Author Topic: The Chicago Discography  (Read 62227 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sueño

  • Posts: 1526
  • How Dare I Be So Beautiful?
Re: Chicago: Love Songs (2005)
« Reply #315 on: October 14, 2013, 03:29:55 PM »


^^^THAT...is in the Netflix queue!    :biggrin:
"We spend most of our lives convinced we’re the protagonist of the story, but we rarely realize that we’re just supporting characters in everybody else’s story. Nobody thinks about you as much as you do."

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #316 on: October 15, 2013, 09:07:27 PM »
Chicago XXX (2006)




Feel (Hot Single Mix)
King Of Might Have Been
Caroline
Why Can't We
Love Will Come Back
Long Lost Friend
90 Degrees And Freezing
Where Were You
Already Gone
Come To Me, Do
Lovin' Chains
Better
Feel (w/Horns)

----------

Bill Champlin: Keyboards, Vocals
Keith Howland: Guitar
Tris Imboden: Drums
Robert Lamm: Piano, Vocals
Lee Loughnane: Trumpet, Flugelhorn
James Pankow: Trombone
Walt Parazaider: Saxophones, Flutes
Jason Scheff: Bass, Vocals

Additional Musicians

Lee Thornburg: Trumpet
Tom Bukovac: Acoustic & Electric Guitars
James Matchack: Keyboards, Loop Programming, Sequencing
Jay DeMarcus: Keyboards, Guitars, Programming, Piano
Dann Huff: Guitar
Shelly Fairchild: Vocals
Rascal Flatts (Gary LeVox, Jay DeMarcus, Joe Don Rooney): Vocals
Dean DeLeo: Guitar
Steve Brewster: Drums
John Brockman: Drums
Yankton Mingua: Guitar
Jack Kincaid: Guitar
Bobby Kimball: Background Vocals
Joseph Williams: Background Vocals

----------

In 2006, Chicago finally did it again.  They released a new studio album of all original music.  It had been 15 years since Chicago Twenty 1.  I'd bought Chicago Twenty 1 when it came out, my first Chicago album since the original lineup, and was not particularly impressed, so I'd pretty much given up on Chicago.  I had my memories of growing up with them, all my original vinyl of course, and was slowly upgrading them to CDs.  The new stuff obviously was not for me.

But when Chicago XXX came out, there was much fanfare.  I actually moved to the Chicago area back in 1994, and of course the media around here was making a huge, huge deal.  The thirtieth album!  Triple X!  So I bought it.  I had to check up on the boys, see what they were up to.

I generally avoid promotion of any kind as much as I can, and I managed to miss that this was in fact their first new studio album in 15 years.  I guess I figured that there had been other albums in between which I'd ignored, but no, I'd managed to buy the last two studio albums in a row and didn't even realize it.

My first impression was the track listing on the back of the CD case.  The opening track is "Feel (Hot Single Mix)" and the last track is "Feel (w/Horns)".  I had a bad feeling about this.  First, that they actually called it "Hot Single Mix" seemed really cheesy.  Then there's the other mix, "w/Horns".  Seriously?  After 15 years, the band with the most famous horn section in rock releases a "Hot Single Mix" without their signature horn section, but makes it a point to also include the version with horns?

But I tried to remain objective, and for the first time in many, many years, I went through the ritual.  Put the album on, play it straight through, loudly, while pawing through the lyrics and credits (at one time on the album jacket and record sleeve but now in a little 4.5 x 4.5 inch booklet).

"Feel" is weird.  It starts with an odd, mechanical percussion loop, reminiscent of "Mama" by Genesis.  Except that "Mama" came out in 1983, so this isn't exactly innovative.  As the song unfolds, honestly, it still fails to excite.  The "Hot Single Mix" did not seem particularly hot.  The slow, mechanical beat which I think was supposed to be driving and heavy, was really just plodding and kinda boring.

The next five tracks -- I kid you not -- are all ballads.  Electric piano, light wimpy vocals, sadness and heartache.  Everything horrible about 80's Chicago was here, only updated for the new millenium.  Actually no, strike that.  It wasn't even updated.  This album could have come out right after Chicago Twenty 1 and it would have picked right up where they'd left off.  By this point, I'd pretty much finished going through the CD booklet and gotten to the "Additional Musicians" credits, and there are more studio musicians than band members on this album.  This didn't exactly inspire confidence, either.  Hmm, did that say Dean DeLeo?  The guy from Stone Temple Pilots?  I wonder...

Then something happened.  "90 Degrees and Freezing" actually rocked.  Drums, guitars, horns.  And the horns are blaring.  Blatant and unrepentant.  Wow, it's about damned time!

"Where Were You" also rocks.  Hey, two in a row.  (No question mark in the title, though.)  Would you believe three in a row?  "Already Gone" rocks, and at 6:51, it's the longest song on the album, it has a weirdass breakdown in it that's kinda cool, and once again, the horns and guitars are all over.

Okay, I won't keep you in suspense.  What they've done here is divide the album into Side One and Side Two, even though as far as I know, it was only ever released on CD.  The first six tracks are all ballads, the next six are the rockers, and the closing track is the better, more rocking version of the opening track (w/Horns).

Ha ha, one of the online reviews I read actually said:

Directions
Step 1: Put CD in
Step 2: Skip to Track 7
Step 3: Press Play

Starting off with all the ballads, I'm guessing, was meant to draw in the fans of the 80's Chicago sound, but it was a complete buzz kill.  The rockers are generally pretty good, but it's odd to divide the album up like this.  I guess the alternative, alternating between ballads and rockers, possibly in ones and twos, would have underscored the dual nature of the album, so they just made it easier for all of us.  Fans of wimpy 80's Chicago can stop after the first six tracks, and fans of the older stuff can just start at Track 7.

This morning on the way to work, I started at Track 7, "90 Degrees and Freezing" and played from there.  33 minutes of old-school Chicago rock and roll.  Some really nice horn charts, actual rocking electric guitars (turns out that is Dean DeLeo from Stone Temple Pilots, but only on one song) and three drummers for some reason (on different songs), but I'm not complaining.  "Side Two" of this album is pretty good.  I'll take it.


The album was produced by Jay DeMarcus of the band Rascal Flatts.  Rascal Flatts is a Country & Western band, and some have called this "Chicago's C&W album".  That's clearly a placebo effect; I don't hear it at all.  Jason Scheff is a personal friend of Jay and the band, and most of them appear on this album on background vocals.  Jay plays some keyboards and manages to get co-writing credits on over half of the songs (as David Foster did back when he produced Chicago), but whatever.  Most of the songs are at least co-written by members of Chicago.  Robert Lamm actually has a sole writing credit ("Come To Me, Do") for the first time in decades.  Actually, the only song wholly written by outside writers is "Feel", by some guys named Blair Daly and Danny Orton.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2015, 11:34:53 AM by Orbert »

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #317 on: October 15, 2013, 09:23:04 PM »
Robert Lamm



It finally occurred to me to find out what was going on with Robert Lamm.  Why was the man who had written most of The Chicago Transit Authority and nearly half of the total material from the first five albums so silent lately?  I'd assumed that he'd just lost his passion for writing.  As I mentioned earlier, the fire of creativity burns brightest when we're young, and he's not so young anymore.

Well, it turns out that Robert has been quietly releasing solo albums to fill the void.  Skinny Boy came out around the same time as Chicago VII, and it seems that he was content to just work within Chicago after that.  But he released a second solo album in 1995, Life is Good in My Neighborhood, with songs he'd been working on for nearly ten years.  As Chicago hadn't released any new studio material since 1991, it made sense that Robert would need to find a release.  Three more solo albums followed, in 1999, 2003, and 2004.  And he's released two more since Chicago XXX.

The best of the batch, all critics seem to agree, is Subtlety & Passion from 2003.  The Chicago horns play on that album, actually all of the then-current members of Chicago play on it, on different tracks.  On his previous solo albums, Robert had stayed away from anything sounding too much like Chicago.  Skinny Boy (which I have) is pretty much white R&B.  The next few dabble in blues and even hip-hop.

Until Chicago XXX came out, Subtlety & Passion was regarded as the return of Chicago.  But now they were actually back (if only for a while).
« Last Edit: July 17, 2015, 11:38:32 AM by Orbert »

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 53179
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #318 on: October 17, 2013, 10:06:09 AM »
Orbert, I love your write-ups.

I just picked up Stone of Sisyphus.  It is . . . interesting.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #319 on: October 17, 2013, 10:54:57 AM »
Thanks, Hef!  I know people are still reading these, but I always like the feedback and reassurance.  Maybe I have deep-rooted insecurities or something.

I found my original mp3's of Stone of Sisyphus from 1993.  I did save them, separate from the official release in 2008.  Oddly enough, I'd filed them under 1993, exactly where they should be, and I didn't see them before.  I've been doing a bit of comparing back and forth between them.  Since it is likely to be the last Chicago album released, and because of its near-legendary status, I want to make sure it gets a good write-up.

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 53179
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #320 on: October 18, 2013, 04:41:56 AM »
Some of the vocal performances on that album are amazing.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Podaar

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9936
  • Gender: Male
Re: Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #321 on: October 18, 2013, 07:08:44 AM »
I also wish to express my appreciation, again, for these write-ups. I like your style man!

Hey, I thought of  you yesterday Orbert while listening to NPR Word Cafe. They had the Tedeschi Trucks Band on who seem to be featuring their horn section much more. I'm going to order their latest album today.

Anyway, I thought you may enjoy this program if you haven't already heard it. World Cafe

My apologies if this is the wrong place to put this post.
"Owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are God. Whereas owners of cats are compelled to realize that, if you provide them with food and water and affection, they draw the conclusion that they are God.” — Christopher Hitchens

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #322 on: October 18, 2013, 11:19:48 AM »
No problem posting that here.  It's my thread and I say so.  Besides, Susan Tedeschi is a babe.  Someone pointed out the Tedeschi Trucks Band to me a while back, but I'd forgotten about them, so thanks for reminding me!

:tup

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #323 on: October 18, 2013, 12:23:28 PM »
About the Cover, and a History Lesson

The City of Chicago used to have three airports: O'Hare, Midway, and a small airport named Meigs Field.  Meigs Field was located on Northerly Island, an actual island in the Chicago harbor.  Due to its proxmity to downtown, it was ideal for private planes and corporate jets to fly people in and out of Chicago for business.  Northerly Island was actually owned by The Chicago Park District, who leased the property to the city.  In 1996, the lease expired, and the park district did not renew the lease.  Mayor Richard Daley, who had wanted to close the airport for while and turn it into a park, saw his chance.  The airport was closed by the city in October 1996, but in February 1997, under pressure from the Illinois State Legislature, it was reopened.  The battle was on.

A compromise was finally reached in 2001 between the city of Chicago, the state of Illinois, and other interested parties, but there was also a federal component of the legislation which did not pass the U.S. Senate.  More meetings were held and compromises were proposed and rejected.

Monday morning, March 31, 2003, people woke up to see this:



It's a little hard to see, but in the middle of the night, in a very controversial move, Mayor Daley had ordered city crews to destroy the runway.  They began by carving big X's into the concrete, rendering the runways useless and stranding sixteen planes which were parked at the airport.  Here's a better look at the damage:



Mayor Daley had no authority to give this order, but the deed was done.  Meigs Field was history.  It was now after 9/11, and Mayor Daley was able to use the idea of planes flying so close to the downtown area, with its highrises and skyscrapers, as a security concern.  He had to look out for the safety of the citizens of Chicago, regardless of what the legislators said.


As the band was starting work on this, their 30th album, Robert Lamm saw those pictures on the news and got an idea for the album cover:



As I mentioned, I moved to the Chicago area in the 90's, and the destruction of Meigs Field was big news around here.  Nobody was happy about it, except for Mayor Daley himself.  The cover, with the three X's jackhammered into the concrete, is admittedly pretty cool.  But for anyone in the Chicago area who had seen the images of Meigs Field, it was disturbing and perhaps a little bizzare to see it stylized and immortalized on an album cover.


A few more tidbits

During its brief stay on the album charts, Chicago XXX peaked at #41.  The first single "Feel" made it to #19 on the Adult Contemporary chart, and "Love Will Come Back" topped out at #21.  Not quite the huge comeback they were hoping for, but not horrible.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2015, 11:43:51 AM by Orbert »

Offline sueño

  • Posts: 1526
  • How Dare I Be So Beautiful?
Re: Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #324 on: October 18, 2013, 12:29:34 PM »
Didn't know that about the album cover (great trivia!) but I lived in Chicago during that time period, too and agreed -- it was HUGE news.  My boss used Meigs Field frequently for his own business travel and to say he was "annoyed" would be an understatement.

The Daleys were kings of Chicago.    :\ :tdwn
"We spend most of our lives convinced we’re the protagonist of the story, but we rarely realize that we’re just supporting characters in everybody else’s story. Nobody thinks about you as much as you do."

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago XXX (2006)
« Reply #325 on: October 18, 2013, 12:40:06 PM »
Yeah, they were.  Richard M. Daley, and his daddy Richard J. Daley, pretty much did whatever they wanted to.  They owned the town.

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
The Best of Chicago: 40th Anniversary Edition (2007)
« Reply #326 on: October 19, 2013, 05:37:21 PM »
The Best of Chicago: 40th Anniversary Edition (2007)




Questions 67 & 68 (Lamm) - 3:26
25 or 6 to 4 (Lamm) - 2:53
Does Anybody Really Know What Time It Is? (Lamm) - 2:46
Make Me Smile (Pankow) - 3:00
Beginnings (Lamm) - 2:49
Colour My World (Pankow) - 3:03
Saturday in the Park (Lamm) - 3:56
Feelin' Stronger Every Day (Pankow/Cetera) - 4:15
Just You 'n' Me (Pankow) - 3:43
(I've Been) Searchin' So Long (Pankow) - 4:18
Call on Me (Loughnane) - 4:02
Wishing You Were Here (Cetera) - 3:01
Old Days (Pankow) - 3:31
Another Rainy Day in New York City (Lamm) - 3:01
If You Leave Me Now (Cetera) - 3:56

Baby, What a Big Surprise (Cetera) - 3:07
No Tell Lover (Loughnane/Seraphine/Cetera) - 3:51
Hard to Say I'm Sorry (Cetera/Foster) - 3:41
Love Me Tomorrow (Cetera/Foster) - 3:58
Hard Habit to Break (Cetera/Foster) - 4:46
You're the Inspiration (Cetera/Foster) - 3:49
Will You Still Love Me? (Foster/Keane/Baskin) - 4:13
If She Would Have Been Faithful... (Kipner/Goodrum) - 3:51
I Don't Wanna Live Without Your Love (Hammond/Warren) - 3:55
Look Away (Warren) - 4:00
What Kind of Man Would I Be? (Scheff/Sandford/Caldwell) - 4:20
You're Not Alone (Scott) - 4:00
Here in My Heart (Ballard/Howard) - 4:20
Feel (W/Horns) (Orton/Daly) - 4:31
Love Will Come Back (Scheff/DeMarcus/Sandford) - 3:43

----------

That's right, another compilation, another "greatest hits" thing.  Chicago XXX was a pretty good album; maybe not the return to the 70's sound or quality that it was purported to be, or 80's for that matter, but because of its aforementioned dual nature, it had something to offer everyone.  But another year -- another year and a half, actually -- had passed, and it was time to get some new Chicago product out there.

This particular collection was marketed as the "40th Anniversary" of Chicago.  The cover features the Chicago logo as the wax seal on an invitation, presumably to a gala event celebrating the 40th Anniversary of the band, which honestly is no small feat.  A nice touch is the glimpse at the inscription inside, the lyrics to "Beginnings" from the first album.

The Wiki page for this album mentions that The Very Best of Chicago: Only the Beginning , the 2002 compilation also from Rhino, has all the songs that this album has, except for the last three, two of which hadn't been released yet at the time.  "Here in My Heart" was from The Heart of Chicago 1967–1997 (it never appeared on a regular studio album) and the other two, "Feel (w/Horns)" and "Love Will Come Back", were the two singles from Chicago XXX.  The Wiki page even includes a link to The Very Best of Chicago for "the origins" of these tracks, implying that this is really just the earlier complilation with three more tracks.

It is not.  Look at the track times.  Wherever possible, these are short versions of the songs, and when there is more than one choice, the "extra short" version is here.  Furthermore, there were a number of tracks on the earlier compilation that aren't here.  The Very Best of Chicago had 39 tracks and was totally packed; this one only has 30 tracks including the three new ones and is less than 152 minutes total time.

This is just another compilation, and an inferior one at that.  If you absolutely have to have the two singles from Chicago XXX, or maybe the one song which has now shown up on multiple compilations but never a regular studio album, then by all means, go ahead and buy this.  But the earlier compilation has all of these songs and more, and many of the songs are their longer versions.

Not all, though.  "Greatest hits" things never include all the full-length versions of the songs.  This is so that there's at least some possibility that some people will buy the studio albums to get the full versions of those songs.  If you really did give them the full versions of all the hits, for many people there would simply be no reason to buy anything else.

I can't see any reason for anyone to buy this album.  It exists simply because it was the latest compilation and gave people something to buy.  Nice cover, though.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2015, 11:46:43 AM by Orbert »

Offline Nel

  • Humorless Bore
  • Posts: 2453
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Best of Chicago: 40th Anniversary Edition (2007)
« Reply #327 on: October 19, 2013, 08:00:44 PM »
I have this one. This was when I was starting to get into collecting discographies and I had asked my parents for maybe a Chicago album or two for Christmas. Of course, my parents didn't really *get* that I wanted studio albums, and just bought this for me instead.  :lol
Hire me. I'm talentless but malleable.

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: The Best of Chicago: 40th Anniversary Edition (2007)
« Reply #328 on: October 20, 2013, 07:20:47 AM »
Parents, sheesh.  Well, you asked for Chicago, and a two-disc set like this does look pretty nice.  They were probably pretty happy that they'd found such a nice present for you.

And as with any compilation, it's probably a good enough overview and introduction to the band, as it does cover all eras pretty well.  What did you think of it?  What did you get next?

Offline Nel

  • Humorless Bore
  • Posts: 2453
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Best of Chicago: 40th Anniversary Edition (2007)
« Reply #329 on: October 20, 2013, 10:43:00 AM »
I, um, thanked them for it (I never try to seem ungrateful for anything, really), put it in a box, and bought the first two albums the following year.  :lol

It IS a nice looking cover.
Hire me. I'm talentless but malleable.

Offline The King in Crimson

  • Stuck in a glass dome since 1914!
  • Posts: 4002
  • Gender: Male
  • Mr. Sandman, Give Me A Dream
Re: The Best of Chicago: 40th Anniversary Edition (2007)
« Reply #330 on: October 20, 2013, 10:59:34 AM »
I own this. I heard "25 or 6 to 4" and a couple of other songs and decided I'd get one of their albums. This was all the local Best Buy had in stock, so I bought it.

I was REALLY disappointed when I found out that a lot of the songs were shortened versions. REALLY disappointed. I sold it off a couple of years ago because meh.

Offline ZirconBlue

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 2560
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Best of Chicago: 40th Anniversary Edition (2007)
« Reply #331 on: October 21, 2013, 09:49:38 AM »
This is actually the one Chicago album I own.  I honestly bought it mostly because it was super-cheap.  I can't remember where I got it, but it was less than $10, new.  I figured if I got a compilation album, it might help point me in a direction of what studio albums to get next.  But, really, this thread has been much more helpful in that regard. 

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Chicago XXXII: Stone of Sisyphus (2008)
« Reply #332 on: October 22, 2013, 10:09:05 PM »
Chicago XXXII: Stone of Sisyphus (2008)




Stone Of Sisyphus (Bailey, Loughnane) – 4:11
Bigger Than Elvis (Scheff, Wolf, Wolf) – 4:31
All The Years (Lamm, Gaitsch) – 4:16
Mah-Jong (Scheff, Walsh, Zigman) – 4:42
Sleeping In The Middle Of The Bed (Lamm, McCurry) – 4:45
Let's Take A Lifetime (Scheff, Walsh, Zigman) – 4:56
The Pull (Lamm, Scheff, Wolf) – 4:17
Here With Me (A Candle For The Dark) (Pankow, Lamm, O'Connor) – 4:11
Plaid (Champlin, Lamm, Mathieson) – 4:59
Cry For The Lost (Champlin, Matkowsky) – 5:18
The Show Must Go On (Champlin, Gaitsch) – 5:25

Bonus Tracks

Love Is Forever (Demo) (Pankow, Lamm) – 4:14
Mah-Jong (Demo) (Scheff, Walsh, Zigman) – 4:59
Let's Take A Lifetime (Demo) (Scheff, Walsh, Zigman) – 4:15
Stone Of Sisyphus (No Rhythm Loop) (Bailey, Loughnane) – 4:35

----------

Dawayne Bailey — Guitar, Vocals
Bill Champlin — Keyboards, Guitar, Vocals
Tris Imboden — Drums, Percussion, Harmonica
Robert Lamm — Keyboards, Vocals
Lee Loughnane — Trumpet, Flugelhorn, Backing Vocals
Walter Parazaider — Woodwinds, Backing Vocals
James Pankow — Trombone, Backing Vocals
Jason Scheff — Bass, Vocals

Additional Musicians

Bruce Gaitsch — Guitar
The Jordanaires — Backing Vocals on "Bigger Than Elvis"
Sheldon Reynolds — Guitar
Jerry Scheff — Bass Guitar on "Bigger Than Elvis"
Joseph Williams — Backing Vocals on "Let's Take a Lifetime"
Peter Wolf — Arranger, Keyboards

----------

On June 17, 2008, they finally did it.  Chicago released their "lost" album, originally titled simply Stone of Sisyphus.  Recorded in 1993, it was to be only their second studio album to have a title and not just a Roman numeral, to emphasize the uniqueness of the album.  As referenced upthread, the album was produced by Peter Wolf, former keyboard player with Frank Zappa, who encouraged the band to make this album exactly how they wanted to make it.  Write songs from the heart, with no thought of commercial viability.  Forget everything that had been forced upon them in the past decade or more about what people expect Chicago to sound like, and just make the music they want to make.  Be experimental, take chances.

Once they'd completed rough versions of three songs, Peter took them to the suits at Warner Bros., who loved them.  Chicago disappeared into the studio and finished the album with a renewed vigor, and without any involvement of any kind from the suits.  During this time, however, the upper levels of Warner Bros. had gone through a complete shakeup; all new suits were at the top, and they didn't like that they had no input to the music, and they didn't like the music.  They saw no commercial viability, and said that they would release the album, but would not promote it.

Chicago chose to shelf the album rather than watch it go out and die due to lack of promotion.  They eventually made Night and Day - Big Band to complete their contract with Warner Bros., and formed Chicago Records with the specific purpose of acquiring and owning the rights to all Chicago music, from the Columbia and Warner Bros. catalogues, and any future music as well.  They then entered into a long-term agreement with Rhino Records to distribute it.  Now, 15 years later, it was time to release the album of which they were more proud than anything they'd done since the 70's.

On the spine, it says Chicago XXXII: Stone of Sisyphus.  On the front, back, and on the CD itself, it says Chicago Stone of Sisyphus.  They've downplayed the XXXII, but it is apparently part of the title now (I always think of what's on the spine as the "official" title).

The album has also gone through some changes along the way.  Some songs have been remixed.  One song was dropped.  But it overall is pretty much the same as it was in 1993.  And listening to it now, it's pretty obvious why the suits at Warner Bros. had trouble with it.  I've been listening to it since it came out, including the past two weeks solid, and some of it still throws me.  Some of it is really out-there, very "un-Chicago-like", which I'm sure was the idea.  But it's a daring, challenging album which rewards any listener willing to give it time to work.

This isn't a concept album, and the title track, "Stone Of Sisyphus" doesn't actually have much to do with the Greek Myth of Sisyphus.  Originally "Twenty Years on the Sufferbus", the music and lyrics went through a lot of changes, and "Sufferbus" eventually became "Sisyphus" when they noticed parallels between their own situation regarding the music business and the tragic character Sisyphus, doomed to forever push a huge stone up a hill, only to watch it roll back down every time he neared the peak.  This song comes blasting out of the gate, with the horns blaring.  You can just imagine the jaws hitting the table in the Warner Bros. conference room listening to this one.

"Bigger Than Elvis" is a very personal song by Jason Scheff.  Jason's father of course is Jerry Scheff, bassist for Elvis Presley's band.  The song is about how young Jason would watch Elvis on TV, and while everybody else was watching Elvis, Jason was always trying to catch a glimpse of his dad, who, in his eyes, was much bigger than Elvis.  Jason "tricked" Jerry into playing on the track (they muted the vocals), and they even got The Jordanaires to sing backing vocals, as they had on so many Elvis Presley records.  That Christmas, Jason played the finished track for Jerry, who was moved to tears when he heard it.

"All The Years" makes me rethink what I said about this not being a concept album.  Robert Lamm talks about "all the years we've wasted" and he admits that he's talking about his band Chicago and what they'd been doing recently, although the lyrics ultimately expand to talk about politics and the world in general.  That's the Robert Lamm we've missed.  The idealist, guy with the world view.  There's a breakdown in the middle with some sound bites, including "the whole world's watching" chant which also appeared in "Prologue, August 29, 1968" from the first album.  Nice tie-in there, from the first album to what will likely be the last studio album.

Mah-Jong is the Chinese mother of all card games which is poker, bridge, and rummy all rolled into one; not the silly tile-matching game that Internet gamemongers would have you believe it is.  And "Mah-Jong" is a song that only a bassist could write.  Funky, rhythmic, and with a catchy chorus that's very hard to shake.  Minor quibble: according to the lyrics, she lives one block east of Chinatown.  One block east of Chinatown is a freeway.  All the apartments and houses are west of Chinatown.  Must not be Chicago Chinatown he's talking about.

Lamm had the music for "Sleeping In The Middle Of The Bed" and knew how he wanted the chorus to work, but couldn't come up with a melody.  He had a rhythm, though, so he rapped it to his co-writer John McCurry, who thought it was great just like that.  So rap appears on a Chicago album.  Yeah, more jaws hitting tables.

"Let's Take A Lifetime" is another Jason Scheff song, another mellow one (like "Bigger Than Elvis") but it's not a bad song.  I'm not a good judge of this kind of music, though.

"The Pull" is another Robert Lamm song (this album has the highest Lamm percentage of any album since the 70's), a very personal song about being pulled in too many directions at once.  Well, two, which is one too many when you're playing in a band and you have a wife at home who needs you.  Jason sings it and tweaked some of the lyrics, and Peter Wolf messed with the arrangement, so they get co-credit, but it's a Lamm song.  And it's another one with a weird beat, a weird sound that says "not commercially viable".  Jaws, tables, head shaking, face palming.  I think it's a great song, but there's no way you'd hear it on the radio.

A rare Lamm-Pankow collaboration, even the title of "Here With Me (A Candle For The Dark)" reflects its dual nature.  Jimmy wrote the chorus and most of the music, and wanted to call it "Here With Me".  Robert wrote the verses and wanted to call it "A Candle For The Dark".  Robert's songs almost never have the repeated line from the chorus as the title.  The awkward dual title is the result of their "compromise".  The break has a cool, pseudo-baroque section to it that I always love hearing.

Plaid, as a fabric style, consists of horizontal and vertical stripes, some wide, some thin, some solid, some cross-hatched, in colors that you might not normally use together, yet somehow it all works and the overall pattern has a texture that transcends its components.  The song "Plaid" sounds like plaid looks.  Every time I hear the song, I'm amazed.  All the different rhythms, the weird sounds, the horns, guitars, and keys, the mix of smooth and harsh lead and background vocals, all weave around and through each other, and somehow it all works.  It's a musical plaid.  I have no idea what the song is about, but it sounds amazing.  And again, you could never play this on the radio.

"Cry For The Lost" is Bill Champlin taking it as far as he can go.  Peter Wolf challenged him to write a commercial song, so commercial that it goes beyond commercial.  I don't even know what that means, but I like the song.  On an album that intentionally tries to push boundaries and just plain get weird sometimes, this song and Jason's ballads actually do help keep things grounded.

Now, if you have a song called "The Show Must Go On" you already know it has to be the last song on the album.  It just sounds like the title of a song which would be last.  The lyrics, however, are another story.  According to Bill Champlin, it's "pretty much pointing the finger at management types. Do you think the suits at the label are going to get behind a record that calls them assholes?"  So there you have it.  Chicago wanted the show to go on, but were continuously stifled.

After being given free reign to write and record whatever they wanted, saying what they wanted to say, including a few choice words about the music business itself, it's not surprising at all that the new management at Warner Bros. listened to this album and hated it.

This is not Chicago. What in the hell is this?

But if you ask the band, this is definitely Chicago.  It is more Chicago than Chicago had been in 15 years, since "If You Leave Me Now" became so huge that suddenly it was what people expected them to be.  Radio was becoming programmed and formatted, and that was the format that someone decided Chicago fit into.

Okay, full disclosure.  I remember buying this, taking it home, playing it, and being disappointed overall.  All this talk about how it was what they wanted to do had me expecting, if not another Chicago, at least another Chicago V.  I would've settled for another Chicago VIII.  Those are each great albums in their own way, even if they each emphasize different strengths of the band.  This wasn't like any of them.  It still sounded like "new Chicago" to me.

But after listening through every studio album and everything they've done, and getting to this point, I can hear now how it is, and was, a definite step back for them.  A good step back.  A step back to a time when they wrote what they wanted to write, played what they wanted to play, and didn't give a damn about what they were "supposed" to sound like.  The horns sound like they did in the old days.  Still warm and smooth and full, but not glossy and shiny like 80's or 90's production; raw yet rich like 70's production.  The Latin percussion is back!  Several cuts have prominent Latin percussion and complex rhythms throughout.  Songs like "The Pull" and "Plaid" and "Sleeping In The Middle Of The Bed" are boundary-breaking tracks.  They're like nothing Chicago has ever done before or since.

There are four "Bonus Tracks", and it's a little weird what they've included.  Four demos, including a song that's not on the album called "Love Is Forever".  It's a nice enough song, a Pankow-Lamm collaboration sung by Jason Scheff.  And it's a bit more than a demo.  I mean, it sounds pretty finished to me.  Full background vocals, horns, everyone plays.  It's not like it's just a voice and piano or something.  All of the "demos" are finished or nearly finished versions.

The weird part is that there's a song missing.  It's called "Get On This" by guitarist Dawayne Bailey, and it is a rocker.  It rocks harder than anything else on the album.  The only way anyone knows about this song is if they have the original leaked version of the album from 1993, and I'm fortunate enough to have it.  Dawayne Bailey took it particularly hard when the album was rejected by the label.  Besides writing the title track, he wrote"Get On This" with James Pankow and Walt Parazaider's daughter Felicia, with whom he was in a relationship at the time.

I think the inclusion of "Get On This" would have made the album even stronger, even more rocking, even more "non-Chicago yet Chicago".  But Dawayne was no longer in the band, and while they kinduv had to keep the title track, I couldn't find anything about the status of his relationship with Walt's daughter.  There has never been any official statement regarding the departure of Dawayne Bailey from the band, or why "Get On This" was dropped from the final version of the album, and doesn't even appear as a demo.  But we can guess.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2015, 11:48:14 AM by Orbert »

Offline jammindude

  • Posts: 15303
  • Gender: Male
Re: Chicago XXXII: Stone of Sisyphus (2008)
« Reply #333 on: October 22, 2013, 11:38:53 PM »
Ugh....when I get back to work, I *HAVE* to buy this album.

This thread already motivated me to buy Carnegie Hall....it may well convince me to buy this as well.

It sounds right up my alley.
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world.
Than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - Neil Peart

The Jammin Dude Show - https://www.youtube.com/user/jammindude

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago XXXII: Stone of Sisyphus (2008)
« Reply #334 on: October 23, 2013, 08:06:20 AM »
It's different, and it's not what I or anyone else expected.  I instantly loved Chicago at Carnegie Hall, but much of that was probably youthful exhuberance and excitement.  I dove right into it, as it was my first album and all I had.

This one has taken much longer to get into.  My mistake was having perconceptions of how it would sound.  As mentioned, I was disappointed and just plain didn't like it at first, and it's gotten a few spins since I picked it up in 2008, but it wasn't until I really started listening to it recently that I "got" it.  I still don't know if it's a great album or even a good album.  It somehow defies that kind of evaluation.  What I like about it is how daring it is, the balls it took to make such an album.  That is what is most similar to 70's Chicago.  The attitude.  The feeling that this is definitely what they wanted to do.

Even between the original version of the album and the official released version, the changes reflect that.  Some of the extra synths on the title track (originally played by Peter Wolf, who felt they were needed) have been removed.  "Plaid" has even more weirdness and rhythmic counterpoint.  That kind of thing.  There are some things on some original versions that are better, but hey, nothing is perfect.  A major loss, unfortunately, is Dawayne Bailey's "Get On This".  The two outright guitar-driven rockers were his, and they cut one.  In 1993, it was where they were.  By 2008, they had changed.

I think my final iPod version of this album will be the official release, plus the "Love Is Forever" demo and "Get On This".  I don't see any point in including demo versions of songs that have final versions on the album, and I don't feel like going through the rest of the album song-by-song and deciding whether I like the original or final version better.  The 2008 version is the official version, although I'll keep the 1993 version and listen to it once in a while.

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Chicago XXXIII: O Christmas Three (2011)
« Reply #335 on: October 26, 2013, 05:47:15 PM »
Chicago XXXIII: O Christmas Three (2011)




Wonderful Christmas Time (featuring Dolly Parton)
Rockin' Around the Christmas Tree
I Saw Three Ships (featuring America)
Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays
What Are You Doing New Year’s Eve?
It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year
I'll Be Home for Christmas
On The Last Night Of The Year
Merry Christmas Darling (featuring Bebe Winans)
Rockin' and Rollin' on Christmas Day (featuring Steve Cropper)
My Favorite Things
O Christmas Tree
Jingle Bells
Here Comes Santa Claus/Joy to the World (with Children's Choir)

----------

Drew Hester - Percussion
Keith Howland - Guitars, Vocals
Tris Imboden - Drums, Percussion
Robert Lamm - Keyboards, Vocals
Lee Loughnane - Trumpets, Vocals
James Pankow - Trombone
Walter Parazaider - Saxophones, Flute
Lou Pardini - Keyboards, Vocals
Jason Scheff - Bass, Vocals

Children's Choir:

Jillian DeGrie
Grace Howland
Hope Howland
Carter Pankow
Lilli Pankow
Connor Scheff
Jason Scheff Jr.
Lydia Young

----------

In 2011 Chicago treated us to their third collection of Christmas music, cleverly titled Chicago XXXIII: O Christmas Three.  Lots of threes there.  Sure, they're mostly just a touring nostalgia show now, but they've made it clear that they intend to keep playing as long as people will pay to come and see them, and they do still record albums.

I mentioned in my writeup for the first Christmas collection that I generally have trouble listening to these, and I think I've figured out why.  The music of course is great, the production is excellent (Phil Ramone returns for his final time with Chicago), but I like to sing along with Christmas songs, and I can't do that if they've messed around with the melody and the rhythm.  Hey, add horns, weird extra harmonies, even change the tempo (a bit) and that's all good, but jerking the melody around just to put your own spin on things crosses the line.  Some people are fine with it; I'm assuming that those are the people who prefer to listen rather than sing along.  I can't help but want to sing along, and I can't do that.  Even if I am just listening, I'm singing along in my head, and dammit, he's not singing it right!

So interestingly, I found myself enjoying the songs I didn't already know much more than the ones I knew.  I'm still surprised after all these years when I encounter a "new" Christmas song.  Sometimes it really is a relatively new song, such as Justin Timberlake's "Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays" but sometimes they're songs that have been around for decades which, for some reason, I don't remember hearing before.  But it was weird realizing that I enjoyed these songs more, and why, and it made me try to listen to the others more with fresh ears.  If I didn't already know the song, would I like this song?  The answer was usually "Yes".  But mostly, I still have trouble with them "jazzing up" the old favorites too much.  I know; first world problems for sure.  This is in general some great stuff.

They upped the quotient of newer Christmas songs this time around, with Paul McCartney's "Wonderful Christmas Time", "Merry Christmas Darling" by The Carpenters and the aforementioned "Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays" by Justin Timberlake.  And as with the first batch, Lee Loughnane has given us another Chicago original, "Rockin' and Rollin' on Christmas Day".

Dolly Parton sings on "Wonderful Christmas Time"; America (actually just Gerry Beckley and Dewey Bunnell, joined by Hank Linderman) sing and play on "I Saw Three Ships"; Bebe Winans sings on "Merry Christmas Darling"; Steve Cropper adds his guitar chops to "Rockin' and Rollin' on Christmas Day"; and as before, the set finishes with a song featuring a children's choir.  As you can tell by the names, it's mostly the kids of the band members.

In 2008, after 27 years with Chicago, Bill Champlin decided it was time to move on.  Bill originally played more guitar than keyboards with Chicago, but recently, especially after the addition of Keith Howland on guitar, he'd been playing keyboards pretty much exclusively.  For touring, Chicago still felt more comfortable having another keyboard player (Robert Lamm has always been just a pianist/organist) so they enlisted keyboardist and singer Lou Pardini.  Lou is also a gifted songwriter; his song "Just To See Her" won a Grammy for Smokey Robinson in 1988 and was also nominated as Song of the Year that same Year.

Drew Hester is also credited as a regular member of Chicago on this album, their first full-time percussionist since Loudir de Oliveira left the band back in the 80's.

« Last Edit: July 17, 2015, 11:51:14 AM by Orbert »

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago XXXIII: O Christmas Three (2011)
« Reply #336 on: October 29, 2013, 07:48:14 PM »
Okay then, moving right along...

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Chicago XXXIV: Live in '75 (2011)
« Reply #337 on: October 29, 2013, 07:49:16 PM »
Chicago XXXIV: Live in '75 (2011)




Introduction
Anyway You Want
Beginnings
Does Anybody Really Know What Time It Is?
Call On Me
Make Me Smile
So Much To Say, So Much To Give
Anxiety's Moment
West Virginia Fantasies
Colour My World
To Be Free
Now More Than Ever
Ain't It Blue?
Just You 'N' Me
(I've Been) Searchin' So Long
Mongonucleosis
Old Days
25 Or 6 To 4
Got To Get You Into My Life
Free
I'm A Man
Dialogue
Wishing You Were Here
Feelin' Stronger Every Day

----------

Peter Cetera - Bass, Vocals
Terry Kath - Guitar, Vocals
Robert Lamm - Keyboards, Vocals
Lee Loughnane - Trumpet, Vocals
James Pankow - Trombone
Walter Parazaider - Woodwinds
Danny Seraphine - Drums
Laudir de Oliveira - Percussion

----------

Chicago was never bigger than they were in the 70's, so after three Christmas albums (well, two and a half), countless "greatest hits" things (including two boxed sets), and a live album capturing the recent band, this should have been a great idea.  Actually, it was a great idea.  In 1975, Chicago was touring in support of Chicago VIII, their eighth Gold Record in six years and fourth Number 1 album in a row.

The original seven plus one, with Laudir de Oliveira on percussion on his first tour as a regular member of the band.  The shows were incredible, full of powerful hits but still with time for "The Ballet" in its entirety, and a couple of indulgences, such as "Mongonucleosis" -- the jam which always followed "(I've Been) Searchin' So Long" -- and their cover of The Beatles' "Got To Get You Into My Life", the horn-driven song which gave Walt Parazaider and the boys the idea to start a rock band with horns in the first place.

Here's the problem: The sound quality.  I don't have this album, but reviews online all agree that while the performances are great, the sound quality leaves much to be desired.  Some say that the horns are mixed too low, others say that the guitar is also too low.  I'm not sure what that leaves, other than the vocals and rhythm section.  All agree that the sound itself is not great.

I have to say, after hours of hunting on YouTube, which has an impressive amount of bootleg and other rare Chicago live recordings, I've never found anything that I could say has even "good" sound quality.  I know it was possible for this amazing eight-piece band to sound good in a live setting because I saw them in 1977, but apparently it was just about impossible to record them properly, otherwise a decent recording of them would exist.  And it may, somewhere, but this is not it.

This two-disc set was issued on Rhino Handmade, a division of Rhino reserved for special, limited-edition releases.  The first disc is packed but the second disc is only half full, clearly because this album represents exactly one concert,   Some reviews say that the performances are so awesome that once you start listening, you forget about the sound quality and just listen.  That's entirely possible.  But by all accounts, the sound quality is an issue.  What's interesting is that this set is compiled from three nights in the same venue, so it was professionally recorded, not bootleg.  Is it possible that someone completely choked while mixing and mastering this live album?  I really would love to hear it, because I don't want to believe that Rhino Handmade would release something this bad, but it's both hard to find and rather expensive, so it might be a while.

By the way, it's not the venue.  I saw Yes on the Union tour at the Capital Centre in Largo, MD, where this album was recorded, and they sounded excellent.  So it's possible for an eight-piece band to sound good there.  I also saw Rush on Counterparts there, but then, Rush always sounds great and there's only three of them, even if they sound like six.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2015, 11:53:13 AM by Orbert »

Offline ZirconBlue

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 2560
  • Gender: Male
Re: Chicago XXXIV: Live in '75 (2011)
« Reply #338 on: October 30, 2013, 08:14:11 AM »
I don't know if it's already been discussed, but it bugs me that live albums and, especially, compilations are included in the sequential numbering of albums.

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago XXXIV: Live in '75 (2011)
« Reply #339 on: October 30, 2013, 10:21:58 AM »
It goes back to the early days, when it was just easier.  The first two albums didn't have numbers, but technically each were eponymous (self-titled) albums.  To help clarify matters, Chicago III was named thus.  Then came Chicago at Carnegie Hall, which also didn't have a number.  When the next studio album came out, the question was what to call it.  It was their fifth album overall, and since they'd gone with III previously, Chicago V seemed like a good idea, and the numbers just went up from there.  So yeah, even though it wasn't given a number in the title, the first live album was counted in the numeration, so the precedent was set and it would have made even less sense to change that later on.

Remember that back then, live albums and compilations were not nearly as common as they are now, or for bands which have been around for ages.  There were no bands which had been around for ages; certainly no one foresaw Chicago being around for over 45 years.  Most bands had one live album and one greatest hits thing.  For a long time, Chicago was the same way.  After Chicago VIII, they took a break, and it was time for a greatest hits thing, so what the heck; they'd counted the live album in the numeration, might as well call it Chicago IX: Chicago's Greatest Hits.

I agree that it's kinda silly now.  I bought Chicago Twenty 1 on CD, then 15 years later, just because I felt like checking up on them, bought Chicago XXX.  A difference of nine in the sequence, and they were actually consecutive studio albums.  Okay, that's not counting Night and Day and the first Christmas album, and with no idea that they'd made Stone of Sisyphus but not released it.  But yeah, counting all those compilations and live albums at this point almost seems like an effort to "boost the numbers" but it's really not.  It's because they'd set a precedent and followed it, and all these years later, the relative lack of new studio content has screwed up the ratios.

I think if they'd known back in the beginning that the band would last 45 years and the second half of that would include fewer studio albums than anything else, they'd probably have only numbered the studio albums.  But again, there was no precedent, and they were making it up as they went along.  Each decision made sense at the time.

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Chicago: Ultimate Christmas Collection (2012)
« Reply #340 on: October 31, 2013, 12:17:57 PM »
Chicago: Ultimate Christmas Collection (2012)




I know, it seems like all Chicago does anymore is release Christmas albums and compilations.  So what better way to finish off this discography than a compilation of Christmas albums?

If you're keeping count, Chicago XXV: The Christmas Album had the original 14 songs, then six more were added and it was re-released as Chicago Christmas: What's It Gonna Be, Santa?  The set from 2011, Chicago XXXIII: O Christmas Three had another 14 tracks, bringing the grand total to 34.

But it's actually simpler than that.  This is a two-disc set wherein the first disc is Chicago Christmas: What's It Gonna Be, Santa? and the second disc is Chicago XXXIII: O Christmas Three.

A new original by Lee Loughnane would've been kinda cool, so the 35th album would have 35 tracks, but whatever.  This is what we have.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2015, 11:55:29 AM by Orbert »

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago: Ultimate Christmas Collection (2012)
« Reply #341 on: October 31, 2013, 12:20:46 PM »
20 studio albums in 45 years, 17 of them all original material (the others being the two Christmas albums and Night and Day - Big Band), is nothing to sneeze at.  Four of the first six studio albums were doubles.  And of course, there are the singles added as "bonus tracks" to some of the compilations and live albums.  They even released a new single this year ("America" - the obligatory patriotic song), so they're still creating new material, just at a slower pace than before.

Admittedly, it makes me a little sad to see what has become of the once vibrant band that I still love.  But it's the kind of sadness you feel for a grandparent or aging aunt or uncle.  You know their time is limited because they've already had so many good years.  You remember the good times, and you imagine them remembering the good times and knowing that those days are behind them, and you can't help but feel sorry for them.

But Chicago is still touring; they're not gone yet.  And I can still put on Chicago Live at Carnegie Hall, and I'm 12 years old again, just starting to learn about music, with no idea what the limits were (because there weren't any back then), and just enjoy.  This still happens every time I play that album.  You never forget your first time.

Offline sueño

  • Posts: 1526
  • How Dare I Be So Beautiful?
Re: Chicago: Ultimate Christmas Collection (2012)
« Reply #342 on: October 31, 2013, 12:35:48 PM »
:clap:  for all of this, Orbert.  Thanks so much for your hard work!   :)
"We spend most of our lives convinced we’re the protagonist of the story, but we rarely realize that we’re just supporting characters in everybody else’s story. Nobody thinks about you as much as you do."

Offline Big Hath

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 5781
Re: Chicago: Ultimate Christmas Collection (2012)
« Reply #343 on: October 31, 2013, 01:39:34 PM »
I saw they also released another single called "Somethin' Comin', I Know" (sounds like a Lamm title to me).  Any chance you've heard that?  I haven't.  Also, what are the Nashville Sessions I see at their online store?  Edit: The description says "Chicago performs 15 of their biggest hits in the studio -recorded in 2009".  Here is the track listing:

-25 or 6 to 4
-Make Me Smile
-Feelin' Stronger Every Day
-Beginnings
-Saturday In The Park
-Colour My World
-Does Anybody Really Know What Time It Is?
-Questions 67 and 68
-Old Days
-Just You And Me
-Call On Me
-Another Rainy Day in New York City
-No Tell Lover
-(I've Been) Searchin' So Long
-Alive Again



As for me, I got into the band when they were already in free fall mode (relative to their early years).  The first release after I became a fan was Night and Day.  So I never really knew what it was like for them to be one of the hottest names in Rock and Roll and putting out top selling great albums all the time.  I envy that.  But the live shows are still cookin' if Chicago in Chicago is any indication.

Orbert, great job with this thread.   A masterpiece.


Now, go do your top 50 songs list while it's fresh on your mind.  :biggrin:
Winger would be better!

. . . and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Chicago: Final Thoughts
« Reply #344 on: October 31, 2013, 04:14:44 PM »
Yeah, I stumbled across some video of the horns recording "Somethin' Comin', I Know".  Interesting that they were in a hotel room, apparently recording on a mobile between shows.  Yep, it's a Lamm tune, the "B-side" of Loughnane's "America".  I know that now in the digital age, there aren't really sides, but I wouldn't be surprised if they still think in terms of singles needing a B-side.  You can't just release one song; there have to be two.

I've never heard of The Nashville Sessions.  Looks like new studio recordings of older songs.  I've never really gotten into those.  If you're gonna re-record the songs with the current band, take the time to record a concert and do it right.  Doing it in the studio, to me, invites direct comparisons to the originals (even more than live recordings would) and there's no way they're going to be better.  It seems like you're admitting that you can't sound as good live as you can in the studio, so you go for the controlled conditions, and where overdubs are acceptable.  (To me, overdubs will never be acceptable on live albums.  Never!)  Basically, it's a cover album of your own songs, which just seems weird to me.


This was a tough discography to do, but as with the others, it gave me a reason/excuse to listen to everything.  Well, everything I could get my hands on.  I stuck with Genesis until the end, and Yes is actually still around (they're writing the new album now), but there are some albums of theirs that I'd never really dug into.  I found a greater appreciation for them by being "forced" to listen critically to them.  I had pretty much given up on ELP, so those last few albums, after they got back together, were interesting.  I'd never heard them.

Chicago was somewhere in between.  There's a "lost period" there in the 80's and early 90's.  I've had the albums (well, the downloads) for years, but honestly, they just didn't seem worth my time.  I'm glad to find out that I was wrong, at least about some of it.  Overall, I find the later material weaker, but that's usually true of any band with a long career.  The good news is that there are still good songs to be found on every album, all the way to the end.  Stone of Sisyphus is challenging and rewarding.  "Side Two" of Chicago XXX is actually pretty strong.

And who knows?  Chicago may still have an album left in them.  I really doubt it, since they're releasing singles now.  If they're doing that, they're not "saving them up" until they have an album's worth.  That's okay.  Like I said, I'll take what I can get, and this is what we get.


P.S.: I don't do Top 50 lists.  Sorry.

Offline JayOctavarium

  • I used to be a whorejerk
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 10055
  • Gender: Male
  • But then I took a Hef to the knee...
Re: Chicago: Ultimate Christmas Collection (2012) and Final Thoughts
« Reply #345 on: November 02, 2013, 10:49:36 AM »
Thanks for the entertaining thread Orbert! I'll admit I really didn't sit and listen to anything after IV but it was still fun.
I just don't understand what they were trying to achieve with any part of the song, either individually or as a whole. You know what? It's the Platypus of Dream Theater songs. That bill doesn't go with that tail, or that strange little furry body, or those webbed feet, and oh god why does it have venomous spurs!? And then you find out it lays eggs too. The difference is that the Platypus is somehow functional despite being a crazy mishmash or leftover animal pieces

-BlobVanDam on "Scarred"

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago: Ultimate Christmas Collection (2012) and Final Thoughts
« Reply #346 on: November 02, 2013, 01:55:37 PM »
You should at least check out Chicago V.  Everybody should.  It's my favorite album of theirs, and I know it's very highly rated among other Chicago fans as well.  They had settled down into writing tight five or six minute songs, but the songs themselves have great jazzy solos and incredible horn breaks, so the "prog" wasn't quite out of their system; it had just been channelled.

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19274
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: Chicago 26: Live in Concert (1999)
« Reply #347 on: November 12, 2013, 08:26:11 PM »
Chicago 26: Live in Concert (1999)




Bill Champlin - Keyboards, Guitars
Keith Howland - Guitars, Vocals
Tris Imboden - Drums, Percussion
Robert Lamm - Keyboards, Percussion, Vocals
Lee Loughnane - Trumpet, Flugelhorn, Cornet, Guitar, Percussion, Background Vocals
James Pankow - Trombone, Percussion, Background Vocals
Walter Parazaider - Saxophones, Flute, Clarinet
Jason Scheff - Bass, Vocals

----------

"The Ballet"
  Make Me Smile
  So Much to Say, So Much to Give
  Anxiety's Moment
  West Virginia Fantasies
  Colour My World
  To Be Free
  Now More Than Ever
(I've Been) Searchin' So Long
Mongonucleosis
Hard Habit To Break
Call on Me
Feelin' Stronger Every Day
Just You 'N' Me
Beginnings
Hard to Say I'm Sorry/Get Away
25 or 6 to 4

Studio Tracks

Back to You (Lamm, Howland) – 3:41
If I Should Ever Lose You (Bacharach, Krikorian) – 4:30
(Your Love Keeps Lifting Me) Higher and Higher (Jackson, Miner, Smith) – 4:11
(vocals by Michael McDonald)

----------

The official justification for this album, according to the band and the label, is that the late 90's Chicago lineup was tight, the shows were still full of energy and excitement, and they deserved to be captured in a live album.  There hadn't been an official live album in well over 20 years (Chicago at Carnegie Hall, or Chicago Live in Japan if you count that one).  And that's all true.  As I mentioned, I saw this lineup of Chicago in 1996 and it was a great show.

The other reason of course is that Chicago had not released an album of new studio material in years.  Yes, there were Chicago 25: The Christmas Album, and Night & Day - Big Band, which were new studio albums, but technically cover albums.  It had been eight years since Chicago Twenty 1.

So it was time for either another "greatest hits" thing, or a live album.  With five official compilations and countless unofficial ones, a new live album was the way to go.

I don't have this one, and I've never heard it.  I've tried to find it, and yes I suppose I could buy it, but while I'd love to hear it, I don't really have any interest in owning it.  Reviews range from positive to lukewarm.  The sound is excellent, and the performances are inspired.

As for negatives, obvious studio doctoring is a biggie.  Another is the set list which features a lot of songs originally sung by Peter Cetera but sung here by Jason Scheff.  Other than "Beginnings" (written and still sung by Robert Lamm) and what is now known simply as "The Ballet", every song is one formerly sung by Peter, but now sung by Jason.  Yeah, Peter isn't coming back, but literally stacking the set list with songs now sung by someone else seems to underscore that.  When I saw them, Robert sang a few more ("Saturday in the Park" and "Wake Up Sunshine", probably a few others) and Keith and Bill sang some of the old Terry songs.

The other thing that brought reviews down overall is the inclusion of three new studio tracks, two of which are covers, one of them sung by Michael McDonald.  Why?  No one knows.  Sure, the official word is that he brought something special to it, they were excited to be working with him, blah blah blah, but ultimately they included studio tracks when that's just not why you buy a live album.  Maybe the new track by Robert Lamm and Keith Howland is good.  But at 3:41, is it worth the price of a CD?  I can't answer that, because I haven't heard it.

Okay, so I was a bad boy.  I finally found this online, at a place of less than stellar repute.  I wanted to hear this album so badly, I couldn't help myself.  I paid the price, caught some nasty malware that took me two days to get rid of.  But the worst part was that I finally got to hear this album, and I literally have to force myself to keep listening to it.

I'm sorry, but I really hate the way Jason Scheff sings.  With Peter's old songs, it's like he has meticulously gone through every line of every song and found at least one or two things to change, just to change them.  Change the rhythm of this line, change this one note here, this one there.  He literally never sings more than one line in a row the same way that it was originally sung.  Everything must be different.  This is how he puts his mark on things.  Like a dog marking his territory, he pisses on everything.

He did the same thing to the Big Band songs on Night and Day, and he does the same things to the Christmas songs that he sings.  Songs that he originally sang on studio albums, he sings them like an actual human.  But everything else, he pisses on.  He just can't follow someone else's melody; he can't sing a song the way it was originally sung, the way people have been listening to it for years, the way they're expecting to hear it.

Champlin does the same thing to Terry's songs.  Fucks around with the rhythm and notes just to change them.  Okay fine, I guess that makes me a fanboy.  I admit it.  But I've been listening to these songs for 40 years, and they have actual melodies.  Believe it or not, the idea is not to sing the song differently every time, or change every other word just for the hell of it.  Sure, make it your own, put your own spin on it.  But literally changing every single line?  Really?  That's what you think it means to sing these songs?

You know who doesn't do it?  Lamm.  Lamm's voice is now deep enough to sing some of Terry's old songs, and he sings them the way Terry sang them.  "Colour My World" sounds great with Bobby Lamm singing it.  He puts his mark on it, changes just a few things here and there, but he basically sings the song the way it was originally sung, the way people who've been listening to it for 40 years expect it to sound.

Actually, I kinda get it.  Champlin was not in the band when Terry was, and Jason was not in the band when Peter was.  They didn't listen to these songs every night, play them while the original singers sang them.  To Bill and Jason, these are their songs now and they get to sing them any way the want to.  Somehow, to them this means that they must change everything.  But they're basically pissing on songs which, I'm sorry, have actually melodies -- good ones -- which they're just plain ignoring.

Children plaaaa-haaay
In the pa-hark
Theydonno - ho
Eye malo-o-o-one,
Inthedark, yeah
Eventho-ho-ha-oh

Time-in tiemuh-gin,
I see yo vase!
Smylininsah-ai-ai-ai-ud!


Bill Champlin, I can say this now, but I never liked you, and I'm glad you left.

Jason Scheff, I don't care if your dad played with Elvis.  You're no Jerry Scheff on bass, and you suck as a singer, too.


The "new" song is okay, I guess.  No worse than any other of their recent ballads, though not significantly better.  At least the horns are there.  The Bacharach cover was okay, at least it had a great melody (as all Bacharach songs do), and I haven't plucked up the courage to listen to the Michael McDonald song yet.

I probably should've at least waited until I've heard the whole album, twice to be consistent and do it right, but I don't know if that will even happen.  This is really painful.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2015, 11:58:39 AM by Orbert »

Offline King Postwhore

  • Couch Potato
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 59455
  • Gender: Male
  • Take that Beethoven, you deaf bastard!!
Re: The Chicago Discography
« Reply #348 on: November 12, 2013, 08:33:40 PM »
While I agree with you on them vocally, (Bill's intonation has always drove me nuts)  Musically, they were right on.  The new keyboardist that replaced Bill has such a great deep voice I think you'd love him live. I know Paladia (sp?) had a concert recently so if you have a digital live music station.  check it out.
I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down'.” - Bob Newhart
So wait, we're spelling it wrong and king is spelling it right? What is going on here? :lol -- BlobVanDam
"Oh, I am definitely a jackass!" - TAC

Offline BanksD

  • Posts: 418
Re: The Chicago Discography
« Reply #349 on: November 12, 2013, 08:34:56 PM »
I tend to feel the same way about Champlain's singing in general with Chicago. Even when he sings on his own songs it just sounds so...bad and out of place, and I don't know who thought it would be a good idea for him to sing Kath's parts but there's no way they could've seriously for the better part of 20 years that Champlain even sounded remotely good  on them (especially on Dialogue, no idea why but that one always stuck out to me as being exceptionally bad with Bill)

Jason on the other hand I tend to really like on his own material, but on other songs I'm usually really indifferent.