#1
Were they for real?

Ace's latest offering is beyond terrible.

I had a listen to the very best of which had one good song on it but the rest of it was utter tripe. EVH tried to join them when he realized DLR was a total **** smoker?

Maybe their target audience was kids, the one thing that has stuck IMO is cheese ball.

Are they proud of fleecing kids during the 70's?

No wonder Paul Stanley has to see a shrink once a week, he must of taken a listen to his discography.

Did anyone think they were a good band?
#2
I'm sure people on cocaine thought they were good in the 70's.

I'm not sure about anyone who's not on cocaine though...
Free your mind and your ass will follow
The kingdom of heaven is within
Open up your funky mind and you can fly

Sumdeus
#4
They're not great, no, but nor is AC/DC or GnR (IMO), but people still love them. Their live show is where the goods are. Studio stuff is pretty 'meh' at best.

I probably haven't been a fan since I was about 12, but I can say that the 3 shows I went to were some of the best rock concerts I've ever been to.

Another thing to understand is that KISS is a brand more than it's a band. It was specifically engineered from the beginning to bring in the $$$ and so you won't really find anything profound musically/artistically there.

Think of them more like a circus act based around rock music rather than a group of legitimate artists and you'll be a lot closer to understanding them.
#5
The early albums are decent, love gun in particular is better than most of their other shit.


It was more about the spectacle than the music for them. Also because of how uptight and christian everyone was back then, some legitimately thought they were demons corrupting kids with music, which is pretty bad ass.


I've seen them a couple times in the last few years, their shows are pretty meh-worthy. They try to hard.
#6
time and place.

they were the slipknot of their time, just a gimmick.
VHT Special 6 ultra
TC HOF Reverb
Line 6 DL4
EHX OD Glove
Fender standard Tele
Ibanez Rga121
Taylor GA 214E
#7
Quote by rickyj
I've seen them a couple times in the last few years, their shows are pretty meh-worthy. They try to hard.


They were really killing it when Ace and Peter came back. When they left again, it went pretty downhill.

I saw the Psycho Circus Tour and the 'Farewell' Tour twice. They were amazing. I saw them a few years later when they were touring with Aerosmith and there was a definite drop in quality. Less fireworks, less connection between the musicians and less overall energy. It just wasn't what it was.
#8
Kiss is great. I don't care what anyone says. Paul Stanley has the best vocal range in rock music and Ace Frehley is a great guitar player. Gene Simmons is kind of a dick head but no one really cares about that as long as the music is good.
#9
Quote by ZeppelinSkynyrd
I don't care what anyone says. Paul Stanley has the best vocal range in rock music



no. just no.
VHT Special 6 ultra
TC HOF Reverb
Line 6 DL4
EHX OD Glove
Fender standard Tele
Ibanez Rga121
Taylor GA 214E
#10
Quote by ZeppelinSkynyrd
Paul Stanley has the best vocal range in rock music.


We are hearing different qualities.
#11
Quote by ZeppelinSkynyrd
Kiss is great. I don't care what anyone says. Paul Stanley has the best vocal range in rock music and Ace Frehley is a great guitar player. Gene Simmons is kind of a dick head but no one really cares about that as long as the music is good.


#12
I would've killed to see them live in their hay day ('76-'79). They're image and live show were their main appeal, but I've never owned a KISS record and I dont think I could put on one of their records and just listen. Their music just wasn't very good. But their performances were legendary.
#14
Quote by ZeppelinSkynyrd
You are all just hating because none of you have the talent that they have. Just get over it.

you're right. i cant do make up like them.
VHT Special 6 ultra
TC HOF Reverb
Line 6 DL4
EHX OD Glove
Fender standard Tele
Ibanez Rga121
Taylor GA 214E
#15
Their music was actually pretty solid up until the late 70's when they started making the solo albums. I think only Frehley made a half decent record back then. They're not exactly groundbreaking in terms of musicality, but neither were most bands. They didn't claim to be anything other than a kickass rock band. I think the first 3-4 albums pretty much solidified that notion.
#16
Quote by ZeppelinSkynyrd
Paul Stanley has the best vocal range in rock music



Apparently you've never heard of Freddie Mercury or Bruce Dickinson.

There is a short list of vocalists in rock music who have a 4-octave vocal range(such as the previously mentioned 2 examples), and Paul isn't on it. And that's not an opinion; that's a fact. Sorry, I love the music KISS made and have seen them several times in concert, but that statement you made has got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever seen or heard and I've been floating around these forums for a long time.
Quote by Resiliance
I'm more of a hermafrodite guy.


Quote by apocalypse13
Lolz

/ultimatesin = genius]

[/really super obvious]


Original creator of the Resi Signal(s)
Only old shred forum regs get it

Some MP3's from me.

My Videos

Click for awesomeness
#17
Damn I feel like i'm being gang raped or something. I mean is it a crime to think that KISS is good?
#18
no, but it's stupid to say Paul Stanley has the best vocal range in rock as that is objectively incorrect. range is not how good someone sings but simply the amount of different notes a voice can cover, which can be objectively measured. and Paul's is not the biggest range in rock music.
Free your mind and your ass will follow
The kingdom of heaven is within
Open up your funky mind and you can fly

Sumdeus
#19
Well i guess I should just say that he is a great singer for what he has. I'm a guitar player and I don't know very much about vocals
#20
I first saw KISS in 1974 when they were still playing clubs in New York and New Jersey. They were totally original in their sound and obviously in their over the top stage show. I just saw them this past August in Atlantic City and they still sound good and put on the best show in rock. At this point the music is almost incidental. Their records are more like audio souvenirs of their shows these days but give credit where is it is due. They were the originals. If you don't get it you are missing out on the best rock show anyone could ever see.
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
#21
Quote by Rickholly74
I first saw KISS in 1974 when they were still playing clubs in New York and New Jersey. They were totally original in their sound and obviously in their over the top stage show. I just saw them this past August in Atlantic City and they still sound good and put on the best show in rock. At this point the music is almost incidental. Their records are more like audio souvenirs of their shows these days but give credit where is it is due. They were the originals. If you don't get it you are missing out on the best rock show anyone could ever see.


When the music is shit dress up like a clown and let off some fireworks and hope people will not notice how horrible the music is??????

I hear this "spectacle" get out of jail card far too often. The reason they have an issue with the Rock N Roll hall of fame says it all really. the reason it took years for them to get in is because they were not worthy and were begrudgingly admitted and not because of their contribution to music but because of the genius of Gene Simmons business acumen. They only people inducted were the original members who half had left the band by 1982 speaks volumes. I admire what they have done but when Stanley aligned himself with the Beatles I feel he is just bolstering my opinion that his delusion knows no bounds.
#22
One thing I did notice is how stupid your comment was. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is a joke. KISS was worthy of getting in a long time ago. They also screwed over Alice cooper as well.
#23
Quote by ZeppelinSkynyrd
One thing I did notice is how stupid your comment was


Nowhere near as stupid as.............

Quote by ZeppelinSkynyrd
Paul Stanley has the best vocal range in rock music


#24
You are just wrong. Are you defending the RNR Hall of Fame that inducted ABBA, CHIC, Madonna, Tom Waits, and a half dozen talentless rap artists while ignoring real influential bands like Deep Purple, Megadeth, Cheap Trick, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden and dozens of others. KISS's problem getting in was they were not kissing the right asses. Finally the pressure and criticism became to much for the Hall of Shame, so they had to do it. First Metallica then Alice Cooper then KISS.
When you can write and record a song as good as Detroit Rock City or Strutter and sell 100 million albums you can call them clowns until then here is a quote from Wiki about their influence on other bands.

"Kiss is often cited as one of the most influential bands within the hard rock and heavy metal genre, with artists such as Metallica, Mötley Crüe, Guns N' Roses, Pantera, Marilyn Manson, Slipknot, Megadeth, Anthrax, Poison, Alice in Chains, Slayer, Sepultura, Dream Theater, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, Foo Fighters, Nirvana, White Zombie, Rob Zombie, Nine Inch Nails, Rage Against The Machine, Bon Jovi, W.A.S.P., Weezer, Melvins, Lenny Kravitz, Tool, Black Veil Brides as well as notable acts of other genres such as Garth Brooks and Lady Gaga citing the band and its various members as influences, both musically and visually."

Maybe you know something these bands don't or maybe.................
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
Last edited by Rickholly74 at Feb 5, 2015,
#25
Quote by Rickholly74
You are just wrong. Are you defending the RNR Hall of Fame that inducted ABBA, CHIC, Madonna, Tom Waits, and a half dozen talentless rap artists while ignoring real influential bands like Deep Purple, Megadeth, Cheap Trick, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden and dozens of others. KISS's problem getting in was they were not kissing the right asses. Finally the pressure and criticism became to much for the Hall of Shame, so they had to do it. First Metallica then Alice Cooper then KISS.
When you can write and record a song as good as Detroit Rock City or Strutter and sell 100 million albums you can call them clowns until then here is a quote from Wiki about their influence on other bands.

"Kiss is often cited as one of the most influential bands within the hard rock and heavy metal genre, with artists such as Metallica, Mötley Crüe, Guns N' Roses, Pantera, Marilyn Manson, Slipknot, Megadeth, Anthrax, Poison, Alice in Chains, Slayer, Sepultura, Dream Theater, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, Foo Fighters, Nirvana, White Zombie, Rob Zombie, Nine Inch Nails, Rage Against The Machine, Bon Jovi, W.A.S.P., Weezer, Melvins, Lenny Kravitz, Tool, Black Veil Brides as well as notable acts of other genres such as Garth Brooks and Lady Gaga citing the band and its various members as influences, both musically and visually."

Maybe you know something these bands don't or maybe.................


Detroit Citi Rock is garbage IMO, there is something intrinsically horrific about it all.

BTW any clown can and often do write for WIKI, there is no surprise that a band from the 70's would have an influence on a swathe of musicians that gew up in America in the 70's????

I already said I admire their achievements I'm just amazed that desspite how musically rubbish they were compared to what I grew up with. You can keep KISS I'll raise you a Led Zep, Purple, Floyd, Queen, David Bowie and Sabbath, because that's where I got most of musical fix from in the 70's.

I doubt real musicians would care about the hall of fame anyway, the fact they do speaks volumes.

Just get back to playing with your KISS dollies.
Last edited by extinctguitar at Feb 5, 2015,
#26
I guess we'll just agree to disagree. After all your opinion is as valid as mine but if you don't think those bands mentioned in the Wiki were influenced by KISS you are wrong because I have seen a number of them on shows like "That Metal Show" where they talk about that. If you were a musician in the 70's (I was) you'd have a better picture of how much of an influence they were.

It's difficult for any generation to look back a pervious time period and wonder what all the fuss was about. I feel that way about Elvis. But I'm assured by writers and older musicians that if you were a teenager in the mid to late 50's Elvis was the major influence in music. There's no denying that. In the 60's it was the Beatles. While I am not an Elvis fan I don't think he was a clown. I appreciate that the music of my era was heavily influenced by musicians who were influenced by Elvis and the other players and singers of that era (Carl Perkins, Chuck Berry, Little Richard etc.). I think you make a mistake when you compare bands of earlier eras bands in later generations. It's like building a house. There needs to be a strong foundation and in world of metal and hard rock, KISS are part of that foundation whether you like them or not. There's no question about it.

Each era of musicians builds on the foundation of the players from previous eras. They don't reinvent the wheel. I do value your observations but I wouldn't compare Chuck Berry's playing to Ace Frehley anymore than I would compare Ace Frehley's playing or any guitar player from the 70's (Blackmore, Page etc..) to Steve Vai, Eddie Van Halen or Yngwie Malmsteen. Different eras, Different influences, different audiences.

Thanks for the thoughts.
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
Last edited by Rickholly74 at Feb 6, 2015,
#27
Quote by TheUltimateSin
Apparently you've never heard of Freddie Mercury or Bruce Dickinson.

There is a short list of vocalists in rock music who have a 4-octave vocal range(such as the previously mentioned 2 examples), and Paul isn't on it. And that's not an opinion; that's a fact. Sorry, I love the music KISS made and have seen them several times in concert, but that statement you made has got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever seen or heard and I've been floating around these forums for a long time.


+1 Bruce Dickinson, seriously good vocalist through the years...
#28
Quote by Simon.JG
+1 Bruce Dickinson, seriously good vocalist through the years...


I saw Iron Maiden back in 2007 on their A Matter of Life and Death tour. My first concert(and lucky me considering they're my favorite band). After that show I watched a few videos of them from the mid-80's and damn does Bruce still got it. That voice.....that voice.
Quote by Resiliance
I'm more of a hermafrodite guy.


Quote by apocalypse13
Lolz

/ultimatesin = genius]

[/really super obvious]


Original creator of the Resi Signal(s)
Only old shred forum regs get it

Some MP3's from me.

My Videos

Click for awesomeness
#29
Doodoodoo doo doo doo doo doodoo doodoodoo doo doo doo doooooooo

In my opinion, Paul was a good vocals.
Last edited by theluf at Feb 9, 2015,
#30
All of you have a decent point, but being in music for 25+ years I can tell you that although not musically a great band, but a great band non the less. Gene is probably the best musician in the band of the original members. They did have Eric Carr and Bruce Kulick who were the best musicians that have been in the band.
They have a big list of anthem songs that people around the world everywhere can sing along to. They have had a great live show, and gene is a Marketing genius ( no pun intended). Which is the biggest contribution to their success . They have had, and still have a huge impact on new bands.
Saying that I will now say that I am glad EVH never joined kiss, it wouldn't have lasted long anyway. EVH is a far better musician than any member in kiss.
#31
Quote by dunkin316
All of you have a decent point, but being in music for 25+ years I can tell you that although not musically a great band, but a great band non the less. Gene is probably the best musician in the band of the original members. They did have Eric Carr and Bruce Kulick who were the best musicians that have been in the band.


Could you explain the bolded please. Is there another way a band can be great, besides musically? Defining musically great would also help. Did they play in 11/16 and sweep pick? No. Did they write music people enjoy? Yes indeed.
#32
Most people don't care at all about sweep picking or shredding, musicians do because they recognize the degree of difficulty but the general public (and me personally) don't care at all about it. As for timing if I wanted to play in strange time signatures I would start playing and listening to jazz. Those guys can play rings around most rock musicians but it bores me even more than shedders and sweepers. just because something has a degree of difficulty doesn't make it enjoyable to listen to. It's interesting for a few minutes and impressive no doubt to other players but in the long run give me a good singer, a good song melody, good lyrics, multi level harmony and decent players and I'm there. Playing faster than a speeding bullet doesn't impress me much any more. It's been done, it was very impressive, now move on and play music (that thing with melody and harmony).
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
Last edited by Rickholly74 at Feb 19, 2015,
#33
Agree with you RH74, when people were raving about Ying, admittedly he is a great player and took the piss classically speaking. after a while it grates on me especially when in Alcatraz, the songs were shit. I am a viking anyone? he had a thing about Blackmore's cast offs lol if you can call Graham B and JLT cast offs??????

I don't like progressive music much, it tends to disappear up it's own arse. It's all about the songs IMO. and when people sweep its never as good as YJM anyway. I am a dinosaur though and don't much care for the billions of sweep picking droids. I've said it before here but guitar reached it's peak in 1988 everything since is pretty much a rehash of what has been done before .
#34
Quote by beer bear
Could you explain the bolded please. Is there another way a band can be great, besides musically? Defining musically great would also help. Did they play in 11/16 and sweep pick? No. Did they write music people enjoy? Yes indeed.


When I say they were a great band I'm talking about fans, record sales, and relevance in the industry. A lot of good musicians started because of them. Maybe I should have been more clear they were average musicians.