Dubya

Reading this board you would think people are way too harsh on Ace and Peter. If Eric Singer and Bruce Kulick read this board they would have a bigger ego than Gene

Supermallet

I don't think anyone is knocking Bruce, Vinnie, or Eric, but no one would remember Kiss if their catalog consisted only of post-Ace/Peter work.

dollfins1

Old School. Gene, Paul, Ace and Peter. Original Line Up. Grew up on KISS and Most Admire their Love Gun/Rock & Roll Over/Destroyer Era Work. Not to diminish the other musicians who kept KISS Rolling Along and Introduced Them To New Generations Of Fans. It's A Testament They Are Still Around And Productive. Love the KISSOLOGY Volumes.

B5Erik

With all due respect... Are you serious????

Seriously, Bruce has NEVER tried to copy Ace. He may have played several of the songs that Ace played on originally, but he NEVER copied the solos note for note. Every single solo he played had his stamp all over it.

Now, Tommy's job has been to play the solos more faithfully than Bruce did, and he does his job VERY well. Truth is, Tommy sounds more like Ace's playing in the 70's than Ace himself does NOW. Tommy can, however, play some of Bruce's solos, which Ace can't. Tommy was also pretty darned good in Black 'N' Blue.

Ace has style, TONS of style - I will always give him that. But he has become sloppier as a player as time has gone on. He's clearly a guy who doesn't like to spend a lot of time practicing. Which is unfortunate, because he was really developing nicely in the late 70's and early 80's - until he took about 4 years off and hardly played at all during that period.

Ace and Peter were great in the mid 70's (Ace was great all the way through The Elder), but now they are both liabilities musically, and that's a shame - because I would prefer that they were still capable of playing the way they did in 1975 so they could play ANY song from the KISS catalog, and play them well. Maybe the Farewell Tour would never have happened if they were capable of that, and the band would still be making albums and touring every two years, who knows?

That's a great show - all the more impressive because the band had only played 2 or 3 full concerts in the preceding 20 months!

I prefer the Detroit '92 show, though (or almost any Revenge show - better stage set, more pyro, slightly tighter performances).

As a drummer myself I was blown away by Eric Singer when I first saw him on Paul Stanley's solo tour in '89. I was familiar with Eric from his work with Black Sabbath, and knew he was in Badlands with Jake E. Lee, but I didn't know just how great he was until I saw the Paul Stanley tour that year.

Eric Carr knew it, too, because once he saw that Paul Stanley tour he kept saying that Eric Singer was going to replace him in KISS.

Pay attention to Eric Singer's performance on both the Revenge show and Unplugged. For the revenge show it's the Power Metal Flash, for Unplugged it's all 70's finesse drumming - with some flash. Unplugged may just be Eric's finest moment as a drummer.

There are lots of reasons why the Revenge/COS era and line-up is my favorite. There's something to like in EVERY era of "KISSTORY," but the Revenge era just has that something special that was magic - like the original line-up from '74-'77! (Only with better musical chops and more muscle!)

Supermallet

But the question was "Who are the most technically proficient musicians in Kiss", the question was "What is your favorite era of Kiss" and you notice most of us are saying 74-77 (or in my case, 74-79), and aren't talking about the reunion. Ace was a genius guitarist and a pretty good songwriter. Heck, I like his Kiss solo album more than a good portion of Kiss' full band catalog. The other players did some good stuff, no doubt about it, but they can't touch the legacy that the Paul-Gene-Ace-Peter line-up made.

B5Erik

As I've said many, many times - I love the '74-'77 era. I became a KISS fan in 1977!

I just like the Revenge era and line-up more. Whether it's the songwriting, the performances, or the live shows - for me ALL of that works in the favor of the Revenge era.

For me it's just a bonus that Bruce Kulick and Eric Singer also just happen to be world class musicians...

nodeerforamonth

Couldn't have said it better myself.

B5Erik

I just wonder if Revenge had been made by the original line-up (and somehow miraculously sounded the same), and released as a Reunion album (with the band in make-up) how many people who prefer the original era would say that Revenge was their best album ever.

It's a freaking GREAT album, regardless of who's on it. (It just happens to be Paul, Gene, Bruce, and Eric S.) The tour was just as good, if not better....

Supermallet

Don't get me wrong, Revenge IS a great album. So is Creatures of the Night and Lick It Up. Without a doubt. I'm not denying the musicianship of any of the other members of the band.

The Cow

Revenge is a great album.

Were you around for the 70s tours? That stuff was frickin amazing at the time.

I'm fond of all their stuff, but KISS is still Ace, Gene, Peter, and Paul.

B5Erik

KISS is Paul and Gene and whoever they want on Lead Guitar and Drums. It's ALWAYS been that way.

I guess I have a different perspective than many fans do. I became a fan in 1977 - but not because of their image or their live show. It was their first album that made me a fan. "Strutter" and "Firehouse" really turned me into a rabid KISS fan. It was ALWAYS music first with me, so I never had a problem when they replaced Peter (Eric Carr was a HUGE upgrade), or even Ace (who was self destructing at the time, and they eventually settled on Bruce - who is one of my all time favorite guitar players). I always looked forward to what the new guys could bring to the band rather than focusing on what may be missed after the old guy left.

I love their early material, I always have and I always will (it's great stuff, no question) and I know just how revolutionary they were live - but I prefer the non-makeup live shows because the band had a higher energy level on stage and they were still putting out good material after Peter and Ace left the band. Look at that stage set up for the Animalize tour from the previous page - it's a freaking playground for them to run around on! And run they did, which they couldn't (and still can't) in the platforms.

To me, everything peaked from 1990-1995. In the 80's they had several good tours (and a couple mediocre ones), but by 1990 they were just absolutely ON! Everything worked during that period, from the Revenge album to the tours, to the COS album - it was all great! And that's why it's my favorite era in the band's history.

I still say that there is something to like on every KISS album (lots of things on most of them), and every tour was at the very least entertaining. 1990-1995 was just my favorite period in their career.

Supermallet

I disagree. Paul and Gene started the band, but Ace and Peter left their mark on the group in a way no other musician did except arguably Eric Carr. One of the band's biggest hits was Beth, written by Peter. Personally, I think Beth is an awful, awful song, but it was a hit and defined Kiss for a lot of people. Similarly, Ace's playing style shaped what we now consider the Kiss sound. What would Strutter or Firehouse be without Ace's playing? Not the songs that we know today. And by 1977, Ace was writing and singing his own songs on Kiss albums. It was only after Ace and Peter left that the lead guitar/drum positions became revolving doors at Gene and Paul's whim.

B5Erik

Bruce left quite a mark. Almost 11 years in the band, and he provided some excellent songwriting and fantastic guitar playing - AND he provided stability at a position that had been chaotic for at least half a decade prior to his arrival.

Eric Singer's mark is almost as big. I'm a drummer, trust me, his presence is felt ALL OVER Revenge, Alive III, Unplugged, and Carnival of Souls. As great as Eric Carr was he didn't have the sense of groove that Eric Singer did (and still does). Revenge has a much different feel than the previous 5 or 6 studio albums - and that is largely due to Eric Singer's playing. And since Revenge is considered a high point in the band's history, I'd say that makes his mark pretty impressive.

The fact that he also played brilliantly on Alive III, Unplugged (possibly the finest moment of his career), and Carnival of Souls just cements the impact he had on the band.

By the way, Peter hardly wrote a thing on "Beth." It was mostly written by Stan Penridge and then altered by Bob Ezrin for Destroyer. (I corresponded with Penridge just before he died, so I know how little Peter contributed to the song.) Peter can't play a musical instrument, only percussion. Both Eric's play (or played) guitar - Carr also played bass. They could, and did, write music, and understood that side of the band far better than Peter ever did.

None of which minimizes what Peter (and/or Ace) contributed to the band in the 70's, nor does it diminish their talents at that time. They made key contributions that helped the band reach the peak of their success, and were the right guys at the right time.

Just like Eric Carr was the right guy for the 80's, Eric Singer was the right guy for the 90's, and Bruce is right anytime.

(Tommy is a solid, solid guitar player, a total team guy, and has earned his spot in the band after 13 years working with them in various capacities - including production assistant, songwriter, and guitar teacher/coach for Ace.)

I just don't see the original line-up as the be-all and end-all of the band. Just one great part of their history - which has other great parts.

Supermallet

I never said they were the be-all, end-all of the band, but let's face it, for people who aren't serious fans...they are. The fact that you're discussing musicians other than Peter, Ace, Paul, and Gene with us should tell you that we're more than your average Kiss fans.

B5Erik

You're forgetting the fact that there are a lot of people for whom "Lick it Up," or "Heaven's On Fire," or "Tears Are Falling," or even, "Forever," was their introduction to KISS, and to whom Peter and Ace mean very little...

So the original line-up in the 70's era isn't the only viable answer to the question posed on the thread.

ALL answers are just as valid as any other - whether it's the '74-'79 era and line-up, or the Creatures of the Night/Lick It Up era and line up, or the Revenge era and line-up (or any other era) - these are all valid choices.

Supermallet

I think we're getting hung up on small parts of each other's posts. As I said, I love every era of Kiss. I just don't think you should be so surprised at the responses that say the 74-77 or 74-79 lineup is the best.

Jason

I don't really agree with this either. Ace and Peter definitely contributed to the original band, and once they stabilized again with Bruce and Eric in the 80's, they also added quite a lot to the band (songwriting, etc.). If Paul Stanley had been the one with drug problems and mental health issues and Ace had been hard working and committed to the future of the band, Gene and Ace would have been the two who kept KISS alive. It would have been a far different (probably heavier) band, but they would have found a new vocalist and drummer and soldiered on.

Yes, Gene (and Paul) has always had a very specific vision for the band, but until the reunion era, I think they accepted that the band was not just their personal playground. When Ace and Peter (and later Tommy and Eric S.) came back, they were basically hired help, and Gene shifted his focus almost entirely to selling KISS as a brand instead of a band.

Dubya

When bands cite Kiss as an influence, I have yet to see any that say the non-makeup era was an inspiration.

B5Erik

I'm not surprised. What I disagree with is the condescending, "That was the only era that mattered," B.S.

Which is why I've been saying that ALL eras are valid, they ALL have their strengths. It's just a matter of which one you LIKE best.

I disagree.

Paul wrote most of their best songs. Paul was the frontman. Without Paul, there is no KISS. Ace wrote some great songs, but no hit singles (his solo hit, "New York Groove," was a cover), Gene wrote a couple hits, but his output was inconsistent. Paul's stuff was almost always really, really good. Paul is the songwriting talent and Gene is the businessman who sells the band (and occasionally writes a really good song or three).

Seriously, who could replace Paul Stanley? Show me a guy who can play guitar and sing that well at the same time? Who has that kind of charisma? Or the vocal range? AND all of that with the same on stage energy level.

Ain't gonna happen. If Paul had been one of the screw-ups KISS would have been over by 1980.

You can't replace THIS guy in KISS...
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WB5rHUADW7o&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WB5rHUADW7o&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BZ3NcqoaKCY&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BZ3NcqoaKCY&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BCv11U0l5S8&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BCv11U0l5S8&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

...and fortunately they've never had to try!

B5Erik

I will say this, though - this is one of my favorite KISS TV appearances EVER! It may be one of their best live performances of the 70's!
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/yWpTC9uyYAU&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/yWpTC9uyYAU&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Supermallet

Have I been coming off that way? I don't think I ever said they're the ONLY era that mattered.

B5Erik

Maybe it was unintentional, and added with a couple other comments from other people it kind of came across that way.

Don't sweat it - KISS tends to polarize people sometimes. Whether it's non-fans criticizing the band (and fans defending them), or fans arguing among themselves about which albums or line-ups were the best, that ends up happening with almost every discussion about the band.

B5Erik

Here are some pics of another great KISS stage set...




I just wish I could have seen the 10th Anniversary Tour (I had tickets, but the San Diego show - with Motley Crue set to open - was cancelled, so I missed the tour).

At the time I was a huge Vinnie Vincent fan. As much as I like his solo albums, I don't think he was a good fit for KISS - although his songwriting definitely helped Creatures, Lick It Up, and Revenge. His lead playing was just too harsh for KISS. He didn't have enough of the bluesy feel that fits the band best. Even when Bruce was noodling in his most Van Halen/Rhoads-like playing he still had a great sense of melody, and when he got back to basics and really started playing bluesy leads he really did that well.

But the Creatures (10th Anniversary) & Lick It Up tours had a great stage set - something unique to KISS!

nodeerforamonth

I did!

But I will add that I do admit that the Sao Paulo show sounded pretty cool and I will have to give it a chance.

And I do like the setlists for the 2004 tour. I have several of the shows. They're hit and miss though. Tommy's no Ace and never will be (he shouldn't be wearing his makeup!), but he will play more obscure songs that Ace wouldn't and that shouldn't be discounted.

johnbook

Great stuff B5Erik, my favorite was the 2nd clip the animalize clip do you have anything with Mark St.john live, like i said in my post earlier my favorite period of the band is the early 80's non makeup period.