This has probably been touched on indirectly a time or two before, but after playing 25 or 6 to 4 with a buddy of mine I decided to try connecting the dots, as there were a rack of songs I either forgot about or knew from my youth but never realized it was Chicago. It really does feel like a tale of 2, maybe 3 bands. I mean, the same band that made this:

http://youtu.be/uFM6R53gui8 (Will You Still Love Me)

made this:

http://youtu.be/tqsgTQVV4HI (Lowdown)

Hell, I've heard this song since I was a kid and it never crossed my mind this was Chicago too:

http://youtu.be/5qrbm2PGbPk

I've been listening to The Very Best of Chicago, figuring I may as well get someidea of what kind of range the band went through over their 40+ years of existance before trying to listen to their full discography (I think I had CHicago 18 when I was in 6th grade though, which I'm not sure I'm looking forward to reliving just yet). Man, their early shit kicked some ass. My wife came downstairs when I was listening to this:

http://youtu.be/cCpXjh4wt2M (Free)

and asked if it was War. I was like 'No, can you believe it's the same people that did this:

http://youtu.be/idCil0mNhoo (You're The Inspiration)

I was floored.

More in a bit...

Don't get me wrong, some of the big saccharine Power Ballads are fun songs ( "You're The Inspiration", "Hard Habit To Break", etc), but he snipped off ALLL the Balls of what used to be a pretty fuckin' good band. It's that typical "let's make some songs they'll play at High School proms" shit that all Rock Bands went through in the 80's. ( See Also: "Open Arms" and/or "Faithfully" by Journey )


Not sure if you mentioned it, but check out "Does Anybody Really Know what Time it is?" That's one of my favorite songs in any genre.


"Saturday in the Park" is that business too.

It's like you know the tune, you know the words, but it took forever for me to link it with Chicago.

And yeah just about every band went through something similar in the 80s. Though it still trips me out the same group could make something as beautiful as Color My World, which is one of those songs that will live forever:

http://youtu.be/74_SSQNNY0Y

argument can be made for top 10 worldwide OAT

EASILY in the top 20


do or die

american bands that are better or more influential:

EWF
beach boys
aerosmith
metallica

i cant think of any others


do or die

i'd sooner cut aerosmith then chicago for fleetwood mac tho


do or die

**whispers**

. . .they'renotfromamerica. . .

~Austin

Please donate. For Anthony: http://bit.ly/xIIjaE

http://austintayeshus.blogspot.com

http://www.last.fm/user/Austintayeshus

http://twitter.com/Austintayeshus

i said maybe


do or die

If you are talking Rumours-era, both the rhythm-section and Christine Mcvie was british. Of course, you could argue that Lindsay Buckingham and Stevie Nicks were the important members but they joined the band quite late. 4

I listened to "Draw The Line", the whole album from '77. I know that's the beginning of their decline but I really enjoy that album.

As far as Chicago goes, I don't know much about them apart from the singles (which are amazing, generally).

It has a murky, groovy vibe that stand out against the ''party-rock'' of their previous albums. Don't get me wrong, it isn't exactly goth-rock but still; it was a nice approach. Very underrated...

If we're talking about Influential American Bands, it might be said that P-Funk influenced more bands that EWF.

NOTE:i'm not talking about "better", because I'm not even a P-Funk guy like that, but I'll admit there were a TON of Funk Bands that followed ( or tried to ) the P-Funk Formula.


Without P-Funk, there'd be no Fishbone, Red Hot Chili Peppers, or *insert any other Funk/Rock combo*

don't agree with your list but its always gonna be too subjective to argue really

>american bands that are better or more influential:
>
>EWF
>beach boys
>aerosmith
>metallica
>
>i cant think of any others

Velvet Underground? There's no Stooges, thus no Ramones, Clash, etc. without them. Basically no loud guitar music that's not metal-derived. I don't know, other than the Beatles I don't see any single band being as influential on the future of rock. I mean Aerosmith?

in no order

beatles
stones
wailers
zeppelin
u2
clash
ramones
queen
ewf

that last spot...i dunno man. temptations? maybe. nirvana? maybe.

chicago can compete most definitely


do or die

>in no order
>
>beatles
>stones
>wailers
>zeppelin
>u2
>clash
>ramones
>queen
>ewf
>
>that last spot...i dunno man. temptations? maybe. nirvana?
>maybe.

and HAIL naw at Nirvana...


>
>chicago can compete most definitely
>
>
>do or die

>in no order
>
>beatles
>stones
>wailers
>zeppelin
>u2
>clash
>ramones
>queen
>ewf
>
>that last spot...i dunno man. temptations? maybe. nirvana?
>maybe.
>
>chicago can compete most definitely
>
>
>do or die

.

Sub-question: is it in fact unfair to criticize a formerly great artist for his latter day sins, is it better to burn out or fade away?

I mean, they were a big freakin' deal in the 80s, and yeh you definitely heard them in your middle school dances across the country (or high school, if you're my wife's age). And as Disco mentioned, quite a few of those were fun. But mostly you have super sugary pop rock that MTV loved then disposed of.

But their early catalog goes hard across the board. Take this for example:

http://youtu.be/eQkGQHnwVjE

This whole suite runs the gambit of styles, and somehow all works.

Or, one of my hands down favorites, Dialogue Pt I and II:

http://youtu.be/uWODczdgGDQ

I just found the long version here and damn... I'm thinking "Is this the same dude that sang Glory of Love for Karate Kid II? Damn Pete!"

Anybody have a clue why they haven't made the hall of fame yet? Does their work in the 80's overshadow their earlier work? Or are the HOF committee a bunch of dicks?

chicago's gettin it in in the lesson like that?
fuuck

and records that do not get a lot of love like CHICAGO XIV (1980) are good with me as well, if only for songs like "Manipulation".

as for their David Foster era (16, 17, 18) ... I kind of hold it in a different esteem; it was a move necessary for their survival and IMO, for singers like Cetera, it was a move right in line with artists that were aging as they were. Because I had heard some of Bill Champlin's music before he joined the band, I was actually shocked he was there. He never really got over as a solo artist on major labels... but him being with the band kind of felt like hearing Michael McDonald on the Doobies. The whole complexion of the band changed; he was also the one who brought Foster aboard. The funny thing was that he was with Chicago over 20 years and it still felt that way. Their power ballads were just hard to imagine having come from more or less the same core band that recorded the likes of "25 to 6 or 4".

However, Foster realized that Cetera was born for that "Lionel Richie Music" (see: "Bad Advice" and "What Can I Say" from Chicago 16) and Bill Champlin was already there ("Sonny Think Twice", same album) so it seemed natural in that regard. Chicago 16 was more or less dominated by Champlin and Cetera vocally, and what I liked about 17, you got Robert Lamm singing songs again, in particular: "We Can Stop The Hurtin" (which is '80s as hell: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LT6OvBc5zQ). Craziest shit is that they still had their signature horn section -- only thing now is that they sounded a lot like what you'd hear with the slick LA scene.



Funny, considering, as I've noted here, Cetera's 1981 solo album (first time he broke from the band) was almost all rock. It wasn't until that year following that you started to hear his voice attached to "soft rock" songs.

I've also heard some of the oddest songs ripping off Chicago songs, 2 of them from the AREA 88 soundtrack.

remind anyone else of Chicago's You N' Me?

http://youtu.be/R3zIj-MJZ14 Chicago

http://youtu.be/rHz0r19UYn4 Freddie

Maybe I'm trippin, but that's one of the first things that popped in my head

them, however they weren;'t no groove Band.

i like there songs and things and there brass section and i liked the DAVID Foster era and Peter Cetera era.

without those whole sums then wouldn't be that deep imo.

i'd take Tower of Power over them.TOP is the soulful version of Chicago,though Chicago got the better overall songs however if Lenny Williams had stuck around longer with TOP that would be a easy win for TOP IMO.

Chicago as far as American Bands go are behind

Earth,Wind and Fire

Parliament Funkadelic

the Isley Brothers

Sly and the Family Stone

Steely Dan

Fleeetwood Mac

The Commodores

The Beach Boys

Kool and the Gang

War

Ohio Players

More a rock/jazz fusion thing, but I never got the idea they were going for soul, which is fine..

Now, War>>Chicago? I can't say that at first glance. Need to listen to some more of both camps but right now I'd lean the other way. Funny, like I mentioned earlier I threw 'Free' on and my wife swore it was War...

For the 25 or 6 to 4 solo alone.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmOEwiz5Kxs

it wasn't even Foster
but I felt a little change on the last album they recorded with Kath (Chicago XI), with songs like "Little One". Yet, that album still had "Mississippi Delta Blues" on it -- which is really what Kath brought to the table.

I can dig his skills on the guitar and really loved his voice, which was a good contrast with Cetera.

I do wonder if it was a combination of Kath dying and the change in the music scene as a whole accounted for Chicago's definite change in sound.

>I do wonder if it was a combination of Kath dying and the
>change in the music scene as a whole accounted for Chicago's
>definite change in sound.

1978 was when a lot of rock (pop) acts like Chicago were making a bit of an attitudinal shift. There were signs on Chicago XI, but when they moved onto HOT STREETS, their sound got a lot more, shall I say, "sophisticated". Not that it wasn't ever, but there was a little more sheen on those records that you'd find elsewhere in their discography. Many blame Donnie Dacus for that (I, for one, believe he did a fine job filling in for the two albums he was on considering the material)... but that was the way that side of the industry was going.

I give them credit for not really diluting their sound until the lot of them had crossed 35 and Columbia had given them the boot.

CHICAGO XIV (the thumbprint album) is one of those lukewarmly-received albums I tend to ride for (other cases in point: Stanley Clarke's ROCKS, PEBBLES AND SAND and LET ME KNOW YOU), because it was the last hurrah for "Old Chicago".

It wasn't just Chicago who felt pressure to adapt, it was everyone. Look at Pink Floyd, but then again, they were always outsiders doing their own thing, unlike Chicago who were having genuine hits. When "If You Leave Me Now" became their biggest hit up to that point (and ever), someone said "oh, so people like this?" Lather, rinse, repeat. Chicago became shampoo, and knew that there was another side to their fans. They catered to that "other side". When they reached the disco era, they were pressured to conform "a bit", like everyone else. Donnie Dacus had that Peter Frampton hair, he was young, he wore tight clothes, he's perfect for the new and improved Chicago, and yet he was not enough to endure after two albums.

Another way to look at it. They were close friends with the Beach Boys. When they did background on "Wishing You Were Here", the Beach Boys were considered washed-up. Everyone wanted "Surfin' USA" and "Good Vibrations' but "Sail On Sailor" was considered "different". By 1976, the Beach Boys cashed in by becoming a nostalgia act, where they could play their old songs forever and never have to wonder if Brian Wilson will come out of his cocoon. Chicago did not want to do that, at least not in the late 70's. They were a band who were friends with all of the "studio rats", and once the 80's came around, they had to deal with a musical reality that did not cater to them. What do you do? Get a few of those studio rats, get a hot "producer of the moment" and become pop. How do you carry the success of "If You Leave Me Now" into the 80's? Make more ballads.

Yet with that said, I love their 80's stuff. I like a bit of schmaltz, and they did that to the limit, but within that was some incredible music. Bill Champlin may not have been the equivalent of Terry Kath, but I don't think they wanted that. Yet at Chicago's lowest points in the 80's, Champlin was truly the band's balls, plain and simple. Go to "Will You Still Love Me". When that bridge comes in, that's all Champlin. His background vocals in "Hard Habit To Break": awesome. "Look Away": beautiful. The funny thing about this is: I was fully aware of bands like Sons Of Champlin and The Sons, but was not aware that Bill Champlin was the man behind them until he was in Chicago. I thought "oh shit, I dig for records and always see their stuff, that's the same guy?" You then realize how trippy and freaky Champlin was with his bands, how he was a perfect fit for Chicago. He may not have executed the wild side, and yet he helped to give the songs a nice punch when it might have been missing.

After 1990, their albums are hard to listen to. Then again,you have NIGHT & DAY, which has the members of Jade ("Don't Walk Away", "5-4-3-2 Yo Time Is Up") in a number of songs. Yet to this day, if I'm mailing a package to Chicago, I write it out with their logo each and every time.




THE HOME OF BOOK-NESS:
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/
http://twitter.com/thisisjohnbook
http://www.facebook.com/book1


http://i32.tinypic.com/kbewp4.gif

Becoming a nostalgia band at that time wouldn't really have worked fo rthem, because they were still utting out good music and a few hits. They did what they had to do, and did it well. On the one hand it's impressive that they managed to be successful in the 70's and 80's, but at the same time, the level of schmaltz and the stigma attached to it overshadows their legitimately awesome work before that.

This is going to be a wild ride...

I'm just going to try and cop the albums and listen chronologically. Managed to get CTA and Chicago II, and will just go from there.

And after listening to the bass on 'Poem For The People', I may have to dispute Maxx on Chicago being a 'soulless' band. I mean, just go to 2:25 and listen....

http://youtu.be/adNAuY2CxUE

There is nothing about this band, the Moody Blues, or Yes that I find appealing.

No parts of them at all. Care to expound?

>There is nothing about this band, the Moody Blues, or Yes
>that I find appealing.


I can't tell you what to like, but Yes had some cuts. Not "Owner of a Lonely Heart" era yes, but the old Prog shit...

You know the part that goes du-du-duh?

Seriously, the mid-section in that song truly rocks with the percussion and everything but as a whole, that song-and Yes in general-is padded out with a lot of fluff even if I like it. The strange thing about Yes is that tehy REALLY needed an editor but when they actually started to edit their songs, they became bland standard rock.

That being said, the album that song is taken from-"¤Fragile"-is their best by far IMO. Still, the idea of letting each member have a self-indulgent individual solo-song is one of those terribly bad ideas that could only have come out of the prog-rock era even if Chris Squire's multi-tracked bass-solo "¤Fish" is really cool.

Anyway, remove those songs and there are like 3-4 tracks on the entire album but they are all pretty good so that album is their crowning achievement IMO...

*Edited for spelling*

I know Aja is a big Prog fan, but I'm curious how a Metal guy such as yourself sees/hears Prog rock.

Talk about being diametrically opposed... Give either of those albums to someone who knows them only from the 80's or post 'If You Leave Me Now' and there is no way they would believe it's the same band, except maybe for recognizing Cetera's voice.

Musically, I think 'Introduction' pretty much summed up what the group was going to give you: a little bit of everything. You want rock? Got it. Lounge lizard jazzy composition? Sure. Hippie love? No doubt. Distortion to static, before it became really popular? Kath got it covered. Dash of funk, latin grove and a smidge of country? Check, check and check. Oh, and did I mention they had a horn section?

Listening to those two albums I got the feeling that they could play almost any style you wanted them to and hang with any band you put them with. The 3 vocal leads, Lamm, Kath and Cetera, all brought something different. Lamm was the smoother, mellow, hippier voice, but with a serious political bend. Kath sounds like he gargled with Jack Daniels and gravel before getting on the mic, and yet can pull off 'Memories of Love' or "Colour My World' with ease. Cetera's tenor plays a pretty good compliment between the two of them, and works really well on any duet the group did. Pete was an absolute beast on the bass (loved the bassline in the middle of 'Poem For The People' but Kath? Sheeeiiiittt...He was a monster on the guitar, whether in a jam session like 'Liberation' or some southern rock like 'In The Country' (one of my favorites). With all the varied styles, I think the one thing that tied it all together was their horn section, which played a major part of that early sound. Often I had to tune out the horns to focus on the guitar work.

It's early through their catalog, but I think that their greatest strength may have been a big problem: they could and did play anything. Besides the horns, there wasn't a signature sound, style, etc that they could be known for. Which makes 'If You Leave Me Know' and their subsequent 'ballad band' tag more readily stick. WHich is a shame, because if the first 2 albums are any indication, they did some FANTASTIC work.

I may do a breakdown of each album later. III and V to come

>Musically, I think 'Introduction' pretty much summed up what
>the group was going to give you: a little bit of everything.

In that the city of Chicago is very much the same: "a little bit of everything". Not to mention a lot of the band's key voices (Kath, Lamm, and the occasional Loughnane) sound like some "typical dudes from Chicago".

Cetera was a Beach Boys fan and it shows in his singing style. Later on I think they actually do appear on a Chicago album (VII if I guess correctly)

THE HOME OF BOOK-NESS:
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/
http://twitter.com/thisisjohnbook
http://www.facebook.com/book1


http://i32.tinypic.com/kbewp4.gif

In other words, even the first two albums are different from one another, but you'll still hear:

1) garage rock
2) jazz and classical elements
3) hard rock with what was considered "acid" rock (i.e. Terry Kath's incorporation of distortion and feedback)
4) a pop sensibility

What's also worth checking out later is the ways Columbia tried to turn these album tracks into "pop songs". "Beginnings" is what, close to 8 minutes but the single edit is under 3. "I'm A Man" and "25 Or 6 To 4" are edited.

For me, "Ballet For A Girl In Buchanan", the 4-movement "It Better End Soon", and the entire "Prelude/AM Mourning/PM Mourning/Memories Of Love" suite are incredible and anytime I put them on my iPod or put it on the turntable, I play them all the way through.

Anyway, when you get to CHICAGO III, you'll hear the group flirting with what they did on the first two, and even trying to be a bit experimental at times, with the spoken word piece, another "Ballet For A Girl In Buchanon"-style mini opera, and a push towards being social and political at the same time. Once they stopped doing double albums and wanted to simplify, you'll see how much they "trimmed the fat"/sacrificed, Kath became less important and yet his songs were often the high moments of the album between V and XI. When you get to CHICAGO VIII, check out "Oh, Thank You Great Spirit". To me, in that period leading up to and including CHICAGO X and "If You Leave Me Now", that is one of Kath's finest moments, and I wish that song had another minute or two. Anyone who says Chicago was never a band of geniuses has never heard "Oh, Thank You Great Spirit".

When you get to HOT STREETS and 13, the two "disco" albums, there's still some great stuff. I will forever show respect for the 13 album because it was highly overlooked, it was one of their biggest flops (next to 14), but the album had "Street Player", "Runaway", "Must Have Been Crazy", and "Aloha Mama".

Anyway... continue with your journey.





THE HOME OF BOOK-NESS:
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/
http://twitter.com/thisisjohnbook
http://www.facebook.com/book1


http://i32.tinypic.com/kbewp4.gif

I started with the 'Best of' collection, so I did hear the single version of 'I'm a Man' and 'Beginnings', which pretty much cut out the percussion sections but left most else intact. I have the remastered II, which has the single edits of 'Make Me Smile' and '25 or 6 to 4', both of which are like WTF?!?! Absolutely ruins both.

Kath really does go hard on that guitar, and that voice works well whether crooning (Memories of Love) or screaming (damn near anything else). That Buchannan suite is really, really good. To hell with critics calling it pretentious. The 'Better End Soon' suite was great too, though maybe not as awesome as 'Liberation'. And as much flack as Cetera gets for the band's later sound (mostly, but probably not all deserved), he was a bad, bad man on that bass.

Looking forward to III and V (if just to hear Dialogue in context with everything else on the album)

When you get to CHICAGO V, listen to my favorite song on the album, "A Hit By Varese". The song is in 3/4, and... the entire band is tight but Cetera's work in that is incredible, from the moment the entire band plays through the "jam" portion of the song.





THE HOME OF BOOK-NESS:
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/
http://twitter.com/thisisjohnbook
http://www.facebook.com/book1


http://i32.tinypic.com/kbewp4.gif

>I will forever show respect
>for the 13 album because it was highly overlooked, it was one
>of their biggest flops (next to 14), but the album had "Street
>Player", "Runaway", "Must Have Been Crazy", and "Aloha Mama".

"Runaway" is my shit for life. and LMMFAO @ "Aloha Mama". P.C. Moblee. GTFOOH, Cetera...

THE HOME OF BOOK-NESS:
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/
http://twitter.com/thisisjohnbook
http://www.facebook.com/book1


http://i32.tinypic.com/kbewp4.gif