Robert Lamm had done the heavy lifting for the first 5 years, I'm not surprised he slumped a bit afterwards. He never really was able to recapture that early songwriting magic afterwards.
Sometimes even if something does pretty well on the top 40 chart it doesn’t leave a lasting impression and kind of disappears. That’s what happened to Free. Just one of those things.
I think the problem is in this period Chicago were too progressive for their singles to be chart toppers, but too good to flop. I think it's no coincidence that the next set of singles off Chicago V were more straightforward and much bigger hits.
My favorite. CTA has some outdated filler toward the end (Free Form Guitar), the second may have gotten a little overplayed and the audio quality is IMO dead (always disappointing initially when I put it on), whereas III does not suffer from these things defects. It had no blockbuster hits (Lowdown, Free), but is solid (no filler, except arguably the brief Progress?) and diverse (hard rocking, country, jazz) all around, and closes with a strong finish.
Many other groups who started out so strongly out the gate would have loved to have a third album (no less a double) this good. You could make 4 or 5 great single albums out of the first 3.
I've always felt that way. They could've saved Hour In the Shower for concerts, maybe. That's a good summary. III includes a variety of songs and styles.
I was a teenager in the 80s and my band director and I were talking on a bus trip to a show. He found out I liked Chicago and asked if I had heard III yet. I had 16,17, a couple compilations and I think II by then, so he went home and made me a tape. Sing a Mean Tune Kid was a very engaging opening for sure, I Don't Want Your Money has some nice Kath jam and I saw Progress? mentioned... personally I think that was brilliant. Having the song devolve into a chaotic instrumental and mixing in man made noise... essentially asking, THIS IS PROGRESS? Then answering the question with the toilet flush. Walt said it was almost like they could fart on a record and it would be a hit...well they did come close. Lol Maybe not a radio friendly album, but one I'll never stop listening to.
IMO 3 just went farther into jazz than their fans were really ready for. It also did not really spawn any real hits. Free was probably the most like 2.
The times in the Music Business were changing,F.M. Radio were beginning to no longer play extended Musical pieces.The record industry was also changing in that they were only willing to pay for a certain amount of tracks per album.After Carnegie Hall they started releasing single albums except for 7 and also remember at that time they were on the road almost 300 days out of the year
Yes indeed. I say this all the time about everything in life. Infact I kind of enjoy liking things that are unique that other people don't know about. However, if I am the only one who likes something, there is a good chance that I won't be able to enjoy it for long, because it won't survive. A band achieving commercial success allows it to thrive and continue. So while I don't pay attention to chart singles or albums, or how many a band sold or how many dollars a band has made or what critics say or whether or not a band got into the rrhof, I'm glad when they do achieve those things so that they can continue to produce.
I've just started listening to this album again after, oh, 40 years (part of an early-Chicago binge inspired by the video of their 1970 Tanglewood performance). I had forgotten that they used a pedal steel guitar on Flight 602; there was that period of 4 or 5 years when it seemed almost obligatory for rock bands (even Steely Dan!) to use pedal steel. It would seem to have begun in country rock with the Byrds' Sweetheart of the Rodeo, then Flying Burrito Brothers and Poco, and eventually bled into straight rock albums for a while until (it would seem) the novelty faded. At any rate, Chicago III is, as I remember it, a damn good album, and pretty much where my listening to them ended, although other comments here make me want to check out a couple of its successors.
The Friday Music CD is worth picking up. It's my go to copy of III....they did a nice job on it and it's much better than the Rhino (not saying much I know) and a bit more clarity to it compared to the original Columbia CD....
Thanks, man. Is the Columbia CD decent? I got one of those coming. I already got the Rhino for the packaging and liners.
Nice natural sound. Not sure who did this one. Gastwirt did a few early titles, but nothing in the credits for this one.
I don't think III was ever as hard to imagine as "an album" as the first two were, because yeah - not as publically-accessessible. That was Sophomore Year for me, and as much as I liked it, I always thought of it in context of, "...and look! Here's some more Chicago...!". Then of course IV was out quickly after that, and all the tracks became lumped-together conceptually within the minds of fans in a years' time. Just too much great music, all in one place to even think of it out of context of each other by then...they were all over the radio. (Like we used to say, "ALL FOUR songs!") Then Freshman Year of college, and they were back - only one LP's-worth - and the tour finally came to our sized city (right when the music was both absolutely astonishing, yet so far out of the general public's comfort level, all they could mouth along with on the radio was "Saturday In The Park" - and then, "play that other one, you know the one we all know the guitar hook to like the back of our hands!"...and nobody had time for any hits by Varese anymore...
A subjective opinion just like mine. I personally find Chicago II to be frequently boring and I am totally done with its hits. Chicago VII had incredible stylistic diversity, was highly experimental in places AND included several hits. Their creative collapse slowly began right after with VIII.