Concert Itch

It's mid-February and I've got the itch: the concert itch.

In about one month, we'll start to learn of summer line-ups. Just this morning, RATT announced a summer tour in support of a new album. Either it will be clubs, or the band will take another two acts on the road as support. Since RATT toured with Poison last summer, they are out.

Yesterday, I bought tickets to Rock on the Range festival right here in Ohio. No, it's not Glam but I think it will be a great two days of music, especially in May. A sort of kick-off to summer if you will.

I despise the cold. It's pretty evident I should be living and working on the West Coast. Perhaps in a couple years. For now, I'm stuck in a frozen tundra that is the Midwest. Each bitterly cold day I catch myself dreaming about summer concerts.

I live for concerts. They tend to make my summer.

So far all I have on tap is Rock on the Range and Rocklahoma. I looked up many other American festivals last night, but nothing interested me enough to fly across the country. It was all Indie or Alternative garbage. This is why I'm hoping for a stunningly large scale tour by a major band.

I want a surprise.

It was a huge deal when the Van Halen tour was announced. People went crazy! I saw them in October and I'll be seeing them again next month.

I'm not sure there are any bands left - save Led Zeppelin - that can give us that sort of excitement or surprise. Perhaps that is why I've taken to love festivals so much?

If I had the money, I would go to Wacken Open Air, Sweden Rock Festival, Rock am Ring and Rocklahoma all in the same summer. That just isn't an option, although I'd love to save my pennies and go to both Sweden Rock and Rocklahoma next year.

Live music makes my heart sing.

Animate Me (or Not)

Do you like when bands make 100% animated videos? I have mixed feelings on the matter. Typically, I like to see the band so I can match faces to songs. It's psychological in one aspect. In another, it is directly proportional to the basis of all human communication: we like to look at one another when we speak. Often, I must look at someone to understand what they are saying. I don't have hearing problems, but I find I can comprehend better this way. Perhaps this direct connection of band-through camera-through television is just the same?

I suppose someone has conducted a study on the matter before, but I guess it's true that this sort of telecommunication probably did help a generation get really addicted to music. Seeing videos and hearing songs is really no different than watching a sitcom or late night monologue as long as the relationship works.

I guess in this school of thought, then, animated videos really are less effective forms of communication. Of course, when we're talking about videos we mean communicating a product, which is the song. That communication - if reliable - would result in album sales.

I can think of two animated videos right now off the top of my head. One is Avenged Sevenfold's new video for "A Little Piece of Heaven." The clip is a deliciously nasty little piece of art, Tim Burton style. The other video is "Hell on High Heels" by Motley Crue. I know there are plenty more but my mind went completely blank.

If you have about nine minutes to kill, here's the Avenged Sevenfold clip:

Now, here's Motley's venture into the art world.

My guess is both bands felt they couldn't adequately portray the song's meaning if they were in the clip. I get where A7X is coming from: necrophilia is a hard thing to act. As for Motley, I think they were taking the easy way out during the depressing New Tattoo tour. I also think they were trying to reach out to a new fan base while not alienating their die hard loyalists.

In some respects, I think animated videos hurt bands - especially Glam artists. No other Metal genre is so closely aligned with both looks and talent. Thoughts?

This Romeo is Bleeding...

Today is St. Valentine's Day. Originally observed by Catholics, the holiday surrounds as many as three "Saint Valentines." All three were martyrs. Much like all great literature, all our modern holiday traditions come from the Middle Ages.

It's customary for lovers to exchange tokens: candy, notes, flowers - and yes, rings. I suppose it's also customary for the unlucky in love to feel a little bummed on this, the most romantic of holidays.

I liken most power ballads to soap operas: steamy, emotional and - usually - just the right length to make a real impact.

I don't remember what month the Bon Jovi video for "Always" premiered, but I do remember the year: 1994. I was in 7th grade, and a big Aerosmith fan. I was watching a ton of MTV at the time because the channel was still actually about music at that point, and my 'Smith were in heavy rotation. So anyway, Bon Jovi released Cross Road in 1994. The mega-selling greatest hits package featured two new songs: "Someday I'll Be Saturday Night" and "Always."

"Always" was written for the movie Romeo is Bleeding, but when the New Jersey band actually saw the film, they were abhorred at the quality and yanked the song. It was probably smart to keep "Always" as that single alone really helped push Cross Road up the charts.

The video for "Always" is clearly big budget. It's also a little nuts, but the song is about a crazed stalker, so I suppose it fits.

I know a lot of you don't like nouveau Bon Jovi. Quite frankly neither do I, but back in the day...the songs, the videos = magnifico!

I can't think of a better song for Valentine's Day than "Always." Sure, it's about the stalker like I said, but it's romantic in that "I-want-to-kill-you-if-I-can't-have-you" sort of way. Really, isn't that what St. Valentine - all three of them - would have wanted?

Enjoy this avant garde Glam classic. Yes, it's a little Eyes Wide Shut meets "Every Rose Has Its Thorn." It is, after all, Bon Jovi.

Music Ageist?

When did it become cool for rock fans to be elitist?

It's all a bit ironic, isn't it? Metal is all about counterculture, or flipping the middle finger at mainstream society. With marketing the modern music machine, commercialism seems to have chipped away the stone that is rock.

Perhaps I should clarify. When I use the term elitist here, I don't mean "of the wealthy or privileged" I mean "of a certain age."

That's right: I've noticed discrimination because of my age. Worst yet, I've actually caught myself snickering at people younger than me while at shows! I'm not proud to admit, but if some teeny booper shoves me out of the front row to get a little closer to, say, Tracii Guns, I really have to catch myself. No, I'm not a violent person. I don't have the urge to come to blows. I do, however, have the urge for an impromptu round of Trivial Pursuit:Glam Metal.  Like, if you can answer three questions about the band in front of you, you're allowed to stand in the front row.

Is it wrong I don't want faux fans in the front row? 

It's like this: I'm die hard. If I spend money to go to a show, buy albums, get some merchandise...I want to actually see the band. I don't care who your husband knows. I don't care if you have giant fake boobs - if you're not a real fan, get out of my way.

Back to age.

I'm not an ageist. I think people should be allowed to work as long as they choose. I think young kids can make inroads in corporate America. I think both older and younger employees make for a more balanced and better functioning workplace. I think Glam Metal is music for the young and young at heart.

I think if you're 14 and flipping your blonde hair in my face at a show I have the right to ask you why you like the band at hand. Is that wrong?

I don't understand "trend-hopping." I say, do what makes you happy. Study cultural anthropology when all your friends go to medical school. Buy a Prius if you care about the environment and can still afford a Mercedes. Listen to any music you choose...but please, actually know something about the band.

You already know I'm young. If you don't, let me remind you that I'm 28. I don't hide much about my life. If it's big, I write about it here. I wear glasses and die my hair jet black, both in a small effort to look a little older. When I interview musicians, they always ask me my age. The response is often met with 1) surprise,  2) trepidation and finally 3) appreciation. While I have very fond memories of Glam growing up, I didn't actually live through the "scene" like some have pointed out. I didn't live through the Salem Witch Trials either, but that didn't stop me from writing a thesis on the matter during my undergraduate days.

So here we are. Another day and just one more instance of me airing my dirty laundry for the world to see. Now you know I hate it when faux fans push their way to the barricade just to be near a "rock star." I love it even more when these same faux fans either 1) mock the band or 2)  objectify the members like pieces of meat.

Maybe this is just my pet peeve. If so, I apologize for the rant.

Can They Last?

 As I posted yesterday, Robin Leach reports on his blog that Motley Crue are the recipients of some major cash. A new 10 year, Live Nation deal is worth 100 million bucks. As part of that deal, the band has agreed to release three new albums and jaunt off on just as many world tours.

Of course, this goes back to the whole "why now" question I asked here just a few weeks ago. 

Does this mean the world is clamoring for more Motley Crue...or is Live Nation bilking die hard fans for cash?

I would say it's a little of both. 

Some fans - like me - will pay multiple times to see Motley. Others will skip the ticket premiums, figuring they've already seen the show and would "prefer to remember the band the way they once were."

Well, "once were and now is" are two totally different things, and I'd rather live in the moment than skip a tour because I've already seen the band. I digress.

Live Nation makes a lot of money on their concert deals. As the group continues to purchase sheds all across the country,  it's going to be virtually impossible to see an act that's not under some sort of Live Nation agreement.

Motley must still be a heck of a draw to get a 100 million dollar deal these days. As the music industry continues to evolve, look for more deals just like this one. Like any contractual agreement, this deal can be both good and bad for the band. They may lose some creative control, but at this point I don't know how much Vince Neil, Nikki Sixx, Tommy Lee or Mick Mars care about innovation.

The fans can surely last three more Motley tours and albums - that's a no brainer. The real question here is...can the band? Is Mick healthy enough to perform off and on for ten years? Will the rest of the band get along well enough to make this venture both profitable and enjoyable? I guess only time will tell.

I do find it curious that neither Live Nation nor Motley Crue has officially announced this massive deal. I hope it's not some sick joke. I plan on traveling a lot this summer to see the Crue multiple times.

On a side note, I wonder what all this means for SIXX: AM? The band has a small tour planned for the spring. I had guessed they would do another album, but it seems Motley really is working on some new material. That's not to say Nikki can't write and record two albums at one time, but I think it's doubtful. I mean, at this stage in the game, why bother, unless to Bring Back Glam?

Update on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 10:07AM by Allyson B. Crawford

Like some of you have posted below, Motley Crue founder Nikki Sixx is now denying this big deal.

Here's his statement, forwarded to me from 10th Street Entertainment:

"Motley Crue has not signed any deals.  Any information reported to the contrary is false and misleading."

I said I was skeptical, but at this point, I do believe there is some truth to this rumor. Motley Crue are excellent at still being able to excite fans and manipulate the media.

Take it all for what you will.

Motley Crue World Tour?

Is Robin Leach credible? This just popped up on Blabbermouth:

"Robin Leach reports on his blog "Vegas Luxe Life with Robin Leach" that MÖTLEY CRÜE — Vince Neil, Tommy Lee, Nikki Sixx and Mick Mars — signed a $100-million-plus mega-deal last week to produce three albums and perform three world tours for the giant Live Nation entertainment conglomerate.

'We'll actually have been together for 37 years by the time it comes to an end,' Vince told Leach.

Vince, who will go off next month on a solo tour of Canada, said that the first of the three long world tours starts this July. The new contract runs for the next 10 years and includes 169 concert dates on the first global journey."

Thoughts? I'm a bit skeptical to say the least...and no, at this point, I don't expect Motley Crue at Rocklahoma.  

Scarlet Violet

Italy is beginning to rival Sweden when it comes to the resurgence of Glam bands.

Scarlet Violet is a great Italian band trying to make it big. Their demo Ready to Rock definitely pays homage to classic 80s bands, while using benchmarks of the modern Glam sound.  

 The track listing for Ready to Rock looks like this:

Back On A Bend
Bad Reputation
In Front Of You
Dirty Little Whore
Ready To Rock

These Milan natives actually have talent and look good to boot. I really like the songs "Bad Reputation" and "Ready to Rock," but the entire effort is very strong. I hear remnants of both Poison and Crashdiet here, so you know these songs must be good. Furthermore, the guitar work is just darn impressive. Guitarist Fylo really knows his way around an axe. In fact, he's so good, it wouldn't surprise me if his solos become the focal point of a live Scarlet Violet show.

Perhaps most surprising of all is that Scarlet Violent remains an unsigned band! The cute quartet got together to independently release Ready to Rock.  With the right marketing, Scarlet Violent could be very viable here in the United States. Someone with connections needs to give these kids a chance. In the meantime, I'll keep listening to the EP.

Get your own copy of Ready to Rock by visiting Scarlet Violent on Myspace

Photo credit: Scarlet Violet via Myspace