Boston

avatar for londonguy
londonguy
Breathe, breathe in the air
Not the place, the band. Just how big were they over there back in to 70s/80s ? Their debut album is one of the fastest selling of all time. Great work.

34 comments

Jump to latest
avatar for Muddy
Muddy
a year ago
More than a feeling is just like a perfection. BTW does it get any baby boomer than Boston, I don't think so.
avatar for Jascoi
Jascoi
a year ago
definitely one of the better groups.
avatar for londonguy
londonguy
a year ago
Foreplay/Long time is fantastic, very creative and in its day ground breaking. More than a feeling is a track I never tire of listening to.
avatar for crosscheck
crosscheck
a year ago
The first album has eight songs and every one of them is played on classic rock radio.
avatar for skibum609
skibum609
a year ago
I went to pick my brother up from work at the Sheraton Tara hotel in 1976. He waved me into the kitchen and walked me to the ballroom. There was Boston running through their playlist for their Boston stop on the tour.
avatar for motorhead
motorhead
a year ago
The debut album “Boston” came out the summer heading into my senior year in high school.

It was the album everyone was talking about. Has to be one of the fast selling debut albums in US History.

It was an interesting time in music. The hard rock metal bands - Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath - were still trying to hang on as a popular genre but they were in a dogfight with music heading in a soft pop direction. Olivia Newton-John, Debbie Boone, Barry Manilow, John Denver.

But you also had some funk bands of the 70’s and the emergence of disco.

And love them or hate them, you had KISS, which in the Midwest at least, was the most popular band of them all

Real interesting, diversified era. Unlike today.
avatar for georgmicrodong
georgmicrodong
a year ago
@motorhead: "Real interesting, diversified era. Unlike today."

Congratulations! You win the "Understatement of the Year" award...
avatar for shadowcat
shadowcat
a year ago
Never heard of them. Yeah, I am old.
avatar for drewcareypnw
drewcareypnw
a year ago
They were huge in the 70s and 80s. These days they are a nostalgia act. They are working on a seventh album though. Good for them.
avatar for docsavage
docsavage
a year ago
Their album was played constantly in my college dorm after it came out. The other album that was always heard was the Frampton live album. My roommate was the only person in the dorm playing punk groups like the Sex Pistols, Clash, Television and Ramones.
avatar for rattdog
rattdog
a year ago
out of curiosity i was checking out numbers for the largest grossing tours in the late 70's and was surprised not to see boston in the top 10. high on the list was a shocker for me - foghat.

below is a spinoff of boston during the early 80's - orion the hunter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fw8mlHFw…

londonguy, how popular were/are boston over in the UK?
avatar for Studme53
Studme53
a year ago
They were one of the first of a long line of blah OK bands with faceless, nameless members. Decent songs but no personality.
Foreigner and Supertramp were similar. Nothing original, not great music, but they made money I’m sure. I blame cocaine.
avatar for Studme53
Studme53
a year ago
Good rule of thumb - do you hear their music on movie sound tracks?
If so, their music probably evokes some type of emotion or nostalgia. If not, they probably don’t evoke anything.
avatar for shadowcat
shadowcat
a year ago
what U.K. group gave the Beatles a run for the money?
avatar for motorhead
motorhead
a year ago
“They were one of the first of a long line of blah OK bands with faceless, nameless members”

As soon as I saw this thread, I had the same thought.

Kansas, Foreigner, Bon Jovi, Def Leppard, Scorpions - all were ok, had a few hits, but nothing spectacular
avatar for motorhead
motorhead
a year ago
Shadowcat - I was a wee bit young, but I always heard it was the Dave Clark 5
avatar for londonguy
londonguy
a year ago
@ rattdog, yes they were. Rarely an hour or two without hearing one of their songs on the radio.

@ Shadowcat, I try think the closest to the were The Hollies.
avatar for shadowcat
shadowcat
a year ago
"50 years ago, Herman's Hermits were outselling the Beatles in the States. The Manchester act sold more than 80 million records. "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0J6q42z…
avatar for skibum609
skibum609
a year ago
Foreigner? Blue Morning; Feel like Making Love; Jukebox hero; Urgent; Long Long way from home; Head Knocker ; The damage is done; Feels like the first Time; Head games; waiting for a girl like you; cold as Ice etc. - they did nothing, right?
avatar for shailynn
shailynn
a year ago
When it comes to classic rock and listening to it today, there’s a lot of stuff that just didn’t age well. The list is probably 2 miles long but these bands sound incredibly cheesy to me today, but teenage me in the 80s and 90s thought they were cool.

Boston

38 Special

Kansas

REO Speedwagon

Styx

But these still sound great:

Robert Plant

Peter Gabriel

Eric Clapton - stuff released in the 80s

Police/Sting

Phil Collins

…just to name a few

avatar for misterorange
misterorange
a year ago
^^ shailynn - I agree with all of those... except for Boston! To me it never gets old.
avatar for Studme53
Studme53
a year ago
Sorry Ski - if you like Foreigner, you must hate good music and like Miracle Whip on Wonder Bread.

Just kidding. They’re alright….I can’t do it - they SUCK!
avatar for JimGassagain
JimGassagain
a year ago
Foreigner=gay sex music; even worse than Loverboy

Bacon!!
avatar for rockie
rockie
a year ago
1976 to me was highlighted by Bob Seger's "Night Moves" and Boz Scagg's "Silk Degrees". As a debut album in 1976, Boston's "Boston" was epic and remains one of the best debut albums ever.
avatar for Mate27
Mate27
a year ago
Boston had that one album and a couple other songs from other albums, but they weren’t like some of the British Invasion rock bands that
Consistently churned out hits after hits on their albums for decades. Boston was a shooting star in their day.

To keep things in perspective, led zeppelin was awesome, but I got burnt out on them after I hit my mid 20’s. Lots of bands give fatigue after hearing them over and over, like the Stones. But two bands I never tire from is the Who and Fleetwood Mac where both are rooted in blues and evolved to their classic rock genre. Black Magic Woman is a Fleetwood Mac original done by the great Peter Greene before the cult got ahold of him. Luv the original bluesy Mac sound. “Oh Well”!
avatar for ancientlurker
ancientlurker
a year ago
I was in school at the time, and Boston was huge. I don't recall whether I bought their records through Columbia House or BMG :-) I never bought anything later than their first two though.

My tastes are kind of opposite of shailynn. Boston/Kansas/Styx/some REO still great. I've been to Kansas and Styx concerts within the past 5 years, though of course not all original members. BOC too. Collins was way overplayed at the time, I got incredibly sick of hearing "Phil Fucking Collins" as I called him. Plant/Gabriel ho hum, Police ugh. Foreigner was big here partly because Lou Gramm was from nearby.
avatar for RiskA
RiskA
a year ago
In high school I dismissed Boston as cheesy faceless pop rock. As an adult I marvel at Classic Rock radio where they occupy 10% of the 30-40 song playlist. But I’ve made my peace with them; they created a different guitar sound & had 2-3 good songs (which they copied for the rest). An early Bon Jovi, Def Leppard, etc., in that sense.
But back then I was a big KISS fan, and now that’s unlistenable LOL. The guitar solos on Hotter Than Hell LP now sound like the soundtrack in Hell….
I saw Foghat & REO in concert several times, and they were great; tight rock bands that consistently delivered a good show. Even tho a little bland on record. Same with Peter Frampton actually. Not the sometimes epic, sometimes crappy shows by Zep, The Who, Queen, Deep Purple; but solid rock show entertainment. And that’s worth something.
avatar for Mate27
Mate27
a year ago
^ dude, any classic rock historian knows tha the Who was the consummate professional band who were the most consistent performing live rock band probably to ever existed. The documentation supporting that is all over with their Live at Leeds album to the Isle of Wight
Show and even at Woodstock. Not sure why yiu had to throw them in to describe as “sometimes crappy”, but they’re most notorious for their awesome live performances, especially ending the Ed Sullu an show by smashing guitars which became a traditional after concerts. Queen was another consistent live
Performers.
avatar for Muddy
Muddy
a year ago
One guy I check out on YouTube sometimes Rick Beato breaks More than a feeling down if any of y’all were interested https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ynFNt4tgBJ…
avatar for londonguy
londonguy
a year ago
Thanks Muddy, I think I have seen it before but I want to watch it again, I have seen a lot of Rick’s “what makes this song great “ videos. I don’t think there’s anyone more knowledgeable than Rick.
avatar for RiskA
RiskA
a year ago
Mate: I saw crappy shows by The Who (the first of their many “farewell” tours, right after Moon died) and Queen (right before their comeback on “The Game”). Sorry man, after seeing maybe 200-250 shows, I trust my opinion of crappy. Now everyone can have an off night or two, so maybe I was just unlucky with them & lucky with the other bands I mentioned. But that’s my basis. I’d be more sus of believing in rock star perfection.
avatar for Mate27
Mate27
a year ago
I believe yiu when you texting your experience with those bands, it just shocks me when it’s the opposite of what I’ve personally experienced with consensus agreement from most who’ve attended their concerts, docunehted with live concerts, and accolades given in Rollingstone magazine for their live performances. Yours just goes against the grain. Maybe they’re not your type of band.
avatar for RiskA
RiskA
a year ago
The Queen “Sheer Heart Attack” concert at Santa Monica Civic is in my top 5; perfection. I saw a really good Who show in like 1982. Def my type. But sometimes even the best band is drugged out, going through the motions, doing it for the cash, etc. Performance is tough, much tougher than studio work with a skilled producer. Bringing this back to Boston, the times I saw them (usually festivals) they could have been lip-synching the records. Perfectly competent, but yawn.
But hey, the great thing about music and performance is how people respond to it, and no response is wrong it’s just personal opinion. Just like stripper looks: one man’s trash is another’s treasure LOL.
avatar for misterorange
misterorange
a year ago
When talking about live shows, the venue's acoustics can make or break it, regardless of how tight the musical performance may be. Having grown up in New Jersey, I've seen a number of shows at the PNC Arts Center in Holmdel (formerly called Garden State Arts Center). The sound there ALWAYS sucked really bad. As a youngster I just figured that was the price you paid for visiting an outdoor venue. It wasn't until I saw live shows at the Jones Beach amphitheater and Boston Pavilion that I realized how great the sound can be outdoors. I've been to two "stadium concerts" at the Meadowlands, both the old Giants Stadium and the new Met Life Stadium. They both suck. I won't waste my money on stadium shows again.

Most indoor arenas are fairly decent, some better than others. Madison Square Garden is one of the better ones, but the relatively new Barclay Center is exceptional as far as arenas go. But the best arena can't compare to the smaller venues. Rosemont Theater in Chicago and the Felt Forum (a/k/a Paramount Theater a/k/a the Theater at MSG) come to mind. But the most mind-blowing venue I've been to was "The Joint" at the Hard Rock in Vegas which was bought out by Virgin and I think has been renamed.

You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now