Jump to content

Bon Jovi - Burning Bridges


Stefan

Recommended Posts

The thing is, Bon Jovi as a business probably want to keep up with the ongoing changes in music styles to stay relevant, otherwise there would come a time where the mainstream press considers them dated and old-school.

 

It's us fans of their original style that are moaning about the changes. Some of us don't like the modern sound, and some do. I guess we don't know the numbers and revenues involved in these preferences. Plus, ticket sales will make them far more money than album sales, so even if their older fans don't like their new material, the band would still be playing some of their old favourites at their gigs to keep them happy year after year. And any of the more modern "processed" sounds on record could still sound more organic when played live.

 

I'm sure Jon won't be losing any sleep over the fact that I'm probably never going to buy another Bon Jovi album - what irritates me is that he seems to be turning his back on the people who made him and his band a success in the first place. It would be idiotic to suggest that he should be penning material that sounds like it came from the late 80s but, equally, it has to be acknowledged that there are plenty of bands out there who are managing to keep both old AND new fans happy by maintaining links to their past without sounding dated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

"Contractual Obligation."

 

What a complete prick this guy has turned out to be. Almost sorry I ever considered myself a fan.

According to certain Kiss members,we wouldn't have Kiss Alive 2 and the solo albums without contractual obligation.....

 

Bon Jovi will never win really,do more of what they did in the 80s and they're just rehashing old music to sell out,move with the times and they're selling out too.

Its not like they're the first band to lose original members either. FFS Foreigner did a tour a couple of years ago where at one point there were no original band members onstage.

 

 

Then that isn't Foreigner, surely? More to the point, outside our immediate circle, Foreigner aren't as well-known as Jon and the boys, so I'm not sure that Joe Average will lose any sleep over whether or not they change line-ups or sound ...

 

I agree that some bands are damned if they do and damned if they don't, but it's still sad to see a band who were once SO good churning out mediocre album after mediocre album :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The thing is, Bon Jovi as a business probably want to keep up with the ongoing changes in music styles to stay relevant, otherwise there would come a time where the mainstream press considers them dated and old-school.

 

It's us fans of their original style that are moaning about the changes. Some of us don't like the modern sound, and some do. I guess we don't know the numbers and revenues involved in these preferences. Plus, ticket sales will make them far more money than album sales, so even if their older fans don't like their new material, the band would still be playing some of their old favourites at their gigs to keep them happy year after year. And any of the more modern "processed" sounds on record could still sound more organic when played live.

 

I'm sure Jon won't be losing any sleep over the fact that I'm probably never going to buy another Bon Jovi album - what irritates me is that he seems to be turning his back on the people who made him and his band a success in the first place. It would be idiotic to suggest that he should be penning material that sounds like it came from the late 80s but, equally, it has to be acknowledged that there are plenty of bands out there who are managing to keep both old AND new fans happy by maintaining links to their past without sounding dated.

 

 

What bands exactly? Are you talking about small niche bands in our tiny genre?

 

BJ are still a worldwide phenomenon, with 99% of their fans loving everything they do, including recent albums.

 

For example - in my office there are loads of BJ fans (all of which have never heard of nor are interested in any of the bands that I listen to) -

 

Facts -

 

1. None of them own the debut or 7800F

2. Most of the older ones got into BJ when SWW was released

3. 99% of BJ fans are like the guys in my office

4. 99% of fans are happy with BJs change in direction / sound and think its the best thing since sliced bread and harp on about what a wonderful diverse artist he is

5. 99% of BJ fans only listen to the music and couldnt really give a stuff who's on guitar..........as long as it sound alright.

6. 99% of BJ fans think BJ is the band

 

Capiche??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The thing is, Bon Jovi as a business probably want to keep up with the ongoing changes in music styles to stay relevant, otherwise there would come a time where the mainstream press considers them dated and old-school.

 

It's us fans of their original style that are moaning about the changes. Some of us don't like the modern sound, and some do. I guess we don't know the numbers and revenues involved in these preferences. Plus, ticket sales will make them far more money than album sales, so even if their older fans don't like their new material, the band would still be playing some of their old favourites at their gigs to keep them happy year after year. And any of the more modern "processed" sounds on record could still sound more organic when played live.

 

I'm sure Jon won't be losing any sleep over the fact that I'm probably never going to buy another Bon Jovi album - what irritates me is that he seems to be turning his back on the people who made him and his band a success in the first place. It would be idiotic to suggest that he should be penning material that sounds like it came from the late 80s but, equally, it has to be acknowledged that there are plenty of bands out there who are managing to keep both old AND new fans happy by maintaining links to their past without sounding dated.

 

 

What bands exactly? Are you talking about small niche bands in our tiny genre?

 

BJ are still a worldwide phenomenon, with 99% of their fans loving everything they do, including recent albums.

 

For example - in my office there are loads of BJ fans (all of which have never heard of nor are interested in any of the bands that I listen to) -

 

Facts -

 

1. None of them own the debut or 7800F

2. Most of the older ones got into BJ when SWW was released

3. 99% of BJ fans are like the guys in my office

4. 99% of fans are happy with BJs change in direction / sound and think its the best thing since sliced bread and harp on about what a wonderful diverse artist he is

5. 99% of BJ fans only listen to the music and couldnt really give a stuff who's on guitar..........as long as it sound alright.

6. 99% of BJ fans think BJ is the band

 

Capiche??

 

 

Alice Cooper springs immediately to mind ... yes, yes, I KNOW he's not a 'band', but he HAS maintained a career spanning nearly 40 years by adapting what he does without losing the essence of what makes his sound unique to him. Hardly a small, niche band.

 

I know that if you spoke to the average person in the street, they'd be stunned to know that Bon Jovi is a band, not just one person; and I take your point that they won't care if it's my Mum up there playing guitar, provided the songs sound the same ... but the fact of the matter is that I STILL think he/they have gone from being very, VERY good indeed to being utterly mediocre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes! Another version of 'Who says you can't go home!' Still their worst song to date, imo.

 

It's catchy bro :D

 

 

So is the flu, and AIDS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

BJ are still a worldwide phenomenon, with 99% of their fans loving everything they do, including recent albums.

 

For example - in my office there are loads of BJ fans (all of which have never heard of nor are interested in any of the bands that I listen to) -

 

Facts -

 

1. None of them own the debut or 7800F

2. Most of the older ones got into BJ when SWW was released

3. 99% of BJ fans are like the guys in my office

4. 99% of fans are happy with BJs change in direction / sound and think its the best thing since sliced bread and harp on about what a wonderful diverse artist he is

5. 99% of BJ fans only listen to the music and couldnt really give a stuff who's on guitar..........as long as it sound alright.

6. 99% of BJ fans think BJ is the band

 

Capiche??

 

 

And that's why the Bon Jovi juggernaut keeps a rolling.

 

That list pretty much describes casual listeners, who probably got into the band when they had their big hits, and remain aware they're around because the hits keep coming and get radio airplay etc.

 

I bet most of those 99% don't spend time on music forums, analysing and dissecting the music, and arguing whose opinion is more important.

 

They're probably more easily pleased and will listen to what they're given, rather than seeking out anything that they might like better. Some people may think that if bands aren't in the Top 40 (or whatever) then they can't be very good. Mainstream commercialism is what music is all about for them.

 

Basically, they're probably not music nerds like us!

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4. 99% of fans are happy with BJs change in direction / sound and think its the best thing since sliced bread and harp on about what a wonderful diverse artist he is

 

5. 99% of BJ fans only listen to the music and couldnt really give a stuff who's on guitar..........as long as it sound alright.

6. 99% of BJ fans think BJ is the band

 

 

 

 

 

Gotta disagree with these.

4.

90% are pissed at the direction change over the years. Doesnt me an they dont listen anymore but most wouldm prefer the old style to return. Except for the soccer mums, they seem to love the country , generic , mid tempo shit they release these days.

 

5.

Lots of Jovi fans have voiced their disapproval with Richie not being there. I woudl say it's split the fan base down the middle. As they are the main band I have collected over the years, I know a hell of a lot of jovi fans around the place and it's definitely impacted.

I'd compare the Jon and Richie associate with the Gene & Paul association. I cant image KISS fans not being worried if one of these 2 left.

 

6.

That's how you get your head bitten off in jovi circles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I love Bon Jovi to write and go back to the 80s formula, I will agree with this change solely because Jon himself realized that he's not capable of hitting the high notes anymore while many 80s rock songs shines in the high register, for example if you listen to the recent live version of 'You Give Love A Bad Name', you can tell it's kinda weak but it's an anthem and it's must be played and if thousand of fans are singing it together, then people can still having lots of fun.

 

The music climate has changed a lot and Bon Jovi successfully adapted to this change and this is reflected from their record sales. If Bon Jovi still stays true to their 80s sound, a lot of people will still complaint and say 'Jon's vocal is poor now', 'the music is a poor man's copy of their heyday', 'Richie's guitar is weaker', etc, so no matter what a band do, people can still find excuse to blame them.

 

After 'These Days', Bon Jovi had gained lots of new grounds with 'Crush' and everything after that, and the last album that we called 'terrible' still sell 1.5 million copies, while Kiss, as a giant band, probably only manage to sell below 500.000 copies with their latest album, 'Monster', and they're trying so hard to stay true to their roots. Not to mention Tesla, Kix, or any other bands who's fighting so hard, probably only sell less than 100.000 copies, perhaps only AC/DC is as strong as Bon Jovi in terms of sales, and Journey's first time with Pineda also surpass the 1 million mark but not anymore with 'Eclipse'.

 

And it's a fact that the original singer usually prevails. Life after Richie doesn't affect much, people still willing to attend the concert to see Jon. Like Axl and GNR without Slash, and I'm sure Motley will do fine without Mick, and people will still see Aerosmith with Steven Tyler even without Joe Perry or see Rolling Stones with Mick even without Keith :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The thing is, Bon Jovi as a business probably want to keep up with the ongoing changes in music styles to stay relevant, otherwise there would come a time where the mainstream press considers them dated and old-school.

 

It's us fans of their original style that are moaning about the changes. Some of us don't like the modern sound, and some do. I guess we don't know the numbers and revenues involved in these preferences. Plus, ticket sales will make them far more money than album sales, so even if their older fans don't like their new material, the band would still be playing some of their old favourites at their gigs to keep them happy year after year. And any of the more modern "processed" sounds on record could still sound more organic when played live.

 

I'm sure Jon won't be losing any sleep over the fact that I'm probably never going to buy another Bon Jovi album - what irritates me is that he seems to be turning his back on the people who made him and his band a success in the first place. It would be idiotic to suggest that he should be penning material that sounds like it came from the late 80s but, equally, it has to be acknowledged that there are plenty of bands out there who are managing to keep both old AND new fans happy by maintaining links to their past without sounding dated.

 

 

What bands exactly? Are you talking about small niche bands in our tiny genre?

 

BJ are still a worldwide phenomenon, with 99% of their fans loving everything they do, including recent albums.

 

For example - in my office there are loads of BJ fans (all of which have never heard of nor are interested in any of the bands that I listen to) -

 

Facts -

 

1. None of them own the debut or 7800F

2. Most of the older ones got into BJ when SWW was released

3. 99% of BJ fans are like the guys in my office

4. 99% of fans are happy with BJs change in direction / sound and think its the best thing since sliced bread and harp on about what a wonderful diverse artist he is

5. 99% of BJ fans only listen to the music and couldnt really give a stuff who's on guitar..........as long as it sound alright.

6. 99% of BJ fans think BJ is the band

 

Capiche??

 

I had to laugh at this a little brother...you have a strange office :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And it's a fact that the original singer usually prevails. Life after Richie doesn't affect much, people still willing to attend the concert to see Jon. Like Axl and GNR without Slash, and I'm sure Motley will do fine without Mick, and people will still see Aerosmith with Steven Tyler even without Joe Perry or see Rolling Stones with Mick even without Keith :D

 

Hm ... I'm not sure about the last two - the Stones IS Mick 'n' Keef, and Aerosmith didn't do so well the last time Joe left the band ... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nightrain, your analysis to pretty much dead-on.

 

HOWEVER...

 

While I'm no longer dating the same gal I was in 1986, I would never get on facebook and call her out for now being a fat, disgusting pig that I'm embarrassed to say was ever my girlfriend.

 

If I were to do that, people would consider me a dick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nightrain, your analysis to pretty much dead-on.

 

HOWEVER...

 

While I'm no longer dating the same gal I was in 1986, I would never get on facebook and call her out for now being a fat, disgusting pig that I'm embarrassed to say was ever my girlfriend.

 

If I were to do that, people would consider me a dick.

 

But if your fat girlfriend still able to date lots of new dudes and maybe got some call from her other old boyfriends other than you, then I think she's doin' just fine, right mate ? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saturday Night Gave Me Sunday Morning

 

Interesting, not too bad, but not really the Bon Jovi style I'm used to, and I probably won't bother with them now if they're pursuing this direction. It sounded more like pop-rock.

 

What did stand out, however, was the lack of any guitar (or equivalent) solo, i.e. intro, verse, chorus, verse, chorus, [no guitar solo], chorus, chorus, fade-out... The nearest it came to anything like that was the few seconds as the song concluded. Basically, JBJ is singing all the way through, instead of there being the usual instrumental break 2/3rds through the song.

 

Is that more common of song structures in today's modern rock (which I haven't really followed much)? I think I need educating...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of modern rock now has (small) solos, or there's "breakdowns" in heavier songs, but yeah, there's also a lot of modern rock songs that do not have a solo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Posts

    • Another Robert Mason post, but this time I really do feel a connection with it. I'm sure I've mentioned it before, but my name is Dustin.  Everybody calls me Dusty, so when I saw the new Warrant album (Rockaholic) featured not only one of my favourite vocalists, but also included a track called Dusty's Revenge, I couldn't believe it. I then find out that it's a concept album about a "Rockaholic" called Dusty. For obvious reasons, I love this album. Here's a couple of tracks.      
    • Harpsichord.    I thought of it and it was random, so there you go.
    • From their FB page: Alcatrazz wish to make the following announcement: Back in late 2020 the brilliant Doogie White came in to help us out with our then already booked live dates after the departure of the previous vocalist (those dates were ultimately postponed to late 2021 due to the Covid lockdowns). We all had a GREAT time...and thus, one thing led to another and before we knew it we had made two fantastic albums and toured considerably in a nearly 4 year period. Now our schedule is getting busier and busier, as is Doogie's with his very fine solo work... and with that, the inevitable clashing of dates in our respective diaries, and needless to say, the impossibility of him being able to be in two places at one time. We remain on very very good terms with Doogie and cannot thank him enough for his contributions to the band, he is very welcome on our stage anytime, as are all past Alcatrazz alumni. Current Warlord vocalist and someone already known to many Alcatrazz fans (as co-producer and also contributing songwriter for Alcatrazz's past 3 albums) Giles Lavery will be stepping up for the 2024 live dates - and with that we will be reintroducing many songs from the Alcatrazz past, including some not played in many years. Giles's first show is 22nd of March in New Orleans, lets all make him feel welcome and please lets also give a massive thank you to our dear friend Doogie White for everything he gave to this band since 2020, he is a true pro and a great person! Doogie has a video message to the fans that we will share later today as well. Jimmy, Gary, Joe, Larry.
    • Maybe it's because I've heard GnR a couple thousand times by now, but I much prefer "Fall to Pieces" by Velvet Revolver over "Sweet Child o Mine" at this point in my life.   
    • I'll have to investigate that Durbin. I'd count Striker and Mick Mars among the best metal releases as well now that I think about it. 
    • Haven't picked up Saxon yet, but as far as metal goes, I love the new Durbin album as well.
    • I wasn’t thrilled with the singles as they came out, other than “The Serpent and the King”, but I’ll be damned if they haven’t grown on me while listening to them as part of the cohesive package that is “Invincible Shield”. I broke down and picked up the Target exclusive to get the three bonus tracks, and I enjoy them too. Overall, a damn fine addition to the JP discography. Is it better than “Firepower“? I’m not there yet, but time will tell. 🤔 This one and Saxon have set the bar pretty high for metal this year. 👍
    • Agree with this. Though I think you should check out Firepower. You can get it real cheap new everywhere. It is molten. I'm also enjoying Invincible very much and 2024 new music as a whole.
    • I remember my early days on the internet joining a group on Yahoo (yeah thats how long ago it was) and the woman who created the group was trying to persaude me how great Creed was, so much so that she sent me the first two albums on CD. I had no idea what they sounded like. When I played them all I could think is that they sounded like Pearl Jam, and I fucking hate Pearl Jam. I ended up trading them for something better. I can't remember the ins and outs of it, but I somehow shared my CD collection online and she noticed straight away that the Creed CDs were not listed. She asked me why and I said I sold them as really did not like them, and got something I did like. She never spoke to me again after that
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.