>>Everybody who was into Rock at the time KNOWS that Sony did >>FAR more for Living Colour, and I have to admit, I was a bit >>annoyed to see Vernon Reid in the documentary, >> >Vernon and LC were Fishbone peers so Vernon is a valuable >voice for recognizing/speaking about Fishbone.
I'm not saying he wasn't. I'm saying that in MY opinion ( and I'm sure a few people would agree with me), that LC was a sanitized , MTV friendly version of Fishbone. If ANYBODY would be a better comparison it would be 24-7 Spyz
I don't know >why anyone would have any attitude towards LC for what Sony >chose to do. >
How about the guys in Fishbone? Don't you think THEY had the right to have some resentment? I'm sure they were all in the fraternity of musicians, but still Fishbone was in the trenches for YEARS, and Living Colour got Sony's blessing...
AND if you watched it, some of the OTHER people who made it ( Les Claypool, Gwen Stefani, and Flea) kinda alluded to the fact that if ANYBODY deserved to blow up it was Fishbone.
>> Fishbone was just too uncategorizable, and that is >>>never a good thing for a black act. >> >>So how do you explain the success of Living Colour? >> > >LC was very categorizable. Very hard rock. Mixed it up a >little towards the end of their 90's era.
they weren't "very hard rock" at ALL. It was corporate Rock at best. Don't get me wrong. I liked LC, but they don't even compare to Fishbone, Bad Brains, 24-7 Spyz or ANY of the other BR bands of the time. and to call them "Very Hard Rock" is ridiculous. "Glamour Boys" is 'Very Hard Rock' to you? Go listen to "Servitude" or "May Your Dogs Colon..." again.
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
The Lesson
