So,uh....what's wrong with "corporate rock" exactly?

And I guess Sam Cooke-inspired music is somehow supposed to be less artistically valid than Mahavishnu-inspired music? The only real problem with latter-day Journey was that the lyrics could be very trite behind what was actually pretty good music. And Steve Perry was an outstanding singer.

 

And we all know Woodstock was the ultimate non-corporate rock event.

 

A lot of the "Yacht Rock" stuff is really good musically: think Jay Graydon, Toto, Louie Shelton, and more. As with latter day Journey, the problem comes with the lyric side of the songwriting, in many cases. That and the fact that the sound got played out to saturation. It had its roots in the West Coast cool jazz scene and studio/film score scenes. Think Marty Paich, Mike Melvoin, Shelly Manne, Henry Mancini, etc. All that stuff is equally good and often much better than most rock 'n roll.

 

Loggins and Messina, Seals and Croft, England Dan and John Ford Coley, Christopher Cross.

Jimmy Buffet spent a lot of his time on yachts, but many yacht rock afficianados reject him because he's too country.

 

The original poster might want to revisit this old thread of antokk's.

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=207926&highlight=corporate+rock

 

WOW!- I've been on this forum along time and without a doubt that has to be the most stupid statement in regards to music I've come across on here (and believe me,I've read a lot of them) Do YOU really believe the Clash is no different than Styx???!!! The Clash had a totally different inspiration,style and focus than Styx.You might have well have said Flava Flav is no different than Britney Spears or something to that effect...

 

Nope, I agree with tspit. It's all music. The Clash were more political and intellectual (also naive, in my opinion), and Styx were certainly more melodic. Who's to judge which of those attributes is more important?

 

There is no difference...it's human beings playing music.

 

Loved them and grew up with them all..........Boston, Kansas, Foreigner, REO, Styx, Journey, Heart etc. Each one of these bands had at least one great album and a couple of real good ones. Whether you like it or not, it doesn't really matter. These bands were all pretty big in their times.

 

I find the term is usually more telling of the accussor than the band.

I also note that those that find no worth in ANY of these so called "corporate rock" groups, in many case prefer bands whose members aren't very proficient in the playing of their instuments, or their singing abilities. To each his own.

 

I never said that. They started off following more of that Santana type fusion sound, but their first two albums didn't sell so apparently their label asked them to change their style. I suppose that one could argue that they weren't really successful in coming up with a distinctive fusion sound and they really found their niche when Perry came on board, but they were undeniably making a concerted bid for popular appeal.

 

To me Arena Rock is a band with a big sound and big, anthem like songs such as REO. Corporate Rock is Pro MOR with no edge. I can easily picture Fleetwood Mac playing a GM convention and all the salesmen going home and telling their friends how hot Stevie Nicks is.

 

Respectfully, have you ever really given thought that a lot of people outside of this forum have heard more of Styx than the Clash?.......and maybe, just maybe, the Clash is not someone's cup of tea whatever you might believe their inspiration, style or focus is? I suggest before you slam Styx completely that you might want to listen to their Wooden Nickel stuff. If you have and still think their style and focus sucks, so be it. Equinox is a great album by Styx. To me, as good as anything the Clash has done. Does that make me some type of musical idiot because my tastes varies from yours? To each his own right?

 

How concerted was their bid really? What precedent was there that Old Journey + Steve Perry was going to be a guaranteed hit? The only group out there before them that was successful and similar in sound was maybe Boston, who was huge at the time. Journey didn't sound like Zeppelin, didn't sound like Aerosmith, maybe sounded a little more like REO Speedwagon. The thing is, prior to 1976 or so, none of the "corporate rockers" were all that successful.

Slicker hard rock was coming into style and Journey had the fortune of good timing when they moved into that area. IMO, they should have thanked Boston for paving the way with melodic rock and high-pitched vocals.

 

I have more of a feeling that rock critics couldn't get into any cliques at all.

 

And the businessmen are somehow less cool and inferior to the more enlightened? Still not sure what point is being made here. But I'll agree that you'd be hard-pressed to imagine Opeth or Slayer playing a similar circumstance. Are the businessmen fuddy-duddys because they can't hear musicality in Slayer? Are kid metalheads idiots because they can't hear the craft and inspiration in Jeff Porcaro's work for Toto?

I say YES to both those questions.

 

This Clash/Styx thing has got me thinking. Thankfully, I've opened my eyes and can now see that Ed Wood, Alfred Hitchcock, Keanu Reeves, Robert DeNiro are interchangeable. Just a couple idiots standing behind a camera filming some morons talking.

FWIW, I find myself a lot more accepting of the bulk of the "corporate" rock bands now than I was back in the day. Probably because I never listen to the radio and these bands are largely out of the limelight. I think there is more than a bit of truth to the criticsism that a good deal of these bands ouvre was safe/bland/unchallenging and that combined with heavy radio rotation got under a lot people's skin.

IMO, a lot of these bands are best in small doses. I LOVE some of Journey's stuff but if I lsten for an hour straight or whatever, I'm climbing the walls.

One thing you can't take away from these bands: most of 'em had great singers.

 

I think Lindsey Buckingham's songwriting/playing had all sorts of "edge". Stevie provided some new age mystique while Christine McVie wrote some very catchy love songs. And all of this was rooted in a rock solid rhythm section. Sure, they became huge, but what's not to like?

 

<Raises hand>

I know that individual tastes vary, but I can't discard the idea that there are objective differences in the quality of artistic works. That Shakespeare's sonnets are better than my poems, that the Beatles are better than the Shaggs, that nearly any movie is better than Michael Bay's movies. The problem, of course, is that it's damn near impossible to quantify these differences in quality. But I think that they're there.

 

But even back then, there was a pecking order of sorts...the corp rock fans mostly all looked down on the Kiss fans.

 

I the record label is telling the artist what songs to record, what mix to use, what singles/videos to release, what apperance the artist should have, they are probably corporate rock.

 

Hipsters don't like it.

You can find lots of hipsters on the Unofficial Fall Forum.

 

but, Eagles are far from "corporate rock". Again, these bands labelled as such just happen to make music that is radio-friendly. There's absolutely nothing wrong with making music that sounds good on radio.

 

Wasn't it actually Rolling Stone that peddled the "corporate rock" and "faceless" tags for those bands? The rise of Journey, Foreigner, Loverboy, REO Speedwagon and Styx coincided with my high school years. So, it wasn't surprising that this was a lot of what other kids were listening to and buying. At least when you're a teenager or even in college, you can be forgiven for falling into the trap of caring what's cool or not cool to like. Yet, that's how critics from rags like Rolling Stone and Spin make their living.

Believe me, this isn't a defense of those band. Even somebody who's not a fan can find redeeming qualities. Foreigner had an original member of King Crimson, eventually a former bass player from Roxy Music, "Waiting for Girl Like You" had synth work from Larry Fast and there was a suprising appearance by Jr. Walker on "Urgent." Journey started out great, and it's definitely agreed that Greg Rollie left at the right time. They did have an outstanding drummer in Steve Smith though, but he most likely did it to help finance Vital Information. Can't take Styx or REO, and only like "Take Me to the Top" by Loverboy.

Boston's been mentioned already. In some ways, they were probably similar, in some ways, to these others acts, but they really don't deserve the "corproate rock" label. The band was rejected several times by major labels before getting signed.