I recall the previous (pathetic) Boston effort had a CD cover showing how much Tom Scholz cared about the planet, cared about ecology, cared about animals, etc. What a pity he doesn't seem to care about humans as much, specifically, Boston fans!
I was describing the band to someone the other day. I explained how the debut album would forever be an AOR masterpiece, how the follow-up matched it in my opinion (although many disagreed), how the 3rd album was a let-down (weaker songs and not enough up-tempo tracks), and how "Walk On" was a slight reprieve, although spoilt by organ. (Why does the man fancy himself as a keyboard player so much? Stick to the guitar!)
I mentioned the inexcusable (and increasing) long delays between releases. I said there was no way he'd have done that if he'd had to put food on the table every day. (Maybe it would have been better if the debut hadn't been THAT big a seller!!!) I mentioned his obsession with making guitars sound like synthesizers to prove some bizarre point. (Errr, nobody CARES what instrument makes a particular sound as long as the sound is there.)
I then mentioned the outrageous "Corporate America" where he thought he could just include his girlfriend's acoustic dabblings and pass it off as "Boston". WRONG! There's a reason millions bought into the great Boston guitar sound with Brad Delp's incredible harmony vocals. They had every right to expect that from subsequent albums. I'm sure Kimberley Dahme is a nice person, and I'm sure her solo album is very good for that genre, but you DON'T force your sweetheart's music down everyone's throat. What if Tony Iommi has married a concert pianist then included a classical piano showpiece in the middle of a Black Sabbath album?!
If anyone should dispute my feelings there, then let me ask a question : if the first "Boston" had been full of Kimberley Dahme originals, would it have had the same phenomenal success? Well? Enough said!
This release (which is so poor it doesn't warrant the time taken to do a detailed track-by-track critique) rehashes songs - a trait already evidenced previously with "Livin' For You". What? In case we missed them first time round? I know Tom Scholz could never be called "prolific", but come on! There is a mixture of voices and styles, but nothing even remotely comparable to their glory days, to my ears. No doubt some diehards will come out with that "logical progression" nonsense, but the only logic I can see is releasing it under an entirely different band name, and seeing if it sells - I dare them!
I remember laughing a few years ago when I read about him battling some record company for not promoting the C.A. album. Hilarious! Blaming others, when the simple reason it didn't sell was because if was utterly NAFF! People chose not to buy then, and even less will buy this.
I sincerely believe that this latest abomination - 11 years in the making? - only appeared because his coffers were running short (due to various legal costs). Will it therefore recoup? Wouldn't hold your breath, mate!
Finally, many rumours have surrounded the death of the late, great Brad Delp, who was at least a little bit more prolific than Scholz over the years. I don't suppose we may ever know the truth, the real story, but there has certainly been mention of Scholz's antics allegedly causing Delp's depression, which led to suicide. As I say, you and I weren't there, but I can honestly say nothing would surprise me any more where Scholz is concerned, should it be true. He's gone from hero to zero in my book, and I can see this album making him a laughing stock. Buy at your peril!
33 people found this helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?