hillary Duff doing porn. Rock n' roll was never about playing it safe. Do you think Disney or the Rugrats belong in this category? Aerosmith was also never about blues. A simple look at all their albums reveal that there were only a few blues tunes on each of them – the rest was what they did best, which is to rock their (and their listeners') asses off. Oh, and a word about covers: it's been more or less a cardinal rule that if one performs someone else's music, not only must it be good, but it must be done in the groups' own style. Van Halen's "You Really Got Me" and "Dancing In The Streets" are good examples; Eric Clapton's "Travelin' Riverside Blues" is another. Not only do these guys go through the motions here, but they sound pretty boring doing it, too. So before you self-righteous shills start criticizing us, you would do well to check your qualifications – if you have any. 67581@blogcritics.org Sun, 6 Jun 2004 01:34:50 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/04/184418.php#comment-67580 First off, I'd like to extend a belated thank you to Amazon for finally printing my review of this album (I'm the "music fan from Oceanside, CA"). After giving this Aerosmith issue some thought (not a whole lot – I do have a life). I've seen a lot of reviewers (mostly from Amazon) criticize the likes of myself, including one who thinks that I have chips on my shoulder. They say that we're stuck in the past; that we're closed minded; that we're purists and self-proclaimed superiors – and on and on... Such people are probably open minded and progressive – which is a polite way of saying that they wouldn't know crap if it hit them in the face. What gives you the kind of expertise that would cause you to make such harsh judgment on us? I was first exposed to music when I was three. From that point on, I heard and enjoyed music from Jerry Lee Lewis, Buddy Holly, Souza, Bach, Schubert, Broadway Show Tunes, Beach Boys, Beatles, Stones, Zappa, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Steely Dan, Alice In Chains, Gin Blossoms, Joni Mitchell, The Limelighters, Nirvana, and lots of others which I doubt any you have even heard of. In other words, I've heard plenty of good ones – I've also heard some not so good and bad as well. Have any of you heard a song that makes you sit up and say, "wow – that's good" – when you weren't told who was performing it? These days, most music fans react with Pavlovian predictability whenever a radio station plays a new song – very seldom will they not tell them who is playing it, because they want to insure it's success (and by extension, their ratings). Would you have given the same praise for "Honkin' On Bobo" if you heard it without knowing who it was by? I'll bet half of you would say no. Anyone who has seen "American Idol" has witnessed the herd mentality of those so-called "fans" – who vote for reasons that have nothing to do with the music and it's merits (It can't be – not when they "stuff the ballot box" with their phone voting). Most of these reviewers are similar in that they hear the name "Aerosmith" and automatically assume that next release is going to be at least good – if not great. This album was promised quite a while ago as a return to the old sound. Most of their fans made up their minds that it was going to be great before hearing the first cut. Mine was always wait and see. I find it interesting that Rolling Stone also praises this album – but then, those articles that slammed Led Zeppelin are noticeably missing as well. Et Tu, Jann Wenner? I gave Aerosmith major credit when they released "Done With Mirrors"; didn't care for "Permanent Vacation"; but thought "Pump" was good. Back then, I felt that they still had it – but I think some exec at Geffen said, "I don't hear a single", and the boys had to, as Joe Perry put it, "make a deal with the devil". When given the choice between being a bunch of minimum wage has-beens or selling out to maintain the lifestyle they're accustom to, this was a no-brainer. Sure, they're successful now (how many of you would bulldoze your own house, like Joey Kramer?), but they paid for it with their rock n' roll souls. The Aerosmith I knew would never have even been ALLOWED in Disneyland, no less the Disney Channel – it would have been as unlikely as Hillary Duff doing porn. Rock n' roll was never about playing it safe. Do you think Disney or the Rugrats belong in this category? Aerosmith was also never about blues. A simple look at all their albums reveal that there were only a few blues tunes on each of them – the rest was what they did best, which is to rock their (and their listeners') asses off. Oh, and a word about covers: it's been more or less a cardinal rule that if one performs someone else's music, not only must it be good, but it must be done in the groups' own style. Van Halen's "You Really Got Me" and "Dancing In The Streets" are good examples; Eric Clapton's "Travelin' Riverside Blues" is another. Not only do these guys go through the motions here, but they sound pretty boring doing it, too. So before you self-righteous shills start criticizing us, you would do well to check your qualifications – if you have any. 67580@blogcritics.org Sun, 6 Jun 2004 01:34:29 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/04/184418.php#comment-56862 sometimes, if you pile enough chips on both of your shoulders...it gets in the way of your ear canals. 56862@blogcritics.org Thu, 8 Apr 2004 13:53:32 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/04/184418.php#comment-56859 First of all, I'd like to mention that there is censorship at Amazon - so don't waste your time reviewing anything there - unless it's praise. As one who dug these guys since their first album, I can only assume that these reviewers are either too young to have appreciated them when Steven and Joe were still the "Toxic Twins", or they are older, and too myopic to see when they're being sold a case of snake oil. Face it, people - these guys blew their collective noses after Eric Clapton sneezed. Following on the heels of Eric's "Me and Mr. Johnson", Aerosmith prove themselves less than competent in this collection of blues songs and covers. After too many years of catering to market demographics, appearances on the Disney channel and the Rugrats movie, I just can't fathom that these guys are going back to their roots - their sincerity rings hollow. If there is any ringing at all, it's the cash register for the poor dupes who buy this worthless piece of tripe. If you want to hear the old Aerosmith, then select any album up to "Done With Mirrors". You slept with the devil, boys - you can't go back. 56859@blogcritics.org Thu, 8 Apr 2004 13:35:10 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/04/184418.php#comment-56010 Man, I am so glad to hear this - I want to like contemporary Aerosmith and now maybe I can. Thanks Mark! 56010@blogcritics.org Mon, 5 Apr 2004 13:42:47 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/04/184418.php#comment-55900 'S about time. Maybe some of those other old bands from 20 - 30 years ago will get the led out and make one more killer album before they call it quits. 55900@blogcritics.org Sun, 4 Apr 2004 23:43:35 EDT