Ahh yes, my friends, that is the question at hand:  did Fergie sell her soul for musical success?  How else could you explain the songs "My Humps" and "London Bridge"? 

Its been a while since we’ve had two songs full of such nonsensical innuendo enter the pop charts, never mind by the same artist.  The songwriting leaves much to be desired – "My Humps" has about six different words total, four of which are "My humps, my lumps" that are just repeated over and over again, and yet it sounds like a song. 

The new single from Fergie, her first as a solo artist, is "London Bridge" and its one of those songs that sounds sexy, but then you think about it and its really… well… stupid.  "Every time you come around, my London bridge wanna go down."  Are we to understand that Fergie has had bridge work done?  Or is it a reference to a belt?  To pants?  Its oddly sexual because of the way its sung, but take away the excellent production and instrumentation, and what you have is some pretty lousy 7th grade poetry.

What makes me question the whole soul-devil exchange thing is that both songs are freakishly catchy.  Hear about 10 seconds of "London Bridge" and you’ll have it lodged in your head for about 48 hours.  Unless you hear "My Humps" which will displace it and stick in your craw for a similar time frame.

I wonder if anyone has listened to the two songs back-to-back more than once?  I’m imagining that it might result in their brains imploding on itself.

Last night was my 11th time seeing Aerosmith and true to form, they continue to impress and amaze.  They had a great set list, sounded fantastic, looked terrific and were really rocking!  The set list consisted of a lot of deep tracks, including a surprise cover of the Standell’s "Dirty Water" – sung by Joe Perry as an anthem to his Boston roots, and a cover of "Rattlesnake Shake," the song that brought the band together back in 1969 in New Hampshire.   The entire set list:

Toys
Mama Kin
S.O.S.
Sweet E
Baby Please
Dirty H2O
Stop Messin’
Seasons
Dream On
Rattle Snake
Eat The Rich
Cryin’
Draw The Line
Encore
Elevator
Walk This Way

That is a solid set from start to finish, and one of the longest shows of the tour so far.  By comparison, Motley Crue was a disappointment last night.  This marked the fourth time seeing the Crue, the most recent being back in March.  They sounded alright then, but I enjoyed them a lot more with my earplugs in, as it helped to cut through the wall of noise that they create with their overly-loud system.  Back then, Vince Neil’s habit of changing the entire flow of the song by skipping over words and sometimes entire lines of lyrics was odd, but the second time around, it was just annoying.  These are the songs you know by heart, and for the second time, I found myself unable to sing along to Vince’s choppy vocals. 

The sub-par performance wasn’t helped any by the fact that Vince was struggling with laryngitis.  So not only was the performance choppy and shaky, but even when the words were right, they didn’t sound good!!

I feel bad saying that since I’ve seen two great shows by the Crue, and the one in March was good – this was a real disappointment though, and I wish I didn’t have to say that.  It was also disappointing to see that on a tour where Aerosmith has been pulling out some deep cuts ("S.O.S. (Too Bad)," "Rattlesnake Shake," "Lord of the Thighs," "No More No More") that the Crue performed the same set they did 6 months ago, minus "Too Fast For Love," "Ten Seconds to Love," "Red Hot," "On With The Show," and "Anarchy In The UK" resulting in this rather predictable set list:

Dr. Feelgood
Shout At The Devil
Wild Side
Looks That Kill
Louder Than Hell
Live Wire
Girls Girls Girls
Don’t Go Away Mad (Just Go Away)
Home Sweet Home
Same Ol’ Situation (S.O.S.)
Primal Scream
Kickstart My Heart

Aerosmith more than made up for it, however, and showed the youngin’s (not that Crue is that young any more) how it’s done.

One quick concert-related note:  when everyone is waiting to get out of the parking lot, anyone who tries to drive up to the front of the line of cars, cutting everyone off should have their tires slashed.  Jerks.

Last but not least, here’s a few Aerosmith-related links:

Review of last night’s show in the Boston Globe

Steven Tyler reveals he has Hepatitis C

And this is a blog entry that was mentioned on the Aerosmith fan club discussion boards today.  This guy is an Aerosmith hater and offers his "Indisputable, Factual Reasons to Hate Aerosmith."  Now, just by the title, you know its going to be a questionable, possibly laughable post. 

I haven’t read much of the rest of his blog, but he admits to enjoying blaring his "honky-tonk country music" making him not much of a rock fan by his own admission.  Besides that, I’m guessing that this guy is a bit of a "music Nazi," believing that only a handful of the biggest-name bands and a handful of the most obscure bands – as well as the bands he likes, of course – are worthy of listening to. 

I actually think that Aerosmith belongs on rock’s "B-list" as well, but I think that the "A-list" is reserved for a very small number of bands and artists:  Elvis, Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis, The Beatles, Rolling Stones, the Who, Led Zepplin, Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen, Black Sabbath, The Sex Pistols, U2, and Pink Floyd would be among them.  These are bands that are the first-generation of a particular genre or sound that others built upon.  The B-Listers include some damn good company:  Aerosmith, Kiss, Jefferson Airplane, Steve Winwood, Steely Dan, Nirvana, etc.  These people who came from a second generation and have influenced many others, but perhaps not as fundamentally as the A-list.  In fact, it might be tough to get anyone whose career started after 1975 on the A-list.  Aerosmith admitted from early on that they wanted to be the American version of the Stones – and they’ve accomplished that with their brawny, strutting style of cock-rock.  They don’t try to be important, they try to be fun, sexy, and purposefully banal in their delivery.  They aren’t out to save the world, they’re just trying to make fun while we’re waiting for it to end!

Aerosmith has had its fair share of influence on bands: from Van Halen to Guns n’ Roses, from the Black Crowes to Ratt, most rock bands started after 1975 would probably list Aerosmith as an influence some way. 

What is funniest about his post is that he calls his opinions "indisputable facts."  Saying that "Crying" "Amazing" and "I Don’t Want to Miss a Thing" are songs that suck isn’t really a fact – its an opinion.  I don’t care for those songs… in fact, I think they kinda suck myself, but I also know there’s a LOT of people who like that song.  "I Don’t Wanna…" hit number one on the singles chart, so apparently most people disagree with the idea that the song sucks.  Of course, N’Sync and Milli-Vanilla were also number one artists at some point, so you really can’t go on the tastes of the American public.

What really made me scratch my head is the the comment of "Once a band releases a “greatest hits”, they might as well stop releasing new music."  That just doesn’t make sense.  His precious Rolling Stones released numerous "greatest hits" compilations before Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers, Exile on Main Street, Goats Head Soup, Some Girls and Tattoo You.   The Beatles had several compilations out before Sgt. Peppers and all that followed…  Springsteen has released some great albums after his Greatest Hits CD came out in ’95 and Bob Dylan – ha!  Bob Dylan’s Greatest Hits came out in 1967 – BEFORE John Wesley Harding, Nashville Skyline, New Morning, Blood on the Tracks, The Basement Tapes, Time out of Mind, Love and Theft and his newest, Modern Times.

Apparently this guy thinks that all of these artists should have stopped putting out albums simply because they put together a greatest hits compilation.  Good job, buddy!

You gotta love blogging – it gives everyone a chance to voice their opinions, but it makes my blood boil just a little bit when opinions are given as facts!

Just a note that Beatallica is hitting the road in the coming months and if you are interested in seeing a very talented band play some great music that’ll make you laugh your ass off, you need to check them out.  Go to their web site for more information.  I’m hoping to do an interview with them in the next few weeks, so stay tuned!

What a better way of capping off a country fair experience than with a country music concert!?!?  Oh yes folks, you read it here: your devout head-banging metal-head went to his first country concert, put on by headliner Brad Paisley and supporting acts Eric Church and the Wreckers. 

I was hardly dragged there kicking and screaming before you get the wrong idea; I went willfully and gladly to make my woman happy and in the end it was quite enjoyable.   I’m not about to rush out and buy a full catalog of country CDs and I’m definitely not going to trade in my copy of Aerosmith’s "Rocks" for "Mud On the Tires" any time soon, so I guess I’m still not technically a fan, but I can appreciate it. 

I believe that one of the keys to country’s popularity is the relatively simple story-based lyrics that are featured in most songs.  Many country songs feature a narrative storyline and are usually quite relevant to the listener – songs about love and loss, about life and work.   They aren’t very abstract, but rather straightforward and understandable – and if case anyone takes that the wrong way, I don’t mean that as an insult, but rather a compliment.  I don’t know what’s easier to write a song about: nonsense or real life, but I’m guessing they are both pretty tough.

This is the opposite end of the spectrum from many other genres – in rock and rap/hip-hop, songs are often about a lifestyle unfamiliar to the listener, and that is part of the appeal.  The artists do the drugs, things and girls that we could/would never do, serving as escapism for the listener.   Others, like folk, are often about an idea or ideal that its listeners center themselves around.  Jazz, classical and even new age are more about the pure expression of musical ability and the raw emotion evoked by them. 

The closest thing to country that I enjoy is blues, which lacks the twang but often has the narrative style, but is usually less "every day" in their stories.  Country music, especially over the last few years, has managed to create interesting music that features rather mundane topics compared to the sex and drugs of rock – your girlfriend burning a cake isn’t exactly "Brown Sugar" even if the cake was made with it.

As my dad says "if we all liked the same thing, the world would be pretty boring" so I’ll take my rock and go to the occasional country concert if she’ll take her country and go to the occasional rock concert!

What is interesting is how much country has borrowed from pop and rock music – the production value of the show was excellent, with more lights than you ever would have seen 15 years ago at a country concert and complete with custom videos to accompany the music.  There were also a few hints of stolen licks from various rock songs here and there, showing their hand as to just how much of a cross-over country music has become.