Lesser of two evils

I'll tell you straight out that the contestants this time around are Susie Hatton and Joey C. Jones and the Glory Hounds. So quick quiz what do these two acts have in common.


A-You have never heard of either of them before.

B-They both stink like a landfill on a hot day.

C-Neither deserved a record contract.

D-Metal Mark is now the not so proud owner of their CDs.

E-They both have ties to Poison members.


Well it could be any of those, but the one I am looking for is E. Susie Hatton was Bret Michaels' girlfriend at one point which is the main reason she got a record contract. He also greatly contributed to the album and she toured as his opening act when he did a solo tour in the early 90's. Joey C. Jones was in Needle Park with CC Deville. Joey C. Jones and the Glory Hounds came to be after parting ways with CC. So this could indeed be seen as the guilty by association version of Lesser of two evils.


Let's have at 'em.


Joey C Jones and the Glory Hounds-s/t (1993)

vs.

Susie Hatton-Body and soul (1991)


Vocals

Susie Hatton vs. Joey C Jones in the first match-up. Susie Hatton's melodies are so much like Bret Michaels as I guess he taught her all he knew and just his style. That of course is a very limited approach and actually she has a decent voice, but she never reaches out much or goes beyond a very basic radio friendly rock style. Joey C Jones has a slightly nasal voice, but it's slightly rough too which helps. The biggest problem with him is that sometimes he pushes beyond his limits and the results are painful. Fairly close in this category. Neither do a good job of conveying any emotion though. I'll go with the smoother voice...

Point to Susie Hatton



Guitars

For Susie it is Pat Schunk for most of the time and Bret Michaels is listed as playing acoustic guitar too. They are up against Craig Bradford for the most part and drummer Adam Hamilton actually does acoustic guitars. Now I did not plan the part about each band having a separate guy doing acoustic parts. I didn't even notice it until I went to write up this part. Not that having a separate person helps in way for these two albums. The guitars in general are prime examples as to why hard rock fell off the face of the music world in the 90's. Many of the riffs here on both albums are bland and ten seconds after the track finishes I was mentally scrambling to remember what the riff sounded like. Then I realized that if I couldn't recall it then I probably wasn't missing out on much. The biggest difference between the two is that the guitars for Susie Hatton just glides through lifelessly. However the guitars for Joey C. Jones do hit upon a few tiny grooves here and there.

Point to Joey C. Jones and the Glory Hounds


Rhythm section


Susie Hatton's rhythm section of drummer Jeff Schunk and bass players John Pierce and Sean Englesby are up against bass player Christopher Torok and drummer Adam Hamilton for Joey C. Jones. If I had trouble remembering the guitars you can imagine the trouble I had recalling the rhythm sections for these two acts. The bass for Susie Hatton is practically non-existent and the drums are the same any other early 90's fluffy hard rock album that nobody should have to hear these days. The rhythm section for Joey C. Jones fare a slightly better as they are part of those short grooves I mentioned above.

Point to Joey C. Jones


Originality/production

Susie Hatton was likely doing her hair and make-up when original musical ideas were being handed. Come to think of it I'll bet Joey C. Jones and the glory hounds may have been in the same situation. Anyways originality points for Susie are 0. This is warmed over Poison only lighter. Originality points for Joey C. Jones are maybe a couple. They sound kind of like Enuff Z Nuff only more boring, but on a few songs they wake up and stir up a few sparks. The production on both albums is fine enough.

Point to Joey C. Jones

Who rocks more

If either band rocked I would be rubbing my temples right now trying to figure out how to answer this question with a response other than "pass". As stated above Joey C. and his band hit some grooves, but there was never a whole song that really rocked. Susie Hatton's band fell flat and the ideas were limited, but vocally she did enough to keep my attention for a whole song despite dealing with poor material. The scales are even on this one...

Tie


Joey C. Jones and the Glory Hounds beat out Susie Hatton 3-1-1 in this contest. Both albums are good examples of bad hard rock from the 90's and both should probably be put in a time capsule, buried and maybe it would be best not to dig them up at least until I am dead and gone. At least that way I wouldn't have to think about either again.

I originally intended to do this match-up some two years ago, but either I found bands that were worse or I grabbed bad CDs that were easier for me to get at. However the stars alligned, I found the CDs and I got my strength up to try and tackle these. So it is...


Slaughter-Stick it to ya

vs.


White Lion-Big Game

In the late 80's/early 90's for every good band like G-n-R, Skid Row and Faster Pussycat you had three or four bands like these. Now these two acts were better than some others, but they still checked their souls at the door and churned out some lifeless slop. Remember for a short period of time when Hit Parader was trying to tout Mike Tramp and Vito Bratta as the next Diamond Dave and Eddie Van Halen? That sure was a stretch. Slaughter seemed to come out of nowhere to all of a sudden being played regularly on the radio much to the dismay of unsuspecting ears. Since I have waited two years to get at these bands lets go ahead and have at them.


Vocals
Mark Slaughter is up for his band taking on White Lion frontman and major league hair farmer Mike Tramp. Mark Slaughter ranges between sounding like Brian Johnson with a sore throat and a screeching cat. He tries and does keep in pace with the music, but he doesn't much range at all. Mike Tramp has a better range, but he tends to be drippy and lacks any real emotion. I guess he was too busy swinging his hair around and trying to maintain a certain look. Neither is much good as individuals and they don't help their bands a lot, but Mark Slaughter's effort is more evident so...
Point to Slaughter

Guitars
Tim Kelly and Mark Slaughter are up for their band taking on White Lion's Vito Bratta. Tim Kelly and Mark Slaughter have an okay tone, but what they play is rather standard. The hit on a few moments, but never take many chances as all. Vito Bratta was frequently pushed by the fluffy magazines of the day as some kind of up and coming guitar hero. Now don't get me wrong he could hit some flash, but normally it was few and far between plus the rhythms only varied from fair to forgettable. He had some playing skills, but without good writing to back it up the sparkling solos don't mean much. Except in this case a few brief moments will be enough to earn his band a point.
Point to White Lion

Rhythm section
For Slaughter it is Dana Strum on bass and Blas Elias on drums vs. James Lomenzo on bass and Greg D'Angelo on drums. As with 98% of the hard rock bands of the time we really don't hear much of the bass so it's hard to judge those two guys. For drums both guys get some help from alright production. Overall both guys are all too happy to plunk, plunk, plunk along like a couple of mindless monkeys providing barely useful beats and they stay well in the background. Still one drummer shows a little more rhythm.
Point to White Lion

Originality/Production
By 89-90 the swarms of faceless, lackluster hard rock bands were taking over the airwaves with their sickening power ballads and warmed over, limp attempts at rockin. These two bands very much fit that mold as they just hoped to hold on make a few bucks. Originality doesn't come into for either album. The production is alright on both as everything is fairly loud, but somewhat too smooth on White Lion's disc. Depsite hearing Marc Slaughter's wretched voice too clearly the production still manages to add a slight sting overall to their band's album
Point to Slaughter.

Who rocks more?
Once again it's category where I have to dig down deep to find a winner. In this case effort goes a long ways and Slaughter were the one who seemed to be trying harder to at least briefly appear to be pretending to be some sort of rock band. White Lion had trouble even pulling off a whole song wihtout collapsing into some kind syrupy mess or just being painfully dull. Slaughter were predictable, but there was some genuine effort there although in small doses.
Point to Slaughter

Slaughter win a battle of two of the many bands who didn't deserve a major label deal. Still they showed enough sparks to pull it off even though as players them may have been the less talented band. Good thing album covers wasn't a category because White Lion would have really been slaughtered. Hahaha, get it? Slaughtered-Slaughter? Oh, never mind.

***I am going to go rest my ears up for the next one. Be back soon.

Lesser of two evils

The worst thing about committing to writing one of these is that I actually have to listen to these albums and it was a real task this time. It's like volunteering to go into the sewer and then once you are there you realize just how much shit is around you. One album was every bit as bad as I remembered it being and the other was even worse. I swear the second album I am referring to felt like it went on three hours instead of the under 50 minutes that it really lasted. Anyways here are two crown princesses of rotten hard rock. It is..

Poison-Flesh and Blood (1990)

vs.

Warrant-Dog eat dog (1992)

This is Warrant's third trip here and they are currently 1-1. This is the beginning of my forth year of writing this column and it's most surprising that this Poison's first trip here. I mean Judas Priest have been here twice and even the mighty Iron Maiden have been here once, but one of the poofiest, lightest, sappiest hair bands of their time are now just getting here for the first time. Well they have waited long enough so let's tear into these heartless mounds of syrupy pulp and see what we have.

Vocals-Poison's Bret Michaels takes on Warrant's Jani Lane. If there was one bright spot to CC Deville era Poison it was Michael's voice and that definitely says something about this band as a unit. Michael's best days were on the debut and like the rest of the band he got worse as he went along. So by this album he was going through the motions to an extent, but he had a few moments where he steps up and does alright. If you look up bland in the dictionary there should be a picture of Jani Lane. I don't care if it's young skinny Jani Lani or old, fat bloated, drunken Jani Lane. Either way he still had the presence of a wet sponge and that's comes across on this recording. I hear his hollow voice come on and I immediately think "blech". That should say it all.

Point to Poison

Guitars-CC Deville is on for Poison and he goes against the Warrant pair of Joey Allen and Erik Turner. Now my usual comment would be to say that Deville might already be outmatched by it being a 2-1 scenario. Then again Deville's musical skills may be outmatched by a ten year old plucking on a rubber band, but it's the Warrant duo he has worry about this time. This whole Poison album is toned down from what wasn't a very solid foundation to begin with, but the whole guitar tone is barely present. Of course some solid riffing might help, but CC was always known for his hair and being an idiot more than his playing. This performance certainly re-enforces the above statement. The Warrant duo were riding two albums worth of grabage going into this album. While they do not end their streak of being incompetent they do get a solid "D" for effort. There are a few seconds here and there where they try to sound like a hard rock band. They don't succeed, but I hear the effort.

Point to Warrant

Rhythm section-Poison has Rikki Rocket on drums and Bobby Dall on bass going up against drummer Steven Sweet and bassist Dixon. As if the guitarists were not weak enough it's like rhythm sections for many of the hair bands of the days were all the same which is to say the drums are routine and boring while the bass is almost nonexistent. Both these sets certainly fit that mold. The rhythm sections for both bands just stand back and add nothing. The drums are soft and the bass might even be weaker for both bands. Neither set helped themselves, their band or their albumas. I guess they saved wear and tear on their instruments by doing next to nothing though.

Tie

Originality/production-By this point Poison were becoming more watered down than ever. I guess they still sounded like themselves for whatever that's worth, but they seemed to be laying back even more. Warrant never did much to create any sound that was worth hearing by anyone with any taste whatsoever. This time around they were trying to heavy up their sound and image. You can tell because they all wore black and put on their serious faces. Heck, I think some of them even crosses their arms or put their hands on their hips in the band picture to really show they meant business. The sound here is in places an attempt to be heavier and I guess get beyond where they were. I suspect the motivation had a lot to do with the fact grunge's increasing popularity so the band and their label likely thought tryiong to be heavier may help. It didn't. The production on Poison sounds like layers of gloss have been tossed on everything like too much bubble wrap trying to protect something fragile. The production on Warrant is adequate. They wanted this album to be more of a hard rock album so it's slightly crunchier. There isn't much there to push to the forefront, but the attempt is there and the production is consistant.

Who rocks more?

Maybe being able to rock is a relative term in that to rock you need to be able to play your instruments. That kind of lowers the chances that these bands could rock. Stinking less than the other band should win you a category if the stench is so bad to take. Thus I do something I have never done and award two ties in one match-up. I hate to, but after listening to these discs (twice no less) I feel it's the right thing to do.

Tie

So Warrant take it 2-1-2 in a match-up that ripped at my eardrums and sucked at my soul as I trudged through these two containers of mess. In my opinion both bands played parts in bringing about the end of hard rock becuase neither presented enough real talent to have any real staying power. However in some ways it may have been to have that time in the early 90's as to some extent it served as a musical enima that cleared out a lot of the shit. Unfortunately many fans of those bands now have more money so these hair bands keep coming back every summer to tour and get money from 35 plus year old people who wish it was still 1990.

***Be back with another one next week and it may even be done with a guest co-writer.

This will be the first I have pitted two EPs against one another in this category. These two bands are also likely the most obscure acts to be featured in this segment as well. Antix's EP can be found on eBay at any given time on vinyl for a few bucks. They played on the Sunset Strip scene for at least five years and did a single three years after this EP with a much different line-up. Still not that much is known about them considering how long and where they played plus some of the connections they had. Their EP was produced by Don Dokken and Jeff Pilson plus they were on the label of Great White's manager. Toy Roz also played in the LA area and their album can be found at almost any given time on eBay if you have more money than sense. Far less seems to be known about them except judging by the cover they liked big hair, bad outfits and like Antix believed that misspelling their band name was the key to success. Let's get past the hair spray and spandex and see what other horrors await.


Antix-Get up, get happy (1984)

vs.


Toy Roz-s/t (1988)

Vocalist

It's Greg Clewley for Antix taking on Toy Roz vocalist Christopher Brian Kent. Kent like many other LA frontmen of the time believed in the Dave Lee Roth school of names, but unfortunately he believed in the Bret Michaels method of vocals. In fact Kent tries a bit too hard to push with the slightly nasal whining style that dominated much of the Sunset Strip in the second half of the 1980's. His vocals are hit at miss at best and about thirty seconds to each song you will likely be rolling your eyes and "saying I have heard this kind of stuff many times before". The backing vocals actually work slightly better. Clewley does a reasonable job of handling the better songs well and perhaps even elevating the weaker songs just a little. His voice is limited, but smooth enough.

Point to Antix

Guitars

Jace White is on for Antix going against Randy Giulliani of Toy Roz. Both guys subscribed to the minimal/don't make waves type of guitar of style so much that I was forced to listen to both albums again because I forgot many of the guitar parts after one play. They both deserve to lose points for making me hear these albums again. I was also still left thinking that the guitars on both albums just sit in the background for much of the time. They were never killing my eardrums of horrible noise, but instead they play rather faceless, bland leads which may be worse than noise. The only memory that really stands out was a couple of smooth notes on Giulliani's solos.

Point to Toy Roz

Rhythm section

Bassist BJ Norris and drummer Ian Evans from Antix go against bassist Robby Wilson and drummer Robin Combs of Toy Roz. This is usually the section where I have to put my ear to the speakers to figure this one out because glam/hair bands of the day often wanted to hide the rhythm section and most of the time they should have because their guys didn't have clue. This time around it's a little better. Much of that may be due to above average production on both albums. Both drummers have some idea of what rhythm is and they keep it going the best they can. I can hear the bass some on both, but Norris gets a few more chops in and does enough not to make the band regret letting him be heard.

Point to Antix

Originality/Production

As usual originality didn't factor in much with either of these acts because if it did they would not be here in the first place. Antix might be more original, but that doesn't mean that what they did needed to be or should have ever been done. Their sound is scattered as there are a couple of alright hard rock songs and then some poppy sounding tracks that don't sound completely fleshed out. Toy Roz are maybe a little less annoying at times, but even less original. They sound like hard rock of the time with a strong leaning towards Poison and maybe Ratt which isn't going get them a whole lot of respect. The production on both albums is actually quite fine, but

Point to Toy Roz.


Who rocks more?

This was a particularly tough decision and not totally because both bands struggle to rock although that was a factor. Toy Roz manage to be consistent enough to keep the pace going somewhat and never hit a total clunker, but they never manage to get beyond watered down, uninspired glam either. Antix are much more all over the board. They have a song or two that may stink worse than anything on Toy Roz's album, but they have one or two that are are above any of Toy Roz's six songs although it's all lightweight fare. Consistency isn't that important if you are just managing to do just enough that you don't embarrass yourself. Actually the first time I heard Antix was when their song "Daze gone by" was on Hit Parader's "The Wild Bunch" cassette only compilation. I liked that song and it's on this album and it's still above average. There is also another song here that isn't half bad. So...

Point to Antix

Antix scores a 3-2 victory over Toy Roz. Just because these were EPs doesn't mean their rottenness didn't rip at my tastes and senses because they did. In fact is wasn't much better taking on fewer songs. I guess that goes along with the idea that garbage stinks no matter how big the pile. Both bands did show some life here and there. Still it's easy to why neither band got very far. Toy Roz were just trying to imitate what was big in hope that some label would pick them and try to cash it despite their lack of originality. Antix's problem stem more from confusion about musical style. They dress like a hard rock band, they have a few hard rock songs too. Then they had some poppy almost sappy moments and several songs that sound like they recorded them before they actually finished writing them. To make things harder on themselves they called their album "Get up, get happy". That sounds a kid's music CD for three year olds. Of course fans of metal bands of the day like Maiden and Priest would have avoided an album with that title. Even fans of more glam leaning acts in 1984 like Motley Crue and Twisted Sister probably would skipped past this album just because of the title too. I guess Antix didn't get the memo about at least trying to seem cool. The creppy little jester holding their band name might scare people away too. There is an import version of this album with a slightly different band picture, different logo and black rather than blue border.
Interesting to note that I wrote a post about Antix a few years ago and it has gotten a number of comments and it gets multiple hits every week. There isn't that much known about them, but apparently a lot of people are interested enough to look them up on the Internet fairly regularly.
http://metalmark.blogspot.com/2007_05_01_archive.html

***I'll be back with another segment of Lesser of two evils.

I have not gotten around to doing one of these in a while so I'll try to get back on track. Today I am pairing two bands that are slightly different in style. Both hard rock, but Rough Cutt's debut came out in 1985 and it was typical for that time while Funhouse came out in 1990 and it was maybe just a little broader in style. Rough Cutt were on Warner Brothers, they were managed by Wendy Dio and they were at leas initially promoted fairly well. Funhouse were Caroline and came out at a time when the hard rock bands were popping out of every hole and into a crowded scene. The bands have two things in common. One is neither band was all that good and therefor number two is they both end up on the chopping block for Lesser of two evils. Let's rip into them and see which one is better or not as bad.


Funhouse-Generation Generator (1990)

vs.


Rough Cutt-s/t (1985)

Vocalist
We have Paul Shortinio of Rough Cutt going against Chris Hazard of Funhouse. It's actually surprising that I have been doing this segment for three years and just now got around to including Rough Cutt. Surpising because they are not that good of a band and I knew that, but I kept brushing it off in large part to the fact that Paul Shortino is a good singer and for a little while he hides the shortcoming of the rest of the band. He has a strong voice, but he can't pull off all of these songs though and eventually you can tell that he is just going through the motions trying to glide to the end of the tracks. Chris Hazard was obviously listening to Guns and Roses, Red Hot Chilli Peppers and Bang Tango as he prepared for theses recordings. Somehow I imagine him in the studio swinging his arms and trying to act animated as he recorded his vocal tracks and saying something like " I am getting my groove on". Maybe not, but the results are okay. He overdoes it some, but not too much and he knows when to move on. Still ...
Point to Rough Cutt

Guitarist
Amir Derakh and Chris Hager are on for Rough Cutt. Amir Derakh gets credit for his name, but loses points for being listed a doing synthesizers along with lead guitars. Anyways the Rough Cutt duo have a huge sound around the guitars. Unfortunately they rely more on volume and production values than on style and there is enough here to suggest it wasn't because of lack of talent. They just held back and settled for repetition far more than they should have. For Funhouse it's Marc Vachon and Joe E. What these guys lack in originality they attempt to make up for with a raw tone. They don't succeed because thy are lacking quite a in the way of hooks, but they try and I give them a little credit for that. Neither pair does nearly enough to help their band's cause. Still I have to pick so...
Point to Rough Cutt

Rhythm section
For Rough Cutt it's bassist Matt Thorr and drummer David Alford. Wait, there was bass on this album? I think it got swept up in the load and ultra-smooth production which of couse was on par for many major label hard rock releases of the time. David Alford is adequate, but again I don't like the finished so much. It's glossy with very little feeling or personality. Funhouse has bassist Cat and drummer Johnny Hill. Cat? Well if Rough Cutt's bassist can add an extra "r" onto the name of a Norse God then I guess Funhouse's bassist can be named after a feline. Bass? Oh, I think I did hear a few notes. The drums are ordinary however the production doesn't suck the life out of it as much as on the Rough Cutt album. So...
Point to Funhouse

Originality/production
Rough Cutt fall in maybe the Dokken/King Kobrar melodic metal/hard rock style. The problem is they never push hard enough to establish much of their own style. Many of their songs start out fine for the first 10-15 second and they throw it into neutral and try to wade through completely forgetable mcuk for the rest of the time. As noted all too many times above the production on this album is way too slick and cold. Funhouse sound like the results of someone taking popular bands of the moment and throwing them in a blender and pouring them out. Unfortunately it's a bit lumpy and bland. The production is better and actually helps their sound a little.
Point to Funhouse

Who rocks more?
I guess I have painted myself into a corner as Funhouse have come back to tie this thing up so now I actually have to think about who rocks more. Even worse I had to listen to these albums again to make a decision because it really was that close. Not because either excelling, but rather because both succeeded in being fairly unmemorable. Each band has about 2-3 songs where they sort of pull together a few moments, but ultimately it was the fact that Rough Cutt put together a few tightly played passages that effected my decision.
Game, set and match to Rough Cutt for getting the final point

Perhaps Rough Cutt deserve points taken off for the limp album cover and the use of an extra "T". However Funhouse deserve points taken off for members wearing pajamas on the cover, doing live tracks on their album that are poorly overdubbed and most importantly not putting band member names in the booklet and forcing me to look up their sorry names so I can be thorough in my write-up. It all adds up to Rough Cutt limping past Funhouse in another Lesser of two evils that gave me a mild headache as I struggled through these two recordings. Maybe I should see if Tylenol will sponsor this segment for me because I always seem to have to use the product after I write one of these. Anyways I'll be back with another one very soon.

Lesser of two evils

Back in the 1980's the LA hard rock scene had more than it's share of bands pouring out and trying to make a name for themselves. Some like Motley Crue became huge while others fell by the wayside. Then there were the ones in between who sort of made it for a while or came close. The bands for today's contest come from this group and they are both actually older bands. We have...

Dokken-Back for the attack
vs.


Quiet Riot-3



Dokken had gotten some airplay and their videos had been shown on MTV. However around the same time Motley Crue had gotten huge and even Ratt had built their way up to being a headliner. Dokken were still opening act as they got ready to release their forth album. Quiet Riot were on a different track instead of slowly rising like Dokken. Kevin DuBrow considered this a different version of the band from the one with Randy Rhoads. Looking at it from that perspective the first album from this version was "Metal Health" in 1983 which was a huge hit. The band followed up fairly quickly with "Condition Critical" the next year. Personally I think it was a good album, but it didn't sell nearly as well as the previous effort. Like Dokken it was two years until they got around to their next album. Even though there was reason to believe these bands would put out good albums, but that just didn't happen. So lets get at them and see which one I could tolerate more.





Vocalists

Kevin DuBrow is up for Quiet Riot as he takes on Don Dokken. This is certainly not the finest moment for either vocalist. Quiet Riot tried to be something different on this album and really it was a failure. However the one aspect that clicked to some extent was Dubrow's vocals. It's pathetic material, but he makes a fine effort at trying to make it click. Don Dokken has always been a singer who has more range than personality. For me that makes him less memorable. He sounded good on the previous two albums, but here it's like the song run together and he seems to approach most of the songs the same. In the end he turns in a rather bland performance here.

Point to Quiet Riot

Guitarists

It's Carlos Cavazo for QR and George Lynch for Dokken. Cavazo was often considered a light weight and Lynch got the label guitar god or virtuoso. Okay, Cavazo deserved his label more than Lynch deserved his. Here it's as much Cavazo's playing that is at fault as it is the whole idea behind the album. What hard rock guitarist could sound good with so many synthesizers? Not many although that doesn't completely forgive Carlos from doing virtually nothing constructive here. Lynch had plenty of good moments on the previous two discs and his signature Mr. Scary is on this release. Still Dokken's album contains far too much filler and Lynch could have made a difference because he has the skill, but he didn't. So shame on him for spending more time on his tan and biceps than on his writing. Still he is the main factor behind the couple of good songs that are on here.

So point to Dokken

Rhythm section


For Quiet Riot is Frankie Banali on drums and Chuck Wright on bass going against Mick Brown and Jeff Pilson. Normally hard rock bands of the 80's seemed to be lacking in the rhythm section. However I actually think that Frankie Banali is a pretty good drummer, but unfortunately here he and wright both have their efforts absorbed into a big synthesized goop. Brown and Pilson had times where they were a decent duo. This time around I think the sound is smoothed more than normal, However the sound is still more coherent and more tolerable than on the QR album.

Point to Dokken


Disappointment factor

Both bands followed up decent albums in "Condition Critical" and "Under lock and key". The element that decided this category for me is the fact that while Dokken tried to be too smooth at least they tried to be hard rock. Quiet Riot were trying to cash on a synthesized rock that didn't benefit anyone. They would have hurt themselves less by not releasing any album until they had enough ideas to at least attempt a real hard rock album.

Point to Dokken


Who rocks more?

There are a couple of good songs on "Back for the attack" but it suffers from a definite lack of substance. The vocals and loud and Lynch's guitars whirl around here and there, but most of what we get is a lot of going through the motions. However that beats out Quiet Riot who through the effort of creating some of the most annoying excuse for hard rock to assault my unsuspecting ears in the mid 1980's. No wonder their mascot hid behind the band logo on this cover. I wouldn't want to show my face either if I had been involved with this mess.

Point to Dokken



Dokken win it fairly easily 4-1. Neither was a joy listening to and neither has aged well. Still I stuggled through and now I will likely not listen to either for some time.

Lesser of two evils

I have talked about Supergroups on my site before. Normally I think that it is a very misleading label. It's given to bands where at least some of the members have previously been in known bands. I think the term tends to raise expectations, but it doesn't mean the finished product is going to be much good. Most Supergroups tend to sound like good ideas on paper, but then the album comes out and you wonder what happened. The Supergroups in question todays are...

Contraband-s/t

vs.

Damn Yankees-s/t



Contraband was a side project for all involved as they were all still in their main bands. Damn Yankees became a regular band for those involved at least for a few years. So both a little different right away in that aspect. Let's break these down.


Vocals

Tommy Shaw and Jack Blades take on Richard Black. Black seems like the odd man out in Contraband as Shark Island were barely known at this point or really ever. However I liked their debut, but here he sounds like he is going through the motions on much of the material. It's not off, but very bland. Tommy Shaw and Jack Blades are smooth, but frequently very sugary in their approach. I guess that's a large of what appealed to some people about this band, but I found it to be mediocre. However the Damn Yankees guys had a sense of order and came across as enjoying what they were doing.

Point to Damn Yankees



Guitars

Ted Nugent and Tommy Shaw for Damn Yankees going up against Michael Schenker and Tracii Guns for Contraband. First off, I normally like the Nuge a lot. However on this project he sounds very restrained. He and Shaw just stay below the surface only peeking up occasion with a few decent runs here and there. Schenker and Tracii Guns would be pick for guys who should have been the storng point of their band. However that was before I played this disc. Like everyone else in their project they just seem to be phoning it in. They hit the notes, but they lack any real passion or much of any spark whatsover.

Point to Damn Yankees





Rhythm section

Bassist Jack Blades and drummer Michael Cartellone of Damn Yankees take on bass player Share Pederson and drummer Bobby Blotzer. If the possible strong players Contraband above couldn't do much then the weak links (the rhythm section) would seem less likely to shine. At least I am right on this call. The drums and bass are about as bland and run of the mill as it can get. Blades does enough sound like he is doing his job and Cartellone might even be a hair better than that.

Point to Damn Yankees

Originality/production

Contraband take on a number of cover songs and add very little to them. However the originals are even worse. Again it's not that they are out of tune, but rather they show the energy that most of us would give to a task like turning off a light switch. Damn Yankees combine AOR and hard rock that wasn't particularly new or all that inspired for 1990, but it was tight. Production on both is typical for early 90's hard rock as both have reasonbly decent sound, but virtually no edge whatsoever.

Point to Damn Yankees

Who rocks more?

Again if either band really rocked they wouldn't be here in the first place. Contraband try to tie up everything, but there just isn't much there to grab onto. There are no hooks and even less soul. Damn Yankees are fluffy, but they move around at least. Contraband was a real challenge to get through as I could feel it dulling my senses with each passing second. Damn Yankees wasn't a treat, but it certainly wasn' difficult to get through.

Point to Damn Yankees



A clean sweep for Damn Yankees. It's not that they were that good, but rather that Contraband were really that bad. According to Richard Black the band never met while recording. They only met for photo sessions. Plus Black is the only member who contributed to the writing. All of that shows up in the final sound. It just sounds a project that wasn't thought through very well.

A funny thing happened in my planning of this Lesser of two evils. I originally thought this would be the sophomore releases from Sweet F.A. and Every Mother's Nightmare. I had not heard either in a while and pulled them out for a first listen. Right away I knew that I was correct for including Sweet F.A., but EMN were way better than I remembered. So I felt like I needed to find another band to complete this match-up. I immediately turned to Jag Wire because they have been on my maybe list for this segment for some time. So let's get this one started. It is...



Jag Wire-Made in heaven (1985)

vs.

Sweet F.A.-Temptation (1991)

Vocalist

Art Deresh for Jag Wire takes on Steven David De Long. Both vocalists suffer from attempting to to do parts that they are not up to. However some of Deresh's shortcomings are due to problems with the writing more than just lack of vocal ability. De Long has a few moments, but there are too many songs where he tried to sound beyond his all too limited ability and ends up sounding silly and out of tune. Deresh has an okay voice and handles mid-ranged songs adequately, but he doesn't elevate any of the songs. However he doesn't kill them either.

Point to Jag Wire



Guitarist

Howard Drossi of Jag Wire is up against Jon Huffman and James Lee Thorpe of Sweet F.A. The Sweet F.A. duo sound like they tried very to cram in little bits of G-n-R, Extreme, Bang Tango and Poison into their sound. Unfortunately they didn't have the skill to use or manipulate these parts. Instead they sound messy and incomplete. Jag Wire are as much an AOR band as they are hard rock. Which in this case meant the guitar parts are all to often hidden behind the keyboards So the guitar parts are often minimal, but Drossi keeps it going okay. More importantly he hits a couple of solos that are not only solid, but actually wind up saving the songs .

Point to Jag Wire



Rhythm section

For Jag Wire it is Joey Cristofanilli on bass and Carl Elizondo on drums and they are going against Frank Coglitore on bass (actually listed as an additional musician) and drummer Tricky Lane. I had to listen to both albums a second time to figure out this category. The Jag Wire guys are okay, but hidden in the mix and all too content just churn out the the most basic parts they can. The Sweet F.A. guys follow the same approach. The only difference is that the production helps Tricky Lane's drums sound to stand out a little.

Point to Sweet F.A.





Originality/production

Considering the rotten band names that these guys picked I knew right away that neither group could help themselves much in the originality department. Jag Wire sound like they enjoyed late 70's hard rock and early 80's AOR. Unfortunately this was the mid-80's and they had very few ideas of their own. Which means they sounded like copycats and they were slightly behind the times. Sweet F.A. fared even worse because they sound like a jumble of other band's ideas. This made them sound poor and difficult to take. Sweet F.A. definitely had stronger production although Jag Wire's production was average. I can deal with run of the mill production more than I can a haphazard musical approach.

Point to Jag Wire



Who rocks more?

Jag Wire tend to be not so bad rather than doing anything positive on a consistent basis. That doesn't make for a good album though. However their biggest shortcoming was that they just didn't push hard enough to really capture any one's attention. They try to slide by, but they do manage a degree of tightness and their guitarist had a few good bursts up his sleeves. Sweet F.A. sounded like they thought they could win people over by being a second rate version of bands that had succeeded in hard rock at the time. Unfortunately it sounds more like it came from a third rate band and no one bothered to listen to the final product before releasing it. If they had bothered to hear it then they would have sent it back and told these guys to tighten it up a lot and put some of their own ideas in.

Point to Jag Wire



Jag Wire take it fairly easily to a tune of 4-1. They may had one of the absolute worst band names all time, but they didn't have the worst album. Jag Wire came out sounding a little better than I thought and Sweet F.A. were even worse. Jag Wire may have actually helped their case by only doing eight songs while Sweet F.A. tested my patience by doing 13 tracks.



***I'll have another one of these out next month.

Here is another post that is about Jag Wire.
http://metalmark.blogspot.com/2008/05/jaguar-jag-wire.html

It's solo album hell again with surprisingly two solo albums where neither is a vocalist. We have former Angel keyboardist Greg Giuffria's band taking on Billy Idol guitarist Steve Stevens with his first solo effort. Giuffria came from a time when keyboards were thought to be cool. Wait, abundant keyboards like those were never cool no matter what some suit at MCA may have thought. They should have known better. Stevens was a fine guitarist with Idol and many fans were excited to see what he could do with more control. The answer was not much because the effort seems minimal on his album. Let's slice these turkeys up and see what's in there.


Giuffria-s/t

vs.


Steve Stevens-Atomic Playboys

Vocals-David Glen Eisley is up for Giuffria taking on Perry McCarty plus Steve Stevens handled vocals on one track. Eisley sounds like he's trying to be Sammy Hagar. That's not the highest goal in the world. However Eisley just struggles to convey any real personality and his consistency level is sketchy at best. Not out of tune, but he doesn't help the material and it needed help. McCarty shows up and tries, but the material is sub-par. Although I can hear that he is trying and he never really hits any clunkers.
Point to Steve Stevens


Guitars-Craig Goldy is up for Giuffria and he takes on Steve Stevens. I liked Goldy when he was in Dio, but here he is clearly in the background and just allowed to sprinkle out a few specks of flash. It's few and far between and by the time it does happen I am already in my "who cares at this point?" mood. Stevens' style of course affects the whole album because it his album. The biggest problem with his release is that he never seemed sure of what he wanted this album to be. The result is a very uneven album with a few promising rock bits and then a whole of filler and clutter. However, he has a few moments and not just a few notes per song.
Point to Steve Stevens

Rhythm section-For Giuffria it is Alan Krigger on drums and Chuck Wright on bass against Steve Stevens on bass and Thommy Price on drums. Giuffria is bad AOR with the keyboard player being in charge so the rhythm section is perhaps even more invisible than on a bad hard rock album. Stevens has his name on the album so that may be a factor as to why we actually get to hear bass work a little on the album. Price isn't stellar, but the drum sound is fair enough.
Point to Steve Stevens

Originality/production-When Greg Giuffria was in Angel they were second or third rate 70's hard rock. Being as this was the 80's I guess Greg heard Journey, Foreigner and the like so he decided to plop out some AOR. Unfortunately this is a lot of fluff without the melodies and catchiness that made up good AOR (yes, I do believe there is such a thing). Steve Stevens' album isn't as formulaic, but it's not all that good either. Some of the ideas are different, but they don't work out so well. The production work on Giuffria is typical of the time which means it's very slick but doesn't convey much in the way of substance. The production for Steve Stevens is good enough as it tries to help and certainly doesn't hurt the album.
Point to Steve Stevens


Who rocks more?-Giuffria and his band were obviously much more focused on aiming for a hit than they were on making a rock album or even a likable album. This is bloated bubblegum with very little redeeming values. Now with that said, I still think Steve Stevens' album was more of a disappointment. Angel were not that good so I didn't expect their keyboard player to create a masterpiece, but Stevens was a good player with Billy Idol and his best songs here were a cover and a couple of very typical hard rock efforts. His ideas were scattered and the results the same. Shame on him. However he is going to win by default or because he did about three songs that didn't make me gag.
Point to Steve Stevens

Well, it's a sweep, but that doesn't mean Steve Stevens should get off the hook for his album either. Giuffria played a style that had a following 25 years ago, but it's a bland and poofy attempt at AOR. Steve Stevens showed that he needed to just go back and back up other people if that was the best he could do on his own. Even the H.R. Giger cover doesn't help a whole lot.

***I'll have another match-up out next month.

Ah, the need for speed. I remember when I first heard early speed metal like Kreator and Destruction around 84-85 and I thought it was oh so fast. I remember first being exposed to Napalm Death and Bolt Thrower in the late 80's. I liked all of those bands, but faster does not always mean better. It's like driving a car, there has to be some control in there to balance the speed. Not everyone seems to feel that way though. Which leads to our contest today. We have....

Dragonforce-Ultra Beatdown

vs.


The Great Kat-Worship me or die




The Great Kat claimed to be "the worlds fastest guitarist" and she went from playing the violin to playing the guitar, singing and cutting her debut in less than two years. It's a shame she didn't take time to practice writing or developing some style during that time. When I first heard her album in 1988 I thought it was fast. That opinion has changed over the years. Dragonforce had a more gradual rise, but the approach is about as questionable. Instead of playing haphazard semi-speed metal, they opted for taking power metal and stepping it up to an even faster pace. Unfortunately they don't add much to that sound except speed. It's not a combination that is pleasant to the ears. Well, lets blow the dust off the cases and have at these speedy stinkbombs.


Vocals

The great Kat vs. ZP Theart. The Great Kat is about as good a singer as she is a songwriter. Which means she is abysmal. There are growls, shrieks and numerous other unpleasant noises thrown in. It sounds like some teenager got a hold of a tape recorder and told her friends "check this out, I can be a cool metal singer". Theart has a range of some sort, it's just unfortunate that he spends too many occasions sounding like he has someones knee firmly slammed against his crotch. Both try to be extreme singers and both end up being extremely horrendous. Theart actually hits some notes though so...


Point to Dragonforce


Guitars

The Great Kat is up against Herman Li and Sam Totman. The Great Kat plays mainly choppy chunks during the bulk of the song and then hits these shrill bursts of fast flying noise the rest of the time. Fast she may be, but it's not heavy, appealing or memorable. Despite her boasts, her guitar parts are really rather weak. If guitars could sound like they were on helium than that would be Dragonforce. Their guitars are like typical power metal only sped up and slightly higher in pitch. Which means they add nothing to their genre, but take away much of the force and fire that could have been there. The only thing that helps Dragonforce is some degree of continuity.

Point to Dragonforce

Rhythm section

That's right there were actually more people in the Great Kat's band than just her. We have Kat's rhythm section of Tom Von Doom on bass and Adam Killa on drums taking on bassist Frederic Leclercq and drummer Dave Mackintosh. I don't really hear the bass on Kat's album (yes, I am tired of calling her "great" at this point). I did hear the drums though and they sound like an old type writer clicking away. Their is no depth, rhythm or much else to the drum parts. The Dragonforce guys fare better. I hear the bass on occasion and it's nothing spectacular, but it has an adequate tone. The drums are the best thing about Dragonforce if there is such a thing. Of course they are too fast at times and do not always add anything, but they never become as ridiculous as the guitar. Plus they have a solid sound for the most part.

Point to Dragonforce

Originality/production

Kat's album came when thrash was huge and I think she was aimed at that crowd, but her music is so scattered that it's not really thrash. I am not sure if it's really music either. Now her sound isn't entirely original, but at the time it came out it was at least slightly original as a gimmick or a joke band which is more of what she is. Dragonforce despite all their hype still sound like someone took albums from Helloween, Gamma Ray and Hammerfall, stuck them in blender and mixed them all together. Then they poured out the remains and sped it up even more. The results are as messy as that description. For production I would say that Kat's album has alright production for the time. I don't think richer production would have enhanced the raw sewage that's there. In fact the raw edges work a little. Dragonforce have high production values, but that just makes their candy coated garbage sound even more glossy.

Point to Kat

Who rocks more

Perhaps which album gave me less of a headache would be a better description. I am going to with Kat here. Neither of these turd platters rock much. However there is a roughness to Kat's disc that has a grain of something that's worth hearing once. Probably only once, but that's more than I can say for Dragonforce. I finished Dragonforce's album and came out all disoriented like I had been riding some cheap, spinning carnival ride for an hour. It wasn't much though. My ears hurt, my head hurt and I realized that speed could be an awful thing in the wrong hands and Dragonforce continue to prove that point.

Point to Kat

Dragonforce squeeze it out 3-2. Although I think this is only the second time in Lesser of two evils that a band has lost the "who rocks more" category and still held on to win the battle. I felt that I had been doing too many of these match-ups on just glam bands so I purposefully picked other styles this time. Unfortunately I paid for that idea as I had to listen to their ranting nonsense. Dragonforce do deserve to be called Dragonfarce because that is what they are. The Great Kat is a joke too and doesn't deserve to be called great or even mediocre, but no one really pretends otherwise with her. Still both these discs should be locked away in a vault and not see the light of day for some time. If you missed the hair bands then never fear because a second Lesser of two evils is coming soon. Very soon actually as I will have another Lesser of two evils out this week.

This could be referred to as my Rocklahoma edition of Lesser of two evils since both bands are on the bill for this year's festival (as are a lot of other acts who have been on this feature of mine). Perhaps it could be the $2 version of Lesser of two evils since I paid a whole dollar each for these CDs. Maybe it's the Lesser of evil for return visitors as Warrrant become the first band to be featured in a second contest and Nelson drummer Bobby Rock is here for the third time since both Nitro and Vinnie Vincent Invasion have been on here before. Well, whatever the case we have...



Nelson-After the rain

vs.

Warrant-Dirty Rotten Filthy Stinking Rich

Those Nelson boys seemed to come out of nowhere and assault good taste by being played so often on the radio back in 1990. They seemed to be kind of sissy music to me back then. I had not heard this album for at least 18 years. My first exposure to Warrant was seeing the video for "Down Boys" on Headbanger's Ball in 1989. My reaction was something "what is this shit and who is the idiot that gave these losers a record contract?". I think that is still my general reaction twenty years later. While thrash was still going and the death metal scene was on the rise, the hard rock scene around 89-91 seemed to be getting softer and fluffier. The bands may have had long hair, but this was marshmallow pop with a few guitar solos plugged in to make seem like hard rock. These guys made Poison sound like a real band if you can imagine that. It's no wonder these acts would get wiped off the map by grunge. So lets get the fire started and roast these weenies.

Vocals

Both Matthew and Gunnar Nelson are up for the band named after them and they are taking on Jani Lane of Warrant. The Nelsons looked like they spent all their time fixing their hair, but they actually had some okay voices. Not overwhelming and certainly not terribly exciting, but they could carry a tune. Some of the melodies were catchy although others were sappy and generic. Jani Lane might be one of the least charismatic singers of all time. I have such a hard time with Warrant because Lane was such a dull singer who manages to suck the life out of whatever comes out of his mouth. It's not so much that he isn't in tune, it's that he cannot conjure up any real energy or passion or anything that would make me care.

Point to Nelson

Guitars

Brett Garsed and both Nelsons contributed for their side while Joey Allen and Erik Turner handled duties for Warrant. Both bands seem to be all too happy to keep the guitars down low and have a syrupy sound prevail. If any heavy moments emerge, they are quickly overwhelmed by keyboards and/or vocals. What guitar rhythms are here were old and dry even by 1989-90 standards. They go through the motions for much of these songs likely posing with their instruments more than playing them. The only difference I could make out between the two bands was that there were a couple of slightly above average solos from the Nelson camp so...

Point to Nelson

Rhythm section

Matthew Nelson handled bass and Bobby Rock handled drums for Nelson while we have Jerry Dixon on bass and Steven Sweet on drums for Warrant. If the guitars were down on these albums then the rhythm sections were practicly drowned out altogether. Hard rock in the late 80's-early 90's was a low point for rhythm sections as they only seemed to exist in the credits of the insert. The bass is almost non-existent and the drums could have been done by chimpanzees smacking on trash cans for all of the emotion and energy displayed here. Only the production was able to allow me to make a decision here. Bobby Rock's drum sound stands out just a little more and it took me two excruciating listens to realize that. If his drum sound had been as big as his hair then the decision may have been even easier to make.

Point to Nelson

Originality/production

There are a few moments where Warrant sound a little like Poison if you really listen down below the layers of gloss. On other songs they actually do have their own sound. It's a sound that should have never been copied and largely is wasn't. Nelson sound like Bon Jovi on a few songs and on other tracks they just sound like rather generic AOR/hard rock. The production on Warrant is full of shiny polish and not a whole lot else. I tried adjusting the settings on my stereo to try and hear there was much else down below the surface on Warrant. Really there isn't, but the production doesn't help them to sound like a rock band. The production on Nelson is okay, but it does manage to enhance some melodies without burying anything.

Point to Nelson

Who rocks more?

I think Warrant were the first band that had me thinking hard rock was dying. They were all show and the music was some of the most shallow pulp to ever creep into my ears and that was just their debut. As I said above, the production didn't help them to sound like a rock band either. By 89-90 for every band like G-n-R or Faster Pussycat you had 2-3 bands like Warrant. Which should tell you why this stuff died out shortly after that. Nelson are actually better than I remember. Not good mind you, but not as sappy overall as I remembered them being. They hit a few slightly decent moments. I guess the real deciding force here is that I made it through Nelson without shaking my head and sighing. I couldn't say the same thing about listening to Warrant.

Point to Nelson.

I thought it would be closer, but Nelson were better than I remembered and Warrant were exactly as I remember them. If I ever miss music from the late 80's-early 90's then I can just put Warrant on and realize that I don't miss all of the music from back then. So there you have it. I'll be back in a few weeks with another match-up.

Lesser of two evils

The one hit wonder. It's a term that's been around for some time. Bands of a certain style and their labels push and hope for a hit to spark their sales and their career. If they get a hit that helps, but if they never get another hit then they might be left with the above label. I knew that I wanted to do a Lesser of two evils on this so I just had to come up with contestants. Right away Autograph came to mind for their one hit "Turn up the radio". Autograph rose quickly as they formed one year, the next they were opening for Van Halen and then signed to RCA. The debut "Sign in please" came out and they had a hit single shortly after that. Unfortunately one hit doesn't always mean the band is on easy street. Autograph did two more albums in the 80's with less success and no hit singles before calling it quits by the end of the decade. The problem here was I struggled to think of another one hit wonder. I mentioned it to my friend Bob Vinyl and he said "what about KIX?". The reason I hadn't thought about KIX was probably because they are from my area so the radio stations would play two or three songs from each of their albums. However they only had one real high charting hit which was "Don't close your eyes". KIX travelled a different road from Autograph, a slower road in some ways. It took them three years to get signed, but it was with a major. Their debut came out in 1981 and they followed with releases in 1983 and 1985. They sold enough to stay on the label, but still a rather minimally know band except for here in the mid-Atlantic area. Then on their forth release "Blow my fuse" in 1988 they finally had a hit. Indeed it helped them finally get some national attention, but it didn't exactly catapult their career. They had some more releases and then went their separate ways in the 90's, but still get together for a few shows every year. Enough on the history lesson lets check these two albums out and see what we have.

Autograph-Sign in please

vs.

Kix-Blow my fuse

Vocals

Steve "Plunk" Plunkett for Autograph taking on Steve Whiteman for KIX. Plunkett has a horrible nickname reminiscent of Bobby "the blotz" Blotzer from Ratt, but he's not a bad singer. Somewhere between David Lee Roth and Sammy Hagar at times. He handles the material alright, but he also has a tendency to glide and not push enough. Steve Whiteman has a nasal often robotic voice. Yet it's distinct and it's the one part of KIX that set them apart. Much like Stephen Peacry of Ratt he's not a great out and out singer, but his voice helps to define his band and give them at least a little personality. Plunkett tows the line, but is a little faceless in his performance.

Point to KIX

Guitars

The Autograph pair is Steve Lynch and Steve "Plunk" Plunkett taking on Ronnie "10/10" Younkins and Brian "Damage" Forsythe. What in the world was going on with all the idiotic nicknames? They must have been drunk when they thought those up. Anyway Autograph's guitars are basic and somewhere between hard rock and AOR. They benefit from decent production, but get covered by too much keyboards at times. KIX became more AC/DC on this album and it's like early 80's AC/DC which is neither creative or entertaining. These two guys with the limp nicknames are still no Angus Young. The tone is bland and the riffs are predictable.

Point to Autograph

Rhythm section

Autograph has Randy Rand bass and Keni "Richetti" Richards on drums going against Donnie Purnell on bass and Jimmy "Choclate" Chalfant on drums. These guys must not have any good friends because friends don't let friends use ridiculously stupid nicknames. Anyways, as you probably know you can't really hear the bass on either album. No surprise there so it looks like it is up to the drummers. Jimmy Chalfant at times sounds like he just playing one long drum beat and they just stuck three or four songs around it. Seriously he's playing the same dried out parts several times over. Keni Richards is bland too, but the production helps and he does mix things up some. So....


Point to Autograph

Originality/Production

Autograph sound a little like Sammy Hagar at times. KIX sound like second rate AC/DC at times and occasionally they sound like they did on their earlier albums for whatever that is worth. The production on Autograph made the mistake of putting the keyboards too much in the foreground at times. However everything sounds well enough. The production on the KIX album was done by Tom Werman who among others did "Shout at the devil" (amazing) and "Girls, girls, girls" (stinko). The production is unfortunately closer to that of the forth Motley Crue album. Which means it's high on gloss and low on substance. It's far too thin on most of the instruments.

Point to Autograph

Who rocks more?

It's not that these bands don't rock. Well, actually I guess it's that they do not rock enough for my liking. These two bands are a little better than some of the other acts that have been on here before. The problems with Autograph are too much keyboards, the guitars don't make themselves known enough and the band plays it very safe. On the plus side they are fairly tight and the production helps. KIX struggle because they copy a known band plus they lack energy and fire. I was almost ready to call this one a tie. Then I thought that since these bands were picked for being one hit wonders that I would let the hits serve as a tiebreaker. "Turn up the radio" isn't nearly as good as I once thought. However when I hear "Don't close your eyes" I want to turn off the radio.


Point to Autograph


So Autograph take it 4-1. Going into this one I thought KIX would take it. The more I listened to their album the less I liked it.


**I'll be back soon with another one of these.

Lesser of two evils

Putting bad albums to good use.

Sometimes they come back. Actually in the last decade or so many 80's bands have come back whether we wanted them to or not. Actually the bands in question today had some high points or a point back in the 1980's. Ratt were actually one of the more consistent hard rock bands of that decade. They were never truly great or groundbreaking, but every album from 1983-1990 was at least good or better. The band broke up in the early 90's after line-up changes, lack of albums sales and other factors finally took their toll on the band. King Kobra were a different story of sorts. They were founded by veteran drummer Carmine Appice (Cactus, Vanilla Fudge and many others) and originally featured guitarist Earl Slick. However some changes were made and the band did manage to land on a major label. They released a fine, but overlooked debut "Ready to strike" in 1985. Then followed it up the next year with "Thrill of a lifetime" which unfortunately saw the band heading in a more AOR direction. The band then fell on rough times as they got booted from their label and then several line-up changes ensued including basssist Johnny Rod going to WASP and other members left to form the Bullet Boys. The band came back with a very different line-up on the 1988 release King Kobra 3 which was a hit and miss affair at best. After that they decided to call it a day as band members went off to other projects.


Time passed, the stars lined up a certain way and these old geezers needed money so they came back. Ratt would return with three original members as they went to a single guitar approach and they brought in former Vince Neil bassist Robbie Crane to round out the line-up. King Kobra includes Appice, some limited playing by former member Mick Sweda and several new members plus some guests.

Here we go.

King Kobra-Hollywood Trash

vs.

Ratt-s/t

Vocalist

I actually had to skip this section and come back because I knew it would be tough. Kelly Keeling (Baton Rouge, Blue Murder) is up for King Kobra. He has always had a good voice as far he has range and can handle different styles, but he lacks distinction and the ability to really display emotion in his voice. He goes through the motions fine, but nothing stands out and he is only as good as the song he sings. Pearcy was known even in the 80's for not having the strongest voice in the world to say the least. If anything it's even a little thinner on this album. However, he has a distinct sound and that makes a difference. His voice is very much a part of who Ratt were. So a an off day for Pearcy is better than an on day for Keeling.

Point to Ratt

Guitarist

Warren DeMartini is up for Ratt taking on Kelly Keeling, Mick Sweda, Steve Fister and guest C.C. Deville. First up King Kobra deserve to be docked for bringing in Deville even though it's in a limited guest roll. I mean if you need his help then you really should not be making an album in the first place. Despite the fact that Sweda has been a competent guitarist in his other bands, most of the work for King Kobra is generic at best and underdone and dull at worst. They sound more like some run of the mill band noodling around in the basement or like the kind of poodle-haired bar band that probably existed back around 1989 in every little town. DeMartini was always Ratt's best player. He is none too spectacular this time around, but there are a few sharp hooks on occasion.

Point to Ratt


Rhythm section

For Ratt it's drummer Bobby Blotzer and bassist Robbie Crane going against Carmine Appice on drums and Kelly Keeling wearing his third hat as bass player. Bobby Blotzer has always been the definition of run of the mill as far as hard rock drummers go. What you can expect from a guy whose nickname is "the blotz"? He is however helped out by some decent production. Robbie Crane is probably just as good as former Ratt bassist Juan Crocier and I really can't hear that either guy made that much of a contribution. On the King Kobra side Kelly Keeling can be heard on occasion and not a bad tone from his bass either. Carmine Appice is no doubt an above average drummer. Yet on a few songs the drum sound is thin and clunky like he is playing down the hall from where the microphones were. Then for most of the album the sound is worked out and he does well enough. There are several parts he handles with ease that I am sure Blotzer could not play at all.

Point to King Kobra


Originality/production

The first thing I think about when I got to this column on originality was the fact that this is the second self-titled album for Ratt as their first EP was also self-titled. However that fact should not reflect on their music. Ratt could have picked up where they left off in the early 90's and it might have worked. Instead they tried to become more serious. They didn't have the writing ability for that to work. instead they lost the best aspect of Ratt which was that they were a fun band when they were on. This is just tedious. King Kobra is even worse though. This is bland, faceless hard rock with a few weak attempts to be slightly modern. The production for Ratt is okay, slightly light yet alright. The production on King Kobra varies like the songs were done at different times. Some are adequate and other times it's so thin that they sound more like rough demos.

Point to Ratt



Who rocks more?

Oh, it's time to take a deep breath and try to figure this out. This category is like figuring out the Rubik's cube. That is if the Rubik's cube involved piles of lame music that made me cringe when I heard it. Okay, maybe it's not that much like the Rubik's Cube except it is tough to figure out. Neither band really rocks, that's obvious. Both tried too hard to do something different than they did in their past and both failed. However Ratt stayed closer to their roots and they did have one really good song on this album which is one more than King Kobra had.

Point to Ratt




Despite putting out the worst album of their career Ratt still take this one 4-1. Reunion albums tend to fail more often than they succeed. Many bands seem to fall into the trap of "oh, we need to be hip to the current trends". So many times you get some old geezers trying to sound modern and they fall on their faces because it's not natural and it's probably not what long time fans want. In this case, despite struggling Ratt do sound a little like their old selves. However this isn't much about King Kobra that links this album to their previous releases. They could have called it "Carmine and the mustaches" or "Hasbeens and neverweres" or whatever and it meant as much as calling themselves King Kobra. Appice had the right to use the name, but it's really just the band in name only. To their credit the King Kobra disc does include two bonus tracks which are demos from the 80's and they are the best songs on the album, but I didn't feel it was fair to include bonus tracks in this contest since they were from a different time and with different band line-ups.


***Be back soon with another one of these.

Lesser of two evils

Ah, the New Wave of British Heavy Metal (NWOBHM), it was a scene with a major impact on hard rock and metal. However like any other scene it produced some great bands and some not so great bands. There were also bands that started fine and for whatever reasons they went off in musical directions that didn't work so well. Saxon gave up their solid denim and leather sound for a stab at success in the mid-80's with less than fantastic results. The energetic Raven signed to Atlantic records and promtly had the life sucked out them as a once bright career faded fast. Thrash pioneers Venom never bothered to learn how to play their instruments until the 90's and they watched the bands they influenced pass them by in the mid-1980's. However the two bands I selected for this match-up are...



Diamond Head-Canterbury (1983)



Vs.



Jaguar-This Time (1984)



Diamond Head were one of the early bands to emerge from the NWOBHM scene. In retrospect they were infuential as well. Bands in their own scene like Satan and Dark Heart were influenced by them and of course Metallica would later cover some of theirs songs as well. Their sound was as much hard rock as metal and they were progressing on their early albums, but the direction on Canterbury had to be surprising to fans. Jaguar spent several years knocking around on the club scene before releasing their debut in 1983. Although it's not highly original, it was certainly a strong metal album that showed a band with some real potential. Unfortunately the music on that album was the direction they chose to follow. Both bands had been at it for a while so the music here is tight and well produced, but the ideas and the energy levels were a different story. So let's break this one down and see what we have twenty some plus years after the fact.



Vocals
Paul Merrell for Jaguar against Sean Harris for Diamond Head. Both singers sound comfortable with what they are doing. That's a plus to some extent. Merrell presents the melodies in okay fashion, but it all across like someone trying so hard to get played on the radio. Sean Harris is a far better salesman. Even when he singing lukewarm he puts everything into the effort.
Point to Diamond Head


Guitars

Garry Peppard for Jaguar takes on Brian Tatler from Diamond Head. Peppard had a good sound on the previous album despite some fuzzy production. Here he is merely average although with much better production. It's just rather typical of radio friendly AOR/hard rock of the time. Tatler slows down some from his previous efforts. He also seems to borrow a few moments from Def Leppard. Yet he has his own style here and there. He also gets in a few decent solos.

Point to Diamond Head

Rhythm section

Jaguar had Jeff Cox on bass and drummer Chris Lovell against bassist Mervyn Goldsworthy and drummer Robbie France for Diamond Head. Both pairs are alright although largely unspectacular. Although I could hear Goldsworthy's bass here and there.

Point to Diamond Head

Disappointment factor

This is tough call. Jaguar changed their sound more. However Diamond Head had been around longer, established themselves as a fairly consistent band and they were more original on their previous albums. So there album was the bigger disappointment because they were at a higher level than Jaguar. A clunker from Diamond Head was fairly surprising at this point because they had seemed to be one of the more steady bands on the scene.

Point to Jaguar.


Who rocks more?

As always, a tough category in this segment. If your band is being written about here than that means you didn't rock much to begin with. While both bands were fairly tight they were both watering down their sound to some extent. Both bands seemed to to have forgotten about heavy metal part of NWOBHM as they sure didn't put much of that into their sound. I think Jaguar were looking for radio play and Diamond Head were trying to expand their sound. Both came out sounding like limp noodles though. Diamond Head slowed things down a lot and tried stretching parts out, but it just made me sleepy. Jaguar would claim they had gotten into bands like U2 and Big Country before writing this. Instead they sound at best like Survivor and at worst kind of like Loverboy. I found myself needing to go take repeated dumps while listening to Jaguar. I am not sure if it was a coincidence or not. Diamond Head hit on far more solid moments although they were spread out.
Point to Diamond Head

Diamond Head take this one 4-1. So Diamond Head seemed to be trying to integrate pop, pomp and other into their sound and Jaguar just shook off the metal label and strapped on an AOR/hard rock persona like it was no big deal. Musical growth can be a great thing and I think Diamond Head were trying that only the results were rather mediocre. Granted they had been at it for a few years and I can't begrudge them trying to incorporate new sounds into their mix, but much of this album didn't work. Jaguar is a different situation because they changed singers just before "Power Games", but most of that album was written before the vocalist change. However when it came time for a new album there were new ideas brought into play and the material made them sound like an entirely new band. Also it seemed to kill any potential that they had shown on the previous album. So for these albums NWOBHM may have stood for..
New wave of bad heavy metal
New wave of barely heavy metal
New wave of bad horrible music
No way of baking hard meatloaf

Okay, the last one didn't make much sense, but neither did some of the ideas that Diamond Head and Jaguar tried on the above albums.


***I'll be back soon with another match-up.