MR

I have a question for U.S. based, old school Journey fans, since my own
experience re: Journey in the very late 70's was in a non-U.S. context.

Go to 1:58 of this May 1978 WCBN interview of Nick Lowe and Elvis Costello.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DNM5_cVsuk

================
Roach: "Why didn't you lose your sense of humor? You know, that kind of..."

Lowe: "Well it's very hard not to, you know, to lose your sense of --you've
got to have a sense of humor about it nowadays, otherwise you'd turn out --
you'll start sounding like Journey or something like that. Or, or--"

Costello: "Now, don't say that. No, that's cruel."

Lowe: "Oh all right, then, Jefferson Starship."
================

Did disdain for Journey go THAT far back, in the U.S. and/or U.K.?
I know the 'corporate' sellout criticism found much use not too much later,
but were the boys subject to this degree of direspect so early? Infinity's
release came four months prior to this radio interview, right?

When I discovered Journey in late '78-'79, it was just music --I didn't
even know what the band looked like, or about any drama around them. I
do remember finally being surprised at their appearance.
Not what I'd expected, lol...

Thanks in advance for any insight.
-wech

The (vintage interview) footage was poorly executed. Lowe and Costello are of a different genre of music than Journey. Notice the retraction later to reference Jefferson Starship. Both groups restructured and reinvented themselves. Disco & Punk Rock cultures were head-to-toe at the time. Rock & Roll (AOR) was the stepchild of the music industry in some locations. I can attest, there was a small group in the East Coast that separated themselves from the above genres. They followed a different path and era.

Groups as Frank Marino & Mahogany Rush, Iron Butterfly, Blue Cheer, Deep Purple, Procol Harum, Jimi Hendrix… You want to talk about disdain. Talk about your black sheep in the flock of sheeple.

cudaclan wrote:The (vintage interview) footage was poorly executed. Lowe and Costello are of a different genre of music than Journey. Notice the retraction later to reference Jefferson Starship. Both groups restructured and reinvented themselves. Disco & Punk Rock cultures were head-to-toe at the time. Rock & Roll (AOR) was the stepchild of the music industry in some locations.

I was into some Bad Company and Rockpile songs not very long after the time of that interview (never
was much into Costello), so yeah, I can see how they didn't share a genre with Journey. I also got that
it was precisely "band-transformation" that framed the (inept) interviewer's question: she was asking
about Lowe's own transition through several musical entities. In any case, I was surprised that Lowe
knew enough to even cite Journey/Journey and Airplane/Starship as transformative examples.

More to the point: I was also surprised that said reference was so negative (there's no doubt that it was
negative, given Costello's reaction) --why was Journey the first name on his tongue? Was Infinity a big
enough hit by May to warrant such dubious top-of-the-list attention? Or was it simply a case of Journey
already having acquired a reputation for ..errr... catering to commercial climate?

I thought "sense of humor" alluded to dealing with a series of commercially (or otherwise) "failed"
band incarnations, and suggests Lowe thought Journey's changes smacked of a little deperation on the
part of whoever was in control of Journey's direction.

If I'm not mistaken Rolling Stone was the one who coined the "corporate rock" moniker... and since they were the premier information source on anything rock~n~roll back then... it was over for Journey (as far as Rolling Stone credibility) after that.. hard to fight that label when Rolling Stone the only game in town..

There was also (still is) a sexist, swaggering, macho thing going on. Rock and roll that appealed to women was suspect and ridiculed by "real" rockers and male rock fans, who were the vast majority and opinion leaders. I could go see Sabbath with my high school boyfriend and that was fine, but if he went to see Chicago with me, his friends would never let him live it down.

slucero wrote:If I'm not mistaken Rolling Stone was the one who coined the "corporate rock" moniker... and since they were the premier information source on anything rock~n~roll back then... it was over for Journey (as far as Rolling Stone credibility) after that.. hard to fight that label when Rolling Stone the only game in town..

Chronology check?
I think most are familiar with RS' bias against Journey, but I'm not sure it necessarily predates
the subject radio interview, at least sufficiently to have influenced Lowe's comment. Was Journey
playing large arenas in May of 1978 --to the point of earning the "arena/corporate rock" tag?

DrFU wrote:There was also (still is) a sexist, swaggering, macho thing going on. Rock and roll that appealed to women was suspect and ridiculed by "real" rockers and male rock fans, who were the vast majority and opinion leaders. I could go see Sabbath with my high school boyfriend and that was fine, but if he went to see Chicago with me, his friends would never let him live it down.

I think I can imagine what you're talking about (I didn't grow up around bullshit like that).
With respect to my question though, that can't have been what was behind Nick Lowe's
comments: his kind of music seems like it would have been no less female-friendly than
what Journey was putting out.

when did Journey make those beer commercials? Was it around this time, or a little later? Because I think that had a hell of a lot to do with the perception of having sold out and becoming commercial rock.

Arianddu wrote:when did Journey make those beer commercials? Was it around this time, or a little later? Because I think that had a hell of a lot to do with the perception of having sold out and becoming commercial rock.

Holy crap... I didn't even know they'd DONE beer ads!!
Thanks.

Did some quick digging around:
Are these 3 radio-jingles for Budweiser what you're referring to?
http://www.journey-tribute.com/journey/ ... urney.html
They're attributed as from 1979: "for the Evolution Tour", or
IOW, the year after the Lowe and Costello radio-interview.

The jingles are also available on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xFeysAYmaM

Remember that at that time in the USA Journey and Elvis Costello were on the same label (CBS/Columbia), so it's not a stretch that he would have heard some of their music at some point even though they were not big in the UK. Elvis was starting to break in the states in that 78/79 timeframe as well, so he would have also heard them on the radio and such, too.

wednesday's child wrote:

slucero wrote:If I'm not mistaken Rolling Stone was the one who coined the "corporate rock" moniker... and since they were the premier information source on anything rock~n~roll back then... it was over for Journey (as far as Rolling Stone credibility) after that.. hard to fight that label when Rolling Stone the only game in town..

Chronology check?
I think most are familiar with RS' bias against Journey, but I'm not sure it necessarily predates
the subject radio interview, at least sufficiently to have influenced Lowe's comment. Was Journey
playing large arenas in May of 1978 --to the point of earning the "arena/corporate rock" tag?

DrFU wrote:There was also (still is) a sexist, swaggering, macho thing going on. Rock and roll that appealed to women was suspect and ridiculed by "real" rockers and male rock fans, who were the vast majority and opinion leaders. I could go see Sabbath with my high school boyfriend and that was fine, but if he went to see Chicago with me, his friends would never let him live it down.

I think I can imagine what you're talking about (I didn't grow up around bullshit like that).
With respect to my question though, that can't have been what was behind Nick Lowe's
comments: his kind of music seems like it would have been no less female-friendly than
what Journey was putting out.

I was in High School... 1976-1980.. and Journey was always constantly ridiculed as "corporate rock"... and I grew up in the SF Bay Area....

StyxCollector wrote:Remember that at that time in the USA Journey and Elvis Costello were on the same label (CBS/Columbia), so it's not a stretch that he would have heard some of their music at some point even though they were not big in the UK. Elvis was starting to break in the states in that 78/79 timeframe as well, so he would have also heard them on the radio and such, too.

Thanks for the label heads-up, US-wise.
If Costello was familiar with Journey, then Lowe likely would have been too.

slucero wrote:

wednesday's child wrote:

slucero wrote:If I'm not mistaken Rolling Stone was the one who coined the "corporate rock" moniker... and since they were the premier information source on anything rock~n~roll back then... it was over for Journey (as far as Rolling Stone credibility) after that.. hard to fight that label when Rolling Stone the only game in town..

Chronology check?
I think most are familiar with RS' bias against Journey, but I'm not sure it necessarily predates
the subject radio interview, at least sufficiently to have influenced Lowe's comment. Was Journey
playing large arenas in May of 1978 --to the point of earning the "arena/corporate rock" tag?

I was in High School... 1976-1980.. and Journey was always constantly ridiculed as "corporate rock"... and I grew up in the SF Bay Area....

My HS years were 79-82, albeit an ocean removed from your context, which
may explain why I only started hearing about the "corporate" bullshit in
the mid-80's.

I never "got" Elvis Costello. He sounded like he had balls in his mouth when he sang.

Rick wrote:I never "got" Elvis Costello. He sounded like he had balls in his mouth when he sang.

I love Elvis' stuff. Not uniformly as some of it's not very good (could really say that with any band), but he's definitely one of the best live performers I've ever seen either with a full band or basically in an unplugged setting (like the tour he did with Steve Nieve about 10 or so years ago). Elvis, Joe Jackson, and Graham Parker all got lumped in together but they're all very different. Graham Parker is the only one I've never warmed up to.

Funny questions from a Filipino, living in Quezon City, where Arnel supposedly lives. Are you him, dude?

Anyone reading Wech's posts will readily understand that Journey did not begin in the Philippines with Arnel. Now everyone can quash the Journey = Arnel in the Phils theories.

Dude, I'd love to meet you and if / when I ever make it back to the P.I., I will look you up! You guys still got Red Horse there? If not, I'll just do some regular San Miguel or Carlsburg. (sp)

Rick wrote:I never "got" Elvis Costello. He sounded like he had balls in his mouth when he sang.

Dude, it frightens me that you even HAVE an idea what singing-with-balls-in-mouth would sound like.




@Steve Austin (a man barely alive, lol)...
Most old-skool Journey fans in the Philippines are too busy making a living to be fairly represented online
(I semi-retired early, on a couple of windfalls). Red Horse? Carlsberg?? San Miguel or GTFO.

StyxCollector wrote:

Rick wrote:I never "got" Elvis Costello. He sounded like he had balls in his mouth when he sang.

I love Elvis' stuff. Not uniformly as some of it's not very good (could really say that with any band), but he's definitely one of the best live performers I've ever seen either with a full band or basically in an unplugged setting (like the tour he did with Steve Nieve about 10 or so years ago). Elvis, Joe Jackson, and Graham Parker all got lumped in together but they're all very different. Graham Parker is the only one I've never warmed up to.

A concert can definitely change my taste. I NEVER cared for Simon and Garfunkel until I saw them on the 25th Anniversary Rock n Roll Hall of Fame show. Now I listen to them. I know I'm fucked up.

wednesday's child wrote:

Rick wrote:I never "got" Elvis Costello. He sounded like he had balls in his mouth when he sang.

Dude, it frightens me that you even HAVE an idea what singing-with-balls-in-mouth would sound like.




@Steve Austin (a man barely alive, lol)...
Most old-skool Journey fans in the Philippines are too busy making a living to be fairly represented online
(I semi-retired early, on a couple of windfalls). Red Horse? Carlsberg?? San Miguel or GTFO.

I see it's all still alive there and I'd be delighted to come to the party. I'll do that sooner than you think and we will have fun. You game?

wednesday's child wrote:

Arianddu wrote:when did Journey make those beer commercials? Was it around this time, or a little later? Because I think that had a hell of a lot to do with the perception of having sold out and becoming commercial rock.

Holy crap... I didn't even know they'd DONE beer ads!!
Thanks.

Did some quick digging around:
Are these 3 radio-jingles for Budweiser what you're referring to?
http://www.journey-tribute.com/journey/ ... urney.html
They're attributed as from 1979: "for the Evolution Tour", or
IOW, the year after the Lowe and Costello radio-interview.

The jingles are also available on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xFeysAYmaM

Yep, those are the ones. As I understand it, Herbie got the band to do it as one way to keep them out of debt to the record label. He did a lot of that sort of stuff early on to keep them out of debt while on the tours, so the label (Columbia?) wouldn't have financial strings to pull on them. The result was a fairly heavy focus on making money pretty much any way they could, including merchandise, from around 1977 on - which is what I attribute a lot of the 'corporate rock' labelling to, and not the music. Keeping them out of debt was pretty sensible, but I don't think the music press saw financial savvy as being part of the Rock'N'Roll Legend. Besides which, I don't think Herbie any made any secret that he intended to make a lot of money out of Journey - he wanted them to be successful any way it took. He did a lot of smart marketing of the band, stuff that is commonplace now, but at the time, I think a lot of the music press just saw him as someone out to make money from the music.
That's where the macho attitude Dr Fu was talking about comes in - I read a stack of Creem and Rolling Stone magazines from the seventies a while ago. The reviews were totally ego-wank works, as much about the reviewer as the music/the bands, and even more so in some cases. I remember one that was 3/4 about the reviewer getting up in the morning and drinking to fix his hangover before he eventually got to putting the album on to listen to. As I recall, the review took nearly 2 columns, and the only actual words that were about the album he was suposed to be reviewing was 'the mellow opening tones lulled me into a false sense of security before the lead singer's voice made my ears bleed.'
The reviews were all about the ego of the reviewer, dictating what was cool and what wasn't. Very little was genuinely about the music. I suspect a fair few rock journalists decided Herbie's focus on making money just wasn't cool, and so screw what the band did, or what their music was, or what reasons Herbie had for what he was doing, they were corporate rock and that was that - and the dumb masses that read their rags followed the band wagon with what was deemed to be cool and what wasn't.

Arianddu wrote:Yep, those are the ones. As I understand it, Herbie got the band to do it as one way to keep them out of debt to the record label. He did a lot of that sort of stuff early on to keep them out of debt while on the tours, so the label (Columbia?) wouldn't have financial strings to pull on them. The result was a fairly heavy focus on making money pretty much any way they could, including merchandise, from around 1977 on - which is what I attribute a lot of the 'corporate rock' labelling to, and not the music. Keeping them out of debt was pretty sensible, but I don't think the music press saw financial savvy as being part of the Rock'N'Roll Legend. Besides which, I don't think Herbie made any secret that he intended to make a lot of money out of Journey - he wanted them to be successful any way it took. He did a lot of smart marketing of the band, stuff that is commonplace now, but at the time, I think a lot of the music press just saw him as someone out to make money from the music.

The irony of it all is that in today's music world --specifically wrt rap/hiphop--
making money is what earns respect.

That's where the macho attitude Dr Fu was talking about comes in - I read a stack of Creem and Rolling Stone magazines from the seventies a while ago. The reviews were totally ego-wank works, as much about the reviewer as the music/the bands, and even more so in some cases. I remember one that was 3/4 about the reviewer getting up in the morning and drinking to fix his hangover before he eventually got to putting the album on to listen to. As I recall, the review took nearly 2 columns, and the only actual words that were about the album he was suposed to be reviewing was 'the mellow opening tones lulled me into a false sense of security before the lead singer's voice made my ears bleed.'
The reviews were all about the ego of the reviewer, dictating what was cool and what wasn't. Very little was genuinely about the music. I suspect a fair few rock journalists decided Herbie's focus on making money just wasn't cool, and so screw what the band did, or what their music was, or what reasons Herbie had for what he was doing, they were corporate rock and that was that - and the dumb masses that read their rags followed the band wagon with what was deemed to be cool and what wasn't.

Glad I didn't have to read any of that sort of crap. We didn't have RollingStone,
or at least I never saw any copies. Here in my country, the main rag was JINGLE,
which was essentially just guitar tabs for local and U.S. Top 40 material.

Just the music and lyrics, thank you very much. Any articles in it were what you'd
call puff pieces, I don't recall reading any of that "too cool for school" crap you
seem to be describing.

I only had some of the tracks from Infinity, jumbled with other material on cassette,
recopied from some unknown person's imported vinyl. It was almost a year before it
was even released locally, and I still had to save money to buy it. Ultimately I
bought it for the music. As the band's subsequent releases impressed me less and less,
I eventually stopped buying. Journey's string of latter hits still formed a fair part
of the auditory backdrop to my teenage years, but those latter hits chiefly hold value
for me today on the basis of sentimental association.*

-wech



*Strangely, this means I can dig Arnel singing some of the earliest Perry-sung stuff,
but can resent hearing his re-recordings of not-so-great later material from the mid-80's
onward. Again, those latter tunes mostly hold value to me as gateways to good memories,
so hearing them sung with a different accent just throws me off my trip.

By the time Perry left, I'd practically tuned out of Journey.
Journey music was something I bumped into, rather than followed. This may be why
some of Perry's solo music is regarded as 'Journey' music in the Philippines: like me,
a lot of folks had stopped following Journey and were just bumping into a familiar
voice. Subsequent years saw them bumping into it less and less, but Journey never
left Philippine MOR radio, and I never stopped periodically dusting off some old LP's.

It was all the good vibe around Arnel that got me following Journey again.
I look forward to their next album. I hope Arnel's contributing more than his voice,
and the material is great, or can at least serve as a soundtrack for new memories.

wednesday's child wrote:

StyxCollector wrote:Remember that at that time in the USA Journey and Elvis Costello were on the same label (CBS/Columbia), so it's not a stretch that he would have heard some of their music at some point even though they were not big in the UK. Elvis was starting to break in the states in that 78/79 timeframe as well, so he would have also heard them on the radio and such, too.

Thanks for the label heads-up, US-wise.
If Costello was familiar with Journey, then Lowe likely would have been too.

slucero wrote:

wednesday's child wrote:

slucero wrote:If I'm not mistaken Rolling Stone was the one who coined the "corporate rock" moniker... and since they were the premier information source on anything rock~n~roll back then... it was over for Journey (as far as Rolling Stone credibility) after that.. hard to fight that label when Rolling Stone the only game in town..

Chronology check?
I think most are familiar with RS' bias against Journey, but I'm not sure it necessarily predates
the subject radio interview, at least sufficiently to have influenced Lowe's comment. Was Journey
playing large arenas in May of 1978 --to the point of earning the "arena/corporate rock" tag?

I was in High School... 1976-1980.. and Journey was always constantly ridiculed as "corporate rock"... and I grew up in the SF Bay Area....

My HS years were 79-82, albeit an ocean removed from your context, which
may explain why I only started hearing about the "corporate" bullshit in
the mid-80's.

yup... Journey got a pass (even from the folks who didn't' dig em and called em corporate) cause they were Bay Area Boys.. but one still heard Journey and Styx in the same sentence as "wimp-rock".

Rick wrote:A concert can definitely change my taste. I NEVER cared for Simon and Garfunkel until I saw them on the 25th Anniversary Rock n Roll Hall of Fame show. Now I listen to them. I know I'm fucked up.

Movies can do the same. I never really cared for Clooney or Torturro until I saw 'Oh Brother Where Art Thou'.


later~

Arkansas wrote:

Rick wrote:A concert can definitely change my taste. I NEVER cared for Simon and Garfunkel until I saw them on the 25th Anniversary Rock n Roll Hall of Fame show. Now I listen to them. I know I'm fucked up.

Movies can do the same. I never really cared for Clooney or Torturro until I saw 'Oh Brother Where Art Thou'.


later~

That was a very different movie for sure. I remember my wife was watching it one night, and I was in the other room, and I could hear the strange music and yodeling sounding singing going on, so I walked in there and asked what in the hell it was she was watching. She's a tough movie critic and gave that one very high marks. From what I've seen of it, it's a really good one, if a bit strange. I just have never sat and watched it beginning to end as I always seem to catch it after it has started and I always seem to catch it in the same place every time too.

Arkansas wrote:
Movies can do the same. I never really cared for Clooney or Torturro until I saw 'Oh Brother Where Art Thou'.

The Odysseia can bring out the best in performers, lol.

wednesday's child wrote:

Arkansas wrote:
Movies can do the same. I never really cared for Clooney or Torturro until I saw 'Oh Brother Where Art Thou'.

The Odysseia can bring out the best in performers, lol.

Whether it's based on Homer or not, I always watch it as a comedy.
The irony, verbal sarcasm, and social satire are simply brilliant.
Confounded. I think that's the underlying theme. And the actors do it so well.

Probably my favorite scene - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tw_YryVgLOg



later~

hmm...interesting discussion...regarding Nick Lowe bringing up Journey in that old interview. At first, I didn't understand his association and name-dropping...but upon further review and following the discussion here, I think it's more his giving an example of a band's going in a different direction--as opposed to an out & out swipe. After all, Infinity (out in '78, the year of the interview) was the band's 1st foray in playing/recording more "listener-friendly" music...and by all accounts, it made an immediate successful impression.

Wow...EC looked like a young kid in that clip...never saw his face until later years. And who's Nick Lowe? Was he in some famous band?

Yeah, you gotta remember that in the pre-perry years, and even though they did not sell alot of albums, Journey was know as a "musician's band" and did have success as a live draw. They did have a hard-core following, all be it a small one. Then the musical change on Infinity was quite a substantial change. Not a 180, but at least a 90. There were very disappointed and bitter fans after that change and it included music insiders, other musicians, RS and other publications. I recall my older brother years ago when I was getting into Journey, I was a kid and seeking approval as kids do (LOL) - I asked if he liked Journey. His response was " I used to like Journey alot before they turned into Steve Perry and the Perryettes".

I think the "artsy" music crowd considered Journey "sell-outs" the moment they changed muscial direction to the more "radio" friendly, lyric based sound. At the time, recall, members of the band were not too happy about the choice to change and the voice chosen to lead that change. Gregg Rolie in BTM stated something to the effect that they wanted somebody out there that could scream not this guy who was crooning. Of course success has away of soothing those types of desires, at least for a while.

Hmn? "Disappointed and bitter fans" seems to still be the act of the day as far as Journey is concerned.