MR

It's almost like two different bands, but damn it, I love it all. Call me a Journey freak. Everyone else does. Can't help what I like. I've got my 15 year old daughter listening now. Now that's great I think.

Two great albums.

shoot_em_up wrote:It's almost like two different bands, but damn it, I love it all. Call me a Journey freak. Everyone else does. Can't help what I like. I've got my 15 year old daughter listening now. Now that's great I think.

All three of my kids were raised on the Perry era of Journey. My 21 year old and 10 year old daughters are more into Journey than my 16 year old son. And now both of my daughters have seen Journey with JSS ( my 10 year old and I saw Journey last August), but it was the first time my 21 year old got to see JSS. She said he was great. I also gave her a Journey boot concert and JSS's Essential Ballads for Christmas.

shoot_em_up wrote:It's almost like two different bands, but damn it, I love it all. Call me a Journey freak. Everyone else does. Can't help what I like. I've got my 15 year old daughter listening now. Now that's great I think.

If they would pared "Arrival" down a little, I think it certainly would've helped a lot. 15 songs is too many, in my opinion. Drop about three of those and you have a much better album.

conversation piece wrote:

shoot_em_up wrote:It's almost like two different bands, but damn it, I love it all. Call me a Journey freak. Everyone else does. Can't help what I like. I've got my 15 year old daughter listening now. Now that's great I think.

If they would pared "Arrival" down a little, I think it certainly would've helped a lot. 15 songs is too many, in my opinion. Drop about three of those and you have a much better album.

Not for me brother, the more the better. Augeri was gold on that Album. I'm more of a Perry fan, but what can I say?

yeah, I've never got when people said "they shoud've released less songs".
I was happy after hearing the advanced copies that they added tunes.

brywool wrote:yeah, I've never got when people said "they shoud've released less songs".
I was happy after hearing the advanced copies that they added tunes.

Personally, I would've left "All the Way", "All the Things", and "Lifetime of Dreams" off that album. That many songs being on an album just makes it too long and like there are a few "filler" tracks.

shoot_em_up wrote:It's almost like two different bands, but damn it, I love it all. Call me a Journey freak. Everyone else does. Can't help what I like. I've got my 15 year old daughter listening now. Now that's great I think.

Two different bands, yeah that's how I hear it too. I like Arrival, since Dean made me really listen to it, but it doesn't sound like what I would have expected from a Perry/Journey album. My daughters just can't get into any Journey without Perry, they grew up listening to Perry, but they've both listened to my downloads of Jeff and think Journey's got a lot more going for them now. When they see the DVD of the Baltimore they'll be as into Jeff as I am.

ohsherrie wrote:

shoot_em_up wrote:It's almost like two different bands, but damn it, I love it all. Call me a Journey freak. Everyone else does. Can't help what I like. I've got my 15 year old daughter listening now. Now that's great I think.

Two different bands, yeah that's how I hear it too. I like Arrival, since Dean made me really listen to it, but it doesn't sound like what I would have expected from a Perry/Journey album. My daughters just can't get into any Journey without Perry, they grew up listening to Perry, but they've both listened to my downloads of Jeff and think Journey's got a lot more going for them now. When they see the DVD of the Baltimore they'll be as into Jeff as I am.

That is great! I can't beleive it myself that my daughter loves Journey when her whole generation loves that other stuff. I don't even know what to call it. We gotta keep it going, it is excellent music. Some just don't realize it yet.

shoot_em_up wrote:

ohsherrie wrote:

shoot_em_up wrote:It's almost like two different bands, but damn it, I love it all. Call me a Journey freak. Everyone else does. Can't help what I like. I've got my 15 year old daughter listening now. Now that's great I think.

Two different bands, yeah that's how I hear it too. I like Arrival, since Dean made me really listen to it, but it doesn't sound like what I would have expected from a Perry/Journey album. My daughters just can't get into any Journey without Perry, they grew up listening to Perry, but they've both listened to my downloads of Jeff and think Journey's got a lot more going for them now. When they see the DVD of the Baltimore they'll be as into Jeff as I am.

That is great! I can't beleive it myself that my daughter loves Journey when her whole generation loves that other stuff. I don't even know what to call it. We gotta keep it going, it is excellent music. Some just don't realize it yet.

My girls are a lot older than yours. My oldest was just a little kid when I got obsessed with Journey. My second has been hearing it from infancy. Neither of them has ever been much into today's music. They each like some of it, but they don't have any passion for any band. They'll always remember Journey though.

brywool wrote:yeah, I've never got when people said "they shoud've released less songs".
I was happy after hearing the advanced copies that they added tunes.

Well, part of me with my favorite bands just wants as much music as possible, but most bands can't make an album with 15-20 songs and have them all be brilliant. It's not that I would've wanted less Journey music, but both TBF and Arrival had some filler on them, which in the context of an album, lessens the impact of the really good songs. Obviously you can always skip over the tunes you don't like (kinda like I do with "Open Arms" ), but I'd rather have an album of 11 or 12 killer tunes than 16 songs with some filler. Of course, what tunes constitute "filler" is different for everyone, so I suppose it's totally subjective. But while many albums have benefitted from the extended running time of a CD, I do think the 40-minute limitation on a vinyl record did force many bands to be selective about what they did include on their albums.

WalrusOct9 wrote:

brywool wrote:yeah, I've never got when people said "they shoud've released less songs".
I was happy after hearing the advanced copies that they added tunes.

Well, part of me with my favorite bands just wants as much music as possible, but most bands can't make an album with 15-20 songs and have them all be brilliant. It's not that I would've wanted less Journey music, but both TBF and Arrival had some filler on them, which in the context of an album, lessens the impact of the really good songs. Obviously you can always skip over the tunes you don't like (kinda like I do with "Open Arms" ), but I'd rather have an album of 11 or 12 killer tunes than 16 songs with some filler. Of course, what tunes constitute "filler" is different for everyone, so I suppose it's totally subjective. But while many albums have benefitted from the extended running time of a CD, I do think the 40-minute limitation on a vinyl record did force many bands to be selective about what they did include on their albums.

Yea, roger that. However, that is the one thing I've always appreciated about Journey. While groups like Boston, whom I love also, thought it was ample to put 7 songs on an album, Journey filled that mothefucker up. I LOVE them for doing that. They give you what you pay for, and maybe some more.

shoot_em_up wrote:Yea, roger that. However, that is the one thing I've always appreciated about Journey. While groups like Boston, whom I love also, thought it was ample to put 7 songs on an album, Journey filled that mothefucker up. I LOVE them for doing that. They give you what you pay for, and maybe some more.

The only Boston album that had that few songs was "Don't Look Back" and the songs there were long enough to nearly equal Journey's albums from that era.

WalrusOct9 wrote:

brywool wrote:yeah, I've never got when people said "they shoud've released less songs".
I was happy after hearing the advanced copies that they added tunes.

Well, part of me with my favorite bands just wants as much music as possible, but most bands can't make an album with 15-20 songs and have them all be brilliant. It's not that I would've wanted less Journey music, but both TBF and Arrival had some filler on them, which in the context of an album, lessens the impact of the really good songs. Obviously you can always skip over the tunes you don't like (kinda like I do with "Open Arms" ), but I'd rather have an album of 11 or 12 killer tunes than 16 songs with some filler. Of course, what tunes constitute "filler" is different for everyone, so I suppose it's totally subjective. But while many albums have benefitted from the extended running time of a CD, I do think the 40-minute limitation on a vinyl record did force many bands to be selective about what they did include on their albums.

Van Halen's first album was 35 min long and their 2nd album was 31 min long. The great thing about those albums is that the songs were short and to the point and before you knew it, it was time to give her a spin again. I think it was David Lee Roth that said people have short attention spans and that's why their songs and albums were so short. I think that is even more true today with the pace of life even faster. Some of todays CD's are way too long for a complete listen at once. 75 minutes seems like an eternity sometimes unless it's a fucking brilliant CD. Not many these days.

JrnyScarab wrote:Van Halen's first album was 35 min long and their 2nd album was 31 min long. The great thing about those albums is that the songs were short and to the point and before you knew it, it was time to give her a spin again. I think it was David Lee Roth that said people have short attention spans and that's why their songs and albums were so short. I think that is even more true today with the pace of life even faster. Some of todays CD's are way too long for a complete listen at once. 75 minutes seems like an eternity sometimes unless it's a fucking brilliant CD. Not many these days.

All of their albums in the DLR era were short. The longest was the debut and that was because there were 11 tunes there. The first album with Hagar, "5150", was easily the longest up to that point at over 40 minutes.

conversation piece wrote:

JrnyScarab wrote:Van Halen's first album was 35 min long and their 2nd album was 31 min long. The great thing about those albums is that the songs were short and to the point and before you knew it, it was time to give her a spin again. I think it was David Lee Roth that said people have short attention spans and that's why their songs and albums were so short. I think that is even more true today with the pace of life even faster. Some of todays CD's are way too long for a complete listen at once. 75 minutes seems like an eternity sometimes unless it's a fucking brilliant CD. Not many these days.

All of their albums in the DLR era were short. The longest was the debut and that was because there were 11 tunes there. The first album with Hagar, "5150", was easily the longest up to that point at over 40 minutes.

I liked much of their stuff with Hagar as well as Roth, but it seems like some of the Hagar era tunes dragged on a little too long sometimes. Not all but some.

JrnyScarab wrote:

conversation piece wrote:

JrnyScarab wrote:Van Halen's first album was 35 min long and their 2nd album was 31 min long. The great thing about those albums is that the songs were short and to the point and before you knew it, it was time to give her a spin again. I think it was David Lee Roth that said people have short attention spans and that's why their songs and albums were so short. I think that is even more true today with the pace of life even faster. Some of todays CD's are way too long for a complete listen at once. 75 minutes seems like an eternity sometimes unless it's a fucking brilliant CD. Not many these days.

All of their albums in the DLR era were short. The longest was the debut and that was because there were 11 tunes there. The first album with Hagar, "5150", was easily the longest up to that point at over 40 minutes.

I liked much of their stuff with Hagar as well as Roth, but it seems like some of the Hagar era tunes dragged on a little too long sometimes. Not all but some.

I really like some of their longer tunes..."Pleasure Dome", "Feelin'", even "Year to the Day" and "Ballot or the Bullet" with Gary Cherone.

conversation piece wrote:

JrnyScarab wrote:

conversation piece wrote:

JrnyScarab wrote:Van Halen's first album was 35 min long and their 2nd album was 31 min long. The great thing about those albums is that the songs were short and to the point and before you knew it, it was time to give her a spin again. I think it was David Lee Roth that said people have short attention spans and that's why their songs and albums were so short. I think that is even more true today with the pace of life even faster. Some of todays CD's are way too long for a complete listen at once. 75 minutes seems like an eternity sometimes unless it's a fucking brilliant CD. Not many these days.

All of their albums in the DLR era were short. The longest was the debut and that was because there were 11 tunes there. The first album with Hagar, "5150", was easily the longest up to that point at over 40 minutes.

I liked much of their stuff with Hagar as well as Roth, but it seems like some of the Hagar era tunes dragged on a little too long sometimes. Not all but some.

I really like some of their longer tunes..."Pleasure Dome", "Feelin'", even "Year to the Day" and "Ballot or the Bullet" with Gary Cherone.

The length of a song isn't what I hate. It's songs that get too repetitive and wander aimlessly. I love Progressive Rock and those songs are LOOONNG and that's OK as long as they are not boring.

conversation piece wrote: 75 minutes seems like an eternity sometimes unless it's a fucking brilliant CD. Not many these days.

Oh man, ain't that the truth?!

I actually love VHIII. It's one of the few albums that I listen to all the way through without skipping a track. That's a testament to the quality of the songs. They're all different and unique. And that electric sitar intro to "Ballot Or The Bullet" is awesome!

JeremyP wrote:

conversation piece wrote: 75 minutes seems like an eternity sometimes unless it's a fucking brilliant CD. Not many these days.

Oh man, ain't that the truth?!

I actually love VHIII. It's one of the few albums that I listen to all the way through without skipping a track. That's a testament to the quality of the songs. They're all different and unique. And that electric sitar intro to "Ballot Or The Bullet" is awesome!

There are some really good tracks on that album but the rest are crap. "How Many Say I" is a good sentiment but it's easily the worst VH song ever, by far. Eddie should never sing lead vocals...NEVER.

conversation piece wrote:

JeremyP wrote:

conversation piece wrote: 75 minutes seems like an eternity sometimes unless it's a fucking brilliant CD. Not many these days.

Oh man, ain't that the truth?!

I actually love VHIII. It's one of the few albums that I listen to all the way through without skipping a track. That's a testament to the quality of the songs. They're all different and unique. And that electric sitar intro to "Ballot Or The Bullet" is awesome!

There are some really good tracks on that album but the rest are crap. "How Many Say I" is a good sentiment but it's easily the worst VH song ever, by far. Eddie should never sing lead vocals...NEVER.

How Many Say I is an absolute embarassment. I like much of the CD but Eddie was in the early stages of dementia when he decided to put THAT on the CD. My dog could have written that one. I wonder what management thought when they heard it!

JrnyScarab wrote:How Many Say I is an absolute embarassment. I like much of the CD but Eddie was in the early stages of dementia when he decided to put THAT on the CD. My dog could have written that one. I wonder what management thought when they heard it!

I seriously think the guy has killed too many brain cells with alcohol. I heard an interview on Stern's show and the guy could barely put a coherent thought together. He even claimed that he had cured his own cancer.

Arrival is a beast and probably too long. I liked it though. Total attempt to copy "Escape", but that was probably what I would have called for then as well.

I hope this time they go for a Rolie era sound with Jeff. Or something totally different. It's their call. Looking forward to whatever they have in mind.

Arrival is very good, and we all know Escape is A+ material. Generations could have used Arrival's production-ERIC

AR wrote:Arrival is a beast and probably too long. I liked it though. Total attempt to copy "Escape", but that was probably what I would have called for then as well.

You have lost your marbles. Arrival, a beast? Dude, get the rope and shower curtain rod out . End it already.
Arrival is syrupy. Too many sleepy songs.

RockinDeano wrote:

AR wrote:Arrival is a beast and probably too long. I liked it though. Total attempt to copy "Escape", but that was probably what I would have called for then as well.

You have lost your marbles. Arrival, a beast? Dude, get the rope and shower curtain rod out . End it already.
Arrival is syrupy. Too many sleepy songs.

It was good thing it leaked out. The first version of Arrival had more love songs. they went back and recorded more rocker-ERIC

RockinDeano wrote:

AR wrote:Arrival is a beast and probably too long. I liked it though. Total attempt to copy "Escape", but that was probably what I would have called for then as well.

You have lost your marbles. Arrival, a beast? Dude, get the rope and shower curtain rod out . End it already.
Arrival is syrupy. Too many sleepy songs.

My opinion.

Then again I thought the Ravens would win.

I need a crazy Islamic death squad to hang me like Saddam. Life is over.

Signs of Life, Higher Place, and To Be Alive Again still rock though.

Arrival had some great songs on it & some filler too!
but didn't trial by fire have some filler also? way too many ballads!!
what about frontiers? back talk , troubled child , frontiers were all throwaways compared to the first 5 songs.
my favorite 3 songs on arrival right now are..
1.highter place 2.to be alive again 3.loved by you

brywool wrote:yeah, I've never got when people said "they shoud've released less songs".
I was happy after hearing the advanced copies that they added tunes.

I third this viewpoint...more songs the better.


And despite what a lot felt was a swing and miss on the attempt to deliver Arrival as the promised "ESC4P3 2000" I do hear the echo of the '81 masterpiece on Arrival...some places more subtle than others like I can feel some DSB in the keys and guitars of Signs Of Life....


Also, VH III is maybe my #2 VH behind FUCK. I like it that much despite the abomination of self indulgence that is HMSI? and the too slow too long Josephina.

But really, how fucking cool is Dirty Water Dog? One of the best Van Halen songs ever made.

Red13JoePa wrote:
Also, VH III is maybe my #2 VH behind FUCK. I like it that much despite the abomination of self indulgence that is HMSI? and the too slow too long Josephina.

could you take some time and reconsider this? "One i Want" is worse song of all time for them.. even above 5150? and the first album? the album seems blurry..