RuntheDamnBall Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Boston's first album was one of the greatest rock and roll records of all time. It was a groundbreaking achievement and the musicianship was flawless. The other bands you mentioned never came close to approaching the greatness that was Boston's first album. Make fun of these old "corporate" rock bands all you want, at least they all had an "original" sound. Something of which the recording industry is completely devoid of today. If you want to take pot shots, I suggest you take a look at the current top ten of todays music charts. As far as Boston being a great "band", it was more of a rock and roll project than a band. They hardly ever toured and their subsequent records never came close to the greatness of that first album. Gotta be impressed that that first album came mostly out of a twelve-track and a garage. The rest of their stuff, meh. I used to take that attitude that they're cheesy, and I've come around to realize hell yeah, they were cheesy. Cheesy good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Boston = Foreigner = Kansas = Styx = Crap (at least there was some talent in Kansas) I know, I left out a few band. I always called the commercial radio-hit bands with the lame faux-operatic lead singers the "Clone Bands", my brother, the musician of the family, called them the "Semi-fag Bands". It's always sad when someone dies, but let's not re-write history and pretend the band was great. I agree, I never cared for them. I thought their song sounded too similar to each other. Friends who rode with me in growing up always knew when Boston was on the radio, because I would immediately change the radio station. I much prefer the bad boys of Boston instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Gotta be impressed that that first album came mostly out of a twelve-track and a garage. The rest of their stuff, meh. I used to take that attitude that they're cheesy, and I've come around to realize hell yeah, they were cheesy. Cheesy good. The first album, certainly was their best work. I didn't know it came from a 12-track and a garage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeFerguson Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Supposedly "Smells like Teen Spirit" was an accidental ripoff of "More than a Feeling". I think there's a bootleg out there of Nirvana playing a "Smells like Teen Spirit/More Than a Feeling" medley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 As much as I would like to poke him with a stick, I envy him. I wish I had been spared the sound stylings of Boston. Actually the first few thousand times were just slightly annoying. But by the time it was played on the radio for 34,594th time I had just about heard enough of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Which Boston recording featured Geddy Lee? Exit...Third Stage Left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLO Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Which Boston recording featured Geddy Lee? I meant his voice was was a signature component of their music like Geddys' is with Rush or Robert Plant with Zeppelin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I 90 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Boston = Foreigner = Kansas = Styx = Crap (at least there was some talent in Kansas) I know, I left out a few band. I always called the commercial radio-hit bands with the lame faux-operatic lead singers the "Clone Bands", my brother, the musician of the family, called them the "Semi-fag Bands". It's always sad when someone dies, but let's not re-write history and pretend the band was great. The fierce response I was too polite to make. Yes, they broke sales records and demonstrated uber-competent musicianship but like the other pace setters of the era ( Frampton Comes Alive ? Fleetwood Mac's Tusk ?) they made wonder just who was buying all those albums. And given the numbers, how could those people possibly be avoided. I kid, but what caught the popular imagination in that time made the seventies the hell they were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stinky finger Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Gonna hitch a ride and head for the other side.... "Freedom on my mind......carry me away for the last time......oohh..ohhh...yeeeaaaaaa" Of all the tunes that I spent playing air guitar to.......this was my favorite. My fondest memories had Boston in the background for many of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 "Freedom on my mind......carry me away for the last time......oohh..ohhh...yeeeaaaaaa"Of all the tunes that I spent playing air guitar to.......this was my favorite. My fondest memories had Boston in the background for many of them. Beautiful phrasing in the ending guitar solo. It was one of my favorite pieces to play way back when I could. In fact, I think I'll pull the guitar out now and give it a hack. Emphasis on "hack". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Boston = Foreigner = Kansas = Styx = Crap (at least there was some talent in Kansas) I know, I left out a few band. I always called the commercial radio-hit bands with the lame faux-operatic lead singers the "Clone Bands", my brother, the musician of the family, called them the "Semi-fag Bands". It's always sad when someone dies, but let's not re-write history and pretend the band was great. You are so (too) avant-garde Deano! True... Boston did sorta of start the trend... They were technically sound none the less... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 As much as some here beg to differ... Maybe it was the mainstream, cheesyness that made Boston great. Like Shania Twain (and believe me I am not crazy about her music) or even earlier ABBA... As much as some say that it is garbage... The ease of listening alone makes the music special... Sure there are the one's that say: "I would change the channel when it came on"... To them I say: "get the stick out of your arse"... Enjoy it for what it is worth. Maybe it is the "oppositional disorder" in some that feel they have to always march to the beat of a different drummer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 Oh... On another note... Did you ever notice that you could turn the bass all the way down and treble all the way up with anything Boston did and it is still very much (of course, IMO... ) listenable and ejoyable... ??? By no means am I an expert on music... What is it about their sound? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Actually the first few thousand times were just slightly annoying. But by the time it was played on the radio for 34,594th time I had just about heard enough of it. Which can be said for just about ANYTHING on radio for the last 40 years. Boston is not the only one in this regard. They were a great band, maybe not everyone's cup of tea, but most people who know anything about music would agree that they were one of the most influential bands of the 1970's... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stinky finger Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Which can be said for just about ANYTHING on radio for the last 40 years. Boston is not the only one in this regard. They were a great band, maybe not everyone's cup of tea, but most people who know anything about music would agree that they were one of the most influential bands of the 1970's... The defense rests.......well put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 All bands named after cities, states, countries, continents, and municipalities suck. Boston. Chicago. Asia. America. Kansas. Toronto. Alabama. Manhattan Transfer. The schitts just keep on comin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Which can be said for just about ANYTHING on radio for the last 40 years. Boston is not the only one in this regard. They were a great band, maybe not everyone's cup of tea, but most people who know anything about music would agree that they were one of the most influential bands of the 1970's... Yeah, I know nothing of music from the 70's. I never said they weren't great or highly influential. I said the radio over played them and yes many bands have been way over played ad nauseam bit I think it's safe to say Boston leads the pack. The music is good, but rather simplistic in it's style which one gets very bored of after hearing it over and over again. On the other hand I could prabably listen to Vivaldi's Quatre Saisons every day for 40 years and never tire of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 All bands named after cities, states, countries, continents, and municipalities suck. Boston. Chicago. Asia. America. Kansas. Toronto. Alabama. Manhattan Transfer. The schitts just keep on comin'. England Dan and John Wilkes Booth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 The music is good, but rather simplistic in it's style which one gets very bored of after hearing it over and over again. Compared to what? Vivaldi? Yeah, you win that one. But if we are comparing Boston to their peers at the time (or even pop music in general), it's far from simplistic in either the style of compositon or production quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Compared to what? Vivaldi? Yeah, you win that one. But if we are comparing Boston to their peers at the time (or even pop music in general), it's far from simplistic in either the style of compositon or production quality. I always thought Vivaldi was more simplistic in style than Boston, frankly. Can't stand Vivaldi. He's so insubstantial, it's like listening to whipped cream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts