|
|
Post by suckit on Aug 11, 2024 0:08:13 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by vinceneilgiraldo on Aug 11, 2024 3:56:44 GMT 1
That's a nice overview on the history of Ratt.
VH1 did a Behind the Music on Ratt around 2006, which is excellent. (It usually gets taken down when posted, though I have it recorded). Full In Bloom's interviews with Beau Hill are also great.
I actually revisited Dancing Undercover and Reach For the Sky recently. In hindsight I may be biased since I know the dysfunction at the time they were recorded. But the thrown-together nature of the deep cuts is noticeable.
The only exception is What's It Gonna Be off RFTS. It has a bit more of a vocal hook, like classic Ratt.
A lot of the events they discussed are now on YouTube, such as the New Years gig in Japan with Bon Jovi.
|
|
|
|
Post by vinceneilgiraldo on Aug 11, 2024 4:31:04 GMT 1
For anyone interested.
Cool short doc on Ratt's popularity in Japan, as Invasion Of Your Privacy was being released.
New Years Eve, 1988, With Bon Jovi. Didn't Jon get some flak recently for pretending he didn't remember this?
Not pristine video quality, but it's managed to stay up for years. The VH1 Behind the Music. Highly recommended if you dig Ratt.
|
|
|
|
Post by suckit on Aug 11, 2024 5:48:39 GMT 1
That's a nice overview on the history of Ratt. VH1 did a Behind the Music on Ratt around 2006, which is excellent. (It usually gets taken down when posted, though I have it recorded). Full In Bloom's interviews with Beau Hill are also great. I actually revisited Dancing Undercover and Reach For the Sky recently. In hindsight I may be biased since I know the dysfunction at the time they were recorded. But the thrown-together nature of the deep cuts is noticeable. Them saying that Detonator was the album they needed to make in 1988 (not 1990) was telling. |
|
|
|
Post by vinceneilgiraldo on Aug 11, 2024 11:28:42 GMT 1
That's a nice overview on the history of Ratt. VH1 did a Behind the Music on Ratt around 2006, which is excellent. (It usually gets taken down when posted, though I have it recorded). Full In Bloom's interviews with Beau Hill are also great. I actually revisited Dancing Undercover and Reach For the Sky recently. In hindsight I may be biased since I know the dysfunction at the time they were recorded. But the thrown-together nature of the deep cuts is noticeable. Them saying that Detonator was the album they needed to make in 1988 (not 1990) was telling. The dysfunction at the time of Reach For the Sky was great. They said Atlantic requested DAT tapes of the sessions (their first without Beau Hill), and Doug Morris freaked out, they were so bad. Hill was brought in to rescue the album, but the band loathed him. In the long run, I don't know if it would've made much of a difference; their expiration date was coming one way or another. They are the one hair band that doesn't have monster power ballad in their repertoire. Giving' Yourself Away likely would've fared better had they recorded in 1988. |
|
|
|
Post by psychobolia on Aug 11, 2024 12:54:43 GMT 1
Cool article, would have been complete if they'd mentioned Blotzer going out as Ratt a few years ago, that was a hoot.
|
|
|
|
Post by suckit on Aug 11, 2024 13:39:18 GMT 1
Yeah that was after.
|
|
|
|
Post by suckit on Aug 11, 2024 13:43:21 GMT 1
Them saying that they shouldve made Detonator in 88 sounds like 20/20 hindsight - at the time, Mike Stone had just produced WS'87, although that album needed Kevin Elson to clean it up too. From what I remember, Stone was an alchy and the sessions went nowhere, and they brought in Hill to tack on Way Cool Jr. at the last minute to give them a lead single. Great song, but the rest of the record wasn't anywhere close to the sane level.
|
|
therealgws
Neither here nor there.
To 'Crat and his remora...
Posts: 2,928
Member is Online
|
Post by therealgws on Aug 11, 2024 17:56:26 GMT 1
Them saying that Detonator was the album they needed to make in 1988 (not 1990) was telling. They are the one hair band that doesn't have monster power ballad in their repertoire. Giving' Yourself Away likely would've fared better had they recorded in 1988. Not exactly a power ballad per se but this should have been a bigger hit... |
|
holdenssv
Single-cell amoeba-like creature
Posts: 52
|
Post by holdenssv on Aug 11, 2024 19:55:06 GMT 1
"What you Give is What You Get" should have been a US single from Invasion. Only Japan got it.
Also, "No Surprise" is a damn good song from Reach. It always gets forgotten, just like "Day After Day" from the Leps' Euphoria.
|
|
|
|
Post by vinceneilgiraldo on Aug 12, 2024 2:05:47 GMT 1
Them saying that they shouldve made Detonator in 88 sounds like 20/20 hindsight - at the time, Mike Stone had just produced WS'87, although that album needed Kevin Elson to clean it up too. From what I remember, Stone was an alchy and the sessions went nowhere, and they brought in Hill to tack on Way Cool Jr. at the last minute to give them a lead single. Great song, but the rest of the record wasn't anywhere close to the sane level. It would be fascinating if the roughs from the Mike Stone sessions ever leak. Beau Hill said Doug Morris described them as a "Bad Holiday Inn band." Guess it wasn't a great idea having an alchy producing a band full of them.  It does sound as if Atlantic gave up on RFTS, but hoped to later revive interest. Though it sold well enough to achieve platinum status and spawned the popular songs "Way Cool Jr." and "I Want a Woman", the record's performance was not enough to keep the group on the road for longer than seven months. As a result, "What's It Gonna Be", a track not released as a single, was used as a B-side to "Lovin' You's a Dirty Job", the first single from the band's next release Detonator. In doing so, it was hoped that listeners would go back and give Reach for the Sky a second listen. |
|
|
|
Post by vinceneilgiraldo on Aug 12, 2024 2:09:40 GMT 1
They are the one hair band that doesn't have monster power ballad in their repertoire. Giving' Yourself Away likely would've fared better had they recorded in 1988. Not exactly a power ballad per se but this should have been a bigger hit... Agreed. That is an often-overlooked song in their catalog. And yes, I'd say it's about as much of a power ballad as Givin' Yourself Away. I've heard Blotzer lament Ratt not having a ballad. Wonder if it just didn't fit Pearcy, lyrically or vocally? |
|
|
|
Post by suckit on Aug 12, 2024 2:34:33 GMT 1
Well, to put a ballad over, you've gotta be able to sing a little, and SEP couldn't even sing a little. Someone on sludge compared him to a "bag of sick cats". That's pretty accurate.
|
|
|
|
Post by vinceneilgiraldo on Aug 12, 2024 2:49:06 GMT 1
Well, to put a ballad over, you've gotta be able to sing a little, and SEP couldn't even sing a little. Someone on sludge compared him to a "bag of sick cats". That's pretty accurate. When I first head Givin' Yourself Away, I thought it was Croucier singing the verses; kinda like his vocal in You Think You're Tough. But yes, I think Pearcy was the reason they never did a ballad. I think writing emotive lyrics would've been an issue for him, too. |
|
