Stryper
Live at the Whisky
I am so embarrassed. That was a poorly written review. I wish I could have that one back – much like the way I imagine some folks would like to have their comments back after the passage of time.
I am such an idiot! I meant to write that Robert Sweet is no slouch in the musical department. Wow. Ouch. Leaving out the word “no” means quite the opposite and it’s an insult or dig I would never make in my writing. It was a totally unprofessional mistake to make on my part. I can’t believe I made such a foolish mistake. I own it. My bad. (My bad grammar).
And then I made my descriptive and clarifying comments in the most disconnected and poorly communicated manner possible. Yeah, it really sucks as a written album/DVD review. No doubt about it.
I’ve got some excuses. Well, not really an excuse. Let’s just call it a lame reason to act without thinking. But it’ll share a tiny amount of insight into why I threw away 29 years of rock journalism in one small album review. Now, I’m exaggerating, because surely this will not spell the doom of my writing career. I’m willing to do things a little different. For example, I’m leaving the original, terribly-written review up and not even correcting the horrendous typo and omission of the word “no” in that slouch comment. This way, perhaps, I can have a laugh at myself in the future and, who knows, maybe even give a young, budding journalist a good lesson in how not to write. Sometimes mistakes and failure are huge positives that twist the darkness into light.
Now, back to the excuse. There is no excuse for mediocrity and incompetence. I owned the mistake. Let’s put this excuse in its proper context. It’s worth about half a cent, but here it is: I received a streaming link to the DVD, so I only saw the performance two or three times. I have been able to listen to the album many more times. I wrote my review within a couple days after this viewing, and while listening to the audio tunes. I turned this review (and two short book reviews) in back in July to make the deadline for the magazine I used to own. After seeing that it did not make it into the August or September issues of HM Magazine (and noticing that someone else reviewed it in the October issue – my buddy Charlie Steffens), I decided to dig up my review and post it in my blog. I quickly copy and pasted them up, giving them a once-over (which, in hindsight, should at least been a twice-over, huh?). That’s how this poorly-written review that had much more work left to go on it saw the light of day.
Now, on to my thoughts on the album and DVD. What I really wanted to say is that it was good. And clarify just exactly how good it was. The guitars, vocals and drums came across as heavy, tight and rather splendid. The band was “on” this night and it was a perfect time to capture their performance – both audio and visual.
Now, what about those vocals? What I should have said was that, while critics might be able to say that the high notes are missing (and say it like it’s a bad thing), it’s really a good thing. Sweet’s killer voice has matured over the years and he can still perform at a world-class level and probably out-high most if not all of his peers. Some of the higher high noted songs are missing from the set. I happen to think Michael sounds better now than he did 30 years ago. His use of high notes is tasteful and artfully played. Why in the world I used a convoluted and wandering dig of a sentence to convey all that is beyond me. Let’s just call it temporary insanity. Dude’s voice is quite impressive – both as a vocalist of any age and also with the qualifying misnomer about his age. It’s just a good voice on display.
What about the DVD comments? What I meant to say was somehow describe the minimalist approach as being perfect. Granted, it’s not an epic Pink Floyd Wall-ish affair or even a “Free,” “Calling on You” or “Always There For You” shoot. In other words, there wasn’t six million cameras shooting this, edited with lots of wide shots, multiple rolls, close-ups and very expensive tricks. It is instead just as it should be. Almost perfect. Mostly wide shots on the not-so-large stage show all the action and the edits and close-ups are perfectly timed and well suited. It feels better than their Greatest Hits Live in Puerto Rico DVD and way better than their ancient Live in Japan VHS video (and laserdisc). It’s a real treat for the Stryper fan and I highly recommend every Stryper fan buying it (comparable to their Live In Indonesia at the Java Rockin’ Land DVD).
The 16-song setlist is superb and well chosen. Like any tour by most any band of great stature, it’s a mix of greatest hits and a few songs from the new album thrown in to showcase their latest creation. The band sounds great from the first notes of “Legacy” and totally hits their stride in a run that occurs five songs in and includes: “Loud N’ Clear,” “Reach Out,” “Calling On You,” “Free” and “More Than A Man.”
That’s it. I could say more, but I wasn’t planning on ever making this an epic review. It’s a very good release and one that’ll please any Stryper fan and, like the latent secret hope in Christian metalheads from way-back-when and now, serves up a quality helping of metal that should impress fans of Maiden, Dio, Scorpions and Motley Crue. This is a release the band can be proud of.
What about the comments people made? I’ll only say a few words. When I’m a fan or a friend of a band and someone attacks that band/friend’s artistic output, I’ll have a tendency to rally on behalf of the band. Being called a wannabe hipster was funny, though. What’s ironic is that us (the old metalheads that are reading this) were all hipsters once. When metal ruled MTV, we were the cool people. We had it going on. We were hipsters. Now, I know what we’re really complaining about whenever we call someone a hipster is the fakeness or unauthentic-ness of said person. Our term in the ’80s was “poser.” It stood for a person that pretended to be in the in crowd, a “try-hard” that really wanted to be accepted and one of the cool people. Older people decrying “hipster this” and “hipster that” I think are mostly tattling on their younger selves. We were hipsters once. We know what it’s like to be cool. There’s nothing wrong with being cool. It’s being fake, chameleon-like and condescending that’s much worse. I did write my review for more than just one audience. I originally wrote it with both young and old readers alike. This review redux, however, was written with just “us” in mind (the older 40-plus crowd). Don’t hate on the hipsters. You were once a hipster.
Okay, now go back to your regularly scheduled programming.
Comments