Money in the Bank (PANTERA related)

mc666 wrote:

Just put Gene Hoglan in a cowboy hat & no one would know the difference.

Hmm... Come to think of it, has anyone ever seen Gene and Vinnie in the same room? Maybe Gene is Vinnie's nice guy alter-ego.

I definitely don't want Pantera to reform without Dime. But at the same time, I wouldn't mind seeing a once a year tribute/reunion type thing with Phil, Rex and whoever on guitar playing the songs live.

Eyesore wrote:

James B. wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Why does everyone assume Vinnie doesn't want to pay Terry? I have never even see anyone ask Vinnie about reissuing those old albums. Not once. So how would anyone know?

Who is assuming anything  ? Not me.
I've known Terry since 1984 and the adage of straight from the camel's mouth applies very much to this situation.   You can dismiss it all you want, doesn't change it from being the truth.

Oh, right. I forgot you know everyone. So how does Terry know, then?

To clarify something so there is no confusion or accusation...I kept in touch with some of the musicians met when doing various club circuits around the country.  No big deal, lots of people have done that.  My cousin is one of Jeff Kieth's ex wives and that is how I know them (Tesla). I did session work for the Elefante brothers and attended some of the Sanctuary churches in So. California. That's how I know some people in that particular circle.

Before Darrell was murdered, the original line up was planning to do some shows around the DFW area.  It was discussed then about reissuing the MMR releases. Terry helped write just about every song on the first 3 albums and has kept his publishing active.  Darrell was cool with paying him and Rex for songwriting contributions but that all changed when he was killed.

I try to keep my private life just that, private.  I don't feel like I've dropped a name to impress anybody or something like that.  I just say something when it offers clarity or to give some factual aspect to a discussion, if applicable.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Quote :

There's this very modern idea now that you can keep an "act" going even without most or, in some cases, any of the original members. I know David Thomas from Pere Ubu has talked about getting too old to perform live and having started to groom a "protege" to take over for him at some point in the future. He might be blowing smoke, but I'm waiting for the day a high-profile "legacy" act is seen to be touring with NO original members because the last surviving original members have retired (KISS, I'm looking at you) and "appointed" replacements.

There was an article in Classic Rock magazine a few months back about 4 bands that are doing just that. The only one I can remember off the top of my head was Southern rock band Blackfoot.

Rickey Medlocke hand-picked 4 young dudes to carry on the name. No originals in the band. Just 4 new guys playing old Blackfoot classics and presumably writing new music under the Blackfoot moniker. Have no idea if that's working out or not, but the idea is there.

It's not a "modern" idea, it's been going on for years 'n' years, with the 50s/60s early rock n roll acts and doo-wop groups that are still doing the dinner-theater circuit. Usually it's one original member and/or almost-original member and a bunch of (much younger) ringers.

I read an article in Rolling Stone years ago about the bands touring in this fashion, I wish I'd kept it because it was equal parts tragic and hilarious. At one point there were two versions of Steppenwolf touring the U.S. - one with original vocalist/songwriter John Kay and a bunch of replacement players, and another with some other original member (not a singer) and a different bunch of replacement players.

Supposedly when the John Kay lineup found out that the "other" Steppenwolf was coming to the same venue they were playing at for a later date, they left a nasty note behind for them with the club's management.

I also remember Kay saying he knew it was tiime to hang it up when a fan approached him before a show at some rinky dink supper club and said "There is no way you are the real John Kay . John Kay would never play a shit hole like this."

Fat Freddy wrote:

It's not a "modern" idea, it's been going on for years 'n' years, with the 50s/60s early rock n roll acts and doo-wop groups that are still doing the dinner-theater circuit. Usually it's one original member and/or almost-original member and a bunch of (much younger) ringers.

Yea, this is true. My father has seen Frankie Valli & the Four Seasons and Dion & The Bellmonts numerous times and their hasn't been an original "Four Season" or "Bellmont" in 30 years. 

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Fat Freddy wrote:

It's not a "modern" idea, it's been going on for years 'n' years, with the 50s/60s early rock n roll acts and doo-wop groups that are still doing the dinner-theater circuit. Usually it's one original member and/or almost-original member and a bunch of (much younger) ringers.

Yea, this is true. My father has seen Frankie Valli & the Four Seasons and Dion & The Bellmonts numerous times and their hasn't been an original "Four Season" or "Bellmont" in 30 years. 

Yup, my wife's parents took us to a concert at the local high school a few years back by some doo-wop group (it was a fundraiser for the school's scholarship fund), I forget their name but on the way out my father-in-law was grumbling about how none of those guys onstage could have been the original members because were all too young to be the real so-and-so's.

This has happened to our local classic band the Vogues. I do believe at one point there were about 3 bands runnning around performing under that name.

Ok, maybe it's not "modern," but it's been something that's only recently been dredged back up. There is nobody touring under "The Beatles" and no talk of doing so. Queen gets close with this "Queen Experience" thing they're doing, but even that isn't billed as the actual band, more a band-approved cover band.

Just seems like it was a bad idea back when and it's even worse now.

Runicen wrote:

Ok, maybe it's not "modern," but it's been something that's only recently been dredged back up.  There is nobody touring under "The Beatles" and no talk of doing so.  Queen gets close with this "Queen Experience" thing they're doing, but even that isn't billed as the actual band, more a band-approved cover band.

Just seems like it was a bad idea back when and it's even worse now.

KISS keeps threatening to replace everyone some day. While they wouldn't be the first, Gene would probably be the first to turn a profit from it.

Where does everyone stand with this practice?

I mean, I've seen a tribute band before - specifically, The Machine, which is (sort of) a Pink Floyd endorsed tribute. They play well and, having many bootleg live recordings to judge from, they play in the SPIRIT of the band as it was in the 70s, without excluding newer material.

Going in, my expectations were below the floor but they did a really solid job not just playing odd tracks and deep cuts, even making the "singles" interesting to hear again. That said, they may have been good, but they kind of made me acutely aware of what I was REALLY hoping to see and which would be impossible to see... So, in some ways, it's like going to a friend's wake and having a lookalike impersonate them the whole time. On some level, it's probably comforting, but your brain kind of prevents you from enjoying it because, face it - that's @%$#ing depressing!

I used to see a lot of tribute bands in the early 90s - KISS, Sabbath, Zeppelin, Maiden, Priest (that was "British Steel," the tribute Tim "Ripper" Owens was in before he moved up to the big leagues) AC/DC, Metallica, the Doors, etc. New Jersey was the Home of the Tribute Band at the time, if you were an original band you couldn't get a gig anywhere.

I never thought of any of them as potential "replacements" for the original band(s) (though in the case of the Zeppelin and Doors tributes, obviously it was about as close as I was ever gonna get to witnessing the real thing), but a good tribute band can at least provide you with an entertaining show and a cheap night out, so I never had a problem with 'em.

For the price of one ticket to see the "actual" KISS nowadays, you can probably see a decent KISS tribute band about twenty times.... and the tribute band's "Paul" would probably sound better than the real thing.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Runicen wrote:

Ok, maybe it's not "modern," but it's been something that's only recently been dredged back up.  There is nobody touring under "The Beatles" and no talk of doing so.  Queen gets close with this "Queen Experience" thing they're doing, but even that isn't billed as the actual band, more a band-approved cover band.

Just seems like it was a bad idea back when and it's even worse now.

KISS keeps threatening to replace everyone some day. While they wouldn't be the first, Gene would probably be the first to turn a profit from it.

I am sure they will - but they will be a small to mid sized theater touring show, no way they pack out arenas. They'll make the business work. They probably already have Tommy on contract to play Ace for the next 20 years... and "lead" the road show. He was already tour manager and gopher. They will do better than dinner theaters.....

Runicen wrote:

Where does everyone stand with this practice?  

I mean, I've seen a tribute band before - specifically, The Machine, which is (sort of) a Pink Floyd endorsed tribute.  They play well and, having many bootleg live recordings to judge from, they play in the SPIRIT of the band as it was in the 70s, without excluding newer material.

Going in, my expectations were below the floor but they did a really solid job not just playing odd tracks and deep cuts, even making the "singles" interesting to hear again.  That said, they may have been good, but they kind of made me acutely aware of what I was REALLY hoping to see and which would be impossible to see...  So, in some ways, it's like going to a friend's wake and having a lookalike impersonate them the whole time.  On some level, it's probably comforting, but your brain kind of prevents you from enjoying it because, face it - that's @%$#ing depressing!

I have no problems with tribute bands. I'm friends with some of the folks in an Iron Maiden tribute band (Sanctuary) and they are quite good.

I guess it's a case-by-case thing for me, depending on how much I like the band in question to begin with or if I've already seen them back in their prime.

Since I rarely go out to live shows anymore, I'm not gonna care if the band wants to try and make some coin playing the old classics. I know the real deal, but I can't fault them for trying to make a living. I might laugh and goof on them though. It's what I do.

Releasing new studio music might be different, but again, it all depends on how well I like the band. I'm not a big Thin Lizzy fan, but I love that Black Star Riders album and will gladly purchase their next one. A new Pantera album with Zakk? Sure, why not? If it's good, I don't care.

Now on the other hand, an Aerosmith album without Steven Tyler just wouldn't sit right with me. Even Chinese Democracy to me is an Axl Rose solo project despite what the label on the album says.

Quote :

I am sure they will - but they will be a small to mid sized theater touring show, no way they pack out arenas. They'll make the business work. They probably already have Tommy on contract to play Ace for the next 20 years... and "lead" the road show. He was already tour manager and gopher. They will do better than dinner theaters....

.

I can imagine it now....

"COMING SOON to the Revel Lounge in the heart of beautiful Atlantic City, for an extended residence - TOMMY THAYER'S ALL STAR KISS EXPERIENCE featuring Ron Keel, Tim 'Ripper' Owens and a surprise visit from Bruce Kulick!"

Fat Freddy wrote:

I used to see a lot of tribute bands in the early 90s - KISS, Sabbath, Zeppelin, Maiden, Priest (that was "British Steel," the tribute Tim "Ripper" Owens was in before he moved up to the big leagues) AC/DC, Metallica, the Doors, etc. New Jersey was the Home of the Tribute Band at the time, if you were an original band you couldn't get a gig anywhere.

I never thought of any of them as potential "replacements" for the original band(s) (though in the case of the Zeppelin and Doors tributes, obviously it was about as close as I was ever gonna get to witnessing the real thing), but a good tribute band can at least provide you with an entertaining show and a cheap night out, so I never had a problem with 'em.

For the price of one ticket to see the "actual" KISS nowadays, you can probably see a decent KISS tribute band about twenty times.... and the tribute band's "Paul" would probably sound better than the real thing.

Ripper's band! Nice!!! LOL!!!

You are correct about the tribute Paul probably sounding better.... I am sure Gene makes cash off that somehow.....

In addition to Sanctuary, I saw a couple other Maiden tribute bands when I was in England... Maiden Scotland (pretty good) and Hi-On Maiden (excellent.... they dress the part, wigs and all to look like the band. They do pack em in for their shows)

The Iron Maidens (all female tribute band) are good - saw them on AXS TV's World's greatest tribute bands a while ago (yes, there is really a series dedicated to tribute bands and it's in HD) Alice Cooper just hired their "Adrian Smith" to replace Orianthi in his touring band.

Speaking of all female tributes, I did see AC/DShe a number of years ago... They use a Bon Scott and only play Bon material. They were fantastic.

Nah, the thing to do is get one of those Vegas residencies that are all the rage these days. Motley, GnR, KISS, Def Leppard have all done (or doing them now). Guaranteed contract, no travel, full-house mid-size venues. What's not to like?

KISS is custom fit for a Vegas residency. All their stage show theatrics without the cost of moving it from town to town.

Fat Freddy wrote:

Quote :

I am sure they will - but they will be a small to mid sized theater touring show, no way they pack out arenas. They'll make the business work. They probably already have Tommy on contract to play Ace for the next 20 years... and "lead" the road show. He was already tour manager and gopher. They will do better than dinner theaters....

.

I can imagine it now....

"COMING SOON to the Revel Lounge in the heart of beautiful Atlantic City, for an extended residence - TOMMY THAYER'S ALL STAR KISS EXPERIENCE featuring Ron Keel, Tim 'Ripper' Owens and a surprise visit from Bruce Kulick!"

  

Quote :

Ripper's band! Nice!!! LOL!!!

A year or so after I saw them, I picked up a magazine and learned that he was gonna be the dude taking Halford's place in Judas Priest. I was like "Well, at least I know he can sing the old stuff."

I saw British Steel and Tim's other tribute act - Seattle - several times back in the day. They would swing through Cincinnati and play the same venue all the time.

Seattle was, you guessed it, a grunge covers band and Tim had very long hair. When Tim was doing both bands he would pile his long hair under a leather hat when he was doing the British Steel band.

Eyesore wrote:

James B. wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Why does everyone assume Vinnie doesn't want to pay Terry? I have never even see anyone ask Vinnie about reissuing those old albums. Not once. So how would anyone know?

Who is assuming anything  ? Not me.
I've known Terry since 1984 and the adage of straight from the camel's mouth applies very much to this situation.   You can dismiss it all you want, doesn't change it from being the truth.

Oh, right. I forgot you know everyone. So how does Terry know, then?

I don't know Terry (we share a name though) or any other Pantera folks so I am not in the now on their goings on, but I read a book, some paper backed Dimebag tome and it mentioned some similar thoughts, a falling out, on those early albums and the lack of a relationship between Vinnie and Terry...