100% WET

[Lula]

I honestly don't care. If I did not go to the website, I wouldn't even know there was an album. Hell, if I didn't come to this website, I wouldn't even know who Soto was. My comment is in regard, to the "shocking" 100% Andrew gave it. I would have never expected it.

yup, you would not know he saved journey millions of dollars in revenue by assuming the role of lead singer on the fly and bringing life to a dead band. yup, you wouldn't know that because as the jrny guys are busy being good people they're f@*king their brothers in the ass!

Hi Dean!

Hi Dan

nope tito, it is i, lula. dean is at granny's in philly. he also would have been much more straight forward than i. when have you known dean to not type it all out to read?

my offer still stands, come on out here and i'll take you to your name sake's taco stand.

[Ehwmatt]

Again, how are others besides Andrew hearing full songs? I don't have sound here, does Drew have links? is there a streaming page? or is it possible to buy this album somewhere already?

[stevew2]

Oh yes, that's right. Walmart held them captive in a dungeon and threatened to boil their family jewels and eat their children's souls if they didn't sign the deal... I keep forgetting that part. Clearly, they had no choice. And you're assuming I haven't criticized other bands that have done it.

I've grown tired of debating with you. Be gone now. *shoo shoo*

Certainly, they didn't have to do it. But, if they didn't do it, there would be NO Revelation not to mention a lot of money forfeited. I think the masses have shown they are grateful there was a Revelation CD. Not to mention, they were going to rerecord some if not all of those songs for promotional purposes (concert advertisement on TV and radio) anyway, so why not get paid for it. If you don't like it, don't listen to Disc 2. I don't.

You wouldn't be tired a debating if you actually had a point.

You just listen to fuckin Windy Cities over and over and over again

[bluejeangirl76]

Oh yes, that's right. Walmart held them captive in a dungeon and threatened to boil their family jewels and eat their children's souls if they didn't sign the deal... I keep forgetting that part. Clearly, they had no choice. And you're assuming I haven't criticized other bands that have done it.

I've grown tired of debating with you. Be gone now. *shoo shoo*

Certainly, they didn't have to do it. But, if they didn't do it, there would be NO Revelation not to mention a lot of money forfeited. I think the masses have shown they are grateful there was a Revelation CD. Not to mention, they were going to rerecord some if not all of those songs for promotional purposes (concert advertisement on TV and radio) anyway, so why not get paid for it. If you don't like it, don't listen to Disc 2. I don't.

You wouldn't be tired a debating if you actually had a point.

I got your point right here. People tire of debating with you because we can't stand the glare off of your Frig-colored glasses.

Sure, Revelation has had some success, but they had to hitch a little ride on a nice easy Walmart deal and some tuxedo tails to find that out instead of going through a real label. If that many people believed in this beforehand, they wouldn't have needed Walmart.

[yulog]

That being said, I was less than impressed with some of the samples, but the full songs have something the samples don't capture. It really is a good album. I don't hear all the much Journey, with the exception of the last song however.

Am I missing something? is this album out already? If so, where can I get it?

I got it last week, and there are some good songs on here, but the new Winger and even the new Salute have more bang for your buck. As far as it being journey sounding? I hear more eclipse and work of art influences rather than journey(which is good,without them the cd i expect ,would have gone in a different direction)

[Ehwmatt]

Oh yes, that's right. Walmart held them captive in a dungeon and threatened to boil their family jewels and eat their children's souls if they didn't sign the deal... I keep forgetting that part. Clearly, they had no choice. And you're assuming I haven't criticized other bands that have done it.

I've grown tired of debating with you. Be gone now. *shoo shoo*

Certainly, they didn't have to do it. But, if they didn't do it, there would be NO Revelation not to mention a lot of money forfeited. I think the masses have shown they are grateful there was a Revelation CD. Not to mention, they were going to rerecord some if not all of those songs for promotional purposes (concert advertisement on TV and radio) anyway, so why not get paid for it. If you don't like it, don't listen to Disc 2. I don't.

You wouldn't be tired a debating if you actually had a point.

I got your point right here. People tire of debating with you because we can't stand the glare off of your Frig-colored glasses.

Sure, Revelation has had some success, but they had to hitch a little ride on a nice easy Walmart deal and some tuxedo tails to find that out instead of going through a real label. If that many people believed in this beforehand, they wouldn't have needed Walmart.

I'm no diehard Revelation fan, but I am in the middle of the Saint Johns/Titos who think that they just made the next Dark Side of the Moon saleswise and you guys who complain about going to Wal-Mart to get sales constantly. Like it or not, Wal-Mart is the new and last standing paradigm to sell a lot of hardcopy CDs for just about any band, but especially older ones. This is a silly argument. They shouldn't catch flak for making a calculated business decision. Arrival, a far superior album to Revelation, is proof positive of how a band can be expected to be treated by a "real label," those buttfuckers at Sony.

[Ehwmatt]

That being said, I was less than impressed with some of the samples, but the full songs have something the samples don't capture. It really is a good album. I don't hear all the much Journey, with the exception of the last song however.

Am I missing something? is this album out already? If so, where can I get it?

I got it last week, and there are some good songs on here, but the new Winger and even the new Salute have more bang for your buck. As far as it being journey sounding? I hear more eclipse and work of art influences rather than journey(which is good,without them the cd i expect ,would have gone in a different direction)

Where'd you get it though?

[bluejeangirl76]

Oh yes, that's right. Walmart held them captive in a dungeon and threatened to boil their family jewels and eat their children's souls if they didn't sign the deal... I keep forgetting that part. Clearly, they had no choice. And you're assuming I haven't criticized other bands that have done it.

I've grown tired of debating with you. Be gone now. *shoo shoo*

Certainly, they didn't have to do it. But, if they didn't do it, there would be NO Revelation not to mention a lot of money forfeited. I think the masses have shown they are grateful there was a Revelation CD. Not to mention, they were going to rerecord some if not all of those songs for promotional purposes (concert advertisement on TV and radio) anyway, so why not get paid for it. If you don't like it, don't listen to Disc 2. I don't.

You wouldn't be tired a debating if you actually had a point.

I got your point right here. People tire of debating with you because we can't stand the glare off of your Frig-colored glasses.

Sure, Revelation has had some success, but they had to hitch a little ride on a nice easy Walmart deal and some tuxedo tails to find that out instead of going through a real label. If that many people believed in this beforehand, they wouldn't have needed Walmart.

I'm no diehard Revelation fan, but I am in the middle of the Saint Johns/Titos and you guys who complain about this constantly. Like it or not, Wal-Mart is the new and last standing paradigm to sell a lot of hardcopy CDs for just about any band, but especially older ones. This is a silly argument. They shouldn't catch flak for making a calculated business decision. Arrival, a far superior album to Revelation, is proof positive of how a band can be expected to be treated by a "real label," those buttfuckers at Sony.

Agreed Matt. I'd have less to say about the deal and more respect for the album (and band) if they hadn't pissed all over the classics that way. It's that they know they can't sell without it, and that was more important than leaving well-enough the hell alone. 'Tis all.

[bluejeangirl76]

Now, I believe the topic here was Andrew's review and the W.E.T. cd that many of us are interested in.

Would be nice to go back to that. Ok'thxbai.

[Ehwmatt]

Agreed Matt. I'd have less to say about the deal and more respect for the album (and band) if they hadn't pissed all over the classics that way. It's that they know they can't sell without it, and that was more important than leaving well-enough the hell alone. 'Tis all.

Fair enough, fair enough. Still probably a case of unequal bargaining power for the band, with a take-it-or-leave it deal likely offered by Wal-Mart.

At any rate, can't wait to hear this album, although I doubt it's gonna be a 100% to my ears That's reserved for maybe 10 albums ever.

[Behshad]

Agreed Matt. I'd have less to say about the deal and more respect for the album (and band) if they hadn't pissed all over the classics that way. It's that they know they can't sell without it, and that was more important than leaving well-enough the hell alone. 'Tis all.

Fair enough, fair enough. Still probably a case of unequal bargaining power for the band, with a take-it-or-leave it deal likely offered by Wal-Mart.

" At any rate, can't wait to hear this album, although I doubt it's gonna be a 100% to my ears That's reserved for maybe 10 albums ever......

......Out of which 7 has to be released yet and the 3 already released are all Britney Spears albums "

[kgdjpubs]

Oh yes, that's right. Walmart held them captive in a dungeon and threatened to boil their family jewels and eat their children's souls if they didn't sign the deal... I keep forgetting that part. Clearly, they had no choice. And you're assuming I haven't criticized other bands that have done it.

I've grown tired of debating with you. Be gone now. *shoo shoo*

Certainly, they didn't have to do it. But, if they didn't do it, there would be NO Revelation not to mention a lot of money forfeited. I think the masses have shown they are grateful there was a Revelation CD. Not to mention, they were going to rerecord some if not all of those songs for promotional purposes (concert advertisement on TV and radio) anyway, so why not get paid for it. If you don't like it, don't listen to Disc 2. I don't.

You wouldn't be tired a debating if you actually had a point.

I got your point right here. People tire of debating with you because we can't stand the glare off of your Frig-colored glasses.

Sure, Revelation has had some success, but they had to hitch a little ride on a nice easy Walmart deal and some tuxedo tails to find that out instead of going through a real label. If that many people believed in this beforehand, they wouldn't have needed Walmart.

I'm no diehard Revelation fan, but I am in the middle of the Saint Johns/Titos and you guys who complain about this constantly. Like it or not, Wal-Mart is the new and last standing paradigm to sell a lot of hardcopy CDs for just about any band, but especially older ones. This is a silly argument. They shouldn't catch flak for making a calculated business decision. Arrival, a far superior album to Revelation, is proof positive of how a band can be expected to be treated by a "real label," those buttfuckers at Sony.

Agreed Matt. I'd have less to say about the deal and more respect for the album (and band) if they hadn't pissed all over the classics that way. It's that they know they can't sell without it, and that was more important than leaving well-enough the hell alone. 'Tis all.

If one believes the Manilla DVD insert, the deal was re-recording the classics and adding a few new songs, NOT a double album. Considering the originals are still available, I just view the 2nd disc as a "better sound" version of the audio off a live dvd. Personally, I don't listen to it much at all, but I think some of the arrangements are a bit more rocking than the originals. Anyway, half of the songs were probably already recorded for radio promos, etc. The package is certainly NOT marked as "Journey's Greatest Hits", which I would have a major problem if it was. In the end, I don't think the average fan cares one way or the other, especially as there are better options out there if you just want the Greatest Hits cd.

[Ehwmatt]

Agreed Matt. I'd have less to say about the deal and more respect for the album (and band) if they hadn't pissed all over the classics that way. It's that they know they can't sell without it, and that was more important than leaving well-enough the hell alone. 'Tis all.

Fair enough, fair enough. Still probably a case of unequal bargaining power for the band, with a take-it-or-leave it deal likely offered by Wal-Mart.

" At any rate, can't wait to hear this album, although I doubt it's gonna be a 100% to my ears That's reserved for maybe 10 albums ever......

......Out of which 7 has to be released yet and the 3 already released are all Britney Spears albums "

You nailed it Beh. I'm still searching for "the ones," besides Oops I Did It Again, which is the most well-crafted pop song of the last 30 years. Insert Patrick Bateman music rant here

[Jana]

That being said, I was less than impressed with some of the samples, but the full songs have something the samples don't capture. It really is a good album. I don't hear all the much Journey, with the exception of the last song however.

Am I missing something? is this album out already? If so, where can I get it?

I got it last week, and there are some good songs on here, but the new Winger and even the new Salute have more bang for your buck. As far as it being journey sounding? I hear more eclipse and work of art influences rather than journey(which is good,without them the cd i expect ,would have gone in a different direction)

Which makes sense, since Sall and Martensson wrote all the songs on the album, that you would hear those influences on W.E.T.
Sounds good.

[Pelata]

I think it's better than both the Winger and Salute albums...which are both good.

[kgdjpubs]

At any rate, can't wait to hear this album, although I doubt it's gonna be a 100% to my ears That's reserved for maybe 10 albums ever.

It's not 100%, and not even close. It is good though, and better than a lot of what is released these days. You have to understand Andrew's ratings, and how they apply to your listening tastes. Personally, anything under about 90% isn't all that good to my ears as a general rule, barring a few instances where I might like something he doesn't care for or visa versa. If you read and listen to enough of what he reviews, you can figure out about where you would stand on a release between the rating mark and the description itself. The scores are WAY too high across the board (and he's admitted this), but they are generally consistent--and that's the major point.

As far as rating albums go, I'm not even sure I've ever heard a 95% album, let alone a 100% one.

[Ehwmatt]

At any rate, can't wait to hear this album, although I doubt it's gonna be a 100% to my ears That's reserved for maybe 10 albums ever.

It's not 100%, and not even close. It is good though, and better than a lot of what is released these days. You have to understand Andrew's ratings, and how they apply to your listening tastes. Personally, anything under about 90% isn't all that good to my ears as a general rule, barring a few instances where I might like something he doesn't care for or visa versa. If you read and listen to enough of what he reviews, you can figure out about where you would stand on a release between the rating mark and the description itself. The scores are WAY too high across the board (and he's admitted this), but they are generally consistent--and that's the major point.

As far as rating albums go, I'm not even sure I've ever heard a 95% album, let alone a 100% one.

I mean, most albums by bands I like are at least worth listening to a few times through and they almost always have a few tracks I want to come back to, so it'd be hard to go anything under 80%. For instance, I'm really disappointed in Foreigner's latest, but there are about 3 or 4 tracks I'll always listen to from the album and if I reviewed it, I'd probably rate it somewhere around 80%, even though I'd describe it as a lackluster effort overall...

[bluejeangirl76]

Again, how are others besides Andrew hearing full songs? I don't have sound here, does Drew have links? is there a streaming page? or is it possible to buy this album somewhere already?

Here:

http://www.melodicrock.com/showcase/wet.html

Track listing on the left are links to the samples. You'll have to get to where you have sound, though.
I don't think the album is out... did I read Nov. 6th around here somewhere?

[kgdjpubs]

At any rate, can't wait to hear this album, although I doubt it's gonna be a 100% to my ears That's reserved for maybe 10 albums ever.

It's not 100%, and not even close. It is good though, and better than a lot of what is released these days. You have to understand Andrew's ratings, and how they apply to your listening tastes. Personally, anything under about 90% isn't all that good to my ears as a general rule, barring a few instances where I might like something he doesn't care for or visa versa. If you read and listen to enough of what he reviews, you can figure out about where you would stand on a release between the rating mark and the description itself. The scores are WAY too high across the board (and he's admitted this), but they are generally consistent--and that's the major point.

As far as rating albums go, I'm not even sure I've ever heard a 95% album, let alone a 100% one.

I mean, most albums by bands I like are at least worth listening to a few times through and they almost always have a few tracks I want to come back to, so it'd be hard to go anything under 80%. For instance, I'm really disappointed in Foreigner's latest, but there are about 3 or 4 tracks I'll always listen to from the album and if I reviewed it, I'd probably rate it somewhere around 80%, even though I'd describe it as a lackluster effort overall...

always depends on your point of reference. Most things that are released should be in the 50% (average) to 70% (much better than average). In my eyes, to correctly differentiate between the good, very good and pure classic, the scale should increase exponentially the higher it goes.

There are some really good songs on the WET album (and less "AOR by the numbers" that I was fearing). It rises above a lot released in the genre, and may well be in my top 10 albums of the year, but I'm fairly convinced it won't be #1 unless something magical happens.

[Ehwmatt]

At any rate, can't wait to hear this album, although I doubt it's gonna be a 100% to my ears That's reserved for maybe 10 albums ever.

It's not 100%, and not even close. It is good though, and better than a lot of what is released these days. You have to understand Andrew's ratings, and how they apply to your listening tastes. Personally, anything under about 90% isn't all that good to my ears as a general rule, barring a few instances where I might like something he doesn't care for or visa versa. If you read and listen to enough of what he reviews, you can figure out about where you would stand on a release between the rating mark and the description itself. The scores are WAY too high across the board (and he's admitted this), but they are generally consistent--and that's the major point.

As far as rating albums go, I'm not even sure I've ever heard a 95% album, let alone a 100% one.

I mean, most albums by bands I like are at least worth listening to a few times through and they almost always have a few tracks I want to come back to, so it'd be hard to go anything under 80%. For instance, I'm really disappointed in Foreigner's latest, but there are about 3 or 4 tracks I'll always listen to from the album and if I reviewed it, I'd probably rate it somewhere around 80%, even though I'd describe it as a lackluster effort overall...

always depends on your point of reference. Most things that are released should be in the 50% (average) to 70% (much better than average). In my eyes, to correctly differentiate between the good, very good and pure classic, the scale should increase exponentially the higher it goes.

There are some really good songs on the WET album (and less "AOR by the numbers" that I was fearing). It rises above a lot released in the genre, and may well be in my top 10 albums of the year, but I'm fairly convinced it won't be #1 unless something magical happens.

Yeah, it's just a matter of what the numbers mean to you. I look at it as a "school grading" kinda thing where 50% would be a miserable failure! You obviously don't. I'm sure in the end, the opinions are pretty close even if the numbers used aren't, if that makes sense

[Behshad]

OK, Everyone give Tito a break please. He has every right to be upset, specially since the release date of the WET CD happens to be the same day another CD comes out which didnt get the same review.

[Michigan Girl]

I am LMAO!!! :wink:

[Ehwmatt]

That's classic shit

[kgdjpubs]

At any rate, can't wait to hear this album, although I doubt it's gonna be a 100% to my ears That's reserved for maybe 10 albums ever.

It's not 100%, and not even close. It is good though, and better than a lot of what is released these days. You have to understand Andrew's ratings, and how they apply to your listening tastes. Personally, anything under about 90% isn't all that good to my ears as a general rule, barring a few instances where I might like something he doesn't care for or visa versa. If you read and listen to enough of what he reviews, you can figure out about where you would stand on a release between the rating mark and the description itself. The scores are WAY too high across the board (and he's admitted this), but they are generally consistent--and that's the major point.

As far as rating albums go, I'm not even sure I've ever heard a 95% album, let alone a 100% one.

I mean, most albums by bands I like are at least worth listening to a few times through and they almost always have a few tracks I want to come back to, so it'd be hard to go anything under 80%. For instance, I'm really disappointed in Foreigner's latest, but there are about 3 or 4 tracks I'll always listen to from the album and if I reviewed it, I'd probably rate it somewhere around 80%, even though I'd describe it as a lackluster effort overall...

always depends on your point of reference. Most things that are released should be in the 50% (average) to 70% (much better than average). In my eyes, to correctly differentiate between the good, very good and pure classic, the scale should increase exponentially the higher it goes.

There are some really good songs on the WET album (and less "AOR by the numbers" that I was fearing). It rises above a lot released in the genre, and may well be in my top 10 albums of the year, but I'm fairly convinced it won't be #1 unless something magical happens.

Yeah, it's just a matter of what the numbers mean to you. I look at it as a "school grading" kinda thing where 50% would be a miserable failure! You obviously don't. I'm sure in the end, the opinions are pretty close even if the numbers used aren't, if that makes sense

obviously, you didn't have my high school Chemistry teacher. That class was thrilled when the average was 60%. Obviously, there was a HUGE bell curve on the tests so that people didn't horribly fail the class.

Getting back to the point, I understand WHY the scores have to be somewhat inflated to avoid infuriating the labels/artists, but I don't think there is anywhere near enough room for an "album of the year" versus a "classic of the decades". I think we can all agree on the general opinion though, even though the actual number rating may differ wildly.

[Michigan Girl]

I think it's better than both the Winger and Salute albums...which are both good.

This is the kind of review I like to hear...do you like it or not?!?!?
I absolutely loved what I have heard!!!

[steveo777]

Muwahahahahahahaha!

And to think someone else gets in trouble for gay Friga jokes....

[kgdjpubs]

That's classic shit

I have a feeling Andrew will have a cow trying to figure out how some of you would think he would give 10% to that.

[Ehwmatt]

obviously, you didn't have my high school Chemistry teacher. That class was thrilled when the average was 60%. Obviously, there was a HUGE bell curve on the tests so that people didn't horribly fail the class.

Getting back to the point, I understand WHY the scores have to be somewhat inflated to avoid infuriating the labels/artists, but I don't think there is anywhere near enough room for an "album of the year" versus a "classic of the decades". I think we can all agree on the general opinion though, even though the actual number rating may differ wildly.

I had a Computer Science prof in college, the class would have had a mass orgy if the test average ever approached a 50%

She was a Chinese immigrant and had some diction issues , causing the class to have a lot of trouble learning a complex subject. Class test average for all three tests never cracked 40%... yet most of us got B+s and A-s cause people told her straight up in class she sucked at teaching It was her first year, she was scared of getting fired right away if every one complained.

[Behshad]

Muwahahahahahahaha!

And to think someone else gets in trouble for gay Friga jokes....

Mines are not jokes though and I do it 5 times a year, not 50 times a day

[portland]

I especially liked this part:

"This song is a huge middle finger to Journey – as if to state – 'hey, you wanted the heritage sound, here it is…' "

And I'm sure they care.

I'm sure they don't, being that these are the same guys who don't realize that their own last album was a huge middle finger to Journey.

BJG the more you type the more I like you