MR

It seems like there are a lot of bands out there now without their original lead singers. Some of these bands seem to be able to make a smooth transition with their fans (Styx for example), whereas other bands, like Journey, seem to stir up a lot of controversy when they change lead singers. What is it that makes it smooth for one band and highly controversial for another?

Let's face it, anyone who sings Elvis songs other than the King himself is known as an "impersonator". But then again, Elvis didn't have a band like Journey with a Neal Schon in it. Or let's take Queen for example. How are the hardcore Queen fans dealing with Paul Rodgers of Bad Company walking around in Freddie's shows?

Can Mick Jagger be replaced and still call the band "The Rolling Stones"? Or how about Aerosmith? Could they pull off replacing Steven Tyler? These are difficult questions to ask hardcore fans of a band.

What I see happening with Journey fans now is a rehash of what happened when Steve Augeri took the place of Steve Perry. Back when this happened, 50% of the band's fans who were diehard Perry fans had a very difficult time embracing Steve Augeri. The other 50% who were comprised of new and old fans seemed to be willing to give Augeri a chance, and some of them even decided that he was better than Steve Perry. These same diehard Augeri fans are now blowing a gasket with the entrance of Jeff Scott Soto on the scene - in the same way the diehard Perry fans reacted when Augeri came on the scene. Now they are getting a taste of their own medicine.

I think replacing Steve Perry with another vocalist in Journey is still a very emotional topic. Much more so than when Sammy Hagar took over for David Lee Roth in Van Halen or Styx replaced Dennis De Young with what's-his-name. Sammy actually added huge sales to Van Halen's discography. Journey and Styx haven't done any record sales worth mentioning since their lead singers departed. It's a similar situation with Queen and Paul Rodgers.

What seems to piss off the diehard fans the most is when someone says "Augeri is better than Perry" or "JSS is better than Augeri". That's like saying "Paul Rodgers is better than Freddie Mercury". Can't you see how that could offend diehard Mercury fans? Why not just say, "I am glad to hear Journey in concert again" or "I am glad to hear Queen in concert again"? That would sure stir up a lot less controversy.

Any thoughts?

There's a major difference with Queen.... Paul Rodgers was brought on board to celebrate the legacy of Queen with the surviving members. I don't believe it's a permanent thing....the Queen reunion is a one shot deal...as I understand it.

As far as Journey without Perry...well all I can say is that Mr. Perry made his choice. He hasn't toured with the band since January '87 and returned briefly in '95 to record Trial By Fire (released in '96) and deserted the guys once again. There are a certain few that will never get over the fact that Perry isn't in Journey and will dismiss any other incarnation of the band. But I would say the majority of us...at least the ones who have been following the band since '98, are open minded to new music and are OVER the Perry bullshit!

jrnyjetster wrote:There's a major difference with Queen.... Paul Rodgers was brought on board to celebrate the legacy of Queen with the surviving members. I don't believe it's a permanent thing....the Queen reunion is a one shot deal...as I understand it.

As far as Journey without Perry...well all I can say is that Mr. Perry made his choice. He hasn't toured with the band since January '87 and returned briefly in '95 to record Trial By Fire (released in '96) and deserted the guys once again. There are a certain few that will never get over the fact that Perry isn't in Journey and will dismiss any other incarnation of the band. But I would say the majority of us...at least the ones who have been following the band since '98, are open minded to new music and are OVER the Perry bullshit!

Fair enough. But what if Perry had his own reasons as to why he doesn't want to front Journey anymore? Maybe he learned (as we all did in '95 after listening to 'Trial By Fire') that his voice simply couldn't handle reproducing what he did in his 20's? I mean, look what it did to Augeri - it shredded his voice in a few years. Can't we respect Perry's decision to not do this to his voice and his reputation? Does it have to be implicated that, "Perry made his choice to desert and abandon Journey"? Doesn't he deserve a little more respect than that for the legacy he created?

You may be surprised as to how many Perry fans CAN get over him not being in Journey anymore. What they have a hard time tolerating is people kicking his reputation and legacy into the ditch and totally dissing him in favor of the new guy. Likewise, if Queen wants a new singer, I truly hope they have fun with him (Paul Rodgers kicks ass!). Just don't diss on Freddie in the process. That would make his fans mad, the same way Perry fans get mad when he gets dissed.

I know some fans who went down to see JRNY at Sweden Rock Festival but I know a helluva lot more fans who stayed home just because Perry wasn´t there on stage.
I am a huge fan and has been since 1977 but just couldn´t see this shit with the lip synching this going on,even the big Swedish rock mag Sweden Rock Magazine mentioned in their review of the JRNY concert that Augeri was miming.
You Augeri heads just can´t get into your heads that with Perry in the band,they will start selling lots of records again.

Voyager wrote:

jrnyjetster wrote:You may be surprised as to how many Perry fans CAN get over him not being in Journey anymore. What they have a hard time tolerating is people kicking his reputation and legacy into the ditch and totally dissing him in favor of the new guy.

I totally agree....

Voyager wrote:You may be surprised as to how many Perry fans CAN get over him not being in Journey anymore. What they have a hard time tolerating is people kicking his reputation and legacy into the ditch and totally dissing him in favor of the new guy.

That works both ways. The other guys in Journey were just "sidemen" to many Loons. Anything they have done since his departure is dismissed as crap because Perry isn't singing it.

NealIsGod wrote:

Voyager wrote:You may be surprised as to how many Perry fans CAN get over him not being in Journey anymore. What they have a hard time tolerating is people kicking his reputation and legacy into the ditch and totally dissing him in favor of the new guy.

That works both ways. The other guys in Journey were just "sidemen" to many Loons. Anything they have done since his departure is dismissed as crap because Perry isn't singing it.

Yet Perry's 'solo' albums were crap too..... hmmm.....

cetera wrote:

NealIsGod wrote:

Voyager wrote:You may be surprised as to how many Perry fans CAN get over him not being in Journey anymore. What they have a hard time tolerating is people kicking his reputation and legacy into the ditch and totally dissing him in favor of the new guy.

That works both ways. The other guys in Journey were just "sidemen" to many Loons. Anything they have done since his departure is dismissed as crap because Perry isn't singing it.

Yet Perry's 'solo' albums were crap too..... hmmm.....

Street Talk is great. FTLOSM has a few good tunes, but was too dreary.

NealIsGod wrote:

cetera wrote:

NealIsGod wrote:

Voyager wrote:You may be surprised as to how many Perry fans CAN get over him not being in Journey anymore. What they have a hard time tolerating is people kicking his reputation and legacy into the ditch and totally dissing him in favor of the new guy.

That works both ways. The other guys in Journey were just "sidemen" to many Loons. Anything they have done since his departure is dismissed as crap because Perry isn't singing it.

Yet Perry's 'solo' albums were crap too..... hmmm.....

Street Talk is great. FTLOSM has a few good tunes, but was too dreary.

Admittedly, I liked a couple on Street Talk but most everything else left me completely nonplussed..... He was definitely a better songwriter with Schon/Cain IMO. Though to be fair, I don't think the 'electronic' 80's production helped....

MATTHEW wrote:

Voyager wrote:

jrnyjetster wrote:You may be surprised as to how many Perry fans CAN get over him not being in Journey anymore. What they have a hard time tolerating is people kicking his reputation and legacy into the ditch and totally dissing him in favor of the new guy.

I totally agree....

I agree totally too.But like some i loved his solo work but then again i am a diehard Perry fan.And not one of sock boys.

Voyager wrote:

What seems to piss off the diehard fans the most is when someone says "Augeri is better than Perry" or "JSS is better than Augeri". That's like saying "Paul Rodgers is better than Freddie Mercury". Can't you see how that could offend diehard Mercury fans? Why not just say, "I am glad to hear Journey in concert again" or "I am glad to hear Queen in concert again"? That would sure stir up a lot less controversy.

Any thoughts?

But Paul Rodgers' voice and stage presence can't really be compared to Freddie, because they are so different. Only the songs are the same. Paul is not 'better' than Freddie, he's different. You can only really compare like with like IMO.

Steve Augeri is/was very similar to Steve Perry. I can't help wondering that reactions would have been different if a replacement who was totally different had been chosen.
And sales of this type of music have dropped drastically since it's heyday, so can Augeri be blamed that the albums he was involved in didn't sell like 'classic' Journey did? I don't think so. Music buyers tastes have changed.
The mass music market isn't for this kind of stuff anymore. Sadly.

It's human nature for fans to say, "my favourite singer is better than yours, " - and I guess we aren't going to change that.

SusieP wrote:And sales of this type of music have dropped drastically since it's heyday, so can Augeri be blamed that the albums he was involved in didn't sell like 'classic' Journey did? I don't think so. Music buyers tastes have changed.
The mass music market isn't for this kind of stuff anymore. Sadly.

Exactly, and a major label push wouldn't have made THAT much difference either....

Different times....

cetera wrote:

SusieP wrote:And sales of this type of music have dropped drastically since it's heyday, so can Augeri be blamed that the albums he was involved in didn't sell like 'classic' Journey did? I don't think so. Music buyers tastes have changed.
The mass music market isn't for this kind of stuff anymore. Sadly.

Exactly, and a major label push wouldn't have made THAT much difference either....

Different times....

We have our memories, though, don't we?
And our CD's.

cetera wrote:

SusieP wrote:And sales of this type of music have dropped drastically since it's heyday, so can Augeri be blamed that the albums he was involved in didn't sell like 'classic' Journey did? I don't think so. Music buyers tastes have changed.
The mass music market isn't for this kind of stuff anymore. Sadly.

Exactly, and a major label push wouldn't have made THAT much difference either....

Different times....

The Eagles have done alright though, haven't they? And their heyday was in the mid-1970s.

U2...the Rolling Stones...Aerosmith...even KISS...all still going strong...even Def Leppard just hit the album charts...and Bill Joel recently sold out 12 nights at Madison Square Garden...

'Dad Rock' is big business...despite the success of rap and r+b amongst the pups...there's still potentially a huge market for Journey.

So I'd argue that it is the decisions Journey have made since 1998 - rather than the 'times' - which are responsible for the situation they're in now.

[quote="MATTHEW

'Dad Rock' is big business...despite the success of rap and r+b amongst the pups...there's still potentially a huge market for Journey.

So I'd argue that it is the decisions Journey have made since 1998 - rather than the 'times' - which are responsible for the situation they're in now.[/quote]




Excellent, points! And I LOVE how you call it 'Dad Rock' and 'amongst the pups' - fantastic turns of phrase.

We would need to examine the role of management then.

Maybe the bands who are still doing allright, as you say, had more successful publicity/promotion/managements etc.

Its all part of a band's success. Maybe Journey fell at that hurdle? whereas the others didn't?



EDIT - Ooh yeh, and radio air play. Back in 'the times' Journey stuff was played on the radio (I can only comment about the UK of course) - now it isn't, but the Stones and Eagles etc still get played here.

Also, Journey did not tour here for 26 years. The Stones keep on going - I know The Eagles jacked it in for a while but they still get a lot of radio airplay in the UK.
Maybe Journey flagged behind a bit there, too?

There are lots of factors contributing, I think.

MATTHEW wrote:The Eagles have done alright though, haven't they? And their heyday was in the mid-1970s.

U2...the Rolling Stones...Aerosmith...even KISS...all still going strong...even Def Leppard just hit the album charts...and Bill Joel recently sold out 12 nights at Madison Square Garden...

'Dad Rock' is big business...despite the success of rap and r+b amongst the pups...there's still potentially a huge market for Journey.

So I'd argue that it is the decisions Journey have made since 1998 - rather than the 'times' - which are responsible for the situation they're in now.

The Eagles are an INTERNATIONAL 'institution' as are The Stones.
KISS have some of the most hardcore supporters of all time and Gene has kept them in the limelight with his TV shows, business opportunities, merchandise etc.
Aerosmith had their big hits recently when they went 'pop ballad'.
U2 never went away....

Journey haven't been HUGE with an enormous hardcore following for some 20 years.

MATTHEW wrote:The Eagles have done alright though, haven't they? And their heyday was in the mid-1970s.

U2...the Rolling Stones...Aerosmith...even KISS...all still going strong...even Def Leppard just hit the album charts...and Bill Joel recently sold out 12 nights at Madison Square Garden...

'Dad Rock' is big business...despite the success of rap and r+b amongst the pups...there's still potentially a huge market for Journey.

So I'd argue that it is the decisions Journey have made since 1998 - rather than the 'times' - which are responsible for the situation they're in now.

Eagles, Stones, Aerosmith and Billy Joel are in another league than Journey. Is KISS doing that well? I never hear any KISS songs on the radio. And Andrew said this covers CD is the worst selling one ever for Lep. Journey is in the Styx/REO/Leppard league. Even casual fans can name every member in the Stones, Eagles and Aerosmith. Journey isn't there.

[quote="cetera]
Journey haven't been HUGE with an enormous hardcore following for some 20 years.[/quote]


They didn't tour here, and radio airplay dried up here too. That all contributes.


And if I had a fiver for everytime someone said to me, "Oh, Journey, I remember them. I always like 'More Than A Feeling'"

cetera wrote:

MATTHEW wrote:The Eagles have done alright though, haven't they? And their heyday was in the mid-1970s.

U2...the Rolling Stones...Aerosmith...even KISS...all still going strong...even Def Leppard just hit the album charts...and Bill Joel recently sold out 12 nights at Madison Square Garden...

'Dad Rock' is big business...despite the success of rap and r+b amongst the pups...there's still potentially a huge market for Journey.

So I'd argue that it is the decisions Journey have made since 1998 - rather than the 'times' - which are responsible for the situation they're in now.

The Eagles are an INTERNATIONAL 'institution' as are The Stones.
KISS have some of the most hardcore supporters of all time and Gene has kept them in the limelight with his TV shows, business opportunities, merchandise etc.
Aerosmith had their big hits recently when they went 'pop ballad'.
U2 never went away....

Journey haven't been HUGE with an enormous hardcore following for some 20 years.

Maybe not - but they are nonetheless the only '80s band' with an evergreen back catalogue. In fact, I read that a huge proportion of the 75 million albums they've sold were bought AFTER 1990.

Also - if Aerosmith can go 'pop ballad' and get big hits recently...then it shows that AOR can still be successful.

MATTHEW wrote:
The Eagles have done alright though, haven't they? And their heyday was in the mid-1970s.

U2...the Rolling Stones...Aerosmith...even KISS...all still going strong...even Def Leppard just hit the album charts...and Bill Joel recently sold out 12 nights at Madison Square Garden...

'Dad Rock' is big business...despite the success of rap and r+b amongst the pups...there's still potentially a huge market for Journey.

So I'd argue that it is the decisions Journey have made since 1998 - rather than the 'times' - which are responsible for the situation they're in now.

You might add Bon Jovi to that list as well...And I agree, Journey's management has been subpar on the promotional side of things. If there's one thing AZOFF can be credited with however, is the very successful Eagles reunion. It seems he left Journey on the sidelines, unfortunately. Def Leppard recently changed management and that fresh outlook seems to be paying off for them now. It certainly helps that they have Journey on the same bill for this tour, otherwise I don't think it would be quite as successful.

jrnyjetster wrote: If there's one thing AZOFF can be credited with however, is the very successful Eagles reunion.

What? Hell, I could have made THAT reunion work.

"Um, sign here, here, here and here. Ok, let's play."

Rockn'deano wrote:

jrnyjetster wrote: If there's one thing AZOFF can be credited with however, is the very successful Eagles reunion.

What? Hell, I could have made THAT reunion work.

"Um, sign here, here, here and here. Ok, let's play."

Deano, are YOU going to be Journey's new manager?

MATTHEW wrote:The Eagles have done alright though, haven't they? And their heyday was in the mid-1970s.

U2...the Rolling Stones...Aerosmith...even KISS...all still going strong...even Def Leppard just hit the album charts...and Bill Joel recently sold out 12 nights at Madison Square Garden...

Those bands still have their "hit" singers. Journey's on Singer #3 at this point. I don't think they're really comparable. And Def Leppard's album hasn't been selling well...

Queen, btw, was labeled "Queen with Paul Rodgers" and they played the songs in tribute to Freddie, which I think is notable when putting Queen fans vs Journey fans.

Great topic...

As for the Journey issue with replacing Steve Perry....you got to keep in mind that SP is a one-of-a-kind vocalist, extremely unqiue and even more impactful live. He made a major impression on fans for years. No matter who you replace him with, you're going to stir up many fans. Especially if you replace him with a "sound-alike". Although SA and SP are not even in the same league to compare, SA is basically a clone-type replacement.

In regards to Queen....Paul Rogers is a very different singer than Freddie. So, the comparisons are not as big of an issue. Paul is an awesome vocalist, but you either like how it gels with Queen or you don't. But for the most part, comparisons between the two won't be such an issue. Especially since Brain and Roger have said many times their intent was not to replace Freddie. It's an entirely new feel to their catalog of songs.

Just my big-picture opinion

caio

chad wrote:Although SA and SP are not even in the same league to compare, SA is basically a clone-type replacement.

And yet Perry fans seem to accept Deen and reject Steve A because Deen sounds more like Perry! How can Journey please everyone?

A Fire Inside wrote:

chad wrote:Although SA and SP are not even in the same league to compare, SA is basically a clone-type replacement.

And yet Perry fans seem to accept Deen and reject Steve A because Deen sounds more like Perry! How can Journey please everyone?

I just think Deen has a stronger and more soulful voice....

MATTHEW wrote:

A Fire Inside wrote:

chad wrote:Although SA and SP are not even in the same league to compare, SA is basically a clone-type replacement.

And yet Perry fans seem to accept Deen and reject Steve A because Deen sounds more like Perry! How can Journey please everyone?

I just think Deen has a stronger and more soulful voice....

I think Deen definitely has a stronger voice, but more soulful? Nah.

conversationpc wrote:

MATTHEW wrote:

A Fire Inside wrote:

chad wrote:Although SA and SP are not even in the same league to compare, SA is basically a clone-type replacement.

And yet Perry fans seem to accept Deen and reject Steve A because Deen sounds more like Perry! How can Journey please everyone?

I just think Deen has a stronger and more soulful voice....

I think Deen definitely has a stronger voice, but more soulful? Nah.

You don't think so? I reckon "A Better Life" is by far the most soulful and authentic track Journey have recorded since Perry left the band.

Such a mystery - to me, anyway - why Journey didn't use Deen more often on the studio albums....or why they didn't release "A Better Life" as a single.

True....Journey can't please everyone, that's a difficult task.

In regards to Dean's vocals, to me it seems like he's not trying to sing like Perry...his normal voice just happens to sound very similar. And he's not straining to hit the notes.

With SA, no matter what people say, to me he's straining 50% of the time. It's truly uncomfortable to hear...especially when you've seen Perry nail these songs live for many years. It's not his fault, as Journey songs are extremely difficult to sing because of the range required. I think SA is a very good singer, and will do well with music that suits his style and range.

MATTHEW wrote:You don't think so? I reckon "A Better Life" is by far the most soulful and authentic track Journey have recorded since Perry left the band.

"Kiss Me Softly"...Not necessarily one of my favorite Journey tunes but a VERY soulful vocal performance by Augeri.