Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Guy LeMonnier talks TSO, Kings of Christmas, more in new interview
#21
(02-12-2015, 01:10 PM)aaroninmaine Wrote: But, what if not just the talking points are scripted myths to paint a better picture of the band and has nothing to do with making interviews convenient? While what if numerous people in the band all give different interviews using the same lines?
Al has said in how many interviews that watching the Beatles he picked up a guitar, realizing they were something unique, and wanted to make music his career. He was 2 years old. Nobody at 2 knows the history of music, let alone even what the word "career" means to start one. What's strange is that until TSO he always told a very different story. He talked about seeing Steve Miller in concert in high school and deciding then to be a full time musician and I'm looking right now at an issue of Guitarist magazine from 1994 I just got on ebay where he says his mom bought him a guitar at age 8 as "she thought it would be cute to entertain all the relatives". (I'd be happy to PM a scan if you don't believe me)

I don't have a lot of interest in Al's pre-Savatage career to be honest, so I have no idea what he's said prior to his time with Savatage/TSO. I can't speak to that.

(02-12-2015, 01:10 PM)aaroninmaine Wrote: Or, all the stories about Paul's big career as a promoter, though if you ask the members he drove an ambulance for decades.
Or, the fact that some members refuse to speak in interviews for fear of going off script? While those who are verbal gives very different stories than the preferrred spokesmen.

I haven't run across a lot of variety, maybe I'm reading or listening to the wrong things. And I've not run across anyone who has refused to speak for fear of going off script. I've had formal interviews with 10+ members and haven't had an issue nor have come across wildly differing stories.

(02-12-2015, 01:10 PM)aaroninmaine Wrote: I just hear Al give the same story that Paul gives that anyone else gives over and over and until 1996 they all had very different life histories. It's not about talking points. Compared Al's interviews with Alice Cooper who does far more interviews and Alice's stories change to the point that he contradicts himself, as his myth has not been completely memorized. He's just entertaining.
You read interviews with most musicians and yes they follow patterns, but there's also a lot of diversity and you don't have two or three members all giving the same lines every single year, interview after interview. Even Alice varies how he describes the different myths how he got his name or the chicken incident, though he's also said that if someone asks him how he got his name he would stop the interview as it's common knowledge. Yet, Paul tells over and over over that TSO is like Pink Floyd as though journalists have never read anything about TSO before, not even on wikipedia. It's almost as if the questions are approved first.
In TSO it's not about doing patterns, but about presenting a user friendly look. People would rather hear Al picked up the guitar via watching Ed Sullivan than going to a Steve Miller concert.

I'm not sure that most musicians do nearly as many interviews as Paul and Al do on an annual basis. They are still on a very old school approach when it comes to radio and press. As far as Paul goes there are no scripted questions because for those quick press interviews it doesn't matter what question is asked first, Paul runs the interview and talks from his talking points and then the interview is over. There are few in-depth interviews with TSO members out there. Definitely less than most artists. As far as the answers, I don't think the answers are for the interviewer in those cases, but for those who still don't have any idea who TSO is.

(02-12-2015, 01:10 PM)aaroninmaine Wrote: But, what about when the musicians say this - not the fans? I've had numerous former band members tell me that they enjoy getting away from the big show and doing the show the way it was, bringing back the intimacy that was lost.

Again, not what I've heard in my experience, but I've not discussed with many ex-members.

(02-12-2015, 01:10 PM)aaroninmaine Wrote: I've seen videos from every year of Savatage right through Damond and they put on a basic rock show no different than any other band. I don't see them recreating any classical rock concert light show ever. Musically they might, but I've yet to find a Savatage video showing them with a show even close to the Who or Genesis. Are we talking about the same Savatage? Are you referring to Avatar maybe? The videos on youtube Keith Collins puts up are pretty crazy small club shows.

From what I've seen they packed in as much as the venue size and budget would allow. No, they didn't have Floyd-like, but they were playing much smaller places. However, they didn't have just a handful of par-cans - they brought as much as they could for the venue size. If they could have brought more, they would have from what I've been told.

Bp
Reply
#22
what are these big productions you keep mentioning about savatage? they barely made enough money to even stay on the road, lol.

i remember paul saying somewhere, and i wish i could remember where, maybe an early tv appearance, (its been a long time so im waaay paraphrasing here): he wanted to combine music so strong it didnt need words, and words so beautiful they didnt need music. and that really shows in the first 4 albums. then the big show took over. he really needs to go back to that and forget about the lasers so bright you dont need a band.

for me, while i like some stuff on night castle, it in no way has the same magic as the first 4 albums. you can really tell when the focus shifted from the music to the "show".

and ill speak as a musician on this part, sure everyone loves to get up on the biggest stage possible sometime in their life. but most musicians will tell you those shows go by in a blur. the best memories and the shows they remember are usually the small ones where you really connect with the crowd. ive heard this from many musicians.
Reply
#23
OH, SQUINTY4E you make me laugh and my sides ache. Or, maybe the pain is because it's lunch time.

Can't use traditional quoting blocks with this response, sorry, but I've marked who is speaking.

I wrote: "I've seen videos from every year of Savatage right through Damond and they put on a basic rock show no different than any other band. I don't see them recreating any classical rock concert light show ever. Musically they might, but I've yet to find a Savatage video showing them with a show even close to the Who or Genesis."
You responded: "From what I've seen they packed in as much as the venue size and budget would allow. No, they didn't have Floyd-like, but they were playing much smaller places. However, they didn't have just a handful of par-cans - they brought as much as they could for the venue size. If they could have brought more, they would have from what I've been told."

First, if you look at old Genesis videos they are playing venues far smaller than what Sava played at their best. They were doing crazy light shows that have gone down in the history books. I would think if they could do it in a far smaller space and a far smaller budget, would Sava? While one would also think that the lights shows of Sava, if they were as big as you imply, would have made them far more famous. Funny, I've never heard that as part of their reputation and one would think they would be mentioned more in the history books if they were really going the distance.

But, you have confused me now.
Originally you wrote: "I think, and have talked at length with people inside and outside the organization, that where they are now with the production was always the plan, it's just it wouldn't fit logistically and financially wasn't viable in the first 5 years of touring."
To which came my apply above.
Now you write: "If they could have brought more, they would have from what I've been told."
You seem to be misquoting yourself and changing things around to make a point. Have you thought of a political career? Or, maybe a lawyer? I just applied to law school. I'd be happy to help you study for the test. I actually passed with an above average grade with only 3 weeks of study. We'll see if I get in.
But, note, you say in another post you've talked to 10+ in TSO in formal interviews. Your second quote is talking about the plan for Sava. You've been asking them about the early days of Sava, too? But, none of them were in the band?  So, that means you've talked to TSO people who in heresay are telling you what Sava wanted. Only Jon was there in the beginning and would know. Have you interviewed him? How did you do that? I've tired to contact him a few times when I interviewed Damond (who strangely, along with interviews with Zak and Alex didn't talk about the lighting shows Sava had --- modesty perhaps?)
(If you want to be a lawyer, you know heresay isn't welcomed evidence usually.)
While you say in the first 5 years of touring. You mean TSO? But, the second quote implies in the first 5 years of Sava - aka pre-Paul. Which is it?

You originally wrote: "Most of the band and management grew up inspired by the largest shows of the time: Kiss, Floyd, the Who, Genesis, ELP, etc. Those shows were the biggest productions of their time and the plan was always to build up to recreate that. Savatage had that at their height as well, they didn't keep it minimal."

I have seen many videos of Sava at their height --- which would be EXACTLY WHEN??? --- and they have the same lighting rig as any band THEIR size, no different than Megadeth who have a minimal set-up. I'm shocked that a band that minimal hits and were not a major mover and shaker would have a lighting rig beyond their peers and not become famous, as I already mentioned.

But, I'm more interested in what you call their height. Under Criss when him and Jon were sleeping on sofas and Jon was writing for other artists as the band wasn't making it? Under Alex when Jon left? After Criss died? After their ONE U.S. chart-topping hit at #83? Or, after their 3 albums that landed in the Billboard bottom 200? Under Al when the band was given one last chance by the label? Post-TSO under Damond when the band was on the way out? Their height is a not very high. If you can find a youtube video of when they "didn't keep it minimal" I would love to see it.

Further, many music clubs supply the lights and a band adds to it. Are you implying that Sava had a complete lighting gig and everything in every video in every club belongs to them?

I think SAVAGEDREAMS agrees with me: "what are these big productions you keep mentioning about savatage? they barely made enough money to even stay on the road, lol." When Al came along DEAD WINTER DEAD was the the make or break album from TSO. Paul said at the time he was putting everything in it as he expected to be dropped from the label. That's how successful they were. Not financially or commercially, or at least not domestically and most labels don't want to work with U.S. bands that are more successful abroad.
Reply
#24
Oh SQUINTY4E .... I know because I'm working part-time and it's overly snowy up here in Maine that I'm waaaay too homebound, but you are doing WAY too good at finding me entertainment! Are you charging for the hour for your services?

(02-12-2015, 03:29 PM)squintyt4e Wrote: I don't have a lot of interest in Al's pre-Savatage career to be honest, so I have no idea what he's said prior to his time with Savatage/TSO. I can't speak to that.

What are you talking about??!! You're quoting me wrong. I never put anywhere in my post anything about Savatage. You can see - going back - that in the quote you excerpted I'm talking about TSO not Sava. Are you implying that because I mentioned TSO I'm also talking about Sava? They are not the same band, unless you feel that when I mention TSO I'm also talking about JOP and Doctor Butcher and the first CIIC album and O'2L, since all these are full of mostly Sava/TSO members? Ugh, that will really make conversations confusing! Even if TSO plays the same music and has many of the same members, they are - in 2015 - very distinct entities. Sava is dead, but soon to do a reunion show (and sadly without the "current" singer of Damond).

As you can read in the excerpt you pulled up what I actually wrote was "until TSO" NOT "until Sava" which you are implying. My point was Al's story was one thing from the beginning of his career THROUGH Sava AND THEN WITH TSO things changed and suddenly band members started echoing each other when the band split into two companies. So, if you have an interest in his Sava career and have read Sava but non-TSO interviews (or even interviews while he was in Megadeth) then you HAVE seen a difference so you CAN speak to that.

Please make sure to quote me correctly and read what I actually wrote and not what you think I wrote to avoid answering something you realize you don't know about in the terms I'm discussing, or that you are seeing only the small picture and realize there might be more (or as I say, cracks in the wall). I find it annoying when someone changes my quote to make a point, which is an invalid point because they're responding their own point, not mine and essentially pushing me off and ignoring me. But, I'm thinking you ARE aiming for a political career? Obama might need a scriptwriter .... He does have a habit of going off teleprompter.

It's pretty obvious you changed words in my post to avoid answering me. It's not appreciated. It's also a great way to silence my dissenting opinion, since you feel like by misquoting me you can kill the conversation. Please don't. But, it's interesting as in my last point I showed how you misquoted yourself and now you misquote me! I am impressed by your skills!

Basically, I'm looking at a big picture over many bands and many decades and see issues. You're looking at a situation that I believe is being controlled and see no issue. Of course you see no issue! Duh! You're not doing the research. Most people won't either and most people won't see the contradictions. That's called great PR. The PR sounds good to you, you don't look at the bigger picture, and thus management is able to perfectly mold the perception of things ... even if to some of us it sounds faked. It's as faked as saying Alice Cooper's name comes from an English witch put to death (which all the members have said was made-up) or that Paul (McCartney, you know the guy that potentially might be famous after working with Kanye "The Saviour" West) is dead.

(02-12-2015, 03:29 PM)squintyt4e Wrote: I haven't run across a lot of variety, maybe I'm reading or listening to the wrong things. And I've not run across anyone who has refused to speak for fear of going off script. I've had formal interviews with 10+ members and haven't had an issue nor have come across wildly differing stories.

You know in my last post I said you might be aiming for a law degree? Nah, your logic skills aren't good enough.

1. Nobody in any interview is going to say they are afraid of speaking for going off script. I'll will pay you if you can find an interview that says that. How about $50 per interview from TSO members that says they can't speak? Paypal? I don't have your e-mail.
2. I can name (but won't publicly) numerous people who have done interviews and have requested that the interview be approved before publishing and have removed negative things from interviews after the fact. Some of them have told people I know and others have told me directly they chose to tone it down. One told me just last month that he toned an interview down as the issues were behind him. I won't tell you who it is, for his privacy, but in a couple months I'll have my birthday and we'll both me 38.
3. The fact that you have interviewed 10+ CURRENT members who DON'T have "wildly" different stories PROVES my point. My point is the stories are the same and that is strange, particularly as the stories haven't changed since 2000. I mean, every year Paul gets more lights and more fire. Having been a lighting designer at the rate he's going the rig should be more than the venue can hold. Let alone he says every year audiences are getting bigger. If that's the REAL case they'd have to build new stadiums. No, audiences went down and now they're going up again. While, all you have to do is look at any other band and see that members have wildly dissenting opinions and many bands have fallen apart or lost members because of it. It happens all the time. That's normal. TSO interviews are not. I can't think of another band that is so scripted, but as my point was, they are creating mythological stories for themselves and the band that are feel good.
4. If you've read any of Dan's interviews than you HAVE run across a lot of variety. He's done a lot of great insightful interviews. You should read them if you haven't. They make me jealous of any interview I've done they're so great. I wish I could dig in that much.
5. You've done "formal" interview with 10+ current members. Name a current member who is going to say the wrong thing to you in their interview and risk their job? How many past members have you interviewed who have no job to risk?

(02-12-2015, 03:29 PM)squintyt4e Wrote: As far as Paul goes there are no scripted questions because for those quick press interviews it doesn't matter what question is asked first, Paul runs the interview and talks from his talking points and then the interview is over. There are few in-depth interviews with TSO members out there. Definitely less than most artists. As far as the answers, I don't think the answers are for the interviewer in those cases, but for those who still don't have any idea who TSO is.

Remember, a lawyer is supposed to support THEIR client, not the other side. Thank you for confirming that the interviews ARE scripted! You're giving this as a defense saying the questions are not scripted, but that's not important. The answers come from talking points and talking points are scripted and that's my sad sad point.

As for why I don't care about the questions ... I post 2-3 interviews a month on my blog and have for years. I wouldn't be surprised if more than one journalist is doing what I do .... they change their question to fit the answer better. I know I've heard a few audio interviews with Paul where this is obviously not done and the answer doesn't match. I've done that more than once on my bi-monthly interviews blog when I transcribe. Changing my question makes the artist look better, because I'm not looking for a scoop. Actually, once the artist asked me to say we did it over skype and not e-mail, to make it look more conversational and then I added comments between his to make the Q&A e-mail not look like an e-mail.

So, you are basically implying there are no REAL in-depth interviews, because if the interview is for the new fan then the info gets rehashed over and over and that's my point. While I'm saying that even in the longer interviews the same talking points are hit. The answers all are within a pattern and get repeated ad nauseum and irregardless of the question none of the controversy ever gets discussed .... except by ex members who are under no obligation to stay the party line ... but you've said you've not read any of those since you've not "come across wildly differing stories." That's too bad. It makes the TSO picture so much more interesting.
Reply
#25
Brace yourselves...I made a mistake. [hanging head in shame Smile]

I mixed topics amongst all of the quote and reply, etc. The comment about "If they could have brought more, they would have from what I've been told." was about TSO and NOT about Savatage. I haven't discussed with the Sava-members or TSO members the production of Sava shows apart from the additional production that was supposed to arrive for the Cologne shoot, but did not (and thus the shelving of the release).

The production comments I was making were based on European shows primarily and they seemed to have a larger (or brighter) arsenal of lights than other bands of their size at the time. And their height I was referring to was the DWD/WOM European tours. I haven't studied lighting grids and design plans, so if I'm wrong I apologize. However, I still stand up for my statement that if TSO's 2000 tour when they split could have had the production of the 2014 winter tour that it would have.

That's the first response, now moving onto the second. I wasn't quoting you really, Aaron. I was actually not trying to dismiss your argument about a change in Al's responses either. I was just simply stating that:

"I don't have a lot of interest in Al's pre-Savatage career to be honest,..." - I don't. I have done zero hard research and know a basic outline of some of the things he was involved with - there's a lot he's done and I don't know the fine details because it doesn't interest me really.

"...so I have no idea what he's said prior to his time with Savatage..." - I don't know pre-95 what he said his inspirations to play were.
".../TSO." - I don't know pre-96 what he said his inspirations to play were.
"I can't speak to that." - I haven't done the research so I don't know what he used to say as opposed to now.

Without going into a Savatage vs. TSO - one band/two bands, etc. discussion. When I wrote this I wasn't trying to quote you. Your point was there has been a change in his telling of the tale. My point was only that I don't know if there's been a change because I don't know what he used to say pre-Savatage/TSO.

The reason why I lumped Savatage/TSO together at that point was because basically when he joined Savatage, TSO came so soon after, so I lumped them together as a period of time on his timeline. 95/96 was his joining Paul's creative timeline. I guess I should have stated it as:
I don't have a lot of interest in Al's pre-1995 career to be honest, so I have no idea what he's said prior to 1995. I can't speak to that."

No pushing off of the topic intended - it's not something I can speak to.

And I guess to take if further I could have said that I've read/heard very little of Al's words during his time with Megadeth as well. Not a Megadeth fan really, and not a huge non-Savatage/TSO (lumped together purposely) Al Pitrelli follower. If it involves Savatage or TSO then I'm interested, but Al's other work I really don't have a big interest in. Not O2'L or A Place Called Rage, etc. Just too many other things that I'm more interested in. No disrespect, just facts. Therefore, that's why I can't really speak to Al like you can. You're trying to write a life's work on him, I would hope you'd know more than I would.

Aaron said:
>>Basically, I'm looking at a big picture over many bands and many decades and see issues. You're looking at a situation that I believe is being
>>controlled and see no issue.

If you want to see it that way, you can, but to be clear and honest - I don't care about Al Pitrelli in the way many others do. I care about his involvement with Savatage and with TSO. Outside of that, not really interesting to me. Other members are more interesting to me and I could speak to about these topics maybe, but it's like you're picking a fight with me about stuff I just simply don't know about. I listen/read interviews with him now yes, but previously - I just don't care really.

If you want to call that being controlled, that's fine. I'd prefer to call it that I just have the time to follow his earlier career because other artists interest me more.

It sounds like you have a beef with Al that you should take up with him, not me.

Holy smokes, Aaron, I'm tired just reading your posts. I'm so much less drama-ladden as you'd have me out to be.

I'm not going to quote all your text cause I don't have the energy, so I apologize up front if I don't touch on all of your points.

You're slicing up lines of my posts and then going off on wild tangents, reading between the lines of things I didn't write and spending a lot of words doing so.

Point 1:
The "wildly differing stories" that I referred to was referencing your Al remark that his answers have changed over time. That's not been my experience during my interviews with Bob or Jeff or Chris, etc. I have not noticed any wildly differing stories between what they've told me and what they've said elsewhere. There's more detail here or there, but if Jeff said he saw Kiss and that was what did it for him that's consistent with what I've seen elsewhere. That's what I meant by "wildly differing stories" because you stated you have a very different story with Al.

Point 2:
There have been other interviews with non-TSO members that I've done where the subject doesn't reveal dirty laundry or asks to go off the record - that's normal. You don't know if there are aspects of a story or interview that is off the record that revealed more than what's published. It's called being respectful. Aerosmith had a large lack of respect for each other during Tyler's fall of the stage back and forth - how did that lack of respect play out in the press? If someone asks you how your job is going, do you spend 5 minutes on war stories about how much you hate it or bring up all the negative things?

Aaron said:
>>"3. The fact that you have interviewed 10+ CURRENT members who DON'T have "wildly" different stories PROVES my point. My point is the stories
>>are the same and that is strange,"

See my comment above - you read what you wanted to read about my "wildly differing stories."

I don't think that the people I've talked to have altered their experiences to suit questions that I've asked. There is plenty of variety because the experiences that each person brings is different. I'm interested in that and their insight.

Aaron said:
>>"I can't think of another band that is so scripted, but as my point was, they are creating mythological stories for themselves and the band that
>>are feel good."

If you listen to bands on a touring run and listen to three or four interviews with them you hear the similar stories and tales. The more the individual does interviews, the more similar it sounds. Listen to yourself as you tell 5 different people about your trip to xxxxx, you'll touch on the same points about the hassle of air travel and the guy who sat next to you, the flat tire on the car rental, etc. By the 4th and 5th time you tell it, it will be much more patternistic. That's what Paul's typical press interviews are and the reason for the lack of variety in subject matter is because in those press interviews Paul controls the interview by running over the host. If you've never interviewed Paul it's a wildly different subject than most other people you'll interview.

Aaron said:
"4. If you've read any of Dan's interviews than you HAVE run across a lot of variety."

Yes, I've read Dan's interviews and they are good. I'm sure you can dig in when you interview and I'm sure you do. There are elements of each interview all of us have done where we feel we've asked a solid question and received an insightful response and fed off that.

Aaron said:
"5. You've done "formal" interview with 10+ current members. Name a current member who is going to say the wrong thing to you in their interview and risk their job? How many past members have you interviewed who have no job to risk?"

How many people do you interview that your objective is to get them to say something so that they lose their job? That's not something I'm going after. I'd rather find out background on the artist, what they're into and makes them tick, their experiences in the band, how this felt or that, some information specifics, etc. I'm not looking for a TMZ headline - that holds no interest for me.

To date I haven't interviewed past members who have no job to risk, but I would think that most would be honest yet respectful of people they've worked with in the past as opposed to looking to throw mud. Again, that's not my objective when interviewing. I'm not trying to get anyone fired. I'm not looking for disgruntled employees to hear bitch at the water cooler.

Aaron said:
>>"Remember, a lawyer is supposed to support THEIR client, not the other side. Thank you for confirming that the interviews ARE scripted! You're
>>giving this as a defense saying the questions are not scripted, but that's not important."

Just like the above, I think you're in this discussion because you're trying to prove that I don't know, like I'm on the witness stand and you're trying to catch me in a lie or something. Why the accusations and hostility? I stated that in the press interviews Paul runs over the interviewer for 10 minutes and the interview is over and Paul hits the talking points of "new show, bigger production, working on new material, etc." Ok. Your original point was that you thought the questions were scripted and I said they weren't because there is usually one or two questions and the rest is Paul's "wind him up and let him go."

Aaron said:
>>"I'm saying that even in the longer interviews the same talking points are hit. The answers all are within a pattern and get repeated ad nauseum
>>and irregardless of the question none of the controversy ever gets discussed .... except by ex members who are under no obligation to stay the
>>party line

Yep, Paul has done a million interviews and he tells similar tales in short, medium or long ones, no debate there.

You state that "None of the controversy ever gets discussed" - what controversy do you really want me to discuss next time I talk to him exactly? That out of 100 members or so of the group since the beginning that there are a handful of disgruntled ex-members?
Really?
I've been fortunate and talked to Paul a number of times at great length and I have dozens of questions that I have about topics that are so much more interesting than that.

Let me ask you this - given the choice...
I could ask him about Berlin in front of a massive crowd or disgruntled ex-member a.
I could ask about any of the hundreds of songs he's written and recorded, lyrical inspirations, recording memories, etc or disgruntled ex-member b.
I could ask about future plans and goals (many of which usually end up not being published but go to a broader understanding) or disgruntled ex-member c.
I could ask about tours and production bits, introductions of band members or disgruntled ex-member d.
Memories of Criss, studio time, and working with Jon or disgruntled ex-member e.

Now you tell me if the 'controversy' of a handful of disgruntled ex-members is important enough to waste my time on asking him about?

Bp
Reply
#26
I actually work with many of  those "disgruntled" members all year long.( And not all of them are even remotely disgruntled). They seem like very honest people to me. Consistently, they all state the same thing. It was absolutely forbidden to go off script, they loved the early days when the band actually connected with the fans, the massive light show ( which in most cases only presented them lit from behind) became the main focus of the production, no original music ideas have developed in many, many years....only the production changed. If it wasn't about the lights, it was about the hair or looks. Their view is that the band lost its edge.
I can only imagine how hard it is to leave a band performing at TSO's level. But quite frankly, despite the financial impact, I think Paul did them a favor in letting them go. Now they have become legends.  Mythical creatures only spoken of with hushed voices :-)  Things can happen in any job that can cause a person to no longer be of perceived value. It happens all the time. And sure, all the new people that have come to find TSO since those days, don't know or care who they are. But in the end...so what? As individuals, they know what they did. They built Paul's railroad. They reached for the stars....and grabbed some for what it is worth.For the soul of any man, that should be enough. The joy is in the journey.
I was never a member of TSO, I am not even a hardcore fan any longer, so I have no axe to grind.  The fact is that I was offered 8 free tickets to see them this year, and passed on the opportunity. While I know this is a very controversial statement to make here, quite frankly I don't find the shows that interesting anymore.. It is too plodding and too plastic for me.
Don't bother responding to this note or attacking me. It is just my opinion. I am not going to argue about it. I just know the people... the ex-members, that get bashed over and over again. And I am glad to call them brothers. I would share a foxhole with any of them.
Reply
#27
(02-14-2015, 09:00 AM)MrWizard Wrote: The fact is that I was offered 8 free tickets to see them this year, and passed on the opportunity. While I know this is a very controversial statement to make here, quite frankly I don't find the shows that interesting anymore.. It is too plodding and too plastic for me.

I find that very interesting. After I saw them (east) this past tour, I felt very unfulfilled... I had seen it all before, heard it all before and felt guilty that I felt that way. They put on a great show but none of it feels authentic anymore. Strange, but honest, feeling.
Reply
#28
What an interesting thread!

First of all - what a great interview with Guy!  Thanks to whoever did that. I love the perspective of folks who aren't just yes-men and gives you real insight into what goes on. I hear Al's interviews and they always start with"My boss Paul O'Neill....". It got me wondering though - he mentions the drama that surrounded his firing - but doesn't go much further.  Its not my business, but any idea why he was fired? The dude has an amazing voice.

squinty (squinty??) - what a long, rambling essay! Some interesting points you try to make, but it seems like you look through a particular lens with your points and apologize for Paul/TSO quite a bit.  You also state a lot of opinions as if it is fact.

(02-12-2015, 03:05 AM)squintyt4e Wrote: Most of the band and management grew up inspired by the largest shows of the time: Kiss, Floyd, the Who, Genesis, ELP, etc. Those shows were the biggest productions of their time and the plan was always to build up to recreate that. Savatage had that at their height as well, they didn't keep it minimal.

I too don't get where are you going with this. Savatage at their height did not have any kind of extravagant production.

(02-12-2015, 03:05 AM)squintyt4e Wrote: As the stage got bigger it became more important to keep people spread out across the stage so that people have someone in front of them for much of the show - many bands do this.

And many bands don't.  This is where things go awry, imho.

(02-12-2015, 03:05 AM)squintyt4e Wrote: I've heard/read numerous interviews with Paul and Al and others who have commented on the talent onstage, including new faces, etc. it's just not that easy to do typically when you've got a 5 minute press interview that's a 30,000 feet overview when you're talking to people around the country who are seeing one coast or the other, etc. It's easier to fall into a simple pattern of running through the same talking points that don't change from interview to interview for those high-level press blitzes where they're talking to 10 stations in a row.

Again, you make it seem like this is too hard for Paul to do. The bottom line is that the production - the bells and whistles - are the most important part of the show and is what they push - not because it is too hard for Paul to mention the music or the performers he hired. It is not that hard to do to mention new vocalists or musicians added or new songs. Many bands do this in their interviews.

I still enjoy TSO - I think everyone that posts here would enjoy them to some extent, or why else be here? But as others have mentioned, it is pretty easy to see the progression from where the music came first to when the show took over (someone earlier in this thread said "How much is too much") and the lights and effects became the focus. Heck, even the performers talk about this. Does that make them "disgruntled" because they say it out loud? Ha!

aaron- funny that you point that out about Al's interviews - I have heard him talk about the Beatles being the point that changed his life - didn't realize he was 2 years old! lol  But it sure sounds good, eh?
Reply
#29
(02-16-2015, 08:47 AM)MikeNY Wrote: First of all - what a great interview with Guy!  Thanks to whoever did that. I love the perspective of folks who aren't just yes-men and gives you real insight into what goes on. I hear Al's interviews and they always start with"My boss Paul O'Neill....".  It got me wondering though - he mentions the drama that surrounded his firing - but doesn't go much further.  Its not my business, but any idea why he was fired? The dude has an amazing voice.

The man responsible for that Guy interview is right here on this forum. Danfromnj. I would highly recommend his interviews with Tommy Farese and Michael Lanning for more behind the scenes stuff.
Reply
#30
Seems like all past, present, private, and public conversations kind of lead to the conclusion that the argument of this topic will never change anyone's opinion regardless of which side one falls on or what points are made. Kind of beating a dead horse, but to each their own.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)