KISS Recording New Album In Analog
February 2, 2009 by Scott
Bravewords.com is reporting that KISS is recording their next album in analog, and get this…they’re writing the songs THEMSELVES! Isn’t that what rock musicians are supposed to do, write the songs themselves? If you don’t write the songs for yourself then how can you poor that emotion in to performing them? You’re just another pop-puppet if you don’t write your own songs, in my opinion. Sure you might have a song that someone else wrote for you or a cover tune on an album, but I just don’t see how ANY legitimate rock band can sing and play songs that someone else wrote for them. Paul Stanley told The New York Post this.
“It’s a KISS album in the most true and classic sense – we’re recording it in analog, not digital, and writing it ourselves.”
I don’t really think it’s going to matter what they record it with, it’s going to suck just as every post 1977 album does and even Love Gun wasn’t that great of an album. To me KISS is one of the prime examples of why people download singles. Most of their albums are almost all filler. You want a good KISS album then just got for the Double Platinum compilation and leave everything else to the fanboy collectors.
Image: Newscom.com
Agreed, Kiss is a band that I can only listen to 2 or 3 songs in a row before I am bored. All of their songs sound the same (that can be said for ZZ Top and AC/DC but I love AC/DC), and are quite redundant. In their heyday they were heralded as a way back to the simple themes of rock and roll (you know with facepaint and fire), with simple riffs and easily sung-along lyrics. But in today’s day and age, its just boring. I have alot of their albums, but the only one I listen to repeatedly is their greatest hits.
what are you talking about you fool, a new KISS album done like the 70’s in all aspects is a better proposition then 90% of the music being released today by boring emo metal trite , nu metal bollocks and alt / indie boredom. The industry needs “entertainment” on the scale only KISS can provide woth an album that is exactly like Love Gun and Destroyer!!! YOU have no relevance today it seems
A new KISS album whether it is done in the 70’s style, with recording software or even done live is still going to be irrelevant in this day and age. All the fanboys like you will buy it up though to add to your collection. What has KISS done that is even remotely memorable in the last 30 years? Lick it up? Psycho Circus? Unmasked? Please! The only thing that keeps them selling is their gimmicks and handful of hits that they play live.
Irrelevant in this day and age? How contrite, are we now to discuss music authenticity and the legitimacy of “real music” soaked in the vats of time vs pure spectacle and entertainment value?, name one act who has not wavered on their course and produced rubbish albums along the way? You cant because it’s all a matter of opinion? I’m sure you are your own “fan-boy” with acts you consider to be of value but assuming a “musical purists” stance is incredulous. Hands down KISS put on a fuckin amazing show at the moment comparable to any act half their age filling arena’s anywhere.. a nostalgia act who finally listen to their fans and return to what the “spirit” of the original was about is a tick by me…an arm chair critic like yourself is nonsense, of course the gimmicks keep them popular, there are already enough “serious” shoegazing acts littering the world stage already. Music is fun, it is entertainment and a new soundtrack to that is absolutely relevant in today’s age when “punk” is MTV driven angst, ROCK is “Bullet for my Valentine” and INDIE is crammed with mediocre garage bands rehashing The Last Waltz, or The Pixies or mid 80’s angular guitar pop. There are some stunning albums out at the moment but that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for a new album from KISS…vote with your wallet as always it’s a sure sign.
Yes, KISS is all about the spectacle. That’s precisely why they don’t need to make another album. They will never make another album like they did in the 70’s no matter what they use to record it. The only reason they are making a new album is because they know they can count on the people to buy it for their collection. Like I said, KISS haven’t made an even remotely good album in over 30 years. They’re all about selling the single and banking on an album sale. Sadly it will sell regardless whether it’s good or not.
Vote with my wallet? What the hell does that even mean? KISS will never get another dime out of me. It’s also obvious that you haven’t turned on MTV in a long time. The “new school punk” bands are over and Bullet For My Valentine is considered metal…and they suck. I’m not a music purist and I listen to bands that have gimmicks and when they make a shitty album, I say so. If a band makes one or two and then redeem themselves with the next one, great. But it’s been over 30 years and the best they can do is make 40 compilation albums of the same songs, a handful of crappy albums with a cool cover and sell a million pieces of merch with their faces on it.
The Beatles are famous because of the albums they put out, not because of their stupid haircuts and their stageshow. Led Zeppelin are famous because they were an amazing band that put out 6 amazing albums, 3 mediocre ones and put on a great show. KISS is famous for painting their faces, playing the same songs at every show, letting off numerous fireworks to make them look cooler than they were, spitting blood and fire, taking off their masks just so everyone would say “Put them back on”, and selling a landfill size amount of crap with their faces on it. Oh wait, and going against everything that is rock and roll by making a disco song just so they could try to be trendy and cool in a time when they almost fizzled out.
I’m not an arm-chair critic, I’m a music fan that is tired of the “KISS Nostalgia” and people that defend them as “The Greatest Rock Band In The World”.
The Beatles, Led Zeppelin and KISS all fit perfectly into anyones collection. The real difference is longevity, the others fizzled in their hey day with their “classic” albums in tact whilst KISS persisted into a mediocre 80’s phase and lost themselves of course. But again like a lot of nostalgia acts all listeners would welcome a “return to form” and they will essentially live and die by their own merit. If it’s rubbish the fans will let them know but we are discussing “relevance” here really and not the validity of KISS as a musical entity. I guess a new KISS record is viewed as redundant but it still doesnt mean that there isnt room for another in todays climate. Apart from something like The Mars Volta most modern music now is rehashed piddle anyway repackaged as “The Greatest NEW rock n roll Band in The World”
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree, sir. However they release the album, it’s going to be successful, whether I like it or not. I think they should go the same route as AC/DC did with Walmart exclusive if they want to put it over the top. I’m sure Sir Money-bags has already thought of this, though. As for The Mars Volta, I still don’t see what the big deal about that band is.
I’m not talking about nu-metal or emo or whatever. Mainstream sucks and has sucked for decades. The “real” (for lack of a better word) music of the day is not heard on the radio. You want great current bands? Stone Gods, Airbourne (although they have one song on the air), Clutch, the Hellacopers, Black Stone Cherry, Black Tide. That list took me less then a minute but I could keep going. All of those are current bands, releasing great material, most of which release VARIED material (aside from maybe Airbourne, well in the AC/DC vein). I’m not saying that KISS wasn’t great, or that they weren’t a stepping stone for alot of bands (Lordi anyone?), but they are awfully repetitive and, frankly boring. Now I would give my right nut to see them live, but that’s not the discussion.
The hellacopters, a poor mans Ramones, and they were pretty average, Black Stone Cherry?who? Black Tide? who? man these bands must be underground bands, waayyy underground, never heard of them. I guess they don’t make much of an impact on the world, and I doubt VERY much anyone will even remember them in 10 years never mind about 30. At least compare Kiss to bands that people will remember in a few years, geez.
Black Stone Cherry and Black Tide are two up-and-coming bands. Both with only one or two releases. Both are some of the best southern rock, thrash metal (respectively) I have heard come out of this millennium.
Black Tide has gone from a nothing band to being on the main stage as Ozzfest, having a short-release “TV Show” of sorts.
While they may not have the mainstay of bands like KISS, is still to be determined, but the argument isn’t what bands will be remembered forever, it was should KISS release new music.
I said No, Derek said that current rock sucks, I countered with my list. I am not saying that KISS sucks or that they have had no lasting influence on bands. They just don’t need to be releasing new music. To do it is just to try to milk out more money out of loyal listeners.
I like blackstone cherry but Klepto is right lets keep this thread on track, should KISS release another album done in the vein of their hey day. YES PLEASE. Fans dont necessarily buy everything which is why Psycho Circus sold very poorly, I would welcome a return to form for sure and even done in analogue all they need is a couple of ace frehley songs to balance it out ha ha
forgive all your NOT Kiss fans , what are you talking about.
off course kiss should do a new album, no problem for me that they do it the right way in the old recording style
I READ SOME OF YOU SAY ALL KISS SONGS SOUND ALIKE,? PLEASE I CAN TELL A NICKLEBACK SONG FROM THE FIRST NOTE! AND BANDS LIKE THEORY OF A DEAD MAN TRY TO SOUND LIKE NICKLEBACK!! NOT THAT THOSE BANDS SUCK BUT TAKE AWAY THE “F” WORD AND THEY COULDN’T WRITE A SONG!!!!!! HERES THE BOTTOM LINE ASK ANY BAND TODAY WHO THEY LISTENED TO AND RESPECT KISS WOULD BE IN THERE TOP 3! AND WHO CARE’S IF GENES TRYING TO MAKE MORE MONEY EVERY BAND IS AND SO ARE WE!!!! THATS THE BOTTOM LINE