Concert Reviews

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Marcia Karen

unread,
Jan 30, 1990, 12:34:17 PM1/30/90
to

Now for a break from the flaming . . . . . . .

Reviews of a few recent shows in the Pittsburgh area:

VoiVod/Soundgarden/FaithNoMore: 18 Jan 90

i came in to the show as FaithNoMore was finishing, but they didn't
sound to bad. Soundgarden was great. They covered a Black Sabbath tune,
but now i can't remember which one. VoiVod were incredible (as usual!),
they opened with "The Unknown Knows". Snake has SOOO much stage
presence! The band cranked out their tunes in true VoiVod fashion,
quick, accurate, intense. They didn't play too much old stuff. i was
hoping to hear "Build Your Weapons", but no such luck. My guess is that
they are headed in such a new direction that they don't have time to try
preserving the older stuff.

OverKill/?/?: 23 Jan 90

The opening bands weren't very memorable, even their names escape me
now. OverKill was more intense than on their last tour. i was thrilled
to here their raw energy pump out the newer tunes, as well as some old
favorites from "Taking Over" and "Feel The Fire". They covered "Hole in
the Sky" by Black Sabbath, which was a first! i've NEVER seen them cover
a tune live. i had a chance to hang with the boyz after the show. Blitz
has dropped a lot of weight (do i detect habits forming?), Gustafeson is
mega-cool. i was sitting on the stage through most of the show, singing
word for word with Blitz, right into the mike. When they did
"Electro-Violence" for an encore, the crowd was pushing too hard and i
lost my space on the stage, so i dove off. It's great to see a band mix
old and new tunes in a show, because all the fans, old a nd new get into
it.

Aerosmith/Skid Row

Skid Row were okay, but the singer has a major attitude problem. He
announced in the middle of their set, in front of 15,000 people that he
was leaving the band. What an ego boost for the other guys in the band,
'eh?
Aerosmith were very impressive. i've never been a big fan of theirs,
but the show was enjoyable, even though i had the flu. They did "Rag
Doll", "Angel", "Sweet Emotion", "Dude Looks Like A Lady", "Love in an
Elevator", and all their radio-popular tunes, as well as some i had
never heard. They copied "Red House" by Jimi, that was a shock! Needless
to say, all the little twelve year olds around us didn't know what the
heck they were playing. They did it in good taste.


Has anyone seen these bands in other places? Please add to my thoughts!

metallicious moshin' marcia
the biker biology babe

P.S. Someone enlighten me . . . .
What does IMHO stand for?

Jim Burwell

unread,
Jan 31, 1990, 1:38:42 AM1/31/90
to
mk...@andrew.cmu.edu (Marcia Karen) writes:


>Reviews of a few recent shows in the Pittsburgh area:

>VoiVod/Soundgarden/FaithNoMore: 18 Jan 90

> i came in to the show as FaithNoMore was finishing, but they didn't

Me too. Just caught the encore. Too bad! I wanted to see them. Sorry
I missed them, their encore was so good.

>sound to bad. Soundgarden was great. They covered a Black Sabbath tune,
>but now i can't remember which one. VoiVod were incredible (as usual!),

Soudgarden was GREAT at Phily (where I saw em). They covered Black
Sabbath's "War Pigs". They also covered a Spinal Tap (!) tune, "Big
Bottom" (hillarious!). I liked soundgarden so much I went and bought
their album the next day!

>they opened with "The Unknown Knows". Snake has SOOO much stage
>presence! The band cranked out their tunes in true VoiVod fashion,
>quick, accurate, intense. They didn't play too much old stuff. i was
>hoping to hear "Build Your Weapons", but no such luck. My guess is that
>they are headed in such a new direction that they don't have time to try
>preserving the older stuff.

Yes. Voi was great also. But in Phily, Soundgarden seemed to have taken
the energy out of the crowd. I was left with the impression that
Soundgarden had more stage presence. (I overheard someone outside of the
club say "Soundgarden ripped Voi a new _______!" I don't agree
with that though.) I think Voi was having some sound problems though.
They weren't nearly as loud as SG, and the bass drums kept dropping out.
But they were still EXCELENT. This is the first time I've seen Voi live,
and I was very pleased with their accuracy in playing their complex music
live. They did mostly songs from _NothingFace_ and _Dimension Hatross_.
They did one song called "Tornado" from their old stuff, but I don't know
what album that's off of, because the only older Voi album I have is
_RRROOOAAARRR_.

>OverKill/?/?: 23 Jan 90

GRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!! I missed OverKill in Philly on the 27th! GRRRRR!!!!


>Aerosmith/Skid Row

Skid Row ? Not really into 'em..

>P.S. Someone enlighten me . . . .
> What does IMHO stand for?

In My {Honest|Humble} Opinion.

C'ya
Jim
--
James S. Burwell
UUCP: ...!rutgers!faatcrl!jimb Internet: ji...@faatcrl.UUCP

John Joseph Swick, Jr.

unread,
Jan 31, 1990, 9:07:53 AM1/31/90
to

mk...@andrew.cmu.edu (Marcia Karen) writes:

>Aerosmith/Skid Row

> Skid Row were okay, but the singer has a major attitude problem. He
>announced in the middle of their set, in front of 15,000 people that he
>was leaving the band. What an ego boost for the other guys in the band,
>'eh?

Awww gee...don't be so harsh. I was at the same show and
he was just joking in reference to the fact that he could soon be in jail in a
*couple* of cities. :-)

I agree with you that Aerosmith is *hot* on this tour. They just
keep getting
better. The only thing I didn't like was their song selection. If I
counted right,
only 8/21 were "pre-Permanent Vacation". In contrast, on the Perm
Vacation tour,
only 3 songs were new. They even dug deep for tunes like 'Rats in the
Cellar' and 'Lightning Strikes'. I felt like on the Permanent Vacation
tour they were
playing for the die-hards but on this tour they were concentrating on
the MTV-teenie
boppers. Don't get me wrong, Permanent Vacation is one of their best,
and Pump is
o.k., but I never would have expected as many teen-MTV-heads for a band like
Aerosmith, or for Aerosmith to cut out standards like 'Toys in the Attic' and
'Big 10 inch'.

---J. J. Swick
js...@andrew.cmu.edu

Miika Kuusinen

unread,
Jan 31, 1990, 9:23:22 AM1/31/90
to
ji...@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) writes:

>They did one song called "Tornado" from their old stuff, but I don't know
>what album that's off of, because the only older Voi album I have is
>_RRROOOAAARRR_.

well "Tornado" is taken from 'Killing Technology' (it's the first VoiVod's
record I like...I have heard some tracks from their LPs before 'Killing
Technology' and I don't like them but after that LP VoiVod has found a
new style (that style was called 'techno-metal' somewhere) which no-one
(yet) have tried to copy...VoiVod's two latest LPs are brilliant but you
have to listen them many many times before you learn to like'em...

==============================================================================
I E-mail: me...@kannel.lut.fi Miika Kuusinen I I
I ========================== Linnunrata 10 H 5 I "Hammer of justice I
I IRC: mega 53850 Lappeenranta I crushes you" I
I ========= Suomi Finland I - Metallica - I
==============================================================================

Steve Elias

unread,
Jan 31, 1990, 1:22:51 PM1/31/90
to
what do you folks think of Bonham??? there's one song that gets a lot
of airplay that i don't like all that much...

but, a couple days ago i heard a raging song which sounded a bit like
the Cult. i heard it again, during a Bonham feature -- so it must be
from his album. it isn't Zeppelin, but it sure rocked.

is Bonham even considered heavy metal???

are the original heavy metal bands worth talking about here???
it seems like most readers here are into the new heavy metal --
which might be another subject altogether.

does anyone have any opinions as to what the difference is between
'old' and 'new' heavy metal??


--
/* e...@spdcc.com ; 617-932-5598 */
/* usenet: the perfect forum for the Turing Test */

JSS...@psuvm.psu.edu

unread,
Jan 31, 1990, 6:22:17 PM1/31/90
to

What do I think of Bonham? I think they're pretty good. They are, to
the best of my knowledge, classified as metal. The song you probably heard
was Wait For You, which I really liked. The underlying medley combined with
Jason's drums made it work for me. The rest of the album is just as good.
One of my favorites is Guilty. Don't know what the other song you heard was
(maybe Just Another Day). Anyway, they're worth checking out.
-------
JUSTIN STEINER, ASPIRING SOMETHING OR OTHER (WRITER?)
JSS132@PSUVM

John Paul Jones

unread,
Feb 1, 1990, 9:33:15 PM2/1/90
to
In article <14...@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM> e...@ursa-major.spdcc.COM (Steve Elias) writes:
>what do you folks think of Bonham??? there's one song that gets a lot
>of airplay that i don't like all that much...
Cool stuff. Not Zeppish, really, except for the singer.

>
>is Bonham even considered heavy metal???
What is "heavy metal"? Bonham uses heavier distortion than Steppenwolf, and
they could be considered "heavy metal". But that's not really what you were
asking, I guess. There is no "definition" of metal, as far as I'm concerned.

>
>are the original heavy metal bands worth talking about here???
Damn right they are, if you're talking about Zeppelin, Deep Purple,
the Who, etc. But what is "original"? Chuck Berry had a heavy sound, so
does Bo Diddley. Are they "metal", Mr.Elias? This is a serious question
so answer seriously, if at all.

>it seems like most readers here are into the new heavy metal --
>which might be another subject altogether.

There you go again, talking about new metal and old metal. I don't
fucking care what year "Born to be Wild" came out, I'm still gonna
listen to it. I guess what's happening with the new groups is more
current, that's all, so it gets discussed more.

>
>does anyone have any opinions as to what the difference is between
>'old' and 'new' heavy metal??

I do. There ain't one. The attitude may have changed, but the agression
is still there.

-John Paul Jones
"...yes you can squeeze my lemon,
'til the juice runs down my leg."

Steve Elias

unread,
Feb 2, 1990, 7:56:08 AM2/2/90
to
by the way -- the DLR returning to VH rumor is total BS...
Eddie was blasted when he said it -- Warner is issuing a press
release today that Sammy is there to stay, and DLR is goine for good.

hol...@agnes.stolaf.edu (John Paul Jones) writes:


> e...@ursa-major.spdcc.COM (Steve Elias) writes:
>>is Bonham even considered heavy metal???
>What is "heavy metal"? Bonham uses heavier distortion than Steppenwolf, and
>they could be considered "heavy metal". But that's not really what you were
>asking, I guess. There is no "definition" of metal, as far as I'm concerned.

good enough... putting a definition on it would just limit discussion...

>>are the original heavy metal bands worth talking about here???
>Damn right they are, if you're talking about Zeppelin, Deep Purple,
>the Who, etc. But what is "original"? Chuck Berry had a heavy sound, so
>does Bo Diddley. Are they "metal", Mr.Elias? This is a serious question
>so answer seriously, if at all.

i wouldn't consider Chuck & Bo to be heavy metal...
the first 3 bands, of course. Queen's early years were metal...
Styx, old Kansas... ??

>>it seems like most readers here are into the new heavy metal --
>>which might be another subject altogether.
>There you go again, talking about new metal and old metal. I don't
>fucking care what year "Born to be Wild" came out, I'm still gonna
>listen to it. I guess what's happening with the new groups is more
>current, that's all, so it gets discussed more.

ok.

>>does anyone have any opinions as to what the difference is between
>>'old' and 'new' heavy metal??
>I do. There ain't one. The attitude may have changed, but the agression
>is still there.

no difference??? bullshit -- what about all the silly occult crapola
and silly monster paintings that seem to surround much of the new
heavy metal... we sure didn't see any of that BS with the 'old'
heavy metal???

/* usenet proves that the Turing Test can be passed. */

Mark Holden

unread,
Feb 4, 1990, 2:16:42 AM2/4/90
to
In article <14...@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM> e...@ursa-major.spdcc.COM (Steve Elias) writes:
>by the way -- the DLR returning to VH rumor is total BS...
>Eddie was blasted when he said it -- Warner is issuing a press
>release today that Sammy is there to stay, and DLR is goine for good.

Good news to me, I've never liked DLR, and I feel that VH managed
to be great in spite of him, not because of him.

> hol...@agnes.stolaf.edu (John Paul Jones) writes:
>> e...@ursa-major.spdcc.COM (Steve Elias) writes:

>>>does anyone have any opinions as to what the difference is between
>>>'old' and 'new' heavy metal??

>>I do. There ain't one. The attitude may have changed, but the agression
>>is still there.

>no difference??? bullshit -- what about all the silly occult crapola
>and silly monster paintings that seem to surround much of the new
>heavy metal... we sure didn't see any of that BS with the 'old'
>heavy metal???

Hmm, I don't see a huge amount of occult stuff in today's metal,
but thazt could just be the difference between what you and I pay attention
to. However, I'll venture an explanation. Look at what's currently
popular im movies, eps. the ones that metal fans got to? One answer is
horror, people like to be scared, and the occult, or voodo, or whatever is
seen as something scary. I think those subjects are kind of a cop-out,
anyways, ways to avoid developing something with more substance. Some of
my favorite metal is based in the idea of creating terror, eg: Metallica
"One" isn't just their popular music breakthrough, but an intense, driving
examination of insanity. The same goes for other Metallica songs:
Blackened - Nuclear War
Fade to Black - Despair, lonliness, suicide
Master of Puppets - addiction
Welcome Home (Sanitarium) - Insanity
the list goes on, includeing more tradition subjects, as in The Thing That
Should Not Be, and The Call of Ktulu, based on H.P. Lovecraft's books.
John Paul Jones (holdenm above) couild probably explaiun this better than I
can, if I still had that paper he wrote, I'd probably be quoting him.
But still, that's not really a fundamental change in the music,
just a facet of the development, I agree with JPJ that it's still the
attitude that makes metal what it is.


--
Mark Holden (hol...@thor.acc.stolaf.edu)
No user servicable parts. Refer servicing to qualified service personnel

a quantum mechanic in a box

unread,
Feb 5, 1990, 1:46:53 AM2/5/90
to
In article <14...@ursa-major.SPDCC.COM> e...@ursa-major.spdcc.COM (Steve Elias)
writes:
>no difference??? bullshit -- what about all the silly occult crapola
>and silly monster paintings that seem to surround much of the new
>heavy metal... we sure didn't see any of that BS with the 'old'
>heavy metal???

How about old Black Sabbath? That was pretty occult---so was some of Led
Zeppelin, or at least meant to appear that way---and very silly. Fun,
though.

And I don't think "much" of the newer heavy metal is surrounded by occult
cheese. There was a phase of that about 3-5 years back (Mercyful Fate,
notably) and stuff like Slayer is still around, but other than that (and
that's not exactly mainstream) I don't think there's very much of it. Alice
Cooper, a little bit of Dangerous Toys.

If there is a difference between new & old metal, I would say that it
consists of metal moving closer to the mainstream on the one hand (witness
all the MTV stuff, some of which---e.g. Bon Jovi---I would say has left the
genre entirely) and further from it on the other (consider Slayer or Dark
Angel). Basically, metal has either had to go further to be rebellious, or
it's been co-opted by the Mass Market. (Sometimes both---I think "One in a
Million" is an example. Rebellion sells.)

>/* usenet proves that the Turing Test can be passed. */

Dare I ask? If Steve Elias is a Turing-test program, I'm *completely*
convinced.

--
..............................................................................
....Nathan Tenny........................tektronix!reed!mojo...................
.....................mojo@reed.UUCP.............mojo@reed.BITNET..............
.........don't forget to feed the mule........................................

William Christiano

unread,
Feb 6, 1990, 10:58:43 AM2/6/90
to
In article <14...@reed.UUCP> mo...@reed.bitnet (a quantum mechanic in a box) writes:
>How about old Black Sabbath? That was pretty occult---so was some of Led
>Zeppelin, or at least meant to appear that way---and very silly. Fun,
>though.


IMHO, from the amount of old Black Sabbath I've listened to, the tone
was more political, rather than of the occult origin. Sure, many of their songs
told of things affecting the mind, but those stimuli were human-caused evils
rather than spiritual evils. But, at any rate, that's what sold then, as makeup
sold for Kiss and Twisted Sister (as someone has already mentioned), as long
hair and skin-tight clothes or just plain skin (promiscuity) sells today. What
sells metal (then to now) probably best describes the differences in metal
(then to now).


Bill C.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages