Steve Perry Q&A @ Fan Asylum

[fredinator]

Yes, Propanolol is for high blood pressure (Inderal) but is used for stage fright and has been found just recently that it dramatically reduces anxiety in post traumatic stress disorder and anxiety disorder... The military is looking into using it for soldiers who are suffering from PTSD.

[Granny]

Yes, Propanolol is for high blood pressure (Inderal) but is used for stage fright and has been found just recently that it dramatically reduces anxiety in post traumatic stress disorder and anxiety disorder... The military is looking into using it for soldiers who are suffering from PTSD.

Thats an interesting twist for an old medication....Is is also used to prevent migraine headaches...what a useful drug....

[yulog]

Yep granny --inderal is used to stabalize moods in pts with mood disorder as well as , helping with anxiety(although its not usually prescribed specifically for anxiety, buspar or vistaril would be prescribed more for anxiety)--part of the theory is that when you pressure is lower you tend to be more relaxed.

[fredinator]

They just did a show on 60 minutes about it... They actually called it a wonder drug; there was this poor woman on there who said it changed her life. Anyway, I've taken it before and I always thought it was a wonder drug...

[Enigma869]

Rodgers has sold 125 million albums, still actively tours, still actively sings, and actually sounds better than he did in his youth, and has fronted multiple hit making bands. If that's not fufilling your destiny as a successful singer, what is?

In contrast, the only thing Perry actively does these days/years/decades is pontificates.

Two points...Who really gives a rats ass whether or not Perry is still touring. This argument is old and tired. Someone else tried to make the point that because Dennis DeYoung is still touring that somehow this makes the guy better. Has it ever occurred to you that some people (regardless of what field they're in) are pretty okay with just walking away, while on top?

As far as Paul Rodgers is concerned, I personally think the guy sounds worse than shit, attempting to sing Queen material. I am honestly stunned that Queen fans embrace what he does to such classic music. I guess because Freddie is no longer alive, fans are a bit more accepting, if it means hearing the music they love! Finally, I would challenge that Paul Rodgers has sold 125 million albums. That would mean he has sold more than U2, The Eagles, The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Aerosmith and Journey (and I left MANY artists off of the 100 million albums list)! I will NEVER believe that Paul Rodgers has sold more albums than even one of the artists I listed!

John from Boston

[CatEyes]

I've never met ANY singer that included drinking coffee as part of their warming up regiment.
Did that strike anyone as odd (Jeremy? Nora?)

I do know singers that drink coffee to "open up" their vocal chords.I know one of them who drinks a few mugs of coffee right before the show,says it warms up his voice.
But coffee doesn't work the same on all the singers.Actually,medically speaking,cafeine dehydrates the vocal chords and makes the voice raspy.
I know singers who avoid coffee on concerts days for this very reason.

However,the BEST beverage for singers is water.Plain and plenty.

Also, in the blood stream, coffee/caffeine mimics a drug named theophylline. It is a broncodilator/expectorant that really opens up the blood vessels in the lungs so that those vessels can more efficiently process oxgenated blood and get it out to the rest of the body.

Some people are very sensitive to the match so much that a cup of coffee can sometimes break up an asthma attack.

Cat

[Wildfire]

Cat is right. I know a friend of mine has asthma, she drinks coffee when she has an attack.

[PROPERRY]

I enjoyed reading all the Q's and A's . It sure is great hearing from Perry again!!

Lori

[Badcotune]

[quote="Enigma869

Two points...Who really gives a rats ass whether or not Perry is still touring. This argument is old and tired. Someone else tried to make the point that because Dennis DeYoung is still touring that somehow this makes the guy better. Has it ever occurred to you that some people (regardless of what field they're in) are pretty okay with just walking away, while on top?

As far as Paul Rodgers is concerned, I personally think the guy sounds worse than shit, attempting to sing Queen material. I am honestly stunned that Queen fans embrace what he does to such classic music. I guess because Freddie is no longer alive, fans are a bit more accepting, if it means hearing the music they love! Finally, I would challenge that Paul Rodgers has sold 125 million albums. That would mean he has sold more than U2, The Eagles, The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Aerosmith and Journey (and I left MANY artists off of the 100 million albums list)! I will NEVER believe that Paul Rodgers has sold more albums than even one of the artists I listed!

John from Boston[/quote]




Dear Rats Ass,

Two points for you.

1: I check my facts before posting, and it's irrelevant what you will never believe. It's precisely because of his musical impact as well as album sales that make Paul a legend whether you tip your hat in his direction or not.

from http://www.answers.com/topic/paul-rodgers

"In a career that now spans three decades, vocalist, guitarist, and songwriter Paul Rodgers and his various groups have sold in excess of 125 million records around the world. Best known for his expressive vocals on songs that have become rock & roll staples, like "All Right Now," "Feel Like Makin' Love," "Can't Get Enough" and "Rock 'n' Roll Fantasy," Rodgers has been cited by dozens of 1970s and '80s-era rock groups and musicians as a major influence."

Point 2: Who gives a rats ass if Perry tours again? Apparently quite a few people, Rats Ass, or was that point lost on you? I've said I do not feel as though he owes me anything (touring or otherwise) - or was that point also lost on you? It's easy to lose track when you're not paying attention, isn't it Rat's Ass? And thanks for being so eloquent, I'm sure it was a challenge. My point, in case you missed it, it that I've lost some interest and respect for Perry because of his self imposed inactivy, inversely (say it slowly) my respect for another singer has grown because he's still creating and pushing the limits of what older singers can be capable of. It doesn't really matter if you like his style of singing, anyone with ears can hear the proficiency, power, and projection of his vocals -- at 57 years old. That's impressive, and inspiring for many rock fans. My opinion, we don't have to share it.

Run along now Rats Ass and compose that clever retort if you must...

[Shadowsong]

Some good
Some not so good
Inderal can also cause impotence

[Matthew]

...sure there was a flicker of activity from 94 to 96, but let's be frank -- after the ROR tour -- for reasons we may never know, and isn't our business to know -- he checked out. It all became too difficult -- too emotional -- to do the thing he struggled for so long to be able to make a living at. His dream job fulfilled and perfectly realized became all too much.
He could sing at half speed and still inject his unique cadence and texture into song, and have an audience well into twilight like Sinatra did, and he'd be surrounded by loving fans for the duration. Instead, he's content to sip tea and pontificate on, and continually polish up old treasures. And good for him -- but I don't have to get excited about it. Perry hasn't just let some very productive years get away from him -- he's let DECADES. My respect for him has dwindled proportionately.

Paul Rodgers in contrast, is in top form, and is demonstrating what being a 57 year old power-singer is cabable of -- and that new performance plateaus can still be attained even at that age if but first there is effort and a desire. My respect for him grows daily.

(P.s. please let's not turn this into a Paul vs. Steve thread. They are apples and oranges. The point of the comparison is clearly defined -- effort and desire = results)

~Badcotune

Paul Rogers has wasted decades too. Rogers had so much potential and it was never fulfilled. Whereas Perry has most definitely fulfilled his...

Respectfully, I couldn't disagree more. Rodgers has sold 125 million albums, still actively tours, still actively sings, and actually sounds better than he did in his youth, and has fronted multiple hit making bands. If that's not fufilling your destiny as a successful singer, what is?

In contrast, the only thing Perry actively does these days/years/decades is pontificates.

Badoctune - I'm not denying that Paul Rodgers has been a successful singer. My point was that his success was concentrated in a very short, electifying period in the early to mid 70s and that his career overall didn't live up to the extraordinary promise of his early years.

Let's be honest - Bad Company peaked in 1974 - and Rodgers was barely visible for almost thirty years until he agreed to do the Queen tour. Yes, I'm sure his die-hard fans can make strong arguments for the quality of his work over these three decades - but the only project that I was ever aware of was The Firm in the mid-80s - which was widely considered to be a creative and a commercial disappointment.

So it could be argued that Perry's 'golden years' actually lasted longer than the equivalent period for Rodgers.

But yes - Rodgers is still out there performing at a high level and Perry isn't. However, I'm not sure I'd want to see Perry fronting another band who are long past their best...like Boston or Foreigner....or singing hits made famous by a contemporary of his.

You're right to say though that Perry ran into 'emotional' difficulties about recording and touring - even about his own gifts - in a way that Rodgers clearly has not. And if you respect Steady Eddie-type professionals more than troubled geniuses then I can see that Perry can be compared unfavourably to Rodgers.

But equally I reckon Perry was a much more 'emotional' singer than Rodgers - and that many of the characteristcs of Perry's which might frustrate us and make us lose respect for him - the self-condemnation, perfectionism, the tendency to withdraw and isolate, and so on - were the very same characteristics which helped to make him such a phenomenal singer in the first place. I honestly think that if Perry had had a well-adjusted and uncomplicated personality Journey would have been half the band they were - so I guess we have to take the rough with the smooth.

[RedWingFan]

So it could be argued that Perry's 'golden years' actually lasted longer than the equivalent period for Rodgers.

But yes - Rodgers is still out there performing at a high level and Perry isn't. However, I'm not sure I'd want to see Perry fronting another band who are long past their best...like Boston or Foreigner....or singing hits made famous by a contemporary of his.

You're right to say though that Perry ran into 'emotional' difficulties about recording and touring - even about his own gifts - in a way that Rodgers clearly has not. And if you respect Steady Eddie-type professionals more than troubled geniuses then I can see that Perry can be compared unfavourably to Rodgers.

I think what you guys are talking about can pretty much be summed up by the old "Tortoise and the Hare" story. While comparing my favorite Rodgers tune, "Silver, Blue and Gold" and Perry's "Sweet and Simple". Rodgers is clearly the tortoise, not meant as a slam on Rodgers, but I listen to Journey for Perry's voice. It was a thing of beauty, they were things he can no longer do in the same way.

[CatEyes]

Some good
Some not so good
Inderal can also cause impotence

So does beer !!!

[Lula]

Some good
Some not so good
Inderal can also cause impotence

So does beer !!!

huh??

[CatEyes]

Some good
Some not so good
Inderal can also cause impotence

So does beer !!!

huh??

Oh it is far more temporary than with the Inderal - however, the poor circulation resulting from large amounts of alcohol is a major cause of impotence -

[Lula]

Hey Cat, so is my sig

[fredinator]

I don't remember anything regarding impotence and propanolol--maybe so... I also don't recall if you take it like you would for high blood pressure--in other words, you would take it only during treatment for PTSD, when public speaking, etc... Stevie might consider it if he's still suffering from the loss of his mother, Journey, etc.... Maybe it would help, who knows?

[Badcotune]

...sure there was a flicker of activity from 94 to 96, but let's be frank -- after the ROR tour -- for reasons we may never know, and isn't our business to know -- he checked out. It all became too difficult -- too emotional -- to do the thing he struggled for so long to be able to make a living at. His dream job fulfilled and perfectly realized became all too much.
He could sing at half speed and still inject his unique cadence and texture into song, and have an audience well into twilight like Sinatra did, and he'd be surrounded by loving fans for the duration. Instead, he's content to sip tea and pontificate on, and continually polish up old treasures. And good for him -- but I don't have to get excited about it. Perry hasn't just let some very productive years get away from him -- he's let DECADES. My respect for him has dwindled proportionately.

Paul Rodgers in contrast, is in top form, and is demonstrating what being a 57 year old power-singer is cabable of -- and that new performance plateaus can still be attained even at that age if but first there is effort and a desire. My respect for him grows daily.

(P.s. please let's not turn this into a Paul vs. Steve thread. They are apples and oranges. The point of the comparison is clearly defined -- effort and desire = results)

~Badcotune

Paul Rogers has wasted decades too. Rogers had so much potential and it was never fulfilled. Whereas Perry has most definitely fulfilled his...

Respectfully, I couldn't disagree more. Rodgers has sold 125 million albums, still actively tours, still actively sings, and actually sounds better than he did in his youth, and has fronted multiple hit making bands. If that's not fufilling your destiny as a successful singer, what is?

In contrast, the only thing Perry actively does these days/years/decades is pontificates.

But yes - Rodgers is still out there performing at a high level and Perry isn't. However, I'm not sure I'd want to see Perry fronting another band who are long past their best...like Boston or Foreigner....or singing hits made famous by a contemporary of his.

You're right to say though that Perry ran into 'emotional' difficulties about recording and touring - even about his own gifts - in a way that Rodgers clearly has not. And if you respect Steady Eddie-type professionals more than troubled geniuses then I can see that Perry can be compared unfavourably to Rodgers.

But equally I reckon Perry was a much more 'emotional' singer than Rodgers - and that many of the characteristcs of Perry's which might frustrate us and make us lose respect for him - the self-condemnation, perfectionism, the tendency to withdraw and isolate, and so on - were the very same characteristics which helped to make him such a phenomenal singer in the first place. I honestly think that if Perry had had a well-adjusted and uncomplicated personality Journey would have been half the band they were - so I guess we have to take the rough with the smooth.

You make some good points, but it's not so much that Rodgers is a "stready-eddie" -- if he didn't have that powerful voice it wouldn't matter if he released an album yearly. I have to take exception to the comment about Rodgers only fronting a band past it's prime, though. Since 2000 he's toured repeatedly with Bad Co., his solo Band, with Queen, and Solo again this past summer. Speaking first hand, I caught him at a summer show in Palm Springs and was floored by the soul and emotion in his voice. He's very similar to Perry in that regard, the way he can sell a lyric with honest emotion, and he sounds better today then he did on those old Bad Co. recordings -- which is astonishing to me. I can't think of another artist or athlete in any profession whose operates at this level in thier late 50's. It's surely an exception -- could Perry outperform his younger self -- probably not, but that's not the point -- the point is that he does not seem embolden to even try. The only other singer I've heard live that has comperable projection and emotion to present day Rodgers and older Perry is Celine Dion in Vegas -- doesn't matter if her music if your cup of tea -- the perfomance and vocal stylings are amazing. Will she sound as good at 57?

I agree that Perry's self torture is probably both a blessing and a curse for him musically, but he was only active in journey for 10 years. The rest has been reflecting on it, and I think as an artist he has more to offer his own legacy. Do I feel owed that? No. Would I like to see it? Certainly. But indifference is creeeeeeeepin' in.

P.s. If you haven't seen it, or know about it -- check out the 2002-2003 Bad Co. LIVE dvd shot in Anaheim Ca. NEAL SCHON and SLASH guest on it, and it's an amazing performance. Highest possible recommendation. Seagull is a particular highlight.

[CatEyes]

Hey Cat, so is my sig

[Deb]

But equally I reckon Perry was a much more 'emotional' singer than Rodgers - and that many of the characteristcs of Perry's which might frustrate us and make us lose respect for him - the self-condemnation, perfectionism, the tendency to withdraw and isolate, and so on - were the very same characteristics which helped to make him such a phenomenal singer in the first place. I honestly think that if Perry had had a well-adjusted and uncomplicated personality Journey would have been half the band they were - so I guess we have to take the rough with the smooth.

Wow, good point Matt.

[Enigma869]

You make some good points, but it's not so much that Rodgers is a "stready-eddie" -- if he didn't have that powerful voice it wouldn't matter if he released an album yearly. I have to take exception to the comment about Rodgers only fronting a band past it's prime, though. Since 2000 he's toured repeatedly with Bad Co., his solo Band, with Queen, and Solo again this past summer. Speaking first hand, I caught him at a summer show in Palm Springs and was floored by the soul and emotion in his voice. He's very similar to Perry in that regard, the way he can sell a lyric with honest emotion, and he sounds better today then he did on those old Bad Co. recordings -- which is astonishing to me. I can't think of another artist or athlete in any profession whose operates at this level in thier late 50's. It's surely an exception -- could Perry outperform his younger self -- probably not, but that's not the point -- the point is that he does not seem embolden to even try. The only other singer I've heard live that has comperable projection and emotion to present day Rodgers and older Perry is Celine Dion in Vegas -- doesn't matter if her music if your cup of tea -- the perfomance and vocal stylings are amazing. Will she sound as good at 57?

I agree that Perry's self torture is probably both a blessing and a curse for him musically, but he was only active in journey for 10 years. The rest has been reflecting on it, and I think as an artist he has more to offer his own legacy. Do I feel owed that? No. Would I like to see it? Certainly. But indifference is creeeeeeeepin' in.

P.s. If you haven't seen it, or know about it -- check out the 2002-2003 Bad Co. LIVE dvd shot in Anaheim Ca. NEAL SCHON and SLASH guest on it, and it's an amazing performance. Highest possible recommendation. Seagull is a particular highlight.

Great post, and I agree with almost every word. That said, I still don't believe that Paul Rodgers has sold more than 125 millions albums and will never believe it, no matter where it is posted on the net. I can tell you that there are many other sites on the net that don't even have Rodgers selling 50 million albums, so I believe most of the numbers out there are completely inaccurate. As it is in most cases, the truth is probably in the middle somewhere. For the record, I liked Paul's vocals in Bad Company but I think the Queen material with Paul singing is as bad as bad gets! Sorry to offend to Paul Rodgers fans of America. I'm just being honest as to what my reaction was when I heard him singing Queen material. I thought to myself "Freddie must be turning over in his grave listening to this"!

John from Boston

[SF-Dano]

...sure there was a flicker of activity from 94 to 96, but let's be frank -- after the ROR tour -- for reasons we may never know, and isn't our business to know -- he checked out. It all became too difficult -- too emotional -- to do the thing he struggled for so long to be able to make a living at. His dream job fulfilled and perfectly realized became all too much.
He could sing at half speed and still inject his unique cadence and texture into song, and have an audience well into twilight like Sinatra did, and he'd be surrounded by loving fans for the duration. Instead, he's content to sip tea and pontificate on, and continually polish up old treasures. And good for him -- but I don't have to get excited about it. Perry hasn't just let some very productive years get away from him -- he's let DECADES. My respect for him has dwindled proportionately.

Paul Rodgers in contrast, is in top form, and is demonstrating what being a 57 year old power-singer is cabable of -- and that new performance plateaus can still be attained even at that age if but first there is effort and a desire. My respect for him grows daily.

(P.s. please let's not turn this into a Paul vs. Steve thread. They are apples and oranges. The point of the comparison is clearly defined -- effort and desire = results)

~Badcotune

Paul Rogers has wasted decades too. Rogers had so much potential and it was never fulfilled. Whereas Perry has most definitely fulfilled his...

Respectfully, I couldn't disagree more. Rodgers has sold 125 million albums, still actively tours, still actively sings, and actually sounds better than he did in his youth, and has fronted multiple hit making bands. If that's not fufilling your destiny as a successful singer, what is?

In contrast, the only thing Perry actively does these days/years/decades is pontificates.

But yes - Rodgers is still out there performing at a high level and Perry isn't. However, I'm not sure I'd want to see Perry fronting another band who are long past their best...like Boston or Foreigner....or singing hits made famous by a contemporary of his.

You're right to say though that Perry ran into 'emotional' difficulties about recording and touring - even about his own gifts - in a way that Rodgers clearly has not. And if you respect Steady Eddie-type professionals more than troubled geniuses then I can see that Perry can be compared unfavourably to Rodgers.

But equally I reckon Perry was a much more 'emotional' singer than Rodgers - and that many of the characteristcs of Perry's which might frustrate us and make us lose respect for him - the self-condemnation, perfectionism, the tendency to withdraw and isolate, and so on - were the very same characteristics which helped to make him such a phenomenal singer in the first place. I honestly think that if Perry had had a well-adjusted and uncomplicated personality Journey would have been half the band they were - so I guess we have to take the rough with the smooth.

You make some good points, but it's not so much that Rodgers is a "stready-eddie" -- if he didn't have that powerful voice it wouldn't matter if he released an album yearly. I have to take exception to the comment about Rodgers only fronting a band past it's prime, though. Since 2000 he's toured repeatedly with Bad Co., his solo Band, with Queen, and Solo again this past summer. Speaking first hand, I caught him at a summer show in Palm Springs and was floored by the soul and emotion in his voice. He's very similar to Perry in that regard, the way he can sell a lyric with honest emotion, and he sounds better today then he did on those old Bad Co. recordings -- which is astonishing to me. I can't think of another artist or athlete in any profession whose operates at this level in thier late 50's. It's surely an exception -- could Perry outperform his younger self -- probably not, but that's not the point -- the point is that he does not seem embolden to even try. The only other singer I've heard live that has comperable projection and emotion to present day Rodgers and older Perry is Celine Dion in Vegas -- doesn't matter if her music if your cup of tea -- the perfomance and vocal stylings are amazing. Will she sound as good at 57?

I agree that Perry's self torture is probably both a blessing and a curse for him musically, but he was only active in journey for 10 years. The rest has been reflecting on it, and I think as an artist he has more to offer his own legacy. Do I feel owed that? No. Would I like to see it? Certainly. But indifference is creeeeeeeepin' in.

P.s. If you haven't seen it, or know about it -- check out the 2002-2003 Bad Co. LIVE dvd shot in Anaheim Ca. NEAL SCHON and SLASH guest on it, and it's an amazing performance. Highest possible recommendation. Seagull is a particular highlight.

I agree with you BADCO, Paul Rogers has definately still got it. He and Perry are both legendary singers with unique styles. This is what sets them apart from others. I do not understand why some have to downplay Rogers accomplishments in order to prop up Perry's, or the reverse. And as far as Rogers accomplishments go, I think Free, Badco, The Firm, The Law, Solo, Muddy Waters Tribute project, Queen all speak for themselves and classify the man as a true Pioneer and Rock and Roll Icon. And I remember at the time, The Firm was a very popular and well received group here in the states. The man absolutely still has a wonderful, unique voice. And, you are right, the Merchants of Cool DVD kicks ass.

[Matthew]

You make some good points, but it's not so much that Rodgers is a "stready-eddie" -- if he didn't have that powerful voice it wouldn't matter if he released an album yearly.

Yes - that's true....

I have to take exception to the comment about Rodgers only fronting a band past it's prime, though. Since 2000 he's toured repeatedly with Bad Co., his solo Band, with Queen, and Solo again this past summer.

I'll take your word for it that Rodgers sounds better than ever but I'm surprised you say Bad Company itself is a band who is still in its prime.

I can't think of another artist or athlete in any profession whose operates at this level in thier late 50's.

The only guy I can think of is Billy Joel. Like him or not he too sounded as good as ever in concert earlier this year. And yes...I did feel a moment of sadness and frustration about Perry when I saw Joel in concert....

It's surely an exception -- could Perry outperform his younger self -- probably not, but that's not the point -- the point is that he does not seem embolden to even try.

I agree that Perry's self torture is probably both a blessing and a curse for him musically, but he was only active in journey for 10 years. The rest has been reflecting on it, and I think as an artist he has more to offer his own legacy. Do I feel owed that? No. Would I like to see it? Certainly. But indifference is creeeeeeeepin' in.

It's strange...I was sure I'd be pissed off if Perry's Q+A didn't resolve anything. However when I read it I felt totally accepting about the situation. Maybe it's indifference creeping in...but I doubt it. There was something different about the tone of Perry's answers this time. He sounded genuinely contented to me....he didn't seem defensive or uptight...and was talking warmly about Schon...and so on.

I don't know...I just got a good feeling from the Q+A...and to be honest...if I was a multi-millionaire strolling along the beach each morning drinking my latte I might not want to return to a career that - for all its joys and triumphs - didn't make me happy in the end.

P.s. If you haven't seen it, or know about it -- check out the 2002-2003 Bad Co. LIVE dvd shot in Anaheim Ca. NEAL SCHON and SLASH guest on it, and it's an amazing performance. Highest possible recommendation. Seagull is a particular highlight.

No I haven't seen that, Badcotune. As you can probably tell...my Rodgers collection stops in 1974...but I'll definitely check that out. It'll be great to see Rodgers and Schon together on stage....

[SF-Dano]

No I haven't seen that, Badcotune. As you can probably tell...my Rodgers collection stops in 1974...but I'll definitely check that out. It'll be great to see Rodgers and Schon together on stage....

There is a some fun behind the scenes footage on there too, with Neal and Bad Co. backstage. Also, there is a making of a video segment on there where Rogers comments on Neal's "Melody making abilities". I think the quote was " Boy, that Neal, sure comes up with some beautiful melodies." or something like that.

I was lucky enough to catch the Paul Rogers and Friends tour twice in the 90s. And yes, it sure was a treat to see Neal and Paul on stage together, tearin' it up on some Blues, Bad Co, Free, and Hendrix tunes. Small Venue with great sound(The Cabaret in San Jose for those in the Bay Area). A memory I will not soon forget. Too bad there is no video footage from that tour. Bootleg Video anyone?

[TRAGChick]

And, irony of ALL ironies:

Steve Perry lists Paul Rogers as one of his early Rock infuences...

...small world, huh?

[ohsherrie]

But equally I reckon Perry was a much more 'emotional' singer than Rodgers - and that many of the characteristcs of Perry's which might frustrate us and make us lose respect for him - the self-condemnation, perfectionism, the tendency to withdraw and isolate, and so on - were the very same characteristics which helped to make him such a phenomenal singer in the first place. I honestly think that if Perry had had a well-adjusted and uncomplicated personality Journey would have been half the band they were - so I guess we have to take the rough with the smooth.

Wow, good point Matt.

Ditto!

It's strange...I was sure I'd be pissed off if Perry's Q+A didn't resolve anything. However when I read it I felt totally accepting about the situation. Maybe it's indifference creeping in...but I doubt it. There was something different about the tone of Perry's answers this time. He sounded genuinely contented to me....he didn't seem defensive or uptight...and was talking warmly about Schon...and so on.

I don't know...I just got a good feeling from the Q+A...and to be honest...if I was a multi-millionaire strolling along the beach each morning drinking my latte I might not want to return to a career that - for all its joys and triumphs - didn't make me happy in the end.

And yet another great point. Even though I was disappointed that he hasn't recorded anything and he's not doing a DVD of Mountain Aire, the Q&A left me feeling good about and for him and where he is in his life.

I don't think it's indifference at all on my part. He's still my favorite singer of all time. It may however have something to do with my feeling better about Journey than I have in a long time. Even though I've never wanted Steve back with Journey I think I resented the fact that while he wasn't singing his great Journey songs the guy that was was totally unsatisfactory to me. That's all changed now.

[Voyager]

Here's the Q&A from the site that was the most interesting to me:

79) You seem to really admire Neal Schon and you guys are magic together. Would you consider working with him outside of Journey?

SP: Well he is and will always be a guitar genius and we were very good together that's for sure. There are many, many old relationships I would like to go back to but after they've run their course- sometimes only love is left...... without the desire to go back. Neal and I could be in that place.

I truly hope that is not the case. I would love to see Journey one more time with Steve Perry... even if it's just an eight-city tour. I would fly out to see SP in concert anywhere.

At least it's good to hear that "love is left" after the VH-1 documentary aired a few years ago that somewhat demonized Perry. I cannot imagine that a few years of bad feelings could ever erase all the years of magic that Schon and Perry shared together.

[yogi]

To me after reading Laura's book, and then after reading this current interview, Steve seems like someone who will only do shi t 100%. He then gets comfortable with that lifestyle and is afraid to change it. He is the musical version of NYPD Blue's Andy Sipowitz.


Way Way back he was sooo into The Journey experience he would have toured forever. Now he seems afraid in some way to get back on the road. He is at a comfortable place for himself right now.

Maybe, and truthfully it will have to be soon, he will find the renewed strength to grow a new pair and we will get to hear from him again. I hope that its with Journey. But at the very least solo.