One of Gene's Grabbers for sale

[the mojo hobo]

Someone on facebook posted this, apparently from 1969.

I still have this record.

[Alanko]

40+ years on, the sting of sour grapes on the tongue is too much for some to bear, eh?

Not really! What next? "I'd like to see you write something as good as Strutter!!!"

I was born in 1989 so Kiss is just old-people music for me and there is nothing for me to be bitter about. The woman that cut our hair as kids liked them! However there is literally hundreds of better old-people bands out there, that didn't have to cover over their musical deficiencies and mind-numbing lyrics by dressing up a concert as a WWE wrestling tournament. Kiss really were only in it for the money, and went way beyond other bands in a bid to extract that money from their fans. There is nothing cerebral about their music at all; it was for kids and teenage boys, and the fact that they can tour with two different guys in costume just demonstrates that they are more of a franchise than a legitimate artistic entity.

After all this time I wish there was something inspiring about Gene's bass playing, for example, but he is way more concerned about getting his stupid botox face and nylon wig into the press or simply making money, than he has ever been about playing bass. That video with Carol Kaye schooling him is some funny shit! The guy still has no inherent sense of rhythm or musicality after being a "pro" musician for decades. How does that work?

[lowend1]

Not really! What next? "I'd like to see you write something as good as Strutter!!!"

Nah. Not my style. "as good as" is too subjective. I look at results. I might be more inclined to say "How many of your records have gone gold/platinum again?"
I'm tempted to leave it at that, but...
I get it. You don't like Kiss, and that certainly is your prerogative. I do find it interesting, however, that for someone who was born long after Kiss' initial heyday, you have spent an impressive amount of time analyzing not only their musical abilities, but their lyrical content, stage presentation, motivation, and their place in rock-n-roll history - and yet you can't seem to grasp what it is that made them so successful. I'm assuming, of course, that you have done all that legwork - otherwise you would be engaging in anal elocution.

Carol Kaye made a name and career for herself by reliably playing what the song required and then getting paid for it - which is pretty much ANY recording musician's job at the professional level, including Gene. At the risk of putting words in her mouth, I would imagine that she would opine that whatever Gene has played seems to have worked out pretty well for him. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that everything is measured by the same set of standards.

Yes, nothing cerebral - like all good rock n roll.

[OldManC]

I can easily see Dave's point of view. KISS never floated his boat. They're not for him and never were; no big deal. But to see such vehemence from non KISS fans who weren't even around during the heyday of the band always makes me laugh. I was ten years old when Alive was released (so a perfect age for what they were selling) and I ended up being a HUGE fan, but I also had to witness lame marketing moves and insane musical decisions while getting crap from other kids who'd moved on to other bands and genres as the 70s continued on. Gene's inner dick was showing long before the first make-up era was over (and I never felt the need to support or defend it) but the fact that he can get such a huge reaction from people all over the net 44 years into his career says something about his industry acumen. I'll always have a soft spot for the original band but that's mostly where it ended. That being said, some non-KISS fans seem to have a bigger hook in their mouth than even old KISS nerds ever did. Who'd have ever thought that would happen!

And no, it's not "I'd like to see you write something as good as Strutter!!!" It's, let's see you do anything at all that has one tenth of the impact, success, and longevity that that band has had. They're pushing 70. Paul's voice is shot and his costume is literally half girdle. Gene's helmet isn't even close to his most embarrassing attribute, and half the band are hired hands in other guys' make-up who had nothing to do with their early success, and they still pull enough money in on tour to float the kind of show they do. Internationally. How many people does that employ? That's impressive no matter how good or bad they are as musicians. So until anyone complaining can put up anything even close to that, it will look like sour grapes whether they mean it that way or not.

[Dave W]

Popularity has nothing to do with how good a musician is. If it were, then Miley Cyrus and Justin Bieber would be the western world's best current musicians.

When you knock somebody younger for not liking a band you adore, time to look in the mirror and realize you've become your parents! 

Not really! What next? "I'd like to see you write something as good as Strutter!!!"

(insert sound of Dave spewing coffee) 

[patman]

After hearing people talk of them in this forum, I actually bought "Greatest Hits".

I didn't get it. listened maybe 3X. Still didn't get it.

[lowend1]

Anybody's "Greatest Hits" collection is generally a lousy place to start. With Kiss, the early studio albums, while being decent rock & roll, tended to be a little weak in the knees. The first three albums each have their own distinct sound, while Alive! is more cohesive in terms of performance and production, and is a better studio record to boot.

[Hörnisse]

My sister bought me Alive for Christmas 1976.  I was hooked.  Started playing bass in late 1977 with a Gibson G-3 no less.  We lived in Panama until mid 1979 so i didn't get a chance to see them live until the Lick It Up tour in 1984.  Palmer Auditorium in Austin TX.  Riot and Vandenberg opened.  The band put on a show and Gene rocked the Pedulla bass.  Paul was jumping and running like a madman with his Leopard print BC Rich Eagle, Vinnie Vincent had probably 7 Jackson Randy Rhoads guitars on stage and the late great Eric Carr on drums.  I saw them again during the 2000 "farewell" tour and while it was great seeing Ace and Peter with the band it seemed like they were going through the motions.  I even left before the encore to beat the traffic.

I would have enjoyed seeing them circa 1974-76.  But that '84 show was incredible.  Especially at a 3000 capacity area.

[lowend1]

When you knock somebody younger for not liking a band you adore, time to look in the mirror and realize you've become your parents! 

I'm surprised you missed this, Dave,  but it wasn't OldManC or myself who brought up the age differential. Once it's been broached, though, it's fair game. In this case, it's like shooting fish in a barrel - except that the fish started shooting themselves. When one responds with opinion (sans qualifiers) as if it were fact, credibility goes out the window.

It is very difficult to objectively assess impact unless you are in and of that same moment and are aware. My parents never got Chuck Berry, Elvis or The Beatles, and neither do my kids. All were before my time, but I was close enough to feel the ripples.

I've seen Kiss a bunch of times from '76-'92 including a no-frills benefit show at the Stone Pony. At their core, (and in their prime) they are a great rock band.

[Hörnisse]

[Dave W]

I'm surprised you missed this, Dave,  but it wasn't OldManC or myself who brought up the age differential. Once it's been broached, though, it's fair game. In this case, it's like shooting fish in a barrel - except that the fish started shooting themselves. When one responds with opinion (sans qualifiers) as if it were fact, credibility goes out the window.

It is very difficult to objectively assess impact unless you are in and of that same moment and are aware. My parents never got Chuck Berry, Elvis or The Beatles, and neither do my kids. All were before my time, but I was close enough to feel the ripples.

I've seen Kiss a bunch of times from '76-'92 including a no-frills benefit show at the Stone Pony. At their core, (and in their prime) they are a great rock band.

Oh, come on. When someone says Kiss sucks, you know it's an opinion. It doesn't need a disclaimer any more than your saying Kiss is a great rock band.

You like what you like. No need to be defensive if others don't agree.

[4stringer77]

I like Kiss. Never got a chance to see them live but I appreciate their place in history as a general fan of rock. Saying they only appeal to kids and teenage boys is sort of a moot point because that statement could apply to most rock bands, even deep purple.
It seems fairly common knowledge that Ace Frehley isn't necessarily the guy you hear on all the recordings. I have to wonder if the same doesn't go for Gene. For example, do you all really think he came up with the lick at 1:40 here?

It doesn't tarnish their legacy if they did use session guys, just an interesting observation.

[lowend1]

I like Kiss. Never got a chance to see them live but I appreciate their place in history as a general fan of rock. Saying they only appeal to kids and teenage boys is sort of a moot point because that statement could apply to most rock bands, even deep purple.
It seems fairly common knowledge that Ace Frehley isn't necessarily the guy you hear on all the recordings. I have to wonder if the same doesn't go for Gene. For example, do you all really think he came up with the lick at 1:40 here?

It doesn't tarnish their legacy if they did use session guys, just an interesting observation.

Gene has always been upfront in that he didn't play bass on every cut on every album. Ace and Paul both played bass on a fair amount of their own compositions, and likewise, Gene played guitar on a lot of the stuff he wrote or co-wrote. On his '78 solo album, he left some of the bass work to Neil Jason
The lick you are referring to sounds like Gene - but I can't swear that it is. Jimmy Haslip and Mike Porcaro supposedly played bass on one song each, but not that one. "Creatures" has a bunch of session players on it, because Ace did not contribute a single note on guitar. I highly recommend the book "Kiss - Behind The Mask" because it delves into the recording of each album and addresses a lot of the "who did what" aspect of many of the songs.

[Dave W]

I like Kiss. Never got a chance to see them live but I appreciate their place in history as a general fan of rock. Saying they only appeal to kids and teenage boys is sort of a moot point because that statement could apply to most rock bands, even deep purple.
....

I can't agree. College age and beyond (18-25) were the prime audiences for most rock groups of the late 60s and the 70s. Not so with Kiss. Everyone I knew who liked them back then were kids and younger teenagers. Every Kiss fan I know locally now was in that age group back then, and none of their wives or girlfriends are fans. Most of the other bands who are still around have broader appeal than just their original age group following.

NTTAWWT.  You like what you like, and there's no accounting for taste.

[4stringer77]

Well sure plenty of people in their twenties liked rock bands in the sixties. The overarching appeal of rock and roll from it's inception was supposed to be a music of youth and rebellion that freaked out your parents and was at the same time sympathetic to the roller coaster of angst and hyper emotionalism that adolescents experience. Even the most revered rock groups are essentially just performing pop music when compared to legitimate composers. It doesn't mean you can't enjoy it as an adult, however rock bands shouldn't be given the same intellectual gravity of something like a Handel grand organ concerto or a Beethoven symphony.