Kevin Chalfant singing "Separate Ways" live, 2009!

[Abitaman]

When he wanted to do the Journey type of song, he did! And did it better with his and Kevin's 2 Storm cds, than Journey did with ROR and TBF.

That is true...

We agree, and think we agree on the rest, just some muddle communications to and fro.

[youkeepmewaiting]

When he wanted to do the Journey type of song, he did! And did it better with his and Kevin's 2 Storm cds, than Journey did with ROR and TBF.[/quote]

That is true...

We agree, and think we agree on the rest, just some muddle communications to and fro.

Right or wrong SP (and the others on TBF) wanted to something that was Journey.. but different (and imo more).

The 2 Storm CDs, whilst I enjoy them, are just your bog standard good AOR tracks ... a bit like Revelation (wich I still enjoy)

[SherriBerry]

I'm not the one rambling - you misunderstood my initial post and attacked it, making erroneous assumptions and mixing up statements.

Sorry.
Look around.
You’re a lone voice in the wilderness on this one.
Many longtime fans in this thread have expressed their appreciation for Chalfant and Rolie’s talents.
If I ever used a partial quote of yours’ rather than a full block paragraph, it was for the purpose of saving Andrew bandwidth and nothing more.
You were not taken out of context, or attacked.
Stop playing the refs, and stand by your utterly shitty excuse for an argument.

My argument was that the potential in a Perry-led Journey in 1996 was greater than that of a Rolie/Chalfant lineup and Neal was right to go with Perry over said lineup. Clear, concise, end of story. It is irrelevant to me whether you agree with that - it is merely opinion. That you cannot comprehend that basic premise is your problem. And if you read this thread and others on this site, you will note that I am not the only one who appreciates TBF and preferred a Perry/Journey reunion. Get over yourself.

[The_Noble_Cause]

My argument was that the potential in a Perry-led Journey in 1996 was greater than that of a Rolie/Chalfant lineup and Neal was right to go with Perry over said lineup. Clear, concise, end of story.

And, as already noted, it’s based on nothing but fawning Teenbeat cult worship.
It’s clearly not borne out by the facts or reality.
To date, Rolie and Chalfant are still working musicians.
Perry, meanwhile, has seemingly dropped off the face of the universe.
If, as you strongly insist, Rolie’s musical defection to his Santana roots vindicates Journey's decision, then surely an even stronger case exists NOT to have gone with Perry.
After all, he has withdrawn from the stage ALTOGETHER – be it playing Latin fusion, arena rock, Peruvian nose whistle, or what have you.

It is irrelevant to me whether you agree with that - it is merely opinion. That you cannot comprehend that basic premise is your problem.

It’s a gut-level emotional opinion, masked in all sorts of deceptively-valid, pseudo-bullshit reasoning.
(i.e. Rolie and Chalfant have no radio hits; they lack Perry’s writing talent; Rolie can only play Latin fusion; Neal possesses Donald Trump-like business savvy).
None of it based on reality, and none of it holding up to so much as a stiff fart of scrutiny.
In fact, if, as you suggest, Perry’s superior writing talent is reason alone for the band not to have moved on in1994, then that should still hold true.
Why move on with Augeri?
Or Jeff?
Or Arnel?
Were they better writers than Perry?
I believe we’ve all heard this non-ultimatum ultimatum once before.
It was called “Don’t Crack the Stone.”
And it’s still bullshit.

[kgdjpubs]

My argument was that the potential in a Perry-led Journey in 1996 was greater than that of a Rolie/Chalfant lineup and Neal was right to go with Perry over said lineup. Clear, concise, end of story.

And, as already noted, it’s based on nothing but fawning Teenbeat cult worship.
It’s clearly not borne out by the facts or reality.
To date, Rolie and Chalfant are still working musicians.
Perry, meanwhile, has seemingly dropped off the face of the universe.
If, as you strongly insist, Rolie’s musical defection to his Santana roots vindicates Journey's decision, then surely an even stronger case exists NOT to have gone with Perry.
After all, he has withdrawn from the stage ALTOGETHER – be it playing Latin fusion, arena rock, Peruvian nose whistle, or what have you.

It is irrelevant to me whether you agree with that - it is merely opinion. That you cannot comprehend that basic premise is your problem.

It’s a gut-level emotional opinion, masked in all sorts of deceptively-valid, pseudo-bullshit reasoning.
(i.e. Rolie and Chalfant have no radio hits; they lack Perry’s writing talent; Rolie can only play Latin fusion; Neal possesses Donald Trump-like business savvy).
None of it based on reality, and none of it holding up to so much as a stiff fart of scrutiny.
In fact, if, as you suggest, Perry’s superior writing talent is reason alone for the band not to have moved on in1994, then that should still hold true.
Why move on with Augeri?
Or Jeff?
Or Arnel?
Were they better writers than Perry?
I believe we’ve all heard this non-ultimatum ultimatum once before.
It was called “Don’t Crack the Stone.”
And it’s still bullshit.

playing devil's advocate here for a minute, I think it's safe to say that circa 1994-95 that the Chalfant/Rolie Journey lineup was experiencing major resistance with record labels for them attempting to move on without Perry--made worse by the fact that Perry WAS out there recording. At the same time, Perry was likely getting major pushes/nudges/suggestions from the record company that Journey is where he should be putting his time and vocal cords, and not on a solo career. From a purely business aspect, it was obvious that reuniting with Perry was going to be FAR more lucrative that attempting to forge ahead with someone else (Chalfant, Augeri, Hugo, Mickey Mouse).

If the gamble works and Perry remains a working musician and everybody manages to get along, Journey is put in a position of being able to play larger venues to more people, with higher ticket prices, and not having to tour every year. They can simply come out every 3-4 years, do a MAJOR tour, and get a bucketload of money. Everyone gets fat and happy, Perry doesn't murder his voice by having to tour every year, and all ends well.

The reality was somewhat different. Perry's refusal to perform after the release of Trial By Fire absolutely KILLS the momentum. An album that could have sold 4x platinum barely scrapes together 1x, and a bunch of money is lost promoting the band for a tour that never happens. Goldenthroat goes back to the underground, leaving a trail of burning paradise behind him.

For the band, it's worse. Now, you are stuck with 2 options--and neither of them are good. Option A is simply say screw it and give up, and try and find some project that makes a living. Option B is attempt to replace Perry, but your odds are worse now than before. If you try and replace Perry in 1994-95, Perry hasn't done Journey in 8 years, and his solo album didn't make all that much of an impact. He may or may not fade away, but you have time on your side. Not easy, but not impossible. After TBF, all Journey managed to do is to convince people that Perry was the voice of the band by waiting for him to decide to sing again....and now you are trying to replace him a year later. Regardless of how it plays out, you fracture the fanbase (which DOESN'T happen if TBF never happened!). Now, you are left with picking up the pieces, but you are in a worse position than where you were 2 years before.

Hindsight being 20/20, the Chalfant/Rolie lineup was the better option. You have a fully viable lineup, a very good singer who wants to sing and tour, and you don't fracture the fanbase. Some of the fans won't be happy with the no-Perry option, but you don't get into the mudslinging contest of letting go your singer (who really doesn't want to sing anyways, but that's beside the point...). It's a big slog to get the band back, but if you are willing to put in the touring, you can get the band to a viable live entity. At worse, there is always the Perry option at some point in the future if he really wants to be part of the band again (this is sounding like the Blues Brothers, I know...).

As it was though, you really can't fault them for the Perry gamble. The "classic" lineup was by far more commercially viable, and considerably more lucrative--if you believed that Perry was back to stay. The gamble went up in smoke in this failure of epic proportions, but you can't blame them for trying. Who would have guessed that Perry would go to the trouble of recording an album, then simply fade away again without even one live show?!?!?

[kgdjpubs]

The 2 Storm CDs, whilst I enjoy them, are just your bog standard good AOR tracks ... a bit like Revelation (wich I still enjoy)

I'd put Don't Give Up and Waiting for the World to Change at least equal if not better than 90% of what Journey has done post-ROR. Taking the Rolie/Chalfant writing team and adding it to the Schon/Cain team would have given 2 more songwriters to a band that, quite honestly, needs someone else who can write good songs. If egos didn't destroy the whole thing, the Journey material of a combined Cain/Schon/Rolie/Chalfant writing tandem should have been pretty darn impressive.

[SherriBerry]

My argument was that the potential in a Perry-led Journey in 1996 was greater than that of a Rolie/Chalfant lineup and Neal was right to go with Perry over said lineup. Clear, concise, end of story.

And, as already noted, it’s based on nothing but fawning Teenbeat cult worship.
It’s clearly not borne out by the facts or reality.

No, it's based on what they achieved with Steve Perry - an evergreen catalogue of classics that still get radio play 30 years later, an exponentially larger fanbase, millions in album sales, and the most downloaded song in iTunes history produced before the digital age and the potential to continue that success in 1996 - versus the lesser levels of success they achieved before or after and the difficulties they have had in their efforts to replace him. Fact and reality.

To date, Rolie and Chalfant are still working musicians.
Perry, meanwhile, has seemingly dropped off the face of the universe.
If, as you strongly insist, Rolie’s musical defection to his Santana roots vindicates Journey's decision, then surely an even stronger case exists NOT to have gone with Perry.
After all, he has withdrawn from the stage ALTOGETHER – be it playing Latin fusion, arena rock, Peruvian nose whistle, or what have you.

You are very optimistic to assume that Chalfant would still be able to sing at this level had he faced singing this catalogue on the touring schedule that Steve Augeri endured and given the strain on Arnel's voice that has finally convinced Journey to tune down. KC was already a half-step down according to HH. Reality.

SP had not withdrawn from the stage altogether in 1996 which is when this decision was made - Journey stood to have a lucrative future of major tours and album releases, more than could be expected with an alternate lineup. That it fell apart and SP completely separated himself from Journey is unfortunate, but a Perry/Journey reunion was what the label wanted, the band wanted and the vast majority of fans wanted. Many of the fans may have adapted, but they have never come back in the numbers Journey enjoyed previously and SP has a significantly large fanbase of his own to draw from. Fact and reality.

It is irrelevant to me whether you agree with that - it is merely opinion. That you cannot comprehend that basic premise is your problem.

It’s a gut-level emotional opinion, masked in all sorts of deceptively-valid, pseudo-bullshit reasoning.
(i.e. Rolie and Chalfant have no radio hits; they lack Perry’s writing talent; Rolie can only play Latin fusion; Neal possesses Donald Trump-like business savvy).

None of it based on reality, and none of it holding up to so much as a stiff fart of scrutiny.

Actually , it is based on sound reasoning. See what I wrote above. As I have written several times, "Given what he knew at the time, I believe Neal made the right decisions". He did not have the benefit of looking several years into the future - he based his decision on what he knew in 1996 and in 1996 the band stood to gain more with Perry. Rolie and Chalfant have a few songs that charted, but we differ on what constitutes a hit. I never wrote Rolie can only play Latin fusion - I wrote that he chooses to play Latin fusion - you should have been able to accurately discern that much, but it is another example of your negative misinterpretation of what I write. Go back and check for yourself.

In fact, if, as you suggest, Perry’s superior writing talent is reason alone for the band not to have moved on in1994, then that should still hold true.
Why move on with Augeri?
Or Jeff?
Or Arnel?
Were they better writers than Perry?

Perry brought more to the table than just the songwriting that is produced with Cain and Schon- he is recognized as the voice of Journey (the Legacy sound that even the band acknowledges) and replacing a lead singer can have damaging repercussions for an already successful band. Why move on with SA, JSS, and Arnel? Moving on with SP was no longer an option after 1998 and there was nothing left to lose. The decision to reunite with Perry was made based on what was known in 1996, not 2009.

I believe we’ve all heard this non-ultimatum ultimatum once before.
It was called “Don’t Crack the Stone.”
And it’s still bullshit.

Your bias is evident. I have based my opinion on verifiable data and history, not "fawning Teenbeat cult worship" and you have ranted like an ass. If you would have preferred to see Journey go with the Rolie/Chalfant lineup that is your preference and I am not saying you and others who would have liked that are wrong. This is music - everyone has their own preference - I prefer Perry with Journey and I have given examples of why I believe Neal made that decision and why I think it was right at the time.

What is bullshit is that not once in your ridiculous ranting, while you were estimating the greater potential of replacing Perry, did you ever once acknowledge the potentially damaging repercussions to the band that decision may have caused at the time. In 1998, SP had made the decision to legally split from Journey; however, denying his request to rejoin the band and moving on with a new lineup may not have been received well by the fans. It is only one of a few possible outcomes, but given the rancor the band endured in replacing SA and JSS and the degree of hope held out for Perry to perform with Journey again, it is a reasonable one. Even some of his most ardent detractors on MR have stated how much they would like to go to a Perry-fronted Journey concert, so that is not limited to what you construe to be his "idol worshipping" fans.

[SherriBerry]

There is something no one has mentioned and I am curious to know more about it. Many on MR have speculated that SP's decision to return to Journey was motivated by Sony actively sabotaging his solo efforts in an attempt to force him back and that Arrival was not promoted properly by the label because it was not interested in supporting the new lineup.

If this is accurate, it is reasonable to conclude that if Perry wanted back in Journey (whatever his motivations) and the band said no, the label would likely have sabotaged or at least failed to support a new album from the Rolie/Chalfant lineup in an effort to force the issue. Neal may not be Donald Trump, but he has survived and thrived in the cutthroat recording industry for decades and would certainly have recognized that.

Does anyone know with any degree of certainty whether the label did in fact sabotage SP's solo efforts to force him back into Journey?

[Abitaman]

When Arrival leaked to the web, I think it pretty much hurt the cd. Arrival was a strong cd, but leaking it to the web, made the band put some more rockers on it, making it even stronger.

[The_Noble_Cause]

playing devil's advocate here for a minute, I think it's safe to say that circa 1994-95 that the Chalfant/Rolie Journey lineup was experiencing major resistance with record labels for them attempting to move on without Perry--made worse by the fact that Perry WAS out there recording. At the same time, Perry was likely getting major pushes/nudges/suggestions from the record company that Journey is where he should be putting his time and vocal cords, and not on a solo career. From a purely business aspect, it was obvious that reuniting with Perry was going to be FAR more lucrative that attempting to forge ahead with someone else (Chalfant, Augeri, Hugo, Mickey Mouse).

If the gamble works and Perry remains a working musician and everybody manages to get along, Journey is put in a position of being able to play larger venues to more people, with higher ticket prices, and not having to tour every year. They can simply come out every 3-4 years, do a MAJOR tour, and get a bucketload of money. Everyone gets fat and happy, Perry doesn't murder his voice by having to tour every year, and all ends well.

The reality was somewhat different. Perry's refusal to perform after the release of Trial By Fire absolutely KILLS the momentum. An album that could have sold 4x platinum barely scrapes together 1x, and a bunch of money is lost promoting the band for a tour that never happens. Goldenthroat goes back to the underground, leaving a trail of burning paradise behind him.

For the band, it's worse. Now, you are stuck with 2 options--and neither of them are good. Option A is simply say screw it and give up, and try and find some project that makes a living. Option B is attempt to replace Perry, but your odds are worse now than before. If you try and replace Perry in 1994-95, Perry hasn't done Journey in 8 years, and his solo album didn't make all that much of an impact. He may or may not fade away, but you have time on your side. Not easy, but not impossible. After TBF, all Journey managed to do is to convince people that Perry was the voice of the band by waiting for him to decide to sing again....and now you are trying to replace him a year later. Regardless of how it plays out, you fracture the fanbase (which DOESN'T happen if TBF never happened!). Now, you are left with picking up the pieces, but you are in a worse position than where you were 2 years before.

Hindsight being 20/20, the Chalfant/Rolie lineup was the better option. You have a fully viable lineup, a very good singer who wants to sing and tour, and you don't fracture the fanbase. Some of the fans won't be happy with the no-Perry option, but you don't get into the mudslinging contest of letting go your singer (who really doesn't want to sing anyways, but that's beside the point...). It's a big slog to get the band back, but if you are willing to put in the touring, you can get the band to a viable live entity. At worse, there is always the Perry option at some point in the future if he really wants to be part of the band again (this is sounding like the Blues Brothers, I know...).

As it was though, you really can't fault them for the Perry gamble. The "classic" lineup was by far more commercially viable, and considerably more lucrative--if you believed that Perry was back to stay. The gamble went up in smoke in this failure of epic proportions, but you can't blame them for trying. Who would have guessed that Perry would go to the trouble of recording an album, then simply fade away again without even one live show?!?!?

I think this is totally sensible - and probably accurate too.

[The_Noble_Cause]

When Arrival leaked to the web, I think it pretty much hurt the cd. Arrival was a strong cd, but leaking it to the web, made the band put some more rockers on it, making it even stronger.

Thank Andrew for that.
It was his review of the Japan version that caused Neal to head back into the studio.
Even with the two tracks it's still too mellow.
Shoulda thrown "Remember Me" on there and a few more Schon/Blades masterpieces.

[The_Noble_Cause]

No, it's based on what they achieved with Steve Perry - an evergreen catalogue of classics that still get radio play 30 years later, an exponentially larger fanbase, millions in album sales, and the most downloaded song in iTunes history produced before the digital age and the potential to continue that success in 1996 - versus the lesser levels of success they achieved before or after and the difficulties they have had in their efforts to replace him. Fact and reality.

You have gone from comparing the two respective lineups on their creative merits, to how many more zeros the Perry reunion would add to Neal and Jon’s bank accounts.
You can make that case if you’d like, I won’t stop you (it’s certainly better than outright lying about Rolie and KC).
However, it’s a pretty sad state when Journey fans have a more vested interest in dollars and cents, than new albums, tours, and music.

You are very optimistic to assume that Chalfant would still be able to sing at this level had he faced singing this catalogue on the touring schedule that Steve Augeri endured and given the strain on Arnel's voice that has finally convinced Journey to tune down. KC was already a half-step down according to HH. Reality.

I never stated one way or the other if Kevin should be behind the mic today.
I fail to see why you would bring this up, however, considering the state of Perry’s voice post-ROR.
Have you actually heard the 1991 Bill Graham tribute or FTLOSM boots?
Once again, like so many of your previous contradictory self-imploding points, you apply a random standard to discredit one singer, when it’s equally as valid (if not moreso) to the case you’re peddling.

Also, KC is a half step down only on his recent Journey covers album.
That has nothing to do with the past occasions Herbie wanted him in the band.

SP had not withdrawn from the stage altogether in 1996 which is when this decision was made - Journey stood to have a lucrative future of major tours and album releases, more than could be expected with an alternate lineup.

Wait a minute...
You pointed to what Rolie is doing currently TODAY to make the point that choosing him would’ve been misguided.
Saying: “He is currently touring playing the Santana style music and nothing he wrote while in Journey, which should at least cause one to question how long he would have stayed in Journey playing pop/rock and the potential longevity of that lineup.”

Mind telling me why can’t we now look to what Perry is doing as guidance for how the TBF tour would’ve played out?
Just for fun, let’s play by your shifting sands of standards, and stick only to the past.
Well, by the time of TBF, Perry had left the band holding the bag for close to a decade and just screwed over his solo FTLOSM band and the record company.
So he cut two costly tours short, screwed over countless bandmates, music execs, and had openly expressed a reluctance to get back with Journey.
Hardly inspires confidence now does it?

Actually , it is based on sound reasoning. See what I wrote above. As I have written several times, "Given what he knew at the time, I believe Neal made the right decisions". He did not have the benefit of looking several years into the future - he based his decision on what he knew in 1996 and in 1996 the band stood to gain more with Perry.

By that time, the warning signs about Perry were already on the wall in big flashing neon letters.
In terms of sheer wanton greed and the almighty dollar, you’re right, Neal did do the right thing.

Rolie and Chalfant have a few songs that charted, but we differ on what constitutes a hit.

So debuting at # 6 and # 22 on the Billboard rock charts is not a hit?
That’s a better ranking than anything Journey had done since 1996 until Arnel, and even beats some of Perry’s own solo singles.
As if it wasn't clear already, in your effort to rationalize a reunion album that left everyone but Perry licking their wounds, you will say anything.

Why move on with SA, JSS, and Arnel? Moving on with SP was no longer an option after 1998 and there was nothing left to lose. The decision to reunite with Perry was made based on what was known in 1996, not 2009.

Perry did not voluntarily quit Journey.
If he is to be believed, the “hip injury” only sidelined him.
After resuscitating the band’s national profile and garnering a Grammy nod, there was even less a valid reason to move on.
Unless, that is, you think Perry’s hip injury was false and he had no intention of singing ever.
Which, of course, you don’t.
Can't have it both ways.

What is bullshit is that not once in your ridiculous ranting, while you were estimating the greater potential of replacing Perry, did you ever once acknowledge the potentially damaging repercussions to the band that decision may have caused at the time. In 1998, SP had made the decision to legally split from Journey; however, denying his request to rejoin the band and moving on with a new lineup may not have been received well by the fans. It is only one of a few possible outcomes, but given the rancor the band endured in replacing SA and JSS and the degree of hope held out for Perry to perform with Journey again, it is a reasonable one. Even some of his most ardent detractors on MR have stated how much they would like to go to a Perry-fronted Journey concert, so that is not limited to what you construe to be his "idol worshipping" fans.

Disagree.
Moving on after ten years of waiting on Perry gave the band a clean break.
Reuniting with him for TBF gave the impression that he had been active in the band and only recently dumped.
Kgdjpubs made similar statements above.
Incidentally, Perry and the VH1-Behind the Music producers would use this very argument against the band.
This misconception plagued the Augeri lineup at every turn, and the band has only recently begun to overcome it.
As Neal said here on MR:
“Well, you know, that was one thing in [Behind the Music] that caused a lot of controversy, in one section it said we waited months for him. And I called up the producer and I said months? Are you kidding? We waited years. We waited ten years and then we got back together and then it was close to two years.”

[kgdjpubs]

There is something no one has mentioned and I am curious to know more about it. Many on MR have speculated that SP's decision to return to Journey was motivated by Sony actively sabotaging his solo efforts in an attempt to force him back and that Arrival was not promoted properly by the label because it was not interested in supporting the new lineup.

If this is accurate, it is reasonable to conclude that if Perry wanted back in Journey (whatever his motivations) and the band said no, the label would likely have sabotaged or at least failed to support a new album from the Rolie/Chalfant lineup in an effort to force the issue. Neal may not be Donald Trump, but he has survived and thrived in the cutthroat recording industry for decades and would certainly have recognized that.

Does anyone know with any degree of certainty whether the label did in fact sabotage SP's solo efforts to force him back into Journey?

Hard to say about label-induced sabotage unless you were actually there. Perry was definitely on the receiving end of a LOT of pressure from the label to reunite with Journey. From a business perspective, Perry solo = $, Journey = $$, Perry with Journey = $$$$$$$$$$. At the same time, you'd have to be a fool to think that Perry wasn't upset about Journey attempting to move on without him, even though he didn't want to be in the band.

Whether the promotion of the FTLOSM album was affected by a label that really wanted to release a Journey album with Perry and not Perry solo is debatable. If anything, I'd argue that Perry sabotaged his own solo career by recording 2 albums 10 years apart and simply fading away both times. Releasing the Against the Wall album would have likely destroyed Perry's solo career, and I'm not surprised in the slightest it wasn't released.

Now, as far as the Arrival album went, I think you have a much greater case for sabotage. Releasing the album in Japan 6 months ahead of the US was simply begging for someone to upload it onto the internet. Combine that with a label that is already annoyed about the failure of TBF (think BIG $$$$ lost here), and I'm sure they didn't want to promote it. With an album lacking a hit single, Journey didn't do itself any big favors here either, for what it's worth.

The only thing you can pretty much prove is that Perry himself tried to sabotage the Arrival album. In his mind, he is the voice of Journey, and the Behind the Music special did its best to paint Perry in that light and fracture the fanbase. He obviously wasn't very happy about the decision to move on without him.

[Jana]

playing devil's advocate here for a minute, I think it's safe to say that circa 1994-95 that the Chalfant/Rolie Journey lineup was experiencing major resistance with record labels for them attempting to move on without Perry--made worse by the fact that Perry WAS out there recording. At the same time, Perry was likely getting major pushes/nudges/suggestions from the record company that Journey is where he should be putting his time and vocal cords, and not on a solo career. From a purely business aspect, it was obvious that reuniting with Perry was going to be FAR more lucrative that attempting to forge ahead with someone else (Chalfant, Augeri, Hugo, Mickey Mouse).

If the gamble works and Perry remains a working musician and everybody manages to get along, Journey is put in a position of being able to play larger venues to more people, with higher ticket prices, and not having to tour every year. They can simply come out every 3-4 years, do a MAJOR tour, and get a bucketload of money. Everyone gets fat and happy, Perry doesn't murder his voice by having to tour every year, and all ends well.

The reality was somewhat different. Perry's refusal to perform after the release of Trial By Fire absolutely KILLS the momentum. An album that could have sold 4x platinum barely scrapes together 1x, and a bunch of money is lost promoting the band for a tour that never happens. Goldenthroat goes back to the underground, leaving a trail of burning paradise behind him.

For the band, it's worse. Now, you are stuck with 2 options--and neither of them are good. Option A is simply say screw it and give up, and try and find some project that makes a living. Option B is attempt to replace Perry, but your odds are worse now than before. If you try and replace Perry in 1994-95, Perry hasn't done Journey in 8 years, and his solo album didn't make all that much of an impact. He may or may not fade away, but you have time on your side. Not easy, but not impossible. After TBF, all Journey managed to do is to convince people that Perry was the voice of the band by waiting for him to decide to sing again....and now you are trying to replace him a year later. Regardless of how it plays out, you fracture the fanbase (which DOESN'T happen if TBF never happened!). Now, you are left with picking up the pieces, but you are in a worse position than where you were 2 years before.

Hindsight being 20/20, the Chalfant/Rolie lineup was the better option. You have a fully viable lineup, a very good singer who wants to sing and tour, and you don't fracture the fanbase. Some of the fans won't be happy with the no-Perry option, but you don't get into the mudslinging contest of letting go your singer (who really doesn't want to sing anyways, but that's beside the point...). It's a big slog to get the band back, but if you are willing to put in the touring, you can get the band to a viable live entity. At worse, there is always the Perry option at some point in the future if he really wants to be part of the band again (this is sounding like the Blues Brothers, I know...).

As it was though, you really can't fault them for the Perry gamble. The "classic" lineup was by far more commercially viable, and considerably more lucrative--if you believed that Perry was back to stay. The gamble went up in smoke in this failure of epic proportions, but you can't blame them for trying. Who would have guessed that Perry would go to the trouble of recording an album, then simply fade away again without even one live show?!?!?

I think this is totally sensible - and probably accurate too.

+1. Except Herbie guessed.

[SherriBerry]

There is something no one has mentioned and I am curious to know more about it. Many on MR have speculated that SP's decision to return to Journey was motivated by Sony actively sabotaging his solo efforts in an attempt to force him back and that Arrival was not promoted properly by the label because it was not interested in supporting the new lineup.

If this is accurate, it is reasonable to conclude that if Perry wanted back in Journey (whatever his motivations) and the band said no, the label would likely have sabotaged or at least failed to support a new album from the Rolie/Chalfant lineup in an effort to force the issue. Neal may not be Donald Trump, but he has survived and thrived in the cutthroat recording industry for decades and would certainly have recognized that.

Does anyone know with any degree of certainty whether the label did in fact sabotage SP's solo efforts to force him back into Journey?

Hard to say about label-induced sabotage unless you were actually there. Perry was definitely on the receiving end of a LOT of pressure from the label to reunite with Journey. From a business perspective, Perry solo = $, Journey = $$, Perry with Journey = $$$$$$$$$$. At the same time, you'd have to be a fool to think that Perry wasn't upset about Journey attempting to move on without him, even though he didn't want to be in the band.

Whether the promotion of the FTLOSM album was affected by a label that really wanted to release a Journey album with Perry and not Perry solo is debatable. If anything, I'd argue that Perry sabotaged his own solo career by recording 2 albums 10 years apart and simply fading away both times. Releasing the Against the Wall album would have likely destroyed Perry's solo career, and I'm not surprised in the slightest it wasn't released.

Now, as far as the Arrival album went, I think you have a much greater case for sabotage. Releasing the album in Japan 6 months ahead of the US was simply begging for someone to upload it onto the internet. Combine that with a label that is already annoyed about the failure of TBF (think BIG $$$$ lost here), and I'm sure they didn't want to promote it. With an album lacking a hit single, Journey didn't do itself any big favors here either, for what it's worth.

The only thing you can pretty much prove is that Perry himself tried to sabotage the Arrival album. In his mind, he is the voice of Journey, and the Behind the Music special did its best to paint Perry in that light and fracture the fanbase. He obviously wasn't very happy about the decision to move on without him.

Thanks for the insight! I was surprised that 'Higher Place' was not promoted more - it was a great song and I think it could have been Journey's biggest hit since they produced ROR.

[steveo777]

There is something no one has mentioned and I am curious to know more about it. Many on MR have speculated that SP's decision to return to Journey was motivated by Sony actively sabotaging his solo efforts in an attempt to force him back and that Arrival was not promoted properly by the label because it was not interested in supporting the new lineup.

If this is accurate, it is reasonable to conclude that if Perry wanted back in Journey (whatever his motivations) and the band said no, the label would likely have sabotaged or at least failed to support a new album from the Rolie/Chalfant lineup in an effort to force the issue. Neal may not be Donald Trump, but he has survived and thrived in the cutthroat recording industry for decades and would certainly have recognized that.

Does anyone know with any degree of certainty whether the label did in fact sabotage SP's solo efforts to force him back into Journey?

Hard to say about label-induced sabotage unless you were actually there. Perry was definitely on the receiving end of a LOT of pressure from the label to reunite with Journey. From a business perspective, Perry solo = $, Journey = $$, Perry with Journey = $$$$$$$$$$. At the same time, you'd have to be a fool to think that Perry wasn't upset about Journey attempting to move on without him, even though he didn't want to be in the band.
Whether the promotion of the FTLOSM album was affected by a label that really wanted to release a Journey album with Perry and not Perry solo is debatable. If anything, I'd argue that Perry sabotaged his own solo career by recording 2 albums 10 years apart and simply fading away both times. Releasing the Against the Wall album would have likely destroyed Perry's solo career, and I'm not surprised in the slightest it wasn't released.

Now, as far as the Arrival album went, I think you have a much greater case for sabotage. Releasing the album in Japan 6 months ahead of the US was simply begging for someone to upload it onto the internet. Combine that with a label that is already annoyed about the failure of TBF (think BIG $$$$ lost here), and I'm sure they didn't want to promote it. With an album lacking a hit single, Journey didn't do itself any big favors here either, for what it's worth.

The only thing you can pretty much prove is that Perry himself tried to sabotage the Arrival album. In his mind, he is the voice of Journey, and the Behind the Music special did its best to paint Perry in that light and fracture the fanbase. He obviously wasn't very happy about the decision to move on without him.

No doubt. I'll bet Perry even went for an injuction to try and legally stop the band from moving on. Maybe that's why they can only talk thru lawyers lately.

[portland]

There is something no one has mentioned and I am curious to know more about it. Many on MR have speculated that SP's decision to return to Journey was motivated by Sony actively sabotaging his solo efforts in an attempt to force him back and that Arrival was not promoted properly by the label because it was not interested in supporting the new lineup.

If this is accurate, it is reasonable to conclude that if Perry wanted back in Journey (whatever his motivations) and the band said no, the label would likely have sabotaged or at least failed to support a new album from the Rolie/Chalfant lineup in an effort to force the issue. Neal may not be Donald Trump, but he has survived and thrived in the cutthroat recording industry for decades and would certainly have recognized that.

Does anyone know with any degree of certainty whether the label did in fact sabotage SP's solo efforts to force him back into Journey?

Hard to say about label-induced sabotage unless you were actually there. Perry was definitely on the receiving end of a LOT of pressure from the label to reunite with Journey. From a business perspective, Perry solo = $, Journey = $$, Perry with Journey = $$$$$$$$$$. At the same time, you'd have to be a fool to think that Perry wasn't upset about Journey attempting to move on without him, even though he didn't want to be in the band.
Whether the promotion of the FTLOSM album was affected by a label that really wanted to release a Journey album with Perry and not Perry solo is debatable. If anything, I'd argue that Perry sabotaged his own solo career by recording 2 albums 10 years apart and simply fading away both times. Releasing the Against the Wall album would have likely destroyed Perry's solo career, and I'm not surprised in the slightest it wasn't released.

Now, as far as the Arrival album went, I think you have a much greater case for sabotage. Releasing the album in Japan 6 months ahead of the US was simply begging for someone to upload it onto the internet. Combine that with a label that is already annoyed about the failure of TBF (think BIG $$$$ lost here), and I'm sure they didn't want to promote it. With an album lacking a hit single, Journey didn't do itself any big favors here either, for what it's worth.

The only thing you can pretty much prove is that Perry himself tried to sabotage the Arrival album. In his mind, he is the voice of Journey, and the Behind the Music special did its best to paint Perry in that light and fracture the fanbase. He obviously wasn't very happy about the decision to move on without him.

No doubt. I'll bet Perry even went for an injuction to try and legally stop the band from moving on. Maybe that's why they can only talk thru lawyers lately.

And maybe why...he cannot put out anything new or go on tour....maybe there is something preventing it?

[steveo777]

There is something no one has mentioned and I am curious to know more about it. Many on MR have speculated that SP's decision to return to Journey was motivated by Sony actively sabotaging his solo efforts in an attempt to force him back and that Arrival was not promoted properly by the label because it was not interested in supporting the new lineup.

If this is accurate, it is reasonable to conclude that if Perry wanted back in Journey (whatever his motivations) and the band said no, the label would likely have sabotaged or at least failed to support a new album from the Rolie/Chalfant lineup in an effort to force the issue. Neal may not be Donald Trump, but he has survived and thrived in the cutthroat recording industry for decades and would certainly have recognized that.

Does anyone know with any degree of certainty whether the label did in fact sabotage SP's solo efforts to force him back into Journey?

Hard to say about label-induced sabotage unless you were actually there. Perry was definitely on the receiving end of a LOT of pressure from the label to reunite with Journey. From a business perspective, Perry solo = $, Journey = $$, Perry with Journey = $$$$$$$$$$. At the same time, you'd have to be a fool to think that Perry wasn't upset about Journey attempting to move on without him, even though he didn't want to be in the band.
Whether the promotion of the FTLOSM album was affected by a label that really wanted to release a Journey album with Perry and not Perry solo is debatable. If anything, I'd argue that Perry sabotaged his own solo career by recording 2 albums 10 years apart and simply fading away both times. Releasing the Against the Wall album would have likely destroyed Perry's solo career, and I'm not surprised in the slightest it wasn't released.

Now, as far as the Arrival album went, I think you have a much greater case for sabotage. Releasing the album in Japan 6 months ahead of the US was simply begging for someone to upload it onto the internet. Combine that with a label that is already annoyed about the failure of TBF (think BIG $$$$ lost here), and I'm sure they didn't want to promote it. With an album lacking a hit single, Journey didn't do itself any big favors here either, for what it's worth.

The only thing you can pretty much prove is that Perry himself tried to sabotage the Arrival album. In his mind, he is the voice of Journey, and the Behind the Music special did its best to paint Perry in that light and fracture the fanbase. He obviously wasn't very happy about the decision to move on without him.

No doubt. I'll bet Perry even went for an injuction to try and legally stop the band from moving on. Maybe that's why they can only talk thru lawyers lately.

And maybe why...he cannot put out anything new or go on tour....maybe there is something preventing it?

I can't see anything that would keep him from releasing his own new material or touring. There may be some legalities with the Journey material, but I don't know that for sure. There may be some things that prevent Steve from peforming anything Journey while Journey is still an entity.

[Don]

There is something no one has mentioned and I am curious to know more about it. Many on MR have speculated that SP's decision to return to Journey was motivated by Sony actively sabotaging his solo efforts in an attempt to force him back and that Arrival was not promoted properly by the label because it was not interested in supporting the new lineup.

If this is accurate, it is reasonable to conclude that if Perry wanted back in Journey (whatever his motivations) and the band said no, the label would likely have sabotaged or at least failed to support a new album from the Rolie/Chalfant lineup in an effort to force the issue. Neal may not be Donald Trump, but he has survived and thrived in the cutthroat recording industry for decades and would certainly have recognized that.

Does anyone know with any degree of certainty whether the label did in fact sabotage SP's solo efforts to force him back into Journey?

Hard to say about label-induced sabotage unless you were actually there. Perry was definitely on the receiving end of a LOT of pressure from the label to reunite with Journey. From a business perspective, Perry solo = $, Journey = $$, Perry with Journey = $$$$$$$$$$. At the same time, you'd have to be a fool to think that Perry wasn't upset about Journey attempting to move on without him, even though he didn't want to be in the band.
Whether the promotion of the FTLOSM album was affected by a label that really wanted to release a Journey album with Perry and not Perry solo is debatable. If anything, I'd argue that Perry sabotaged his own solo career by recording 2 albums 10 years apart and simply fading away both times. Releasing the Against the Wall album would have likely destroyed Perry's solo career, and I'm not surprised in the slightest it wasn't released.

Now, as far as the Arrival album went, I think you have a much greater case for sabotage. Releasing the album in Japan 6 months ahead of the US was simply begging for someone to upload it onto the internet. Combine that with a label that is already annoyed about the failure of TBF (think BIG $$$$ lost here), and I'm sure they didn't want to promote it. With an album lacking a hit single, Journey didn't do itself any big favors here either, for what it's worth.

The only thing you can pretty much prove is that Perry himself tried to sabotage the Arrival album. In his mind, he is the voice of Journey, and the Behind the Music special did its best to paint Perry in that light and fracture the fanbase. He obviously wasn't very happy about the decision to move on without him.

No doubt. I'll bet Perry even went for an injuction to try and legally stop the band from moving on. Maybe that's why they can only talk thru lawyers lately.

And maybe why...he cannot put out anything new or go on tour....maybe there is something preventing it?

I think Lora said no to that but I thought it before also. A non-compete agreement where he can't go out and sing anything that he and the band did together but in return, the band has to pay him like he is still a member.

[brywool]

This thread would be funnier if it was the "Kevin CRONIN sings Separate Ways".

Imagine the horror....

[SherriBerry]

Particularly when Rolie's favourite sound is the 70s era Santana sound that he consistently returns to and currently plays, not pop/rock and nothing from the Journey catalogue.

This shows how ignorant you really are to where Gregg was in 1996. Sure, he had been in Abraxas Pool...But, he was abandoning that to join Journey. ALL of his solo albums prior to that were pop/rock - not Santana.

I went back through the thread and realized this had been addressed to me. Read the sentence again. It does not say he has never played pop/rock or did not play it in the past. It says the Santana sound is the one he favours, returns to and currently plays, not pop/rock. Prior to 1996, he had 2 solo albums, so a more accurate term would be both, not all. I am aware of this - I already mentioned that I own his first solo release, 'Gregg Rolie'. I also own 'Abraxas Pool' and I do prefer his work on that.

My reference to him not currently playing pop/rock was a reference to the more commercial, ballad oriented type of music associated with Journey. Would you classify Rolie's sound on his solo CD's as "pop"/rock or just rock? It is obviously a softer rock, but I am surprised to hear his own music catigorized as pop oriented.

[Abitaman]

And maybe why...he cannot put out anything new or go on tour....maybe there is something preventing it?

Perry is preventing it and no one else. He doesn't want to do it!

[SherriBerry]

No, it's based on what they achieved with Steve Perry - an evergreen catalogue of classics that still get radio play 30 years later, an exponentially larger fanbase, millions in album sales, and the most downloaded song in iTunes history produced before the digital age and the potential to continue that success in 1996 - versus the lesser levels of success they achieved before or after and the difficulties they have had in their efforts to replace him. Fact and reality.

You have gone from comparing the two respective lineups on their creative merits, to how many more zeros the Perry reunion would add to Neal and Jon’s bank accounts.
You can make that case if you’d like, I won’t stop you (it’s certainly better than outright lying about Rolie and KC).
However, it’s a pretty sad state when Journey fans have a more vested interest in dollars and cents, than new albums, tours, and music.

First of all, I have not "lied" about anything and in accusing me of intentionally saying something I know to be false when I have not, you have lowered yourself even further. You can also try to deflect the merits of the above statement, but it undeniably supports the reasoning behind Neal's decision to go with SP in 1996 with the exception of the iTunes reference. Either you don't understand it or choose not to - Journey fans do not have any particular interest in the dollars that Journey makes, but the band certainly has a vested interest in the levels of its own success, which is not limited to dollars.

If success were not highly relevant, the band would never have switched to the more radio-friendly sound they were against in 1977. They could have played the music they wanted, lost their record contract and stayed on the road playing smaller gigs to devoted fans. I think there is something special in the music created by Perry, Schon and Cain working together and perhaps they thought so too and wanted to recapture it and take the unexpected opportunity to create more towards what they describe as their Legacy.

You are very optimistic to assume that Chalfant would still be able to sing at this level had he faced singing this catalogue on the touring schedule that Steve Augeri endured and given the strain on Arnel's voice that has finally convinced Journey to tune down. KC was already a half-step down according to HH. Reality.

I brought this up because in arguing that the Rolie/Chalfant lineup would have had greater potential, you are also arguing that they would have been able to produce and tour on more than one album. Their catalogue is one of the hardest in music vocally, and it affects the longevity of any lead singer. But you are right - HH noted that KC was a half-step down on his Journey cover CD and that was two years ago. When SP reunited with the band, HH said he impressed the band singing the old hits, so the Bill Graham performance could have been writen off at the time as a singer being out of practice. I don't believe Neal knew how much a tour might be a struggle for him at that point, so it wasn't a factor against going with SP.

SP had not withdrawn from the stage altogether in 1996 which is when this decision was made - Journey stood to have a lucrative future of major tours and album releases, more than could be expected with an alternate lineup.

It did not seem to matter to Neal and Jon why SP came back for ROR or whether he really wanted to be there - they knew he was considering a solo career instead and wanted him back badly enough that they handed over almost full control of the band. Even after ten years, they still wanted him back badly enough to shaft Chalfant and Rolie, and Rolie had been like a brother since Neal was 14 in Santana. When Robert Fleischmann was the lead singer of Journey and SP was on part of the Infinity tour as his intended replacement, no one warned RF, including Rolie. Nothing any of them do in this business inspires confidence - they all seem to do what it takes to get what they want. That certainly does not make it right, but that is the reality. Journey has a history of screwing over bandmates and they have lasted almost 4 decades, so I don't see why SP leaving behind his FTLOSM band to rejoin Journey would have been viewed by them as anything more than taking the best option.

Wait a minute...
You pointed to what Rolie is doing currently TODAY to make the point that choosing him would’ve been misguided.
Saying: “He is currently touring playing the Santana style music and nothing he wrote while in Journey, which should at least cause one to question how long he would have stayed in Journey playing pop/rock and the potential longevity of that lineup.”

Not misguided, but his first love seems to be the sound he helped create in Santana and it is just my opinion that he would not have been happy creating ballads with Jon Cain. Rolie said part of the reason he left Journey was that he was not happy with its musical direction and that was when it was more of a rock band. One of the factors in the split in Bad English was the struggle for control over the writing between Jon Waite and Jon Cain and I don't see JC giving up very much control of Journey's songwriting to anyone, including the guy he replaced, but like everything else I am speculating.

Actually, I am interested to know how the writing dynamics of the new lineup would have worked out. Would everyone have put their egos aside or would it have resulted in a struggle for control over the content and direction? What would have been the direction? More rock oriented?

Actually , it is based on sound reasoning. See what I wrote above. As I have written several times, "Given what he knew at the time, I believe Neal made the right decisions". He did not have the benefit of looking several years into the future - he based his decision on what he knew in 1996 and in 1996 the band stood to gain more with Perry.

By that time, the warning signs about Perry were already on the wall in big flashing neon letters.
In terms of sheer wanton greed and the almighty dollar, you’re right, Neal did do the right thing.

"Gain" is not limited to money, as I have mentioned their amazing evergreen catalogue of music and the classics that people continue to love over 30 years later. Do you place absolutely no value on everything they created from Infinity to ROR? That was what SP helped to create with Journey and there was the very real opportunity handed to Journey to create more.

As if it wasn't clear already, in your effort to rationalize a reunion album that left everyone but Perry licking their wounds, you will say anything.

No, but I will consider all relevant data and factors, including pressure by the label to reform Journey with SP, consider the options Neal had in 1996 and say he made the best choice given what he knew at the time. Most of your arguments against going with SP are based on what you know now. If he could have looked into the future and seen the fallout, Neal would obviously not have made this choice. Your insisting that he should be omniscient is simply ridiculous.

Why move on with SA, JSS, and Arnel? Moving on with SP was no longer an option after 1998 and there was nothing left to lose. The decision to reunite with Perry was made based on what was known in 1996, not 2009.

Perry did not voluntarily quit Journey.
If he is to be believed, the “hip injury” only sidelined him.
After resuscitating the band’s national profile and garnering a Grammy nod, there was even less a valid reason to move on.
Unless, that is, you think Perry’s hip injury was false and he had no intention of singing ever.
Which, of course, you don’t.
Can't have it both ways.

When SP was told that Journey was auditioning other singers to replace him, he called his lawyer and made the choice to start "the divorce". He was understandably hurt and angry, but he made that choice voluntarily. You are the one who will say anything and by the way, I finally bothered to read the rant I never bothered to respond to. Picking sentences out of a full answer or editing words out is taking a statement out of context. If you are going to rant about something I write, requesting that you actually quote properly is not "bitching", but it certainly would force you to think harder in your responses. And don't pass that off on Andrew - as you are obviously not so concerned with his bandwidth.

What is bullshit is that not once in your ridiculous ranting, while you were estimating the greater potential of replacing Perry, did you ever once acknowledge the potentially damaging repercussions to the band that decision may have caused at the time. In 1998, SP had made the decision to legally split from Journey; however, denying his request to rejoin the band and moving on with a new lineup may not have been received well by the fans. It is only one of a few possible outcomes, but given the rancor the band endured in replacing SA and JSS and the degree of hope held out for Perry to perform with Journey again, it is a reasonable one. Even some of his most ardent detractors on MR have stated how much they would like to go to a Perry-fronted Journey concert, so that is not limited to what you construe to be his "idol worshipping" fans.

Disagree.
Moving on after ten years of waiting on Perry gave the band a clean break.
Reuniting with him for TBF gave the impression that he had been active in the band and only recently dumped.
Kgdjpubs made similar statements above.

Had SP not expressed the desire to return to Journey, I would agree that it gave Journey the option of a clean break, but that isn't what happened. I am curious to know what people think might have happened if he had been refused, because he would not have gone away quietly and I believe it could have been worse. I agree that the reunion for TBF ended very badly for the band and did not help it in the end, but that is hindsight and it's still a great album. People seem to think that Neal (and Jon to be more accurate) should have known what would happen, ignored all of their previous success and great music and the potential to create more, ignored pressure from the label and gone with a significant gamble in changing their sound and lead singer. It might have worked, but it just isn't realistic to expect that he would have chosen that option at the time.

[The_Noble_Cause]

First of all, I have not "lied" about anything and in accusing me of intentionally saying something I know to be false when I have not, you have lowered yourself even further.

But of course, when you call me an “idiot” or tell me to “get over myself” that is all in the Queensbury rules of good sportsmanshsip, right?
Gimme a break...
You are a liar, or at the very least dishonest.
Monker has kept tabs of the lies as well - I won’t go over them again.
And let me guess, am I quoting you out of context here because I choose not to include the entire long-winded paragraph?

You can also try to deflect the merits of the above statement, but it undeniably supports the reasoning behind Neal's decision to go with SP in 1996 with the exception of the iTunes reference. Either you don't understand it or choose not to - Journey fans do not have any particular interest in the dollars that Journey makes, but the band certainly has a vested interest in the levels of its own success, which is not limited to dollars.

By 1996, Perry had already pulled a coup d'ete on the band.
He fired members, fired Herbie, and dictatorially had begun calling the shots on cover art.
He even had a history (pre-dating ROR) of wanting out.
You know what they say, past is prologue, and that turned out to be especially true with TBF.
And NO, one limp musical apologia, (“Anyway” on FTLOSM), does not kiss it and make it all better.

If success were not highly relevant, the band would never have switched to the more radio-friendly sound they were against in 1977. They could have played the music they wanted, lost their record contract and stayed on the road playing smaller gigs to devoted fans. I think there is something special in the music created by Perry, Schon and Cain working together and perhaps they thought so too and wanted to recapture it and take the unexpected opportunity to create more towards what they describe as their Legacy.

In 1977 Journey was in its infancy, touring in a dilapidated Winnebago, and about to be dropped by their record label.
They had developed a cult following as a jam band, but aside from that, they were not established at all.
They needed a hail mary pass to keep it going.
In 1996, the band had name cachet and millions in sales behind them.
They could afford to take a chance.
Which, of course, is exactly what the band ended up doing in 1998.
Tell me, if TBF was the “right direction”, why did the band end up in the exact same place a few years later?
Sounds alot more like a holding pattern to me.

I brought this up because in arguing that the Rolie/Chalfant lineup would have had greater potential, you are also arguing that they would have been able to produce and tour on more than one album. Their catalogue is one of the hardest in music vocally, and it affects the longevity of any lead singer.

Chalfant had been on the road with The Storm and sounded very good.
His Journey performance at Herbie’s birthday, which was lauded by the San Francisco press, would also seem to indicate he had the chops.
Speculate about Chalfant’s vocal resilience all you want.
By the time of TBF, everyone knew with absolute certainty that Perry’s voice had changed and had a history of bailing out on tours.
Besides, at the end of the day, the band DID finally move on with a singer who was adversely affected by the rigors of touring - so you are essentially arguing against reality.
I think a re-formed Journey, even with a deficient singer, would have been preferable to the once-and-done anticlimactic TBF fiasco - and I’m a fan of the album.

It did not seem to matter to Neal and Jon why SP came back for ROR or whether he really wanted to be there - they knew he was considering a solo career instead and wanted him back badly enough that they handed over almost full control of the band. Even after ten years, they still wanted him back badly enough to shaft Chalfant and Rolie, and Rolie had been like a brother since Neal was 14 in Santana. When Robert Fleischmann was the lead singer of Journey and SP was on part of the Infinity tour as his intended replacement, no one warned RF, including Rolie. Nothing any of them do in this business inspires confidence - they all seem to do what it takes to get what they want. That certainly does not make it right, but that is the reality. Journey has a history of screwing over bandmates and they have lasted almost 4 decades, so I don't see why SP leaving behind his FTLOSM band to rejoin Journey would have been viewed by them as anything more than taking the best option.

But Perry didn’t just cancel FTLOSM shows.
He cancelled ROR shows too and had threatened not to tour even earlier than that.
Was going with Perry for TBF a $afer bet?
Only if you have a romanticized version of Perry and his turbulent history with Journey and live touring.

One of the factors in the split in Bad English was the struggle for control over the writing between Jon Waite and Jon Cain and I don't see JC giving up very much control of Journey's songwriting to anyone, including the guy he replaced, but like everything else I am speculating.

That’s probably correct.

Actually, I am interested to know how the writing dynamics of the new lineup would have worked out. Would everyone have put their egos aside or would it have resulted in a struggle for control over the content and direction? What would have been the direction? More rock oriented?

Great question. To date, only Kevin Chalfant has mentioned these writing sessions.

"Gain" is not limited to money, as I have mentioned their amazing evergreen catalogue of music and the classics that people continue to love over 30 years later. Do you place absolutely no value on everything they created from Infinity to ROR? That was what SP helped to create with Journey and there was the very real opportunity handed to Journey to create more.

And maybe Perry could have contributed another album down the road after TBF?
And maybe another one after that.
This catchall “Perry is magic” card can be trotted out conveniently any time you want to prevent the band from moving on.
What makes 1996 so special?
Especially when the endgame was no different than what had happened with ROR and FTLOSM?
It’s like Einstein said, insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

No, but I will consider all relevant data and factors, including pressure by the label to reform Journey with SP, consider the options Neal had in 1996 and say he made the best choice given what he knew at the time. Most of your arguments against going with SP are based on what you know now.

Not at all.
The ROR and FTLOSM cancellations all pre-date TBF.
According to the band and Herbie, Perry’s reluctance to tour was evident even before then.

Why move on with SA, JSS, and Arnel? Moving on with SP was no longer an option after 1998 and there was nothing left to lose. The decision to reunite with Perry was made based on what was known in 1996, not 2009.

Perry did not voluntarily quit Journey.
If he is to be believed, the “hip injury” only sidelined him.
After resuscitating the band’s national profile and garnering a Grammy nod, there was even less a valid reason to move on.
Unless, that is, you think Perry’s hip injury was false and he had no intention of singing ever.
Which, of course, you don’t.
Can't have it both ways.

When SP was told that Journey was auditioning other singers to replace him, he called his lawyer and made the choice to start "the divorce". He was understandably hurt and angry, but he made that choice voluntarily. You are the one who will say anything and by the way, I finally bothered to read the rant I never bothered to respond to. Picking sentences out of a full answer or editing words out is taking a statement out of context. If you are going to rant about something I write, requesting that you actually quote properly is not "bitching", but it certainly would force you to think harder in your responses. And don't pass that off on Andrew - as you are obviously not so concerned with his bandwidth.

What is bullshit is that not once in your ridiculous ranting, while you were estimating the greater potential of replacing Perry, did you ever once acknowledge the potentially damaging repercussions to the band that decision may have caused at the time. In 1998, SP had made the decision to legally split from Journey; however, denying his request to rejoin the band and moving on with a new lineup may not have been received well by the fans. It is only one of a few possible outcomes, but given the rancor the band endured in replacing SA and JSS and the degree of hope held out for Perry to perform with Journey again, it is a reasonable one. Even some of his most ardent detractors on MR have stated how much they would like to go to a Perry-fronted Journey concert, so that is not limited to what you construe to be his "idol worshipping" fans.

Disagree.
Moving on after ten years of waiting on Perry gave the band a clean break.
Reuniting with him for TBF gave the impression that he had been active in the band and only recently dumped.
Kgdjpubs made similar statements above.

Had SP not expressed the desire to return to Journey, I would agree that it gave Journey the option of a clean break, but that isn't what happened. I am curious to know what people think might have happened if he had been refused, because he would not have gone away quietly and I believe it could have been worse. I agree that the reunion for TBF ended very badly for the band and did not help it in the end, but that is hindsight and it's still a great album. People seem to think that Neal (and Jon to be more accurate) should have known what would happen, ignored all of their previous success and great music and the potential to create more, ignored pressure from the label and gone with a significant gamble in changing their sound and lead singer. It might have worked, but it just isn't realistic to expect that he would have chosen that option at the time.

Too long. Fuck it.

[Lora]

The only thing you can pretty much prove is that Perry himself tried to sabotage the Arrival album.

Thanks. It's been a stressful week and I needed a good laugh.

[Monker]

Had SP not expressed the desire to return to Journey, I would agree that it gave Journey the option of a clean break, but that isn't what happened.

Bullshit. You don't know what you are talking about. He did not even want to TALK about Journey during the first part of the FTLOSM tour. There was a Kerrang interview where he gets angry when asked about Journey...saying all the other guys had their time outside of the band and he wanted his too.

It was not until after the band meeting in Florida that all of the crap started coming out that Perry wanted to be in the band.

I agree that the reunion for TBF ended very badly for the band and did not help it in the end, but that is hindsight and it's still a great album.

I had the foresight to know that it wouldn't work. My attitude was the Journey should be Journey and Perry should be solo...cuz that is what everybody seemed to want and was happy doing. Slamming together a band was unhappy when it ended, and was only together for the $'s was a BAD idea.

And, calling TBF a 'great album' is an opinion, not a fact. it's a very mediocre album, IMO.

People seem to think that Neal (and Jon to be more accurate) should have known what would happen, ignored all of their previous success and great music and the potential to create more, ignored pressure from the label and gone with a significant gamble in changing their sound and lead singer. It might have worked, but it just isn't realistic to expect that he would have chosen that option at the time.

They, and Sony, should have remembered the chaos during and after ROR and known that letting Perry in was not the best of ideas...and given the FACT that Perry talked down the idea during his solo tour should have also given them a clue. To sit there and say that it was a 'significant gamble' to add Gregg and Kevin Chalfant, and keep Herbie...is absolutely ridiculous.

[amaron]

If Journey would have pulled a VH back in the late 80's and replaced Perry, things probably would have been much different.

Back then it MIGHT have motivated Perry to either come back sooner than 10 years later, or Journey would be NO WORSE than the position they are in now.

The only reason Aerosmith and VH are relevant now is because they kept releasing new music and touring.

[Don]

If Journey would have pulled a VH back in the late 80's and replaced Perry, things probably would have been much different.

Back then it MIGHT have motivated Perry to either come back sooner than 10 years later, or Journey would be NO WORSE than the position they are in now.

The only reason Aerosmith and VH are relevant now is because they kept releasing new music and touring.

Not to mention Sammy came in and said "Dave who? I'm Van Halen's fucking singer and don't you forget it."

(Actually, this is what Sammy said. "I decided I wasn't going to get criticized for being the second singer in the band -- I was going to be the only singer in the band. )