STORY_TELLER wrote:No offense Gid, but dividing up a broad stroke point into sectional separate arguments doesn't mean you won the point of the conversation. It's just your tactic to divert attention off the elements you failed to address.
My "slice 'n dice" of posts enables me to respond to each point; something you failed to do because of supposed time constraints and then criticized me for. That's what we call a double standard and, speaking of tactics, that seems to be the only thing you can use to even attempt to argue with. Well, that and the frequent mention of your precious time. But... isn't it amazing what a little bit of goading on my part can get you to do?

STORY_TELLER wrote:Here's the thing:
You're either just not getting "it" or you're intentionally circumventing "it" ("it" being the source point of this friendly little debate). Because every one of your statements are pointless to the source point of this discussion and that's part of the reason why I didn't bother spending an inordinate amount of time addressing them line by line. As you've demonstrated, it only takes a line or two to make an inaccurate statement or pose an opinion as some kind of fact, but unfortunately, it takes a great deal of time and effort to counter argue and explain why your simple statements are wrong. And unlike you, it's time I just don't have.
Yup, yup, here we have that oft' mentioned time constraint.... which still doesn't stop you from making multi-paragraph responses when properly baited. Like Greg, you seem to have no problem accusing others of being wrong, but when it comes to actually proving it, well there seems to be no greater challenge for you. Try again.

STORY_TELLER wrote:You've been including these bizarre tangent points which circumvent the topic being discussed. I mean advantages? Really? How are the advantages you point to relevant to what Journey became via Perry's substantial contributions? That Journey had a record deal and Perry didn't? Hello? Alien Project had a contract, but I'm not getting drawn into a tangent discussion.
The advantages are relevant because I'm discussing how essential he was to their success and vice versa. Journey came to the table with a greater hand; they had the establishment, they had the record deal, they had experiencing making and selling albums that Perry simply didn't. And as I pointed out to Slucero, Perry's record deal evaporated. Why don't you go ask a mathematician or an economist which is a greater loss: potential (Journey) vs. actual (Perry); Journey was in danger of losing their deal, Perry's was already gone.
That's about as factual as one can get.
STORY_TELLER wrote:The point is:
How is that linearly relevant to a discussion about Journey's success with Perry, when it's historical fact that prior to his joining the band, Journey were doing so poorly, their own record company was about to drop them?
No one denies that they were in danger of losing their deal.
An equally historical fact, though, is that Perry had already lost his contract. Again, potential vs. actual loss and it's rather inane that you're attempting to argue that they were somehow in the same boat, much less that Perry had some sort of advantage. But maybe if you keep repeating it, you can bend the laws of space and time and Perry's definite loss of his record deal will somehow mean less than Journey almost losing theirs. I personally doubt it, but "anything is possible."

STORY_TELLER wrote:Seriously, explain this to me because your logic simply escapes me (I swear these are unintentional puns).
I hope this helps; I applaud your willingness to understand basic logic and make a change for the better (damn those puns).
STORY_TELLER wrote:The point you either didn't get or intentionally circumvented about Chalfant is this:
Of course I knew about The Storm. The reason I brought him up was he was in the music biz, with management, record contracts and all, for almost 10 years BEFORE The Storm. 707 had a one hit wonder in 1982 (that very few people even know or care about today). 10 years during the heyday of AOR and he achieved zilch! Nothing to be ashamed of, it's not an easy thing to achieve, and that's my point.
No, I understood the point well enough and I agree that a gifted singer isn't sufficient (at times) to be a success. Which is why I've been saying singer/songwriter; Perry wasn't the only talented one in the industry at the time. And when Chalfant joined Gregg Rolie and the others under Herbie Herbert's direction, they managed to achieve considerable success given the timeframe and the drastically changing musical landscape.
STORY_TELLER wrote:I only point it out to counter your assertion that Journey would have been plenty successful had some other random albeit talented singer joined instead of Perry. My assertion this whole time is that your assertion is absolutely dismissive nonsense. Chalfant is plenty talented and there are, by your own reasoning, plenty of OTHER talented musicians he could have joined with. Oh wait, that's right, it's not that simple is it? Not so easy to just get out there, make a song, let alone and album, that resonates with the majority of music listeners and becomes a hit. It's not just a voice, then is it? It's the art of crafting a song too. How was Journey doing that before Perry? Oh yeah, they weren't. Yet the first album Journey does with Perry scores, the record company is happy and they just keep on building from there. Gee, what a coincidence. But you're right, anyone could have done that. Just ask Chalfant or Michael Bolton, who struggled for years before anything broke for him, and he had to do a cover song to get that ball rolling. Great talent there, great voice, but it took a cover song of a previous hit to get him a career. Again, Journey blew up right off the bat with Perry's songwriting involvement and vox and that's because Perry was the focal point for the crafting of all their songs during the Rollie era. NOT JUST THE VOICE.
I said that the odds would have been more likely that they would have found success without Perry than Perry would have found without them. I never said that they'd be as successful, they might not have been! Or they might have been more successful, unless you believe Steve Perry is the fulcrum that balances the ever expanding universe and he and he alone was gifted enough to raise Journey from the ocean floor of mediocrity or something else equally obnoxious.
STORY_TELLER wrote:See how much time that took to point out? Just not worth the effort to do that across all your little tangent statements, especially when considering the following:
Yet you did it in spite of your "precious time" (pun intended); who do you think you're fooling? (pun intended; can you guess the song?

STORY_TELLER wrote:Journey will be remembered by the majority for their musical heyday catalog with Perry. The majority of fans who listen to Journey's music don't care about the post Perry era catalog and that's why Perry and Journey are inseparable. That a handful of people on this board disagree is irrelevant. We are all hard-core fans. We know the ins and outs of every little stupid thing that went on with this band. The discussions on this board aren't indicative of the mind of the casual fan. Journey's legacy is secured in music history as described (Perry-centric). Pineda, Augeri, as talented as they are, will only be thought of as Perry soundalikes hired to replaced Perry. That the details differ is irrelevant. Perception rules the day, and as recent articles have pointed out, casual fans think Arnel sounds like Perry. Even Sammy Hagar pointed out Journey failed with Augeri because he was trying to be Perry (look it up).
I'll never deny that Perry was a major, critical ingredient to the success Journey enjoyed.
STORY_TELLER wrote:Stop grinding your axes already. Stop going around board to board, policing and hounding everyone's posts who's opinion you're trying to change.
You mean........... like you're trying to do with me, right now?



STORY_TELLER wrote:You're changing nothing. You're gaining nothing. In the end, you will be nothing, lol... go outside and get a life already. 'Nuff said!
So in what world is the guy who claims to be uber-busy and struggling with a demanding schedule and yet somehow finds the time to post multiple multi-paragraph arguments after being goaded an ideal choice to lecture others on getting a life? In typical Loon fashion, your words don't match your actions.





STORY_TELLER wrote:(prediction: Gideon will slice and dice this post as he always does. These slices and dices will create more tangents. Others will chime in on these tangents and none of you will see the sun for the better part of a month!).
(Prediction: In spite of your multiple assurances and your incessant claims of an incredibly demanding schedule, you'll come back and make more time for me. And I'll spend that next month laughing my ass off.



STORY_TELLER wrote:ST out!
You'll be back.