Escape81 wrote:SherriBerry wrote:I observed it as merely pointless condescension - there is nothing to "let go".
Your observation is noted, but since the majority here—including yourself, if I recall—proudly wear the moniker, why would you consider it a pejorative? It was a tame comment, and it in no way weakens his argument. So, yes, let it go.
You recall incorrectly - I called myself a Perry because I did not want to be lumped in with the more obsessive types that track down SP's birth certificate and nickname their soap. It weakens Parfait's argument in that he begins his argument by attempting to belittle the person he is challenging. It's called an Ad Hominem - look it up. At this point, you're the one who needs to let it go.
SherriBerry wrote:That does not change the fact that he did not hold up Journey, so your comment is irrelevant.
Sure he did (hold them up), and sure it is (relevant). He held them up between ’84-’86, between ’87-’96, and ’96-’98; Herbie was pushing the rest of the band to move on without him during each of those occasions. But they were loyal. His middle name might as well be Delay. That’s all he does. The man exhibited tendencies suggesting that he was clearly afraid of the band finding success without him, thus “don’t fracture the stone.” He fractured it to his benefit more than once.
The band was not held hostage and could have chosen to move on without him, with the full support of Herbie. They chose not to and moved on to other projects instead. Your assumption is that they were loyal - mine is that they believed SP would be too difficult to replace. The band has demonstrated little loyalty over the years and SP has been proven quite difficult to replace.
SherriBerry wrote:Bad English was a three year project because these guys needed to stay on the road touring to remain intact, but jumped into side projects off the road and wound up disbanding - that is a quote from John Waite. That and he was clashing with Jon on the writing. Think about it - if they were enjoying huge success at whatever they were doing, they would not end it to try to reform Journey.
What is there to think about? Bad English did enjoy some incredible success, including a number one hit—something neither Perry nor Journey have yet to achieve otherwise. Perhaps Neal secretly enjoys playing in Journey?
If you need to ask what there is to think about... Bad English did not enjoy continued success - it ended, and once again Neal and Jon turned to Journey. If they were filling stadiums as any other band, they would not have disbanded a successful band to reform Journey and see if they could make another go of it. That is a ridiculous assumption.
SherriBerry wrote:The SuperBowl performance was completely preventable and demonstrated problems with Journey's management. It was supposed to showcase the new Journey on national television and certainly did not enhance them - ask ScarabGator. The tribute band remarks have no merit to you and I noted that I do not feel that way either, but it has been debated on here and is therefore relevant to Journey's legacy and fanbase.
The atrocious Bill Graham Memorial performance was also preventable and demonstrated problems with not management, but Perry himself. The songs were taken down, the lyrics allegedly taped to the damn floor. He put the crowd into a coma. Doesn't take away from his creative genius and (former) talent.
Steve Perry poured his creative genius and talent into Journey. None of the successive lead singers, as talented as they are, have offered a fraction of that to the music. You are making the argument for me.
SherriBerry wrote:Where have you been? No one currently espouses " the legacy" and continuing it more than Neal and Jon and you'll notice that I was responding to Parfait's assertions that Steve Perry tried to thwart their efforts to continue it. That was why I mentioned it - directly countering Parfait's assertions to the contrary. There is nothing to "let go" - it's called a counterpoint. As for the majority who go to hear a few old hits, have no appreciation for the entire Journey catalogue and are clueless to the history of the band and don't care, well their ignorance may be bliss, but the music means more than that to some of us and it matters.
Parfait’s correct: Perry did try to thwart Journey and their efforts to continue it. Why else would he plead them to not go on without him? Perry’s only interested in perpetuating a legacy that DIRECTLY involves him and his voice. Not new material and not new records. You haven’t made much of a counterpoint, but illuminate the man’s monumental selfishness.
Perry tried to thwart the band's potential damage to the legacy of what they built together as Journey, not to stop them from playing the music. If they wanted to go on without him and tour and write new music as the J-Boyz or anything else, that would not have been an issue.
SherriBerry wrote:Could you, like, consider, that there is a significant difference between Steve Perry going into the studio to engineer the old catalogue and release the albums so that the fans can enjoy the originals with a clearer sound, and releasing very poorly produced rerecords that did nothing but artificially inflate Journey's sales numbers? They get zero airplay, but the general consensus on this board is that the rerecords make great coasters.
Why would he engineer the old catalogue? The sound was perfectly fine; Perry was out to make a buck, not to drastically improve the quality of the sound. It’s not like it was shit to begin with. I appreciate you trying to impute some sort of altruistic mentality on a man who has never exhibited any, but we live in the real world. Journey had more of an incentive, musically speaking, to release the old hits: they wanted to prove that they had a vocalist who could honor Perry’s legacy—as Ross said—by singing the old material up to par. What was Perry’s motivation? Ah, yes. The unattested notion that he was improving the quality of sound. Please. He’s far more intent on milking the old material than the rest of Journey is. They, at least, put out new material.
SP engineered the old catalogue because Sony asked him to and the quality with the new technology is, in fact, an improvement. If you have the original albums on CD, it's your choice as to whether or not you want to purchase them. If you wanted 'Revelation', there was no choice - the rerecords were part of the deal. As for doing so because they wanted to prove they had a singer who could honour the legacy, do your research. Neal has been talking about rerecords as far back as Steve Augeri, but at least you acknowledged that the band references the legacy regarding their actions.
SherriBerry wrote:I did not say they didn't - I said leave some for SP, not give it all to SP.
Parfait in no way disrespected Steve Perry. He gave his opinion about Perry’s less-than-honorable dealings; just like you provided some similar dealings by current Journey (i.e. Tapegate, JSS firing, ect.). What’s the difference between the two of you?
I did not say Parfait was disrespecting SP in that instance - I was stating that he should be respected too. Perhaps if you left the statement I was responding to at the time, it would be clearer to you.
SherriBerry wrote:That the critics branded Journey as corporate rock to minimize their music demonstrates their insipid bias - using them as an example of judging artistic integrity does not benefit you. I don't care what they think of the songs anyway, but using them for crap commercials ruins the association and the enjoyment of them by the fans and if you don't get that, so be it. And again, I was countering Parfait's arguments, so seriously, drop the attitude.
Your excuses are irrelevant. The fact remains that NO ONE important considers Journey to be on par with the true greats in terms of artistic integrity and soul. And that includes the Perry-era. They’re underrated, underappreciated, and that’s not likely to change. The talent’s there, but no one cares about their legacy and their integrity other than their ability to put on a good show. And in what weird-ass dimension does using a song for “crap commercials” (which are subjective to begin with) ruin the integrity? The key edict to any novice in P.R. understands one thing—there’s no such thing as bad publicity. It’s called exposure. Don’t Stop Believin’ could be used for anything from Tampon commercials to election campaign commercials and all it would do is just put the song into people’s heads.
Your entire statement is utter ignorance and if that is your opinion of their music, what in the hell are you even doing here? A bunch of elitist cranks at Rolling Stone magazine and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame don't appreciate Journey's music, so their music, integrity, and legacy is irrelevant? That is the stupidest comment I have ever heard on here! I am not calling you stupid, but you should rethink your position. If it were true, Journey would still be on tour with Steve Augeri playing to tapes - it matters. Stephen King is one of the most critically panned authors in existence, but that does not negate the significance, quality, or impact of his writing. And giving a song negative associations is significant, and anyone with a basic understanding of psychology would recognize that.
SherriBerry wrote:True,
Good, then you acknowledge that your point was meritless.
No, but your comment did not affect the point I was making in responding to Parfait.
SherriBerry wrote:but that does not change the fact that people continue to whine about SP getting paid while he was not touring. Neal agreed to it and as there was already a precedent set by Gregg Rolie, it is hardly reasonable to keep throwing that criticism at SP.
Where is the source for Gregg Rolie? And furthermore, when did Gregg Rolie get paid after royally screwing the band over? Different circumstances; your comparison is moot. But your Perry apologia is entertaining, so I encourage you to continue.
