MR

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:24 am**

It seems more and more people are willing to accept anything and everything so long as the name stays the same. Take the most recent case of Journey. (And yes this related to Styx, bear with me). Journey is now two singers removed from their most popular and successful line up. Now while I understand Steve A. was a pretty good stand in for Steve Perry until his throat gave way, I'm hearing that JSS is really not like either Steves. So have they finaly stopped trying to "sound" like Journey?

There is no denying that bands like Styx, Kansas, Boston and Journey have signature sounds that revolve around their vocvals. Boston with Brad Delp, Journey with Steve Perry, Kansas with Steve Walsh, and Styx with Dennis DeYoung (and to a lesser extent Tommy Shaw). Here we are 20 years removed, and Kansas is the only one with anything resembling their signature sound - but even Steve Walsh's voice is a mere shadow of what it was.

So whats my point? Are you willing to take any band calling itself Boston, Kansas, Journey or Styx as long as they play the songs? Does how the song sounds as important as the song itself - or don't you care?

It just seems like people think they can plug in anyone and continue on with the name and not care about the average fan. In the case of Journey they seem to not even care to find someone who even remotely sounds like the classic Journey sound. Even with this, we continue to get constant daily updates on this site with regard to how Journey is doing.

It's getting annoying to hear news reports on how bands are doing and day to day reports on the previous night's show when they're basically just doing "anything" to stay on the stage. If they're being honest with themselves they should just call it a day as soon as they can. I do understand this is a business and if Journey broke up now with this tour it would likely result in a ton of lawsuits - so I don't blame the guys in Journey for sticking it out from a business stand point - but lets not be unrealistic and think it's something it's not. At least in the case of Styx and Boston they at least TRIED to find someone who sounded like their former singer.

It's disingenouous for sites like this to keep the non stop daily gossip publicity about this when it's a short term fix to what is likely a terminal situation. Anyone who thinks Journey isn't in real trouble is kidding themselves - and no amount of publicity and positive spin/propaganda on this web site is going to change that. (And Andrew - I do have the utmost respect for you and your site - this being the first time I've been openly critical of your coverage - so please do not take it personally).

I think Styx is one more line up change away from facing the same problem - particularly if that involves Todd or Larry. Not so much because those members are cornerstone, but because at that point they'll stop "trying" to sound like the styx of yesterday. With Larry they're at least trying from a musical standpoint if not from a singing standpoint.

You'd think that the long term plan for Journey wouild be to either do the same - or call it a day.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:26 am**

Why should they stop if there are people willing to pay to see them? And not everyone is infatuated with singers. There are other musicians on the stage with them, you know.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:32 am**

Ash wrote:At least in the case of Styx and Boston they at least TRIED to find someone who sounded like their former singer.

Respectfully disagree here. They got neither a lookalike or soundalike. Gowan isn't close to DDY and his versions of the DDY songs are nothing like Dennis. But that said, I've praised them for going that route. It's the more respectable way.

Ash wrote:I think Styx is one more line up change away from facing the same problem - particularly if that involves Todd or Larry. Not so much because those members are cornerstone, but because at that point they'll stop "trying" to sound like the styx of yesterday. With Larry they're at least trying from a musical standpoint if not from a singing standpoint.

If they lose Todd it would be a big loss, but he's the drummer, not a frontman. If they lose Larry, he's replacable. They have an issue if Tommy leaves since JY can't have Styx without either the actual Dennis or Tommy. One of those guys has to be there.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:34 am**

NealIsGod wrote:Why should they stop if there are people willing to pay to see them? And not everyone is infatuated with singers. There are other musicians on the stage with them, you know.

That's it in a nutshell. If people are paying, why should they stop? I've been to many Styx shows where people are shocked to find out DDY is not there, and they won't hear "Babe" or "The Best of Times". That is why they won't get repeat business from those folks, but hey, someone's paying. They've been on the road for 7 years.

With Styx it's more grey since in ads, they use DDY songs to help promote with DDY's voice.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:05 am**

Ash wrote:It seems more and more people are willing to accept anything and everything so long as the name stays the same. Take the most recent case of Journey. (And yes this related to Styx, bear with me). Journey is now two singers removed from their most popular and successful line up. Now while I understand Steve A. was a pretty good stand in for Steve Perry until his throat gave way, I'm hearing that JSS is really not like either Steves. So have they finaly stopped trying to "sound" like Journey?

"Journey" was more than just the sound of Steve Perry's voice. So yes, for the short-haul, maybe they're not trying to sound like Steve Perry, but keep the momentum going until they have a moment to get their bearings.

There is no denying that bands like Styx, Kansas, Boston and Journey have signature sounds that revolve around their vocvals. Boston with Brad Delp, Journey with Steve Perry, Kansas with Steve Walsh, and Styx with Dennis DeYoung (and to a lesser extent Tommy Shaw). Here we are 20 years removed, and Kansas is the only one with anything resembling their signature sound - but even Steve Walsh's voice is a mere shadow of what it was.

Again, Styx's signature sound was MORE THAN JUST vocals. There was cynths, harmonic guitars, quirky bridges, group harmonies, kick ass showmanship, and the list goes on. yes, vocals played a big part, but not all or even the majority, IMO.

So whats my point? Are you willing to take any band calling itself Boston, Kansas, Journey or Styx as long as they play the songs? Does how the song sounds as important as the song itself - or don't you care?

It just seems like people think they can plug in anyone and continue on with the name and not care about the average fan.

Well, I assume by "average fan" you mean someone who owns a Greatest Hits compilation or loves the radio songs. In which case, THAT fan will usually not give a rat's arse either way, as long as the show is fun and has decent sound quality.
If you mean "average" like us, that's another story - then you get into personal feelings and nostalgia and loyalties and whatnot. The average fan doesn't have any of that.

Point of interest - the average fan is what most bands count on when selling concert tickets. They're much less anal retentive.

In the case of Journey they seem to not even care to find someone who even remotely sounds like the classic Journey sound. Even with this, we continue to get constant daily updates on this site with regard to how Journey is doing.

???

It's getting annoying to hear news reports on how bands are doing and day to day reports on the previous night's show when they're basically just doing "anything" to stay on the stage.

I guess it's like Brangelina. Personally, I could give two sh*ts, but apparently, someone gives two sh*ts because they're on every tabloid cover out there. If no one was reading it, no one would be covering it.

If they're being honest with themselves they should just call it a day as soon as they can. I do understand this is a business and if Journey broke up now with this tour it would likely result in a ton of lawsuits - so I don't blame the guys in Journey for sticking it out from a business stand point - but lets not be unrealistic and think it's something it's not. At least in the case of Styx and Boston they at least TRIED to find someone who sounded like their former singer.

I don't think that's what Styx did. Not to mention that Styx has always had 3 "lead" singers.

It's disingenouous for sites like this to keep the non stop daily gossip publicity about this when it's a short term fix to what is likely a terminal situation. Anyone who thinks Journey isn't in real trouble is kidding themselves - and no amount of publicity and positive spin/propaganda on this web site is going to change that. (And Andrew - I do have the utmost respect for you and your site - this being the first time I've been openly critical of your coverage - so please do not take it personally).

Well, I agree that I feel Journey may be in trouble, but I'm open to the notion that there may be people who are more privvy to information than I, or who might see things differently. I won't go so far as to say they're kidding themselves, not just yet anyway. LOL

I think Styx is one more line up change away from facing the same problem - particularly if that involves Todd or Larry. Not so much because those members are cornerstone, but because at that point they'll stop "trying" to sound like the styx of yesterday. With Larry they're at least trying from a musical standpoint if not from a singing standpoint.

You'd think that the long term plan for Journey wouild be to either do the same - or call it a day.

Well, no matter who's up there, it will always be the "best lineup ever." ;-)

Seriously, you make sense in that AT SOME POINT, even the hardest of fans is going to get bored with a rotating door in any band.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:06 am**

NealIsGod wrote:Why should they stop if there are people willing to pay to see them? And not everyone is infatuated with singers. There are other musicians on the stage with them, you know.

This has been part of my long running stand. The band is not just the lead singer, but also the other musicians that make up the music through personal intonation and playing styles. Without those behind the lead singer - the group, the sound, the song just isn't the same.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:14 am**

styxfanNH wrote:
NealIsGod wrote:Why should they stop if there are people willing to pay to see them? And not everyone is infatuated with singers. There are other musicians on the stage with them, you know.

This has been part of my long running stand. The band is not just the lead singer, but also the other musicians that make up the music through personal intonation and playing styles. Without those behind the lead singer - the group, the sound, the song just isn't the same.

Yeah, Journey is as much Neal's guitar as it is Perry's or Augeri's voice. At least, to me.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:18 am**

I'd rather if a singer is going to be replaced that they find someone different looking and sounding, of course personality wise as well. I'll give them a chance, but if I don't like it then I just stop attending concerts and buying CD's. I usually give a new singer at least one chance in concert and on a recording. I get tired of acts that play the same stuff over and over and over again though. I want something different and I don't like going to concerts where the band thinks they need to play everything just like the "record".

Wasn't impressed with Gowan, though I know some like him just fine. After the Jrny fiasco, 8 years was worthless in some people's minds. And I've seen Kansas & Foreigner in the good days with Walsh and Gramm, before and after their voices were shot. Not pretty to my ears. When it becomes more about money and they can't get new stuff on the radio, it's time (for me) to move on.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:31 am**

Zan wrote:Seriously, you make sense in that AT SOME POINT, even the hardest of fans is going to get bored with a rotating door in any band.

To me it's not the rotating door. I can go for long stretches of time without seeing the bands and artists I like (Styx and DDY included) because their setlists are stale to me. The performance is just fine.

As someone who is a die-hard, I understand the need to play the hits and am OK with it. But throw us a bone. In 90 minutes I should get more than a medley or a single tune. Tapegate aside, that's where Journey has done well for the past few years. They have played, as people call 'em, "the dirty dozen", but they manage to slip some nods to the die hards in from time to time.

Styx has barely done that even when they were doing their 3 hour shows in 1999 - 2000/2001. DDY has at least tried to shake it up and add a few in, and does rotate some songs. Glen being in now also enhances his ability to change the setlist a tad.

I can forgive lineup changes, but there is a law of diminishing returns at some point. I can't forgive being bored out of my skull when I pay $50 - $100 a ticket

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:56 am**

I guess what I'm getting at --- is at what point does a band become their own cover band. I've seen a lot of good cover bands that do reasonably decent facimile's of a band's music - but when it's that band itself sounding more and more like a cover band then what is the point.

And I understand there is more than a singer in a band - but lets fact reality here - most of these 80s rock bands are known for their vocals. Journey didn't sell millions of records because of Neil's guitar solo's - or strictly because of Perry's voice. It was a combination of songwriting and performance as done by that mix of guys. IF you had a different mix of guys, you may (or may not) have had the same thing. But a whole lot of people will know a voice and a singer as opposed to a guitar sound and player. They may recogonize a sound to a particular band, but the specific players? to the casual fan? nah I don't think so.

Alan mentioned he went to shows and people being bent about Dennis not being there meaning they wouldn't hear Babe or Best of Times. Is that because they weren't going to play the SONGS? If they played those songs how many people would notice Dennis wasn't there? I think Styx is unique in that they seem to go out of their way in their shows and their interviews to draw attention to the fact that Dennis is gone, even though you still hear Come Sail Away and the like used in their radio commercials.

I realize, I'm a bit all over the road in some regard - this is a pure stream of consciousness and not yet really a cohesive thought. I guess I'm just tired of bands being 25-50% of what they used to be and still selling themselves as that act - particularly when they're in their second, third, fourth, or fifth line up. At some point, enough is just enough.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:08 am**

Ash, (keep in mind this is only my opinion)... I think that in lots of cases, not all, it's easier for a lead singer to find people to back him or her and sound like the original or close enough for some people, than it is to find a new lead singer for an already established band/group. Maybe this is why people have a hard time sometimes with changing lead singers?

I agree that if the band is good enough at what they do, then people recognize certain things, not just the singer. But the way lead singers go about finding a new guitarist for instance, they can find someone who can play as well in some cases as say the "old guy". Make sense to anyone other than myself?

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:10 am**

Ash wrote:It seems more and more people are willing to accept anything and everything so long as the name stays the same.

Yep Ash this is true and it all boils down to being a true fan of that band and the reasons why the band has split up.
I was a JRNY / Augeri fan simply because they gave Perry 2 years to do his thing and get back with JRNY
Perry has never since returned to any singing or band

Styx on the other hand had a plan to dump Dennis after the money making tours in 96-97
They saw he was only doing so many shows a year and poof they walked away from the guy
they spit in his face and the faces of the real true STYX fans

Now we have peole saying they are STYX fans and in reality they are fans of either Shaw or Gowan
Nobody stands up for poor old JY and they others are just fill ins

Neither STYX or JRNY are real in my mind.

So whats my point? Are you willing to take any band calling itself Boston, Kansas, Journey or Styx as long as they play the songs? Does how the song sounds as important as the song itself - or don't you care?

I would say Kansas is still Kansas sorta but recently they lost Robbie so they are just like REO only the singer remains

It just seems like people think they can plug in anyone and continue on with the name and not care about the average fan.

Certainly Shaw and Young feel this way and thats because they just want money.

In the case of Journey they seem to not even care to find someone who even remotely sounds like the classic Journey sound. Even with this, we continue to get constant daily updates on this site with regard to how Journey is doing.

JOURNEY is done
STYX is done

That is a shame.

ASH you are right on target with this one.

It's getting annoying to hear news reports on how bands are doing and day to day reports on the previous night's show when they're basically just doing "anything" to stay on the stage. If they're being honest with themselves they should just call it a day as soon as they can. I do understand this is a business and if Journey broke up now with this tour it would likely result in a ton of lawsuits - so I don't blame the guys in Journey for sticking it out from a business stand point - but lets not be unrealistic and think it's something it's not. At least in the case of Styx and Boston they at least TRIED to find someone who sounded like their former singer.

It's disingenouous for sites like this to keep the non stop daily gossip publicity about this when it's a short term fix to what is likely a terminal situation. Anyone who thinks Journey isn't in real trouble is kidding themselves - and no amount of publicity and positive spin/propaganda on this web site is going to change that. (And Andrew - I do have the utmost respect for you and your site - this being the first time I've been openly critical of your coverage - so please do not take it personally).

I think Styx is one more line up change away from facing the same problem - particularly if that involves Todd or Larry. Not so much because those members are cornerstone, but because at that point they'll stop "trying" to sound like the styx of yesterday. With Larry they're at least trying from a musical standpoint if not from a singing standpoint.

You'd think that the long term plan for Journey wouild be to either do the same - or call it a day.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:16 am**

NealIsGod wrote:
styxfanNH wrote:
NealIsGod wrote:Why should they stop if there are people willing to pay to see them? And not everyone is infatuated with singers. There are other musicians on the stage with them, you know.

This has been part of my long running stand. The band is not just the lead singer, but also the other musicians that make up the music through personal intonation and playing styles. Without those behind the lead singer - the group, the sound, the song just isn't the same.

Yeah, Journey is as much Neal's guitar as it is Perry's or Augeri's voice. At least, to me.

I completely agree.

To me Boston had a lot more to do with Tom Scholtz and his guitars, organs, and studio anal retentiveness than Brand Delp's voice.

Eric

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:16 am**

NealIsGod wrote:
styxfanNH wrote:
NealIsGod wrote:Why should they stop if there are people willing to pay to see them? And not everyone is infatuated with singers. There are other musicians on the stage with them, you know.

This has been part of my long running stand. The band is not just the lead singer, but also the other musicians that make up the music through personal intonation and playing styles. Without those behind the lead singer - the group, the sound, the song just isn't the same.

Yeah, Journey is as much Neal's guitar as it is Perry's or Augeri's voice. At least, to me.

I completely agree.

To me Boston had a lot more to do with Tom Scholtz and his guitars, organs, and studio anal retentiveness than Brand Delp's voice.

Eric

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:25 am**

froy wrote:
Ash wrote:It seems more and more people are willing to accept anything and everything so long as the name stays the same.

Yep Ash this is true and it all boils down to being a true fan of that band and the reasons why the band has split up.
I was a JRNY / Augeri fan simply because they gave Perry 2 years to do his thing and get back with JRNY
Perry has never since returned to any singing or band

Styx on the other hand had a plan to dump Dennis after the money making tours in 96-97
They saw he was only doing so many shows a year and poof they walked away from the guy
they spit in his face and the faces of the real true STYX fans

Now we have peole saying they are STYX fans and in reality they are fans of either Shaw or Gowan
Nobody stands up for poor old JY and they others are just fill ins

Neither STYX or JRNY are real in my mind.

So whats my point? Are you willing to take any band calling itself Boston, Kansas, Journey or Styx as long as they play the songs? Does how the song sounds as important as the song itself - or don't you care?

I would say Kansas is still Kansas sorta but recently they lost Robbie so they are just like REO only the singer remains

It just seems like people think they can plug in anyone and continue on with the name and not care about the average fan.

Certainly Shaw and Young feel this way and thats because they just want money.

In the case of Journey they seem to not even care to find someone who even remotely sounds like the classic Journey sound. Even with this, we continue to get constant daily updates on this site with regard to how Journey is doing.

JOURNEY is done
STYX is done

That is a shame.

ASH you are right on target with this one.

It's getting annoying to hear news reports on how bands are doing and day to day reports on the previous night's show when they're basically just doing "anything" to stay on the stage. If they're being honest with themselves they should just call it a day as soon as they can. I do understand this is a business and if Journey broke up now with this tour it would likely result in a ton of lawsuits - so I don't blame the guys in Journey for sticking it out from a business stand point - but lets not be unrealistic and think it's something it's not. At least in the case of Styx and Boston they at least TRIED to find someone who sounded like their former singer.

It's disingenouous for sites like this to keep the non stop daily gossip publicity about this when it's a short term fix to what is likely a terminal situation. Anyone who thinks Journey isn't in real trouble is kidding themselves - and no amount of publicity and positive spin/propaganda on this web site is going to change that. (And Andrew - I do have the utmost respect for you and your site - this being the first time I've been openly critical of your coverage - so please do not take it personally).

I think Styx is one more line up change away from facing the same problem - particularly if that involves Todd or Larry. Not so much because those members are cornerstone, but because at that point they'll stop "trying" to sound like the styx of yesterday. With Larry they're at least trying from a musical standpoint if not from a singing standpoint.

You'd think that the long term plan for Journey wouild be to either do the same - or call it a day.

So STYX should have split up after Equinox and cancelled that tour. Is this correct Froy? They should have told A&M thankx for the record deal, but we have decided to call it a day? If this is truly how you feel, then STYX would never have existed after 75 and everything after that was taking advantage of the "fans".

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:36 am**

Ash wrote:I guess what I'm getting at --- is at what point does a band become their own cover band. I've seen a lot of good cover bands that do reasonably decent facimile's of a band's music - but when it's that band itself sounding more and more like a cover band then what is the point.

Good question which has no easy answer. I'm in a Rush tribute band that plays all over New England and our singer (who is a female) does older Geddy better than Geddy these days, but I'm not saying we're better than Rush at all because we are not. We do a damn good job though.

Ash wrote:Alan mentioned he went to shows and people being bent about Dennis not being there meaning they wouldn't hear Babe or Best of Times. Is that because they weren't going to play the SONGS?

Yes more than anything else.

Ash wrote:If they played those songs how many people would notice Dennis wasn't there? I think Styx is unique in that they seem to go out of their way in their shows and their interviews to draw attention to the fact that Dennis is gone, even though you still hear Come Sail Away and the like used in their radio commercials.

I think they'd notice, but ultimately they wouldn't care. They got to hear their favorite song and to their ears, sounded fine. Styx is unique, but how many people when they hear the ads or see the name Styx, ante up their hard earned dollar, really do their homework or pay that much attention? The folks here do.

Ash wrote:I realize, I'm a bit all over the road in some regard - this is a pure stream of consciousness and not yet really a cohesive thought. I guess I'm just tired of bands being 25-50% of what they used to be and still selling themselves as that act - particularly when they're in their second, third, fourth, or fifth line up. At some point, enough is just enough.

To play devils advocate, even some bands that are close to 100% are not the same bands anymore. U2 got shelled in the 90s for what they did, but they still sold out arenas. Their past two albums have been "back to basics". Why? Fans had their say. Same with Aerosmith. How many times did you read an interview that their last album was a return to their roots? And the new album? They tout it will sound like the old Aerosmith.

The glory days are looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong gone for these acts. Rush is one of the few acts that tries to respect their fans as best they can. Sure, the die hards get upset when they refuse to play "The Camera Eye", but they don't do songs they can't convincingly play. They don't try to be something they are not. Yet they manage to still make compelling music at the same time AND do their own three hour show with no opening act since 1996. Has their fan base dwindled a little? Sure, but they're also not out there every year like Styx, Journey, Aerosmith, et al. The value proposition and seeing an "event" every few years is gone. I can see Styx at least once or twice a year somewhere near me. Same with Journey. Aerosmith? Yup.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:45 am**

froy wrote:Styx on the other hand had a plan to dump Dennis after the money making tours in 96-97
They saw he was only doing so many shows a year and poof they walked away from the guy
they spit in his face and the faces of the real true STYX fans

Here's where I take a bit of issue. I know more than the average fan (meaning I know stuff off the record I'd never say) and have an insight into the workings of what's happened. At the end of the day, you had dueling agendas and confilcts that are decades old. JY makes money from touring more than album sales. Tommy loves to tour. Dennis likes to play live, but more limited and on his own terms. See any problems here? Everything old is the same. People don't change over time. Anyone who thinks Styx would have stayed together in the '96/'97 lineup forever is dreaming. I seriously believe that at some point - whether it was 2 - 3 years as it did pan out, to 10 years (which would be now), at some point things would have come to a head.

DDY has repeatedly said he did '97 pretty reluctantly. It wasn't something he was wholly gung ho over. And the other guys didn't like the fact - like the DDY of old - he had other stuff going on and Styx (whether it was true or not) was perceived to be taking a backseat. It goes back to the end of the RTP tour where they wanted to extend it and DDY didn't want to. Again I submit, did anyone think it would last? I'm glad I got to see 4/5 of the "classic" lineup for two years. I didn't think I would get that.

Look at the mess that was BNW. I've always equated it to Yes' Union album. It is perfect evidence of guys not in sync. "Everything Is Cool" must have been completed early on in the process. I'm not 100% convinced even if none of the split happened BNW would be much better than it is. There aren't many songs on there I consider classics.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:52 am**

Todd has said that the touring agenda for BNW if they waited for Dennis was going to be at best 20 shows. (Hardly a tour at all.) After the RTP tour, there clearly was no desire to stay on tour for a prolonged period of time.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:56 am**

styxfanNH wrote:Todd has said that the touring agenda for BNW if they waited for Dennis was going to be at best 20 shows. (Hardly a tour at all.) After the RTP tour, there clearly was no desire to stay on tour for a prolonged period of time.

Starting with the EOTC tour is when Styx did the 40 or so date tours as a rule with Dennis. That continued through '97. I can see Todd's point, though. If they had waited until say, September, you miss the summer touring season.

Styx toured extensively with Dennis from '77 through '81. '83 was good, but not as extensive.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:57 am**

BTW, I'm not bringing DDY's health thing in because while it is certainly a factor, it's easy to blame that (though valid from both sides - if DDY couldn't tour, what was Styx to do; for DDY had to be a serious concern). What you have is the workings of old wounds which will never completely heal.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:02 am**

StyxCollector wrote:[As someone who is a die-hard, I understand the need to play the hits and am OK with it. But throw us a bone. In 90 minutes I should get more than a medley or a single tune. Tapegate aside, that's where Journey has done well for the past few years. They have played, as people call 'em, "the dirty dozen", but they manage to slip some nods to the die hards in from time to time.

Funny how perspectives differ. I can appreciate that Journey was playing a lot of different album cuts along with their hits. But it always felt like the "same ole thing" because it was all Perry era. Last year was awesome but obviously can't be done all the time. To me, if you can throw a bone to the die-hards, it should be the new material that only they know. IMO

As for the OP, it all depends on the fan and their interpretation of what they think the band is. Journey definately is recognized for Perry's vocals. But I was able to move to Steve because there was more to the band than just Perry. And Steve still brought a similar sound. But as time as gone by, I have embraced that Joureny sound from the rest of the band equally as much (or maybe moreso) than the sound of the vocals. That is because there is such a history with the band that includes other vocalists. So, I have come to the realization that Neal (and 2ndly Jon) are Journey. I wouldn't cry if Jon left. But I would be EXTREMEMLY hesitant of a Journey without Neal.

In the case of Styx, I was a huge fan of DDY's voice. But I also know of some of the history, including Tommy's and JY's songs. The only real exposure I have had to Gowan was in concert for the Main Event Tour. I thought he sounded quite a bit like DDY. I am sure that was intentional because that is what Styx fans like myself expected. I have not been to enough concerts with LG on vocals for me to discern any real difference. That was the case with Journey and Steve I am sure. Most fans heard it once and were fine with it. Those of us who saw them frequently heard the differences, not the similarities.

At the end of the day, it comes down to the audience. If there is an audience, it is fair to continue...especially if there are still key members in the band. Those Motown bands that are still touring with NO original and few long-time members are a stretch in my book. And if I recall correctly, Monker has explained how LRB became no original members but still OK to be LRB. It all depends on fan acceptance.

I have come to the decision that I will listen first and then decide. I did that for Joureny. I did it for Styx (although not to the same extent). it would be hypocritical of me not to continue.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:12 am**

jrnyman28 wrote:Funny how perspectives differ. I can appreciate that Journey was playing a lot of different album cuts along with their hits. But it always felt like the "same ole thing" because it was all Perry era. Last year was awesome but obviously can't be done all the time. To me, if you can throw a bone to the die-hards, it should be the new material that only they know. IMO

...

In the case of Styx, I was a huge fan of DDY's voice. But I also know of some of the history, including Tommy's and JY's songs. The only real exposure I have had to Gowan was in concert for the Main Event Tour. I thought he sounded quite a bit like DDY. I am sure that was intentional because that is what Styx fans like myself expected. I have not been to enough concerts with LG on vocals for me to discern any real difference. That was the case with Journey and Steve I am sure. Most fans heard it once and were fine with it. Those of us who saw them frequently heard the differences, not the similarities.

It is funny I 100% disagree that Gowan sounds like Dennis in any way.

I didn't need to see them a lot and I heard it. In the same way, many people who see Journey with JSS (or with Augeri when he was on the road) had the same experience as you did. It was "good enough". That's what the casual fan wants. It sounds pretty much like they remember it, and they played what they wanted.

I loved when Journey did the hour of the early stuff last year. I like the 1st three albums. I don't expect bands to do that every time at all. Just more than they do. It's just lazy at this point because at the end of the day, it's the die hards who will carry them.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:32 am**

And I understand there is more than a singer in a band - but lets fact reality here - most of these 80s rock bands are known for their vocals

.

While this is true, they were not the alpha and omegas of their respective bands either. Had they been, they would have gone on to flourshing careers after leaving.

Examples: Vince Neil, Peter Cetera, Lou Graham, David Lee Roth, (and even DDY and Perry). None of these guys managed to leave their former bands in the dust.

I personally haven't ever cared for singers who thought "team" is spelled with "I". That's a notion that was shared by the above list IMO.

People come and go. Since you brought up Journey, They had nearly seen a complete line-up change by Raised on Radio. But they were still called Journey.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:42 am**

Hippie wrote:While this is true, they were not the alpha and omegas of their respective bands either. Had they been, they would have gone on to flourshing careers after leaving.

Examples: Vince Neil, Peter Cetera, Lou Graham, David Lee Roth, (and even DDY and Perry). None of these guys managed to leave their former bands in the dust.

Let's be honest. Even if, say, DLR or Lou Gramm were still at the top of their game today, would they be successful? More likely they wouldn't as the music they sing is not as popular today. Hell, even singers of the 90s that were hot bomb today. Mariah Carey's recent success IMO is a complete fluke. She was down for the count.

Also, Styx hasn't exactly blazed the trail, either. So the split with DDY has been moderately successful on both sides, but I wouldn't give either the edge.

Hippie wrote:I personally haven't ever cared for singers who thought "team" is spelled with "I". That's a notion that was shared by the above list IMO.

Yet Motley keeps taking Vince back. Cetera quit Chicago and had success in the 80s and went away. There has to be a great story with Cetera because to this day he refuses to talk Chicago. Jason Scheff is a soundalike,tho.

Hippie wrote:People come and go. Since you brought up Journey, They had nearly seen a complete line-up change by Raised on Radio. But they were still called Journey.

Except for Neal.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:47 am**

I think bands that have been around for a long time and have a vast catalog use the "catalog is so big, we can't play it all" as an excuse. The medley becomes a way to give the fans enough of a taste of the old catalog without them having to play the songs in its entirety.

A vast catalog should give them the ability to pull out more of the gems they haven't played in a while or ever. Even Styx today could touch another 30 songs that were fairly popular without having to cut into DDY's material.

At some level you have to give Styx credit that for the most part they have dropped much of DDY's work and gone it alone on their own song writing merit. However, Larry could certainly add songs from his repetoire to the sets and they could have clearly added more Glen songs when he was with them. That in my opinion is one of the areas they are making a mistake.

In the area of Larry sounding like Dennis. I think he tried to mimic Dennis more in 89 when they first hit the road and has been allowed to be more of himself once they left Dennis' songs behind.

I also believe that to those bands you are casual fans of, there is less of a big deal if members leave - even if it is the lead singer. Most "fans" are reliving the music that was implanted in their brains from their high school years and really don't have a viable comparison from high school years to current day. The hardcore fans that see them every chance they get today, are more educated about the ongoings of the band over the years and change iritates them more as these are the fans that know the nuances of the songs.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:48 am**

Where you draw the line depends on why you listen to the band in the first place. If you listen to Journey because of Steve Perry's voice, then I guess you wouldn't be to happy to hear them with anyone else. But, there are people out there, I'm sure, who liked Journey with Greg Rollie (sp?) singing, so...

My husband has an good theory about bands that continue to tour under a name, while there may only be a couple original guys there. If you keep the singer and the main-songwriter, you're usually in the clear. With The Who touring without Entwhistle, he says that with Daltrey and Townsend, you still get the singer and the guitarist/main-songwriter--it's still The Who. Keeping the singer and songwriter gives it a bit more merit I suppose (unless you're KISS)...otherwise, it starts drifting into Ratt territory.

The problem with Styx is that there are two very good songwriters/singers/musicians in the band's history--and they don't see eye to eye. So, whether the band touring as Styx is a sad imitation comes back to why you started to listen to the band in the first place. I love stuff like "Come Sail Away" and "The Grand Illusion," but it's the Tommy (and J.Y., to a lesser extent) stuff that brought me to the band, and it's the stuff I listen to the band for. I don't see a problem with them performing as Styx. They've got an original member, the blessing of another original member, and the prescence of the guy who sang and wrote the majority of their setlist. Sounds fine to me.

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:21 am**

StyxCollector wrote:It is funny I 100% disagree that Gowan sounds like Dennis in any way. I didn't need to see them a lot and I heard it.

MO is because you're not a casual fan. I've read reviews from people who even went so far as to CALL Gowan Dennis DeYoung and say "he looked & sounded great." My daughter, before having any clue about the drama of the band used to say to me "It's hard to tell them apart because they sound exactly the same."

Now, I don't think they sound exactly the same. In many cases, I think they sound VERY different. However, there are SIMILARITIES or CONSISTENCIES in their voices that you can pick up on in certain ranges in certain songs. I think Dennis has a fuller-blow-me-down sort of show voice (like Paul Anka-y) while Gowan has a raspier, edgier sounding rock voice (like Peter Gabriel-ish). But I can see how an untrained ear (ei: someone who hasn't studied the Styx sound implicitly for years and years) wouldn't notice much of a difference (or care).

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:33 am**

[quote="ZanNow, I don't think they sound exactly the same. In many cases, I think they sound VERY different. However, there are SIMILARITIES or CONSISTENCIES in their voices that you can pick up on in certain ranges in certain songs. I think Dennis has a fuller-blow-me-down sort of show voice (like Paul Anka-y) while Gowan has a raspier, edgier sounding rock voice (like Peter Gabriel-ish). But I can see how an untrained ear (ei: someone who hasn't studied the Styx sound implicitly for years and years) wouldn't notice much of a difference (or care).[/quote]

I think Gowan and Dennis sound nothing alike, but to be honest when my brother (a life-long casual Styx fan) and I saw them last year he said that 'the new guy' sounded just like Dennis.

I thought had ringing in my ears from the show, but he meant it.

I think my expression was something like this... :shock:

Posted: **Wed Jul 12, 2006 11:00 am**

DerriD wrote:I think Gowan and Dennis sound nothing alike, but to be honest when my brother (a life-long casual Styx fan) and I saw them last year he said that 'the new guy' sounded just like Dennis.

See? LOL!

Posted: **Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:19 am**

Zan wrote:
StyxCollector wrote:It is funny I 100% disagree that Gowan sounds like Dennis in any way. I didn't need to see them a lot and I heard it.

MO is because you're not a casual fan. I've read reviews from people who even went so far as to CALL Gowan Dennis DeYoung and say "he looked & sounded great." My daughter, before having any clue about the drama of the band used to say to me "It's hard to tell them apart because they sound exactly the same."

Now, I don't think they sound exactly the same. In many cases, I think they sound VERY different. However, there are SIMILARITIES or CONSISTENCIES in their voices that you can pick up on in certain ranges in certain songs. I think Dennis has a fuller-blow-me-down sort of show voice (like Paul Anka-y) while Gowan has a raspier, edgier sounding rock voice (like Peter Gabriel-ish). But I can see how an untrained ear (ei: someone who hasn't studied the Styx sound implicitly for years and years) wouldn't notice much of a difference (or care).

That was my point. I am more of a casual fan of Styx and only saw them live the one time with Gowan. At the time I thought he sounded a lot like DDY. But when I listen to Journey, it was surprising to me how people could call Steve a Perry sound-a-like!

MR

So Where Do You Draw The Line

So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line

Re: So Where Do You Draw The Line