So...Chicago is pretty cool.

I actually hear too much Terry Kath jamming on this live album that makes his guitar solos indistinguishable from his studio version of his guitar solos found in their albums.

 

Well, it's rather un-melodic as well. I don't hear a melody to the track at all. It always sounded to me like Kath was just making up the melody (and probably the lyrics too) as he went along.

Which again, isn't necessarily a slag on it. I would presume the whole "made up on the spot" feeling of it is the charm of the piece that is the reason those who like it, like it. So I will say it just never connected to me. And I love Terry Kath and have listened to it countless times hoping to find some appreciation for the piece. But all I ever come away is with "wow---they were really desperate to make this thing a double LP..."

But I'm glad you dig it. I'm sure there are things I love (maybe even Chicago tracks) that are head scratchers for you. It's all good.

 

Yeah, there are some extended guitar solos, but they don't really feel like "band jams" to me. At least not in the way I'd like to hear a band such as Chicago jam. More of just a "Terry gets to solo until he waves his hand letting us know he's done" type of thing.

I like Carnegie Hall for what it is, having purchased 2 LP and 2 CD versions of it over the years. But it's not an album I pull out very often. Easily the least played of all the 'classic years' stuff for me.

 

The song highlight for me is the fourth part called "Dreamin' Home" which serves as the bridge of the five-part song. It features the three-part vocal harmony sang by the band's three lead singers (Kath, Lamm and Cetera).

 

I love the Carnegie Hall for its purity as a live album with no studio doctoring or post overdubbing to make the songs sound better. It's actually among the very few authentic live albums. On some of the songs, they sound raw like a garage band with horns and in my opinion, that's the real beauty of a live performance as opposed to hearing your favorite artist performs and sound like you are just listening to their studio album tracks.

 

It's certainly quite raw.

I think the biggest problem I have with it is the degree to which it sounds like it was taken right out of the board and therefore loses some of the "live" feel in the sound. I don't know how it was mic'd or mixed --- to what degree they utilized room/ambient mics, for example--- but it sounds too much like straight-out-of-the-board for my taste.

Also, IIRC, there's a lot of hard panning of the vocals which make them sound more separate than they probably need to. Which doesn't help the fact that the vocals are kind of all over the place as it is.

 

I agree with you regarding the way their live performances were poorly mic'd and recorded. Whoever recorded them have not heard or listened to the album "Belafonte At Carnegie Hall" (1960?) which is in my opinion among the best recorded and best sounding live albums I've heard. They should have learned from it regarding optimum mic placements and other technical aspects of a good sounding live recording.
All in all, the "Chicago At Carnegie Hall" is not perfect recording-wise but it's listenable and the music is great if you are familiar with Chicago's first three albums. The best sounding one is the Rhino CD set, the only Rhino CD of Chicago that I can highly recommend.

 

Finally playing Chicago IV, just put on Side 2 (playing it on my new AT-LP-120 aka the Dank Tank), and I actually really like it so far. I'm sure by Side 8 I might have a different opinion but so far it's all butta with me.

 

In Danny Seraphine's fine autobio Street Player: My Chicago Story, he addresses the recording of Chicago at Carnegie Hall on p. 124, saying:

 

After playing all of IV last night, it's raw and underrated. Loved it.

 

Much better than many doctored "live" albums released by other artists.

 

I always thought it was weird that people were shocked by that, rather. After all they had tunes like "Does Anybody Really Know What Time It Is"--really slick AORish pop that's actually lighter than tunes like "Stay the Night" and 'Hard Habit to Break", and "Colour My World"--a soft rock ballad that's not that far removed from tunes like "If You Leave Me Now", going all the way back to the beginning. Their transformation from the first album to their sound and the material they were doing by the mid 80s was a very gradual, very logical progression for anyone who had been following them all along and really paying attention to the albums.

Personally, I like them from the beginning all the way through to the most recent album. But I like all sorts of music, including that there's a ton of soft rock, yacht rock, etc. that I love.

 

CARNEGIE HALL, LIVE IN JAPAN and the out of print CHICAGO XXVI LIVE albums are all underrated in my book.

Oh, and for those who are bothered by Terry Kath's "endless" soloing: Like it or not, that's kinda what he did ... it was a large part of his style, even in the studio, where his soloing throughout a song could be quietly assimilated into the mix. I don't even know if I'd call it soloing in such instances, but that's me. Just listen and check it out.

 

Improvisation is the right term for it.

 

We're all different, and that's what makes the world go round. Mother is one of my favorite Chicago songs (although I slightly prefer the live version), and Lowdown is a great track. I often enjoy listening to An Hour in the Shower. I find the bass lines particularly memorable. That's my 2¢ worth. ;-)

 

The opener for "XIV" is a great song in my opinion:

 

I like "Mother"

 

Had Cetera remained they had a chance to stay good. Once he was gone it wasn't the same.
He has admitted he just doesn't want to work hard anymore and rejoin.

 

If you like V, go fwd and score VI. Similar vibe, plus the album closer, FEELING STRONGER EVERY DAY totally rocks (imho, 1 of their top-5 most energetic and compelling tracks). The horns set the tempo and tone for the track.....Guitar, vocals, drums....

There's some quality pop on it, which makes VI accessible. Also many compelling performances. IMO, VI delivers the best sonics of all their albums.

Some fans sing VII's praises. It delivers some nice moments, but never resonated too much with me.

GT

 

Personally, I prefer the more eclectic Chicago VII (1974) over Chicago VI (1973).

 

While I agree that I like VII more, it doesn't seem fair to compare a double to a single album. VI has some great music on it.

 

Hot Streets for me

 

I always enjoy a good Chicago thread here. Even though I normally contribute with the same thing:

They are criminally overlooked here in the UK and I don't know why. I will be 53 this year yet I only really heard Chicago (other than 'that' single) recently. It's difficult to find nice copies of the LPs here. Even more difficult to find ones with the inserts, posters etc. For that reason most of my Chicago LPs are 'place fillers' at the moment. I really don't know what record shops in the UK do with them... Probably never even put them out. I know of one shop which insists on putting them in the soul and funk section - not utterly crazy but not the first place I would look either.

I did splash out on the Rhino reissues of CTA and II because I simply couldn't find nice originals. How does The Rhino II compare with the SW remix? - I think the remix is due to be released on vinyl soon. Don't really want to have to buy another expensive vinyl copy - but I might have to if it is the one to own...