KISS Performs Unmasked Without PAUL STANLEY; Video Available
- July 27, 2009
According to Kiss On Fire, KISS members Gene Simmons (bass, vocals), Tommy Thayer (guitar) and Eric Singer (drums) played the band's classic song "Deuce" at this year's San Diego Comic-Con International on Saturday, July 25 at the Hard Rock Cafe. This marked the first time KISS (minus guitarist/vocalist Paul Stanley) performed unmasked since 1995.
Watch video footage of the appearance below.
KISS is tentatively scheduled to release its new album in early October. Songtitles set to appear on the CD include "Russian Roulette", "Modern Day Delilah" and "Stand".
Thayer wrote and sang his first song on the album, while Singer also got his first opportunity to sing a lead vocal on an original song.
Simmons recently told The Canadian Press that there were no outside writers working on the Paul Stanley-produced disc. He also described the album's sound as "no strings, no keyboards, no synths, no tambourines, no nothing — just meat and potatoes."
Simmons confirmed that a deal is in the works with Wal-Mart that will result in an "entire section" of the giant retailer's stores across the country (apparently dubbed "Kiss Korner") being dedicated to KISS.
There has been no official announcement of a KISS deal with Wal-Mart for the band's next CD, although artists such as THE EAGLES and AC/DC have both issued recent albums exclusively through the giant retailer. In addition, AEROSMITH guitarist Joe Perry may have inadvertently let it slip that the band's next studio album will come out exclusively through Wal-Mart.
To report any abusive, obscene, defamatory, racist, homophobic or
threatening comments, or anything that may violate any applicable laws,
please send an e-mail to bmouth@bellatlantic.net
with pertinent details.
Anyone posting such material will be immediately and permanently banned. IP
addresses are recorded to aid us in enforcing these conditions.
COMMENT | Very cool... posted by : KISSOFF 2004 7/27/2009 7:57:58 AM
Enjoyed that clip. Yet another reason I wish I could have gone to this year's Comic-Con.
NP: Nevermore "This Godless Endeavor"
COMMENT | posted by : redrum4 7/27/2009 8:02:56 AM
I hope they didn't fire Paul Stanley to hire Dan Nelson !!
COMMENT | Huh.... posted by : rocknrolla 7/27/2009 8:40:50 AM
Damn good.
COMMENT | Robonez... posted by : Joe Siegler 7/27/2009 8:49:22 AM
They did do one more album after Revenge. The sadly forgotten "Carnival of Souls".
COMMENT | posted by : Dudemanbro' 7/27/2009 8:59:45 AM
Gene looks bored, not a single tongue wag.
COMMENT | Gene for President posted by : Whitetrashgod 7/27/2009 9:06:00 AM
This sounds amazing, Gene is recession proof and an icon. The guy took comic book imagery and rock fury to build an empire bigger and better than any corporate business entity.......
KISS forever.....
COMMENT | Damn. posted by : Sinistas 7/27/2009 9:09:57 AM
Thayer is nasty, and on a Tele to boot!
COMMENT | Carnival of Souls". posted by : JRSPON 7/27/2009 9:57:18 AM
Yes, one of the most underated albums of all time. If released today i think it would be a big hit.
COMMENT | Wow, posted by : JRSPON 7/27/2009 9:58:55 AM
Great job Tommy!!!
COMMENT | the Genius of posted by : BSlash24 7/27/2009 11:09:08 AM
IwinIwon09-61. Fantastic...I hate to question such wisdom, though I suggest "lasting longer" isn't always a good thing, nor makes a band better. Most bands have a great period of 7-10years(max). Soft? do you homework IwinIwon....but its opinion, so I will let you have it. If you think Gene/Paul out did Paul/John, have at it! Its what pleases you most.
COMMENT | Great video posted by : RiotAct666 7/27/2009 11:56:08 AM
KISS are icons!
COMMENT | MAYBE ALL THE KISS BASHERS FINALLY GOT JOBS?!??!? posted by : Angry Johnny 7/27/2009 12:06:44 PM
Where's all the "Greed $immons" and all that crap?? You know, Stanley's a queer and whatnot . . .
Thank God. Those guys need to move out of mommy's house. Hopefully they'll start slowly and just get some crappy job and won't be able to afford internet for awhile.
We could all use a break from these ass-hats.
COMMENT | KISS... posted by : LordofSalem 7/27/2009 12:28:30 PM
are some ugly ass dudes...
COMMENT | hilarious^^^^ posted by : Haymaker 7/27/2009 12:55:14 PM
BSlash24, your responses to "IWinIWon09thru61" always crack me up! but anyone who posts that kiss is even close to the beatles musically should not be encouraged! ;-)
"Joe Siegler" and "JRSPON", i thought i was the only one who liked "COS" - great album! i could never figure out why kiss fans didn't embrace it! if they included "jungle" in their live set today, i met actually return to see them!
COMMENT | Angry Johnny posted by : BSlash24 7/27/2009 1:22:03 PM
the "haters" ,as you say, of Gene's financial manifesto are laying in the weeds, ready to pounce when there's a news item that Gene & KiSS are releasing a new KiSS Central Air Conditioning system, or KiSS Steel Belted Radial Tires. Then we unleash a well deserved torrent of abuse on the modern day PT Barnum.
This news item is quite bland & middle of the road. Gene playing a song with 2 members of the band, that for once is musical, or semi, so more power to him. But you know its been 2 solid weeks without a non musical product release, well over due for a KiSS Spaghetti strainer.
Haymaker, IwinIwon sees Kiss from a totally different light. Maybe the world for that matter. While Chris Columbus went on tour to prove "the world, she's a not a flat", IWinIwon sees the earth as an octagon. And KiSS WAY more prolific & hard rocking than the Beatles...he also types with his nose, strapped in a gurney. Pure genius each post.
COMMENT | Haymaker posted by : JRSPON 7/27/2009 1:22:19 PM
Yes,. i thought (think) that it is a great album, i still listen to it every so often, i think if this album was released today, it would do well, it would sell to all the Kiss fans, plus all the other rock fans, it would of done well then but with all the reunion stuff going on it was released and that was about it, an way, i thought it was written well, some of Pauls best rythm playing, Bruce was great , all n all it was a 9 out of 10.
COMMENT | posted by : JRSPON 7/27/2009 1:30:15 PM
And for me, yes i respect the Beatles for what they had done, in my opinion, any one who stepped up to the pump back then could of been as big as they were(are), i dont think they are (were) great muscians, they were just good, yes they did write a ton of good songs, and most were good to great, they are over rated to me, they were on of the first to make it big, and to me it could of been anyone. And They have never in their dream could of put on a show like kiss does, hell no one can do it to this date!!!!
I've always felt that Joh Lennon's guitar playing and Ringo Starr's drumming was around average. George Harrison was a great guitarist, and Paul McCartney's bass playing is BRILLIANT..
I must say though, with all the shit Gene always gets, his bass playing on this clip isn't half-bad..
COMMENT | Angry Johnny posted by : BSlash24 7/27/2009 1:42:48 PM
PS- we write from work, us non Paul Stanley ballwashers can multi task...with all due respect, isn't it the KiSS Star Trekie style people, that get married at KiSS conventions, that GO to KiSS conventions, collect Kiss Dolls & KiSS trading cards, that wear Gene Simmons plastic pointy ears(oh, wrong fake character), aren't they more the lovable stereotype of the person living in their parent basement...that wear KiSS underRoos, quote Gene, sleep in a KiSS Coffin, have purchased a KiSS burial plot, will be buried in Paul makeup & panties...
wouldn't they be the types to be living with their mom at 40 because they spend all their hard earned cash on KiSS product...and I salute them, and stand behind their right to LOVE KiSS loyally. The most loyal fan in rock, maybe 2nd to the DeadHeads...a very odd social dynamic....why those 2 bands I wonder, why not say "the Jefferson Airplane" and "Foghat".
while the Deadhead & the KiSSologist might be completely different beasts in nature, they share the same qualities, the desire to be seen as THE biggest fan, that "look at me, I'm Gene or Jerry's biggest fan".
They drive the volkswagen bus(wouldn't they be disappointed when Gerry drives away in a BMW with his middle finger in the air) or the Hurst, depending on their fandom. They wear tie dye ties to work, or a Hotter than Hell tie. At home they are 24/7 about their band. Friends & family know them for their love of the band. It is their identity, it gives them a purpose. Right down to KiSSmas ornament or dancing bear at the top of the KiSSMas Tree....
so I ask you Angry Johnny, maybe you got that stereotype a little backwards. Wear are you writing from today? Does the makeup come off easy at night before you put your head down on your KiSS pillowcase?
COMMENT | JSPRON posted by : BSlash24 7/27/2009 1:48:26 PM
let me guess, you were born in 1986? It could have been anybody? But it happened to be a band that wrote album, after album, after album of brilliant material...as far as John's guitar playing, he's better than you think, AND it was SO not about laying down some shred guitar. he also played just about any instrument you put in front of him, along with Paul, and writing/arranging some of rocks most complicated songs. Maybe not the most complicated guitar pieces, who the F cares.
Ac/DC, you're a good man(or woman). But Duece, while a great song, one of my favorites of KiSS, is nothing much on bass, guitar, etc, as far as technical playing. I'm not dissing it, but Its still great playing cuz its to the point, love ACE's work on it. But its nothing tough. But again, that's not the point of great music.
Yeah, i havent seen Paul McCartney live , but every one says that he puts on one hell of a show, Harrison was great, Everyone looks at Paul Stanley as being just a front man, but i am a guitar player myself and seeing Stanley live many times he is a great ghuitar player, yes Gene take a lot of shity, but he can play live, thats one thing they do is bring it 110% every night , no matter what they bring it.
COMMENT | posted by : Aces_High99 7/27/2009 1:51:34 PM
They should've performed unplugged rather than unmasked.
And by "unplugged", I mean "not plugged into their amps or the PA system". Ha.
COMMENT | BSlash24 posted by : JRSPON 7/27/2009 1:52:19 PM
1967 - And they have sold like what - around 500 million albums, thats not good, thats great,
COMMENT | posted by : Aces_High99 7/27/2009 1:56:38 PM
Anybody who can't acknowledge the fact that the Beatles are the most influential band in history simply doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.
And no, I'm NOT hardcore Beatles fan. I will take the Stones over the Beatles any day...I'm actually a HUGE Stones fan, but I'm not a fucking sheep who would petulantly insist, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the Stones are/were more influential, or are/were even better artists.
'Cuz that would be total bullshit. I prefer the Stones' dangerous, edgy, blues-driven guitar attack much more than the Beatles' more melodic, artsy approach, but as far as REAL musical artistry is concerned, there's really no competition.
There's a big difference between "best" and "favorite".
COMMENT | Are you kidding me? posted by : Lemmyisgod 7/27/2009 2:00:08 PM
"Carnival of Souls" is the biggest pile of steaming dung this band has delivered. Even worse than "Crazy Nights". Nothing on "Carnival..." is remotely original for them. They listened to Alice In Chain's "Dirt" over and over, then wrote "Carnival..." to try and be relevant. And, they didn't care at the time because Paul and Gene knew the reunion was in the works.
COMMENT | ace's are freakin' high posted by : BSlash24 7/27/2009 2:06:35 PM
thank you! and on any given day I may prefer the Stones for the same reason. but...
JSPRON- I'm not trying to put you down. And of course, if you like KiSS better, that's fine, its your opinion...I'm shocked you dismiss the Beatles as "they fit the suit" while you were born in 1967...there were others they came out & were huge at the same time, but were lame. Like Jerry & the Pacemakers, a few others. Beatle might have been a little tame on their first release, but they evolved like no band ever. Every album just was a GIANT leap from the previous. Granted, their was less of a blueprint, but they made it.
Don't listen to me, pull up an interview with Paul or Gene, they WORSHIP the Beatles. (and Stones)....please, I won't use the album sales as a barometer, or as amo to win an argument. Beatles sold a ton, but if they sold 1/10 of that, it wouldn't matter. Lots of Shit bands have sold a ton. Or people I don't care for, like that "ropin' the wind" guy.(I'm drawing a blank right now).
you are very KiSS biased. I will say this, I respect Paul as a front man, performer, rhythm guitarist that knows his role, plays to the song, complimented Ace, a solid band mate. But NOT a great guitarist. Not close. he keeps it simple. Ace wasn't a GREAT guitarist for cryin' out loud. Love him, but....case & point, I remember Paul's Coming out(not sexually, but guitar wise), on some mid 80's in Concert Video, and he gets in way over his head, does a HORRIBLE tapping solo(Kiss should never go there), some other faux flash crap & was miserable. Stick to solid rhythm.
First off --- MAN. If I was a woman who was into KISS, AC/DC, ZZ Top, etc. as much as I am, I would probably be a dyke working in a hardware store..
As for the bass line on Deuce, I know it's not rocket science, but it's not one note or chord riding through the entire song either. You can see that Gene is pretty conscious of the notes he's playing.
COMMENT | AC/DC posted by : BSlash24 7/27/2009 2:15:39 PM
or you just described greatest girl there ever was! How do you look in a wig? OH, is this thing on? But seriously folks.
its a good debate. This thread was so dead, like KiSS career circa 1987. look at the life out here now. Gotta love a good rock n roll debate...
Gene & Paul would tell you straight up, no doubts, no hesitation, John & Paul trump them 1,000 fold as musicians, song writers, every fascite. That's not a put down on those two, they are but a zillion that didn't have that whole package...if you're more interested in a guy shredding up & down the neck, but can't write a song, play to a song, arrange, play multiple instruments well, then you miss the point of what a real musician is. (not gearing that to you Ac/Dc Forever).
The beauty of Kiss was their simplicity, with a splash of Beatles & stones, but mix in some Zep(Larger than life for instance).
COMMENT | posted by : Aces_High99 7/27/2009 2:22:04 PM
C'mon, man...a girl into KISS, AC/DC and ZZ Top would be a thing of beauty!
My girlfriend listens strictly to Top 40 radio, and it drives me fucking insane.
COMMENT | posted by : jake12474 7/27/2009 2:33:18 PM
i think everyone is confusing the look on gene's face....he is not bored he is lost,,,lost without his sidkick....remember tommy and eric are hired guns.....and without paul upthere gene cant believe he is playing music with a couple fools.....who dont deserve to be on stage with the allmighty gene....having paul upthere makes it ok but when he is not there,,,its painfully obvious gene is not happy playing music with a couple guys who in his eyes are lower in the food chain.....
was a grundge attempt. I like the 'Master and the Slave' song track 2, I think. if you burn your own cd's as I do. there's 3 or 4 to pull off of that CD. put it right next to revenge 4 or 5 songs and hide it in your CD player. Everyone puts out garbage CD's at least once every 10 yrs. or so. And speaking of garbage CD's ... St. Anger is right there too. Must say the DVD of st. anger is the real gem, live with modern-day snare. If Kirk added some leads ... btw
LED ZEPPELIN is where it all begins as far as Metal (AC/dc, metallica, Iron Maiden. Yes I think the mighty mighty ZEP is responsible more so than beatles. imo. 4 metal specificallyu.
Well.. I AM a Capricorn, but she's a Gemini.. So much for that song..
Actually, her favorites were always from the lighter side (Sting, Billy Joel, etc.), but over the last 9 years she has seen all of my faves with me. She enjoys the music and shows, and basically takes an interest in my bands as a couple.
COMMENT | Wow THAT WAS COOL! posted by : oboma 7/27/2009 3:14:50 PM
Rumor has it Paul was trying out for Anthrax!!!I must amit Tommy Thayer sounds much better the Ace!
that's cool, fantastic woman. and if I have to put up with Sting or some Joel, I could deal if I can sprinkle in some of my rock, & not have to listen to top 40. You can at least find some middle ground. When you're mellowing out, candle light diner, appease her, let her have her Sting, tell her how much you agree with the lyrics to "if you love somebody, set them free". she'll think you are a well rounded, modern man....then it frees you up to listen to "Let there be rOck" on a friday afternoon in the car. Brilliant.
KillEddie- Zep definitely has the large influence on hardrock/Metal, but for rock, just about any musician born circa 1950 was heavily affected by their Ed Sullivan appearance & influenced to join a band...Kiss were infected. Aerosmith, they all loved the beatles first. (stones too)
as a matter of fact, Ozzy's favorite alltime band is the Beatles. While they grind you with their molten metal, Ozzy would throw in a Beatle-esc melody....and while the Beatles aren't considered hard rockers, before the Zeps/Sabbath/Purple, the Beatles could be as heavy as any, first feedback, songs like "She's so heavy", and Helter Skelter is considered by many to be the first metal song.
You two are awesome! Love your posts, and you had me laughing on a shitty day, so thanks!
Okay, so what's the secret to getting your lady to open her mind to "our" brand of music? Mine won't even let a note dribble out of the speaker before she either leaves the room or non-chalantly turns the stereo down or off! But when the "David Cook" CD comes out, I'm expected to sing along - I'd rather stick needles in my eyes! Any advise would be great. She likes some decent rock and roll (i.e. Springsteen, Mellancamp, some vintage KISS) but her CD's are pretty pop-current!
The KISS vs. Beatles debate is SO stupid! The Beatles affected and influenced EVERYTHING that came after them, not just in rock and roll, but in EVERY other genre, be it pop, classical and even country music. To even argue that KISS or any other band could even touch them is absolute ignorance.
COMMENT | posted by : Aces_High99 7/27/2009 3:44:45 PM
I took my girlfriend to see both Heaven and Hell and Iron Maiden.
H&H, she kinda liked, but Iron Maiden was a bit over-the-top for her...plus she got the impression that Bruce was very full of himself...perceptive, ha!
I told her that Iron Maiden is actually very upbeat and happy as far as metal bands go, so I won't be taking her to see Slayer anytime soon.
COMMENT | They should never have done.. posted by : chickenmonster 7/27/2009 3:55:14 PM
a reunion tour. It's been going on now for what, like 12 years now. LET IT FUCKIN DIE ALREADY. Like one dude said, get Kulick back in the band and start playing some more cool shit like you did with revenge and carnival. At least it sounded more modern. I'm fucking sick of 70's era kiss!!
COMMENT | Brianca posted by : BSlash24 7/27/2009 4:00:30 PM
right on!...this is dead true, & also a compliment(you might not think), but I thought you WERE a girl! I swear. Cuz the name, Brianca, & you more than anyone(this is a compliment) have more "sensitive", open minded posts. Please don't take that as a put down. I guess you picture certain people by their tone...RIOTACT666, i have a clear vision. anyhow.
I try to sweeten the girls up with a hard rock band, but find a more poppy song. Like AC/DC you go with "Shot down in flames", that's more catchy, big hooks, melody. As an example....or find that middle ground. I've had many girlfriends into classic rock, beatles/Stones, some Asmith.
COMMENT | All that's left to say over and over again is... posted by : MurdererKillerSlayer 7/27/2009 4:12:32 PM
I wish I had an answer for that! I think the reason it works out well with my wife and I is because she's not into music as much as all of us on here are. She's more passionate about her flower beds and cooking (I swear I'm not dropping a female stereotype.. - Those of you who have an Italian GF or wife know what I'm talking about!). If she took music more seriously, it may have been an issue..
COMMENT | KiSS women posted by : BSlash24 7/27/2009 4:35:10 PM
I do find women that are WAY into music are over the top sometime. I hate to sterotype, but its like they are trying to prove they know it, to be taken seriously. Some girls might like Zep a bit, or some Stones, but if a girl know Zeppelin started as the New Yardbirds, or wears her satins, "like a lady', then it gets scary.
Brianca, I hope I didn't offend. I DEFINITELY didnt mean that as a put down in any way. Brianca reminded me of Bianca, and I just had that in my mind. Your posts are different too.
COMMENT | $cab Ki$$ haters posted by : Get up and make it work 7/27/2009 4:58:43 PM
To the dilrod asking where we were at, yeah, sorry, your sister just got off me, I've been busy all day.
Well, I guess temporarily, you can remove the "imposter" label from the "$cab Imposters", considering they showed their ugly mugs without Ace and Peter make-up, but they are still mediocre $cab fill ins.
Playing the Hard Rock eh?? That holds about 1500 people, so that puts them on par with their State Fair and casino tour attendance.
COMMENT | lol posted by : Just_Lee 7/27/2009 7:53:39 PM
Glad to see you made it out "get up". "Playing at the Hard Rock", like it was an offical KISS gig. Where were you comments a few days ago when they were drawing 40, 50, and 90,000?...lol. And Brianca I agree with you on the Beatles vs. KISS thing. The Beatles are the freaking Beatles for crying out loud. I still prefer KISS music because I like a harder edge. But I love me some Beatles too....the later years of the Beatles that is. As far as The Rolling Stones go....can't freaking stand them. Just don't like Jagger's voice at all.
COMMENT | BSlash24^^^^ posted by : brianca 7/27/2009 8:18:45 PM
No offence taken, man! I actually pride myself on my open-mindedness, especially when it comes to music. As far as being sensitive, I just think that everyone's opinion is equally valid as long as people are respectful to one another.
Yep, it's funny how you get a picture of certain people on here. It would be an interesting experiment to have people fill in a profile of certain regular posters to see if their visions of that person were accurate. Take for example, "IWinIWon" - I'm certain you could paint a pretty accurate picture of him/her - am I right? ;-)
COMMENT | Tommy's a hack... posted by : Ronnie Black 7/27/2009 8:32:31 PM
Not even one flubbed note - & he's sposeta be mimicing Ace?? Frehley rules, botched notes & all....
COMMENT | Brianca posted by : BSlash24 7/27/2009 8:32:56 PM
IWinIwon is on a different plain all together!...maybe English isn't is first language too though, not sure. IF it is then LOOK OUT...
I'm not able to watch the clips at work, just watched this now. There were some "WOW, Tommy, you kicked ass on that!". He played it NOTE FoR NOTE Like Ace. He didn't take it anywhere, to a new level. He played it note for note. He did that well, but its a simple song to play, he's played a zillion times, if he didn't do it to that level he'd be in trouble. Its Ace's licks. He's the Rich Little of KiSS guitar. Again, not knocking him, he's doing what is asked, but its hardly "WOW". And I'm not being negative.
COMMENT | The Beatles may have been slightly more influential... posted by : nodeerforamonth 7/27/2009 9:23:15 PM
but KISS is louder, harder, & faster. Hence they are better.
your words, "brianica", and it only took a dozen posts for an idiot like "nodeerforamonth" to prove you correct! i love it when morons try to knock down the beatles, especially on a thread about kiss, who openly claim to have been heavily influenced by the fab four!
What can I say, man. You pretty much knocked that one out of the park!
Like I said, everyone's opinion is equally valid, provided they are respectful, but also somewhat educated about the matters they are speaking on. The post you responded to is neither.
COMMENT | musicforever posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 9:20:52 AM
boy are you misinformed & need to really do your homework. you're name should be Musicforaminute.
1st off, if someone had a beard, who cares. #2, predating KiSS were bands that KiSS ripped off (Alice Cooper), and bands that KiSS could & didn't ever touch live.
How about Jimi Hendrix, the greatest showman there was. Pull out Jimi at Monterey, this over the top guy from outerspace, playing guitar like had never been heard(and KiSS certainly didn't top that), playing behind his back, through the legs, fucking the amps, lighting his guitar on fire, smashing it as a sacrifice, on his knees, you name it, he laid the performance blue print...and he had NO BEARD. Go figure. If you were BORED at that show, you don't have a pulse.
Led Zeppelin. KiSS couldn't touch their playing & power on stage. Sure, Page had a beard for a period, Plant too. WHo the fuck cares. how small minded is that thinking. KiSS was HOPING to capture their power & mystic on stage.
Alice Cooper band was fantastically theatrical. Great tunes, scared the hell out of parents, KiSS owes them a huge debt.
David Bowie. No Beard there. 1972(predating KiSS), theatrically OUT there. Great guitarist, more rocking in this Ziggy period than the average fan give him credit. Far freakier than KiSS on top of that. Nothing boring going on on that stage.
The Stones in 72....I could go on & on. Bands with more power, better songs, better playing live....and a KiSS show was fantastic circa 1977. No doubt. There was energy from the band, but a hell of alot of bells & whistles.
What makes the hair stand on my arms at a show, when I get those music chills, is less fire breathing, less blood spitting, fireworks, but pure energy coming from the musicians, channeled into their playing & performing...and KiSS did acheive this as well, so I'm not saying they sucked live, but to say they were the first to be "unboring" etc, is so ignorant.
Stop listening to Gene Simmons interviews. He says that bullshit all the time "oh, the hippies in their jeans & T's on stage, looking at their feet, all high, boring live, we brought you a show" Fuck you Gene. He's simply rationalizing a lot of KiSS's silliness on stage, wearing makeup. Gene rips every band virtually, cuz he's insecure musically, a hack bass player....BUT, he LOVES the Beatles, STones & Zep. As does Paul....Gene admits ripping off the Stone's "Bitch" when writing Duece.
COMMENT | DP posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 9:33:47 AM
add Deep Purple to the list that in their heyday would WIPE the stage with KiSS. Techinically a zillion time better on their instruments, personally I find their songs to be more powerful, and put on a show like no other. Time is forgetting them, but KiSS look like a silly band all made up for 10 year olds against these bands...the fucking Who! There's another. Please. These bands BLOW KiSS away, and we are talking 1968 on....oh, I guess Ian Guillen had a beard for a while & Pete Townsend...Gene WiSHES he was an ounce of the musician & song writers theses list of people are...and you want loud, no one was louder than the Who, and Deep Purple. They melted ears. THey just didn't wear mime makeup I guess. Or spit blood. I forgot that. Or had trading cards & comic books.
And the Beatles argument, I guess why even go there. You don't have to like them, but to dismiss them as overrated & KiSS is louder, so that makes them better...simply ignorant.
COMMENT | ^^^musicforever^^^ posted by : Haymaker 7/28/2009 10:55:48 AM
nearly twenty emails and counting - still no reply. but like i said, i'm persistent! i'll keep you posted.
regarding the beatles vs. kiss debate: i think what you are saying is that while the beatles had an immeasurable effect on music, kiss had an immeasurable effect on showmanship. and i think this is true - kiss did break ground on the elements that could be included in a rock show such as make-up, costumes and pyrotechnics.
BUT, as the esteemed BSlash24 has pointed out, these elements were really nothing new to rock and roll. many other bands were already using make-up (alice cooper, new york dolls), costumes (bowie, p-funk) and pyro (alice). where i think kiss DOES deserve credit is for bringing all of these elements together into one bombastic presentation. but again, even bowie's and alice cooper's shows pre-dated kiss and included all of these elements, too. perhaps one could say that kiss was the most popular band to wear make-up and have a large stage show. but are kiss in the same league as the beatles? i think if you asked gene or paul themselves they would be humble enough to admit that NO ONE is in the same league as the beatles.
COMMENT | For those interested........ posted by : spaceace69 7/28/2009 11:08:58 AM
Or just curious. IwinIwon has a myspace site dedicated to ACE. His name is Dominic. He has said it on here, so i don't believe i'm doing anything wrong. I forgot how i got to it, (it was by chance and i just noticed the "writing style", and knew they were one and the same). His pic is there. Looks like a normal 26 yr old guy. Go figure.
COMMENT | Interesting^^^^ posted by : brianca 7/28/2009 11:52:23 AM
Years ago, there was an article featured in the KISS Alive Worldwide magazine about an super-fan from South Americo named Dominic. I wonder if he's the same person?
COMMENT | Haymaker posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 12:06:08 PM
well said. And I don't discard KiSS contribution to rock n roll performance "art". They took other elements, & exaggerated them, blew the top off of it. In some ways, it was amazing. It really took things by storm. In other ways it came off cheesy, took the edge off of the dangerous side of say Bowie, or NY Dolls, made it too "kiddie" stuff.
KiSS were a major phenomenom. For sure. around 76-77. It was huge, but it was due to mostly none musical aspects. The best songs added to the whole circus. Where with the Beatles, that was, after Elvis, the first HUGE MEGA phenomenon, but that was music first, circus 2nd. Kiss has some cool songs, early, but they were retreading, nothing at all ground breaking.
There were just too many great acts before them to say KiSS were the first real big stage show. Maybe as far as levitating drums, rising stage, yes. But "Their" performance as humans, and musically, they weren't breaking ground or were they better than the bands I mentioned above.
COMMENT | IwinIwon posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 12:08:23 PM
a Blabbermouth Icon. Hero. His command of the language, 2nd to none. NOW we're talking innovative, groundbreaking. He speaks a language twins speak in the womb. Splash of colors and sounds.
yes, he confirmed he's that guy. Dominic. Dom?...maybe english isn't his first language, hence the off beat diction.
COMMENT | forgotten posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 12:12:58 PM
someone sent me a photo of the guy Arthur Brown, he's a side note in rock history, the Crazy World of Arthur Brown(FIRE), in 1969 he had makeup on his album cover that is nearly identical to Gene's. Check the internet.
Gene & Paul are certainly no fools. Marketing, stealing, add steroids. They cherry picked every little aspects of the bands they loved & mixed it up. It became their own, but Musicforever, its very far from the first.
COMMENT | BSlash24 posted by : Just_Lee 7/28/2009 12:32:40 PM
I agree somewhat. But some of those bands you mentioned suck in my opinion. You see that's the problem, the debate over who the best band is will go on forever. It's totally opinionated. I agree the Beatles were a major influence on rock n roll, but KISS has their place there too. Not as much as the Beatles, but certainly for a whole host of bands to follow. I don't expect you to give KISS credit for anything and it's ok....really. I think Paul and Gene sleep pretty well at night....lol.
COMMENT | Just_Lee posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 12:45:30 PM
hendrix, the Who, Led Zep, deep purple, Beatles you feel all suck? while I respect opinion, I pity you. Gene & Paul love these bands...whether they sleep well or not or as many argue "they are richer than you can ever image" means zero to me.
don't think it doesn't bother Gene, despite all his riches, not to be respected by his peers. That a Jimmy Page thinks of them as strictly a gimic. And now a Vegas act. Gene is always defensive, putting other bands down, the "hippie" bands. If he slept well and was comfortable with his place in rock history, he'd let the music do the talking. Instead he tries to create a diversion, lumping all band before him as if they were all the Grateful Dead, Jefferson airplane, or Canned heat....take away KiSS's pyro, blood, & they wouldn't stand a chance sonically, powerfully, against the Zeps, Who's, DPs, VH's, Aerosmith, Hendrix's, Ac/DC's in their prime. They just don't pack that kind of musical punch live.
COMMENT | BTW posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 12:50:37 PM
I did give Kiss some credit. I said they were a phenomenon. I gave them credit where it was due. But the credit of being the first NON boring rock band, or loudest, or wildest performers, its not credit they deserve. lets call it like it is....KiSS changed rock n roll marketing, I'll give them that. (though the Beatles were marketed fiercely, though the band didn't like it)....
and KiSS maybe the first with the GIGANTIC stage presentation. I don't know of another band that had the drums rise, stage, stairs going up, all that. Stones had lots of inflatable stuff, Zep was the first with the giant Screen behind the stage in 1975...but in my mind, after you keep piling all that stuff on, it gets in the way of the music. Its silly. I get the chills from the music & energy.
COMMENT | BSLASH^^^^ posted by : brianca 7/28/2009 3:03:58 PM
I did a "Google" images seach of "Arthur Brown" and you're right! There's a photo of Arthur wearing his very Gene Simmons-like make-up - clown white base, pointed images around the eyes, black lipstick, he even wears a crown that is lit on fire during the show - and the photo is from 1968! I had heard of "The Crazy World of Arthur Brown", but had no idea that KISS drew so much influence from him! Pretty cool! But it also reinforces your point that KISS were not all that original, even though they took the whole make-up/stage show gimick to a whole new level!
COMMENT | Yermama posted by : Just_Lee 7/28/2009 3:24:00 PM
I don't think you read my posts correctly. I agree with the Beatles being the biggest influence. BSlash named bands that he thought wiped the stage with KISS or whatever....I don't agree. Deep Purple were ok, but can't stand the vocals or those damn loud ass organs....David Bowie for crying out loud...don't care for him...never did. That's where it got opinionated...in my opinion. I am in no way trying to say that KISS was as influential as the Beatles....I'm not stupid. But in my life....my life....KISS was more influential. I do love the Beatles....I like the Who...can't stand the Stones....just my opinion.
COMMENT | brianca posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 3:25:01 PM
of course! as you said, KiSS took this whole mix, all these ideas, others ideas, & just blew it up huge. Went to the next extreme. As we've mentioned over & over, we loved KiSS in the day, because of their larger than life image, the Superhero get ups, they captured the imaginations of any kids 10 years old in 1976. It was huge. They did it very well...and that was their influence, they influenced all those hair bands in the 80's, that were 10 in '76....guys who started with KiSS, graduated to Aerosmith, & were further influenced musically by VH.
BUT, with all that in mind, KiSS were stealing from everyone. There is really not an original idea other than to take other's ideas & enlarge them....Alice has given credit to Author Brown & the Doors. While Morrison looked like a normal 60's rock star, his antics were shocking on stage. And the were REAL...Alice took all that, & wore makeup, thigh high boots, spandex, (and snakes), EVERYTHING KiSS wore, only KiSS went one step further. Arthur Brown had a show stopped cuz of pyro issues & his crown of fire caught him one night. (I read on Wiko)....Gene of course was not oblivious to this, and Bowie....for shock, I find Bowie way more real & shocking. But KiSS stage presentation, gimmicks, the whole works was nothing original....Frank Zappa had also been very shocking, out there. But not a large mass appeal.
Kiss just took it all & marketed it for mass public consumption. Took the rough edges off too, made things huge, but also watered them down. like Bowies androgeny, too scary for middle America...and KiSS' music was an after thought, that was less original than the stage presentation....all together it was a goldmine....and KiSS Alive did rock, in a real rock way.
When I read post saying they made live shows unboring, that they are more influential than the Beatles, it was boring hippies up to KiSS, it blows my mind....
I will say, & this is very stereotypical, slightly unfair, but I find huge KiSS fans, again to be like Deadheads, they insolate themselves, & see & listen to very little else. Deadheads don't stray too far from maybe a few jam bands, maybe Floyd....KiSS maniacs I have found to be the same. They believe all of Gene's verbal sewage, and feel KiSS were the first, the only, the biggest, the loudest, & most powerful....to me they were the band that watered it down to a 10 year old level & helped introduce me to a world of Rock that truly was ground breaking...musically.
COMMENT | PS.... posted by : Just_Lee 7/28/2009 3:26:57 PM
I think Led Zeppelin is awesome too. I think their music is superior to KISS, but the stage show...not close...in my opinion. Led Zeppelin was sloppy...lost your attention. The crowds were almost asleep. Hendrix...also a great guitar influence...don't like his vocals though. Like I said...jut my OPINIONS....lol.
COMMENT | Just_Lee posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 3:30:58 PM
despite those opinion, which are valid, and I have mine, I still recogize greatness. There are band people LOVE, that I don't get, but I still recognize their influence, or their song writing ability. Bruce Springsteen comes to mind. I'm not a fan.
DP does sound a bit dated with the organ, but live they were more dynamic, more powerful, and far more technically proficient than KiSS. HEndrix. Zep. And i realize you can throw technical skills out the window if you can't write a song, or perform. I love KiSS simplicity too. hooks....I don't know, to hold KiSS to that high of standard musically, both studio & live, in my opinion is shallow. There's so much greater, with far more teeth. There, I said it!
COMMENT | GOOD LORD posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 3:43:11 PM
you've got to be kidding about Led Zep. Just watch the DVD, right out of the gate, killer, crowd way into it. They aren't little 10 year olds though, so they maybe a bit stoned, compared to a KiSS show.
One thing straight, led zeppelin wasn't sloppy, Page was at times, more towards the later part of their career. The rest of the band were precise....also, we're comparing to KISS!! Come on. Ace Fucking Frehley. Again, I love him, but he's the King of Slop, he's a Jimmy Page wanna be. His style is Jimmy Page light....He Jimmy Page on Zep I, and Ace never progressed beyond that. I mean really.
KiSS might not be sloppy live too, because #1, their songs are basic, simple. to the point. Very easy to play. AND, they play the same songs, the SAME way, EVERY NIGHT for 30 years! Please. They don't go off course for ONE second. They stick 100% to the script. And its an easy script. Like acting in Rocky Movie. You can't go wrong, or sloppy.
Led Zeppelin was 150% more powerful, as a band, then KiSS EVER could have pray for. For get the bombs, the blood, all that kiddy bullshit, just the 4 guys. Bonham alone could bash more power into a rock show...Me thinks you are very single minded Just_Lee....how old may I ask, without being demeaning.
COMMENT | Just to add fuel to the fire...... posted by : brianca 7/28/2009 3:58:37 PM
I have to be honest with you guys, when I go to see a live show, I don't want to hear a note-for-note reproduction of the album. I actually don't enjoy seeing a band that is so good live, they sound like their studio work. I've seen KISS nearly a dozen times, and there have certainly been occasions when they didn't play very well. But you know what? That to me is part of the charm of a live show!
I was always a little disappointed when I heard that KISS had "touched up" Alive I and II in the studio. Why? If it's for recording imperfections, okay. But to redo guitar tracks, drum tracks, bad vocals - I think that's sacrilidge! There's nothing better than a live recording when it's real and honest, missed notes, forgotten vocals and all!
Now, having said that, it shouldn't excuse a player like Ace Frehley from being so drunk he can't play his own material. And I've seen shows where Ace WAS so out of it he didn't play well. But there's a difference between playing well and playing your best!
COMMENT | Brianca posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 4:23:57 PM
KiSS Alive is basically studio. Did you see the "classic album" series, Eddie Kramer telling how they took audience from like 5 shows & compressed them to make the audience sound huge. And Paul resang parts, Ace replayed....but in defense of Kiss, it was common practice. But it is sort of sacriledge. What's the point then?
I don't mind say Rush doing note for note, but I love when a band takes a song somewhere else, depending on the song. If its a quick 2:00 hooky song, stick to the studio, but that wasn't Zep, they never played it like the studio...Kiss plays it each night not like the studio, but like Alive 1 & 2....right now, KiSS is so safe live its not even funny. Each night, after night, after night, not a note changed. ZZZ. and unlike Rush, its not precision music. Its straight up rock, ready for a change.
COMMENT | PS posted by : BSlash24 7/28/2009 4:50:42 PM
i do like KiSS rework live of "I was made for lovin' you". They make it more rough & ready. See, I give credit where credits due for KiSS!
COMMENT | Musicforever posted by : BSlash24 7/29/2009 9:33:50 AM
hard for me to debate with someone who reveres KiSS, KiSS, over Led Zep and think Led Zeppelin was boring live. Just watch the DVD from 1970, Royal Albert Hall, if you find that boring, and KISS with their bombs & pyro exciting, you should be going to Barnum & Bailey or a 4th of July Parade over a concert.
And Deep Purple used to complete explode things, trash their set...but really, is that what makes a rock concert good. If that's your barometer of an exciting show, its pretty shallow. its about the energy..
and I will say, in the 70's KiSS put on an exciting show, they had the energy, I won't deny that...but I'd prefer to have been at the show at Winterland in 1975, the black & white filmed show, to 1979 when they are wearing Capes, & look like they raided the wardrobe of the Golden Girls. Jimi Hendrix, with a trio, would blow you away with his playing alone. There's nothing boring about his performance at Monterey Pop, even without the lighting of his guitar....again, what's the point of this argument if you're more impressed with pyro & comic books.
COMMENT | Bslash posted by : Just_Lee 7/29/2009 8:31:56 PM
I am old enough to have seen your mighty Zep live in concert myself...not on DVD....in the flesh. Look....I love Led Zeppelin. I'm really not trying to compare them with KISS. To me, it's totally different. Like I said earlier....just my opinions. Zeppelin, Hendrix, Deep Purple....I like something about all of those bands. Even though I liked Rainbow better with Joe Lyn Turner singing. Seen them live...Blackmore is the shit....no doubt. A KISS show is a KISS show....what can I say, I'm a fan...but I'm not some young kid like you seemed to try to say I was. It's all good anyway, I just come in here to have a bit of fun from time to time....I'm not here to make enemies, but I like KISS so fuck off.
COMMENT | lol posted by : Just_Lee 7/29/2009 8:35:30 PM
just kidding about the fucking off part...lol
COMMENT | opinions posted by : BSlash24 7/30/2009 11:35:02 AM
opinions are one thing, but you simply haven't done your homework. Zeppelin might be alot of things, THIN Sounding simply isn't one of them. Fact. Kiss would be CRUSHED under their heaviness...and DP, while I know you don't like that keyboard(admittedly dated sounding), again, its fills in the sound 2 fold, & they are simply not thin sounding...Zeppelin is KNOWN for their heaviness, KiSS is Zep Light. Bonham alone assures this....I won't get personal, I simply don't feel you've done your homework....forget the makeup & bombs for a minute, SONICALLY, energy wise, Zep were the standard KiSS hoped to meet. They bashed you over the head....I'm perplexed.
COMMENT | I don't know..... posted by : Just_Lee 7/30/2009 8:51:05 PM
I don't think Led Zeppelin was going for a heavy sounding thing. I mean they play a lot of different sounding things. I think they are more Bluesy in a good way. I think Zeppelin have some great tunes. I own every cd they have. They just didn't do it for ME live as much as on cd. KISS is the other way around in my opinion. I still think Rainbow with Joe Lyn Turner is better than Deep Purple.....lol
COMMENT | oh..... posted by : Just_Lee 7/30/2009 8:52:14 PM
And Zeppelin does have a thin sound live...I had to say it. I know you are going to freak, but live....Jimmy Page was the worst of Zeppelin....just my opinon.
COMMENT | Musicforever posted by : BSlash24 7/31/2009 10:48:28 AM
1st off, the debate, was regarding KiSS being the 1st band that wasn't boring live, as you claimed. Yes, opinion...and KiSS should have played their last show 30 years ago, yes, again opinion.
so any band that doesn't have a rhythm player is thin, NO Opinion, not fact. Not true...Jimi Hendrix NEVER sounded thin. what about Eddie Van Halen. another player would just be in the way. And when he solo'd, the band did not sound thin...and VH, in 1978, would, and did, utterly just BLOW the doors off KiSS...they didn't need bombs, makeup, comic books, fire, blood & semen. Pure sonic blast of rock n roll.
Re: Page, if you don't like him, whatever. That's fine. The worst, simply a stupid statement. He created some of rocks greatest riffs, they sonically were so powerful, and just_lee/Pyroforever, you are on a small island that feel Zeppelin was thin sounding....
but the most ridicules part of this discussion, after saying Jimmy Page is the worst, you turn around & say KiSS, fucking KISS is the greatest. I love Ace, he couldn't hold a CANDLE to Jimmy Page, HE knows that. he's never created or played anything as complicated as Page. Ace is a poor man's Jimmy Page to top it all off. he plays in that Page Style, but watered down....Ace is fun, but he's rock 101 as far as technical playing....Page for sure could be sloppy live, but if he was sloppy, what's the term for Ace then. he slopped his way through songs & Solos that are not that challenging.
Ace's shock me solo, on Alive II, played well. Easy to play, but its done well...its also complete fixed up in the studio. Hear him play that on that Houston Bootleg that ended up on the Discogrophy, its a completed mess, over saturated with echo, and he's SO sloppy....but I love Ace for that, but how dare you say "Page is the worst", then turn around & applaud KiSS...I feel like I'm debating with 10 year olds that are more impressed with makeup & fire.
COMMENT | wait.... posted by : Just_Lee 7/31/2009 4:18:57 PM
I didn't say Jimmy Page was the worst guitar player....I was saying that Jimmy Page was the worst musician live in Led Zeppelin. He often butchered it live...in my opinion. Writing riffs...fuck yea, he was awesome. Staying in key for a solo live....not so good, but to each his own you know. I was not in any way saying Page was the worst. I'm not saying Ace is better either...you see your blind hatred for KISS has gotten in your way of reading my post. I will repeat, I think Jimmy Page was the worst musician on the stage when Led Zeppelin played live. In my opinion, John Paul Jones and John Bonham were way better at what they did in the live setting. And I will say again, every artists touches up live recordings in the studio....fact. But it's all good Bslash, you don't like KISS...fine. There are thousands upon thousands of us who still do....it's all good. I still like Led Zeppelin, just calling it like I see it.
Your statement about Van Halen blowing the doors off KISS....just opinion....prove it...who are you going to get to prove it. You see that's my point. All this bullshit talk about who is better, who is worse is useless. It's all opinionated. Prove it. How??? And you are calling us 10 year olds?....lol
COMMENT | Here you go........YerMama posted by : Just_Lee 8/1/2009 7:07:12 PM
I never said KISS were the greatest musicians. But it all depends on who you ask who is better. Especially live. I have seen Van Halen 10 times...Led Zeppelin 1 time and KISS 27 times. I have seen bad Van Halen nights....have seen bad KISS nights for sure. Don't really know if the Zeppelin night was bad or not...I have nothing to compare it to. I have seen KISS better than some of my Van Halen shows....I have seen Van Halen better than some KISS shows. David Lee Roth is worse than Gene Simmons for forgetting lyrics...lol. Anyway, you are right KISS aren't the greatest musicians but are still very entertaining....maybe that's what we like about them. And you are not reading my posts correctly either....I never said they are as musically accomplished....but yet you say I am auto programmed to defend KISS? Call me what you want, I do defend them...it's my right, just as it is your right to bash them...lol.
COMMENT | it's all good posted by : Just_Lee 8/2/2009 2:13:49 AM
If we can't have a little debate over rock n roll, what is it good for?....rock on.......
COMMENT | just_lee posted by : BSlash24 8/3/2009 12:20:12 PM
I never said I didn't like KiSS...but if we're comparing to Zep...and there's so much live stuff of Zep out there, later on, Page got a bit sloppy, but there's tons of great sound Page, live...and lots of crappy sounding Ace...I love KiSS Alive, but its not really a live album after all.
COMMENT | Bslash posted by : Just_Lee 8/3/2009 8:26:10 PM
Page's drug habits caught up with him...lol. Dude...I love Jimmy Page...I fucking love Led Zeppelin...I got everything they have ever released. Songwriting skills are top notch. Live they are ok. I'm not saying KISS is better at all....but when KISS hit the scene in a big way....74/75...I'm talking the beginning...they kicked some ass. They made many bands change their stage shows....believe it...or not. I think that was the point of the poster....which I am too lazy to look up who it was....then the favorite bands thing popped up you know...who judges the favorite band competition you know???? Anyway...hope I haven't offended you in any way...I agree with a lot of what you were posting...I do happen to agree with the other guy about KISS's live show back in the day.
"The Song Remains the Same".....also touched up in the studio. They actually lost 2 bass tracks due to techinal difficulty and didn't know it until they started to mix it down....in the studio. They added the tracks there. Everyone touches up live albums...KISS just lets it be known....lol.
COMMENT | just_lee posted by : BSlash24 8/5/2009 4:37:08 PM
not offended one bit. its cool. As long as people don't get personal, its cool...your right, the live albums, especially in the 70's were all touched up...I think its subjective too, cuz Zep did get sloppy, live, later in their career, 1975 on, but previous they were stellar. I think if you were looking for them to sound like the studio, then yes, disappointing, but that's not what they were after. it wasn't like they couldn't,(well its tough for Plant), but the DVD, the 1970 show sounds great, by my standards.
Where KiSS, and Cheap Trick hit the mark with their live albums, was bringing those songs to live. I want you to want me, or God of Thunder, many others, are just RIPPIN' live, when compared to the sort of watered down studio version.. Or most of the 1st KISS Alive album, the songs are beefed up life. Come on & Love me for example. They added steroids.
Zep were much more improvisational live. Sometimes over indulgent, but...KiSS on the other hand, especially post reunion, is completely scripted. You see one show on the tour, you've pretty much seen it all. Maybe a song change, maybe a F up here & there, but they don't improvise, or change the song one note. I think that's sort of...safe to put it mildly. Lame is better way to describe. it's their 1978 show each time. They are a "heritage" act to the max....I for one find that a complete bore...and I don't hate them, its just done, cooked. Time's up.
COMMENT | .... posted by : Just_Lee 8/5/2009 7:31:59 PM
I like the fact that Zeppelin was improvisational...that was cool. But man those studio albums of Zeppelin....oh man they are the shit to me....except "In Through The Out Door", which I don't like as much as all the rest. Zeppelin are freaking gods...in my mind. It's a whole different world than the KISS world. But at the end of the day, KISS has there place in rock history too....and they should be in the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame.
COMMENT | Maybe posted by : Warchief 8/16/2009 1:08:57 AM
This was a little i don't need you either to Paul.
BLABBERMOUTH.NET is run and operated independently of Roadrunner Records. The accuracy of the information
contained herein is neither confirmed nor guaranteed by Roadrunner Records, and the views and opinions of
authors expressed on these pages do not necessarily state or reflect those of Roadrunner Records or its employees.
