How big were Aerosmith in the 70s?

This says it all:

 

I bet that was good show in Boston.

 

In record sales, I'd say yes. As a live draw? Probably not.

 

Second tier!!!!!!!!!!!!! You have to be joking.

Yes, they weren't as huge as LZ but who were? They were really, really big in the States. Not in the UK or Australia at the time.
Get Your Wings[my favourite] up to and including Night in the Ruts are the best hard rock Aerosmith.
I went off them when they got outside writers in and when they became obsessed with ballads as singles. Apparently it was Tyler who was into all the ballad crap. They ceased being a hard rock band to me.

 

Yardbirds wannabees, to be more precise. And Aerosmith has admitted as much many times.

 

When we said "second tier", (speaking for myself) we were not saying there were only two tiers, but many (i.e. 2nd tier is still very big)

 

You surely are not talking about the Aerosmith of the 1970's using the term hair band. Of course, I never heard the derogatory term in the 80's either, but that has been fought out on other threads. I really never heard the term in the 70's.

Aerosmith was huge. Their self-titled run through their live album Bootleg is incredible. I saw them in 1979. They were loud and good.

 

That is a great question being a fan of both. You got Toys, Rocks, Live Bootleg and Draw the Line compared to Dressed to Kill, Alive, Destroyer, Rock N Roll Over and Love Gun. KISS was at their height, so was Aerosmith. This is a tough one. I slightly go with KISS because that run is their best albums and Alive beats Bootleg. Of course, it is Aerosmith's also. I saw KISS in 1976 and Aerosmith 1979.

 

ROFL

somebody got it, at least ;-)

 

A good question. I remember one of the magazines, maybe Circus or Creem or HitParader, asking a similar question... who was bigger, Aerosmith or Kiss or Zeppelin?

Probably by that time, nobody was bigger "musically" than Zeppelin.. at least in the high schools. Or so it seemed. Radio airplay, merchandising, ticket sales... who knows. Zeppelin sold a ton of tickets but only toured every other year, meanwhile, Kiss was on tour constantly and selling well.

I dont know, guessing at all that.

 

Circa 1977, in the USA Aerosmith was arguably the most popular American rock band, just a touch behind Zep (#1) and the Stones (#2), right up there with Pink Floyd, KISS.

"Walk This Way" and "Dream On" were played seemingly every 5 minutes on rock radio, they were the most famous rock songs of that time, behind "Stairway to Heaven".

They were massive, bigger in a cultural sense than they were in the late 80s/early 90s.

 

I was living in Europe (Netherlands) during the mid-70s and over there the situation was different, I vividly remember KISS and Aerosmith initially being presented as the new sensations of US Hard Rock. None were among the real major acts, but soon KISS eclipsed Aerosmith in every sense, if only on the strength of their striking image. Even if KISS at the time had limited chart success overseas, they frequently featured in teen magazines and stuff, those spectacular costumes always generated great articles and photos. I guess around 1975-78 many people in Europe were aware of KISS while not having heard one note of music by Paul Stanley & co.

 

This is beyond dispute as far as who Aerosmith themselves cite as their main influence. For example Tyler is quite clear (almost to the extent of vehemence) about it in his book. And Joe Perry has always clearly been more in the Clapton/Beck/Page school than like Keith Richards.

But... in terms of image, the Stones connection was clearly there. But more to the point by the mid seventies and as the decade progressed Aerosmith's teen audience pretty much did not know who the Yardbirds were, meanwhile the Stones were still huge, either 1 or 2 with Led Zeppelin. Hence it was easy to see why the casual fan would see them as heavily Stones influenced.

But of course as the decade progressed, and by the mid seventies Mick Taylor had left the band, the 72 tour was long gone, their music was less edgy, the Stones were losing their standing as the top. (It's not for nothing many consider Some Girls a comeback album, whether you agree or not.) Even the Ledsters had moved into the more for lack of a better word sophisticated (maybe complicated appeals more to others) Physical Graffiti, an album that doesn't even seem designed to appeal to a teen audience. So there was certainly an opening there.

 

That makes sense to me, I don't think Aerosmith really translated well in Europe or the UK, they were really an American phenomenon.

 

I don't think there was any clear top band by the time 77 rolled around, even if only the US market is considered. There were too many regional differences (not there were not differences before, but I digress). At the time I lived in the NY area, and while disco was getting big in lots of places, there was also the growing punk presence by then. Clearly as I noted in my previous post there was an impression the Stones and even Led Zeppelin were if not running out of gas not clearly on top anymore, either. In their wake lots of bands were up there, especially for me and my friends Pink Floyd (Animals), and after them there were any number of bands. Yes, Bad Company, maybe Foreigner for some. Kiss was seen as a kids band, not for real. But there were also big acts like Linda Ronstadt, the Eagles, Fleetwood Mac (not for me, but..). And you can't forget acts like Elton John and early Billy Joel were getting big followings. Some funk bands were still doing well like Earth Wind and Fire, the Commodores, Kool and the Gang. Other prog acts like King Crimson.

In all that yeah, Aerosmith had a presence, but at least where I lived they did not dominate in that post Stones LZ period like they seemed to in the Midwest.

 

One of the few bands in that day that could have followed 'smith in their prime.

 

In effect they were, but you could probably write a term paper on why a band heavily influenced by the (English) Yardbirds could be/were seen as an American phenomenon.

 

My opinion is that the UK and Europe already had had the Yardbirds and Zeppelin and weren't all that interested in another version of that. Americans were like, "Hell yeah, gimme more of that stuff!"

 

Yes, although I'm suspecting european snobbism was small part of it. Why bother about regular meat 'n potatoes bands like Aerosmith or Grand Funk Railroad when you already have Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath and a bit later Judas Priest, UFO and Rainbow at your disposal. Besides, we had our own hard-working blue collar outfit in the form of Status Quo. Sometimes those US heavy bands were really looked down upon. On the other hand, Van Halen (half dutch) and AC/DC (australian, which back then was considered something exotic) were very popular in Europe as well. Also, surprisingly, Ted Nugent in his prime was overseas more successful than 70s Aerosmith or Grand Funk ever had been

 

Aerosmith didn't really go over that well in the U.K. initially.....they got a lot of bad publicity. One critic in Sounds magazine called them a Stones parody, and Tyler fired back in Melody Maker calling them "all old blokes" and "f-ing stupid most of them". They also got grief in Germany where Tyler and Bebe Buell were supposedly strip searched....a small amount of hash was found, and Tyler allegedly blew it back in the customs officers face. Not surprising they stayed mostly stateside, where they were selling out 65,000 seat stadiums.

 

That is a surprise, but perhaps Ted was seen as something so quintessentially American that he was as "exotic" as AC/DC. By contrast Aerosmith were perhaps more of an American knockoff of a British sportscar, so to speak. Also, Ted's supercharged speedy, almost punk rock riffing might have been seen as more current that Aerosmith's more typical 70's rock sound.

 

Jr High, I was ,like most a big fan of Aerosmith from Dream on on the radio (in real time.Meaning like others here , I remember Radio before Aerosmith and when Dream On first hit the Radio air waves) Haunting song to me. By '76 Rocks was out and they could do no wrong But, it seemed they did onward from that point ( Live & studio?) By ANITR album I was losing interest in them........ Good for them in the big comeback they made(not my cup of tea ) but still they survived and succeeded in mainstream Rock.

 

Thanks for your recollection. I was 13 and living in the DC area that year and here's what i recall: At that time, Led Zep were the Hammer of the Gods, they just overawed everyone, they were the clear-cut #1 rock band, nobody had their aura.

Punk was some weird thing happening in England and NYC, with pale, hyper-skinny heroin-addict looking dudes with spiky hair and pins and needles in their face playing incomprehensible noise music. We'd see pictures of punks in Creem magazine but it was like viewing something happening on the moon. Was way outside the mainstream of us kids, most of whom were listening to Zep, Aerosmith, Boston, Floyd, Yes, Kiss (though Kiss was controversial, many regarded them as uncool, something for 12 year olds, LOL), Fleetwood Mac, The Eagles, Frampton, Seger, The Stones, Foreigner, Kansas, etc.

Yes, disco was all over the radio, but if you were a would-be macho tough guy, LOL, you slammed it publicly (Disco Sucks!), even if you listened to it in your room when no friends were around, LOL. E.g., I was a fan of KC and the Sunshine Band, but wouldn't get caught dead admitting it.

As i said, this was the view of a suburban white boy living outside DC, age 13. Of course, at the time, I assumed my POV was that of the entire planet, LOL.