KISS and CRAZY NIGHTS: The record used to convict an entire generation of music production

Years before I could ever have called myself an engineer (No I don't use quotes, I earned my stripes) when I was about 10 years old in the late 80's I bought a record by my favorite band KISS called CRAZY NIGHTS

My 10-year-old ears were so highly offended by what I heard that I couldn't even pretend to like it (Like I had to pretend to like every KISS record AFTER Music From The Elder....couldn't stand the crappy "Hey we don't wear make-up and now we play heavy metal!" version of the band) but I digress...

...I GUSHED over the sounds of the 1970's version (We wear makeup and play Power-pop with the occasional disco tune thrown in for fun) Version of KISS, Bob Ezrin's "Destroyer" or "The Elder" Eddie Kramers "Rock n' Roll over" or "Love gun" Neal Bogart's (He wasn't even a producer, he was the label president, they couldn't afford to hire one at that point) Dressed to kill, Vini Poncia (It was ALMOST Morodor, but KISS woudn't wait for him) "Dynasty" and "Unmasked"

I also loved my first wave American and British Punk, The Sex Pistols Never Mind the Bollocks, The Dammed's Dammed Dammed Dammed, Both New York Dolls record's The Ramones first 4 record's (And I actually think Spector did a good job on the fifth, but I'll admit it sounds DIFFERENT) Bob Clearmountain's Original Mix of The Dead Boys "Young Loud and Snotty" Iggy and the Stooges RAW POWER

David Bowie Alladin Sane/Ziggy/Diamond Dogs, The Rolling Stones "Some Girls" "Emotional Rescue" "Undercover" I even love "Dirty work" 

But something happened when KISS made CRAZY NIGHTS and the Stones made STEEL WHEELS

I didn't know what it was but the difference was NIGHT AND DAY, 

All those records's I mentioned SOUNDED a certain way, they DID something

That something was GONE on CRAZY NIGHTS and STEEL WHEELS and it wasn't just inferior songwriting....

as a 10 year old I could hear it plain as day, even though I had no idea what the difference was

Those records along with the other gutless sounding records being released around that time were recorded..........can you guess?........I bet you can!
DIGITALLY!!!!!!!

I could tell something was wrong at 10 years of age so don't tell me that I'm nostalgic for record's that were made before I was born......those new record's sounded BAD

Neith KISS or the Stones would be caught dead using ANYTHING but 2" tape in 2017 and both groups have said so.......maybe they don't know much about records either? Not as much as you anyway.

Just like the first time I heard an analog synth I nearly soiled myself, the difference isn't small, the difference is HUGE!

Preamps, Mics, Guitars, Synths, Tape yes these things sound different and make all the difference in the world.

The problem with you 80's engineers is all you cared about was FIDELITY you cared about it more than the music you were recording, so all you guys LOVE C.D's sooooo much and think digital's pristine highs are just to die for

That whole generation of engineers have their head up one giant collective ass, they were raised trying to eliminate tape's imperfections, which were, in fact, AWESOME, chasing something NO ONE CARED ABOUT BUT THEM

Then when the world turned to them and said, "Hey guys! These records you are making suck! what happened to that tape machine we used to use" you threw one big collective tantrum, I see it in every thread where a kid asks about buying his first tape machine

There are 4 80's engineers in there within minutes trying to talk him out of it

Face it guys, you failed,
Fidelity sucks and the world knows it

The "engineers" as you patronizingly call them HAVE learned to KNOW WHAT THEY LIKE as you put it, but you are wrong about one thing, it isn't some delusional nostalgia (Look in the mirror for that) that makes them seek the sounds they do, it's the fact that unlike your generation of engineers

THEIR EARS DON'T LIE TO THEM

KISS the band with too many fans who HATE their music

Merry "Let's put the X in X-mas" everyone!

I thought I'd offer a brief diatribe on those, who having found KISS records under the tree this year (Who the hell buys C.D's anymore? Vynal lives to win!) Are asking that dreaded question, that has haunted the band and pissed off the people who actually like their music for as long as the band has been making it.

"Hmmm....KISS record....is it HEAVY ENOUGH?"

These are the people who say Hotter than Hell. Creatures and Revenge are the best records but can't seem to acknowledge that those are 3 of KISS's worst selling records, and the people who say they are so good, never bought any of them, and really never liked KISS's music, to begin with. These are the fans who were along for the fire-breathing blood spitting and (truth be told) are fans of the bands show and only tolerate its music. Heavy Metal fans have held this band back its whole career. Can you think of any other band whose every record release is greeted by a chorus of "Is it heavy enough? It sucks! It's not Heavy enough!" NO OTHER BAND IS CONSTANTLY QUESTIONED as to whether their records are heavy enough. This is a band whose first two songs from the first record Strutter and Nothing to lose sound like a Rolling Stones song followed by a little Richard song, but music fans who attended the bombastic shows loved the look.. they wished they were hearing Black Sabbath or Deep Purple instead of The Rolling Stones, New York Dolls, Ramones with guitar solos band they heard.

THAT is why the records didn't sell those "fans" NEVER liked KISS's music and always wished they were a metal band, they wern't and when they tried to be, they sucked (Lick it up, Anamalyze) if KISS had stayed closer to the NY punk scene instead of heading out on the road after 3 gigs, I think they would have appealed to the Blondie, Ramones, Richard Hell and the voidoid's, Johnny Thunders crowd (who they ALL knew anyway, but those bands hung around New York and played clubs, while KISS was out on the road) We would have seen a much more musically comfortable KISS, without any mid-west meat-head always asking:"Is it heavy enough? Does it sound like Sabbath?" I wish those people would leave a band alone that they never liked to begin with.

It's enough to drive a fan of the band's MUSIC to start "liking the taste of alcohol"

So let me answer the question for you, you mulleted (Non-ironic Mullet, I should add) knuckle-dragging, "play Exiter! Play "I've had enough (into the fire) shouting, Mom's basement living genetic misprint....

NO! IT'S A KISS RECORD! THEY PLAY ROCK N' ROLL! GET YER FIX O' CRAPPY METAL ELSEWHERE......

....Goddamn Mark St. John Loving dummy....put on some damn deodorant too...

Go play the new Jackson guitar you got for X-mas and leave this Rock N' Roll band ALONE

KISS! Stop blaming Unmasked and The Elder for the early 80's famine! The REAL story behind KISS in the 80's

Let the word go forth from this day forward!

Let it be heard from every hamlet and village be it on mountaintop or valley floor!

Let the children sing it out! Unafraid of getting litigious calls from Paul and Gene's attorneys!

UNMASKED AND THE ELDER ARE GREAT RECORDS AND NOT TO BLAME FOR KISS's EARLY 80's FALL FROM GRACE.

The story can now be told, gather round, as I strum my lute and sing as bards do of yon days of old....THIS is why KISS went into the crapper circa 1980, I'll just jump right in.....

KISS became a mainstream fad in the late 70's which was great except that mainstream fads all have one thing in common,

They have three years to live. After which the backlash ensues and they are tossed in the Pop-culture trash.

So, in 1980 KISS released a great, logically styled, New-Wave-Power-Pop masterpiece called Unmasked. This was the year the backlash began. They could have released Destroyer in 1980 and it would have flopped. Unmasked wasn't a total failure but sold FAR less than the worldwide smash Dynasty (4 x platinum) KISS panicked and blamed a good record for the downturn so they decided to get adventurous and record a concept record, the infamous Music from the Elder, 

now for myself and anyone else who was too young to be there, this is a confusing record, not because it's confusing, but because IT'S EXCELLENT. It's a departure from the usual KISS record, but it does sound like KISS and is a great record from top to bottom, Lou Reed co/wrote some of the songs and Bob Ezrin produced. We've been told all our lives how horrible it is and on first listen we see we've been lied to...

KISS was HATED by the media in the 70's and the thought of them releasing a Spinal Tap record and falling on their faces was titillating beyond belief (The cover to Unmasked pokes fun at this relationship) The record failed again, this time BADLY, but NOT because of the music, but because KISS shouldn't have been releasing ANYTHING in 1981, they needed to go away for a while, but they didn't, the press was MERCILESS and they were considered D.O.A at the time.

Stay with me, I am going to answer your question, but you need to understand a few things before it can be answered. 

OK, So after the Elder debacle KISS was desperate, to make matters worse they had signed a new huge record deal in early 1980 when they were still one of the biggest bands in the world but no one had forseen thier incredible fall in so short a time, the deal was predicated on 3 original members being in the band and Ace had decided to quit (The only reason he is pictured on the original cover is so they could collect the advance fee owed under their old record contract, as soon as it was known Ace had left, the label renegotiated the deal, for FAR less money, this is a crucial factor in answering your question.)

KISS had always been a rock n' roll band and nothing really resembling a Heavey Metal band but in 1982 they took stock of the music scene and figured the best option for trying to save thier careers was to do a heavy metal record.

Enter Creatures of the night, considered by many o be one of their best (Personally not a fan) 
What a lot of people neglect to mention is the Creatures Floped as bad as The Elder had NOBODY bought it when it was first released.

KISS realized at this point people were listening with thier eyes instead of their ears, they knew they were a hairs breadth away from being dropped by their label and in a last ditch attempt to regain relevance took off the make up and recorded Lick it up.

Lick it up was inferior in everyway to Unmasked, The Elder and COTN, but sold more than those three records combined, it went double platnum.

KISS learned a lesson, sadly I wish they hadn't but they can only go by what they experience. 

"Nobody cares what the records sound like, they care about the packaging, the perception"

Now, here is a specific answer: Armed with this new revelation and working under the confines of a much stingyer record contract KISS was not about to put themselves in debt with high recording budgets and made their next several Non-make-up records as cheaply and quickly as possible, under the terms of any deal production costs are recoupable by the label based on future revenue, so why spend money on something that didn't increase sales?

This philosophy was never more crudely on display then on 1988's Hot in the shade, the record was a collection of demos. One track (Can you guess which) is Gene and Bruce Kulick playing along with a Roland 707 drum machine, another is Gene, Bruce, and a DMX drum machine. PRODUCTION COSTS = ZERO. RECORD SALES = PLATINUM (With a top ten single)

There were two occasions when this version of KISS decided to invest in their records sonics. One time was Crazy Nights Ron Nevison was paid the big bucks to get them to the Def Leopard promised land, this record produced a top 10 hit in the UK, but domestically, it went platinum and stalled, thus selling half as much as the Paul and Gene produced ASYLUM, the other time was when Ezrin was brought back for the critically acclaimed REVENGE.

As much as REVENGE is lauded by fans, in the first year, it was released it only went GOLD, 

So THIS is why KISS records from that era sound so blah, they were done haphazardly on a shoestring budget after it had been proved to the band that investing in a records sonics did nothing to increase its sales.

KISS UNMASKED: How the Ramones saved KISS with their dying breath (And Van Halen fans wish they hadn't

Van Halen fans hate KISS.

That's really the line of demarcation, isn't it?

Those who thought Van Halen was great NEVER go back to being KISS fans, I personally don't like Van Halen and have never lost my love for KISS, but have noticed that nobody hates KISS more than a dedicated Halen fan.

It's funny that they are even compared, as musically, KISS's roots and the musical sweet spot is more comparable to the Proto-Punk-Glitter bands they came up on the NY scene with.

For some reason (I guess it's their own fault, for mis-marketing themselves as something they aren't) people always compare them to technically proficient hard rock bands, when, if you listen to the music, KISS is WAY closer to The Ramones, New York Dolls, Blondie, Slade, The Rolling Stones and Alice Cooper (With a dash of Zepplin in the riffs, if not the songwriting it's self). Bands that no one would ever compare with Van Halen because it's just totally different worlds.

On the subject it's self, I've already posted about the 80's production values. But I will add (and others can too if so inclined) what I consider to be the best SOUNDING KISS record.

I am a HUGE fan of Unmasked both its songwriting and production. Vinny Poncia did an excellent job of making KISS sound like what I think KISS was supposed to sound like: Energetic and raw Power-pop.

The guitar tones on these records remind me very much of Chris Thomas' work on the multi-layered guitar masterpiece Never mind the Bollocks by the Sex Pistols (2000 Man, Hard Times from Dynasty sounds pretty much identical to The Pistols. Tomorrow/ Is that you? and others from Unmasked could have been put on a Blondie record and no one would know the difference ("Is that you?" is very much like "Rip her to sheds") Interestingly another band accused of not being able to play, who could, and another band no one would compare to Van Halen)

In a way, this helps answer the original posters question. What happened to KISS's sound in the 1980's Van Halen happened.

After their power-pop-new-wave-disco records failed due to the 70's KISS fad ending (Actually, Dynasty was a massive hit, Unmasked was disappointing commercially but not an outright bomb) After their crash coincided with the release of the experimental, Lou-reed collaborated broadway show-ish "Music From The Elder" KISS decided that the only way to stay commercially viable (Now that any genre they had once belonged to was now virtually non-existent, the sands shifted quickly in the early 80's) was to target the Heavey-Metal Genre, which was lead by... guess who? Halen!

The problem is, that a band can only really sound like themselves, no matter what genre they try to align with, and outright heavy-metal, it's songwriting motifs and production values really didn't suite KISS at all.

The guitar tones clashes with the style of songwriting, the mixing of the guitars was not complimentary to KISS's strengths although they were already trying to write differently it just never "Clicked" KISS was a rock n' roll band (A raw, basic NY 70's rock n roll band at that, who would default to their Beatles and Raspberries roots way before they would default to anything like Sabbath or Purple) Thus you had KISS major flaw on display for an entire decade.

The flaw being this, they could not lead themselves musically, they could write and play their songs, but it really took a Bob Ezrin to tell them what KIND of songs and playing suited them, left to their own devices, they would panic and display an underlying musical low self-esteem. They didn't want to end up like the Ramones, New York Dolls or the Dictators. As acclaimed as those bands are, they did not achieve the kind of success KISS prioritized above all else. And they were deathly afraid that if they did not chase whatever was "Current" in music, that they woud end up like those bands (Comercially speaking)

And so for an entire decade, in addition to what I wrote in my last post, you had a band, with no idea what they did and didn't do well, trying to out Van Halen Van Halen, and even though the two bands were friends, it's no secret that those fans they were trying to appeal to, would NEVER get on board with KISS, because looking at them through Van Halen colored lenses, KISS were nowhere near Van Halen and never would be.

It never occurred to KISS that they were completely off course in who they were trying to appeal to. When the make-up came off, and sales returned to "Decent" if not impressive levels, they thought: "AH HA! Were getting warmer!" what they were doing was dooming themselves to a decade of mediocrity, and mediocrity just leads to more of the same, it became habitual. They were surviving, sometimes doing well, but never getting over the hump to anywhere close to what they had been.

I often wonder, if at any point in the 80's if anyone sat Paul and Gene down and PLAYED Rock n' roll over or Destroyer for them, MADE them LISTEN to Dynasty or Unmasked and asked them, "Do you guys not hear the difference? It's not even close to being the same type of music!" Aerosmith is a good example of a band who was in touch with what they did well, even though they did all the 1980's updates, with co/writers and producers Aerosmith ALWAYS sounded like Aerosmith. It's baffling that KISS didn't catch onto that, KISS ran from their 70's sound as if they were terrified of it, Aerosmith OWNED their sound and updated it. 

I'm not even an Aerosmith fan, never really liked them much. But their attitude and awareness towards the sound they had created was obvious, AC/DC is another example, they may have updated their sound a little, but they KNEW what AC/DC was supposed to sound and write like.

Sadly, KISS did not have the musical confidence of those two bands, probably because they were measuring themselves by the wrong criteria. Neither AC/DC or Aerosmith were really in the same musical waters as KISS, they were VERY close, but thier IS a difference between the kind of music KISS does well and the music of those two bands.

Never has this been more apparent than when at Johhny Ramone's request (The Ramones had been at the first ever KISS show at Coventry in Queens, Joey Ramone was a huge fan and saw all their local gigs before they went out on tour behind the first record) KISS covered "Do you remember Rock n' Roll Radio?" by The Ramones on the Ramones official tribute record.

The results were heart stopping for any KISS fan, it's a 10 out of 10, 5 stars nuclear detonation that totally blows away the original, and it's a band sounding like god INTENDED them to sound, it's KISS sounding the way KISS used to sound, the way KISS should have ALWAYS sounded, Aerosmith couldn't sound like that, AC/DC couldn't sound like that....and Van Halen......please.

I'm a huge Ramones fan, but I no longer consider "Rock n roll radio" a Ramones song, it was the Ramones gift to KISS, a song written by guys who had been in the crowd of 30 people in the room watching the day KISS was born. A reminder, from people who would know, THIS IS WHAT YOU DO WELL

Did they get the message?

Sort of, Sonic Boom was a huge improvement, (Although the mark was missed in the writing department more often than it was hit) the same can be said of Monster. I chalk this up to Paul Stanley producing the records,

If the rumor is true and we one LAST KISS record (At least with Paul and Gene in the band) coming down the pipe, let's hope the question the Ramones asked KISS before they left this earth isn't forgotten...

...Do you remember Rock n Roll radio?

And let's pray the answer is YES!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6SYfguaJtk

Paul Stanley will hate this blog! And debunking false KISS myths

I like to defend Peter Criss.

It's thankless work but like the snaking of a drain pipe pr bleeding of a septic tank, someone has to get this s^%t unclogged.

In opposition is no less of a voice than the one belonging to Paul Stanley (Insert Paul's voice is shot joke here) at the end of the day I have no illusions as to who's side of the story will get more pages sticky, but I've never been one to pass up on the opportunity to give it a pull, so I'll keep trying to balance the scales, should future generations wish to know the other side of the story. The fact is, there is a lot more to the history of the band KISS, then either Paul Stanley or Gene Simmons (or perhaps even Ace, who is doing his darnedest to get his old job back) are willing to spill in 2017, that's alright though, It gives me something to do between septic jobs, funny thing is, both tend to leave you covered in poo.

The feces were certainly airborne and primed for a soft n' stinky drone strike when last I suggested Peter was the best singer in the band and had brought the signle most IMPORTANT song in thier catalouge to the table. This was in reaction to Paul's claims that Peter was tone-deaf and couldn't write a song if his indoor plumbing depended on it. At this point, it's well known that Stan Penridge had a LOT to do with the material Peter brought to KISS and people have tried to use this revelation to disprove my claim that if it weren't for Peter Paul would still be driving a cab. Here's my response, taken from another publication:


I did NOT say Peter was a songwriter, it's well known that Stan wrote Peter's contributions, and as a songwriter, Peter isn't even on the same planet as Paul (Or Stan for that matter) but Peter's presence still saved KISS's career.

Destroyer was TANKING when Beth brought it back from the dead and exposed KISS to a wider audience than they had ever reached, that's how they went from what was essentially an alternative rock freak-show (They were NOT a mainstream band, ALIVE broke through to the masses but Destroyer, prior to Beth showed that they were headed right back where they started) Beth exposed KISS to all the kids who bought the lunchboxes and let their parents know it was OK to let them keep it.

I am not discrediting Pauls talent, only his attempts to make it seem as if he were the ONLY talent that band had to offer, or that the band would have been better off with a different mix of talent. Peter's contributions were essential, as were Gene's Ace's, Stan's and Sean Delaney's (Who, to this day has not received the credit he deserves, most of the KISS visual presentation we have all come to know and love, and that changed music forever was his baby, and the songs he received credit for ALWAYS sound like pure unfiltered shots of what made this band musically great, rumors that he was denied credit on many others have some credence as when he stopped working with the band, the group had trouble sounding like it's self, a VERY odd thing if you think about it, an honest attempt was made during Sonic Boom, and to me the highlights of "Dangerous" and "Nobody's Perfect" sound like Paul and Gene trying to write like Sean Delaney)

It took everyone to make KISS what it was. Aucoin, Bogart and Ezrin too of course....(yes Ezrin, as KISS fans we like all or most of the records, but to the rest of the world, many of whom hate KISS with a bizarre amount of passion, Destroyer is the one record that legitimises the group musically, even the haters admit it to be one of the best Rock n' Roll records of all-time...and in typical KISS "foot shooting" they decided it was horrible and blamed Ezrin for killing their career...until "Beth" happened) So I am not writing this to take anything away from anyone, simply to contradict the myth Paul has been trying to spread that he was the only member of KISS who mattered.

His envy for Gene is pathological, his anger at Peter for not being a Bonham clone is myopic (Though there was a time in the early 90's where he did admit, that Peter's style made the band stand out, that it made KISS bop and swing instead of plod and lumber, so he is aware of it, he just won't admit it anymore) EVERYONE on board back then played an essential part in creating one the most controversial, fascinating and fun bands that ever existed, KISS was a success, a big one, at this stage in the game they should all be having lunch once a month swapping old stories, laughing about their fights and slapping each other on the back for a job well done, not trying to tear each other down (Gene and Ace have been great about this, and interestingly enough, those two ARE having lunch and writing songs for Ace's new record)

Peter's bitterness is a shame and mostly unfounded, sure he has been disrespected by Paul in particular (Financially and otherwise) but at this point he should be "Whatever guys...put another zero on Ace's check if you want, mine's still big enough to buy a private island after every show. Paul's expose' of his real feelings towards his co/workers and the world at large should have been kept between him and his therapist, as they are truly horrifying in their implications.

Paul is a great songwriter, not as good as Sean Delany, and not as good alone as when he is collaborating with Gene. He is a great singer ( I saw the Vegas residency and thought he sounded fine, so I don't buy the "he can't sing any more stuff") Not as good as Peter, whose voice had something special about it, that made it one of the best in Rock ' Roll, but still great. A great guitar player, not as good as Ace, but few guitar players in history play with the charisma Ace does (I watched an area of 20,000 in 1997 sing along with every note in every solo, never seen an audience do that for ANY other lead guitarist) A great performer, though not as good as Gene who will go down in history as one of the top-performing musician's of all time (Along with Elvis, James Brown, Mick Jagger, Iggy Pop, Tina Turner, Jonny Thunders, Frank Sinatra, Micheal Jackson and Prince...add Gene Simmons and you have the top 10 greatest performers, personally I would put Gene in a tie for #4 with Iggy) The fact that Paul wasn't the best at any of these things but worked harder than any other member at them, did them more consistently and often, reveals the fact he wants everyone to know: That he was the day to day substance of KISS, his work was the bedrock on which everyone else could showcase their talents. Remove the foundation and the building crumbles.

The funny thing is, no one has ever tried to deny Paul the credit he deserves for being the lynchpin member of the band, not even Gene, who when asked, has always said "Paul's a better writer, better looking, more prolific, kept the band together" ect. Paul has been fighting a war in which he has no enemies, and the only one he hurts is himself. It's really too bad that someone with that much can be that unhappy, it's my hope that before it's all said and done, Paul can accept the great life he has and know it doesn't need to come at the expense of another,

PETER CRISS : ROCK N' ROLL N!&&$R? WHY ORIGINAL KISS DRUMMER CAN'T GET JUSTICE, and why you owe him BIG TIME!

It's a brisk day here in hell, and someone tell those Pigs to fly a little to the left, I'm tired of them pooping on my lawn from 20,000 feet. Oh yeah....and KISS are in the Rock N' Roll Hall of Fame.....they had a full issue devoted to them in Rolling Stone asw well....and they are generally considered one of the top classic rock bands of all time.

Wow.......I am reminded of the famous nation inspiring Olympic ice hockey call from the 1980 Winter Games...."Do you belive in miracles?" I 'm told that fans in the 70's were often beaten up if they wore their KISS gear in public, I wouldn't know but i can tell you that in the 1980's I wasn't afraid of getting my ass kicked....but I got mighty tired of getting laughed at, That was the sub-basement level of down-and-out the band had sunk to, after having never even been taken seriously during their heyday, where they were briefly but honestly able to lay claim to the title of "Biggest band in the world" my childhood introduction was reminiscent of a kid taking home a hobo and asking his parents to feed him. In neither era did KISS have an ounce ofr respect from the Rock establishment (Oxymoronic no?)

So one would be tempted top think that this fairy tale has a happy ending for all the founding deities who energetically fused im the stratosphere and took the form of rock musicians to save the world from....yeah, whatever, two Jews a Catholic and a guy who wasn't sober enough to remember his religious background,would be able to sit back shake each others hands and say, "Well, your an asshole....but whatever....we did it, love ya you prick"  Y'know like Ace and Paul do in Ace's video before they play that diareha inducing Free song.......ewww....and I guess for the most part they have,

Except this is KISS, and for however big they get there is a small but active biut of sel-destruct implanted firmly in thier foundation. Oh....you didn't know? It'sd the same thing that makes them continue on eith the rediculas narritive that UNMASKED and THE ELDER are bad records, even though if today's indie kids got a hold of UNMASKED it would probably be 4 x platnum by the end of the week, and people would have realized (Like the original reviews of it confirm) that the ELDER actually IS a work of art and an incredible KISS record that people would love if the band stopped telling them it sucked every five minuetes, The same reason the sure-fire smash hit and worthy successor the "Rock ' Roll All Night" and potenmtially the best KISS sonmg of all time "It's My Life" has been neglected and unreleased (save for a collection of demos) for over 20 years.

In light of all this you must admit, KISS does some pretty strange stuff to it'self. There always has to be an internal scapegoat, even when times are good, even if the thing being targeted is crucial to thier success, crucial as say......Peter Criss?

The KISS strategy has always been CONTROL THE NARRATIVE they rinse and reapt the styory they want told so many times that the public begin to parrot it in spite of themselves,it's quite the clever trick actully. But you think they woulduse it mor to thioer benifit (MONSTER is a great record now write that down 1000 timkes!) than to slight a man who though troubl;lesom, can only help the band bring even MORE loot flowing into the coffers of KISS inc

Even semi-excumunicatees like Ace Frehley have begun spining the yarn of how Peter couldn't play the drums and was insufferable and they would have been better if he hadn't been theree.....

STOP IT

Let's get one thing straight. ALIVE didn't NOT cement KISS as a household name and ensure their trajectory to the top. DESTROYER was slipping off the charts in the summer of 76' and it seemed like the live breakthrough was more like a stay of execution than a full parole  from "wanna-be status" (Hey if Dee Snyder is the watermark for a wanna-be than the shoe fits, platforms and all) there was one man however who stepped forward into the spotlight and saved the day for KISS CASABLANCA and Bill Aucoin's AMERICA EXPTRESSS.

THAT WAS PETE CRISS Make no mistake about it. without Beth it was looking like Destroyer would have been the final KISS record. It saved Destroyer and led to the record pushing past platinum and beyond, little is mentioned these days of the miraculous "night of the living dead like " re-birth of what is rightfully know as KISS's best record, but Detroit Rock city had failed as a single and after it's initial bit of interest Destroyer was a week away from sliding off the charts, sales of the record had ground to a halt and KISS was within a week or two of being pulled off the road by Neal Bogart who wasn't about to risk his company on KISS a second time, he had made much of his investment back with ALIVE but he wasn't going to spin the wheel a second time.

Nobody else was even on the track that saved KISS, only Peter. Paul wants to have us believe Peter is unable to sing.....well......what can I even say tot hat, he is spitting at the voice that paid for his house. Ace wants to "Separate" himself from Peter these days, well Ace if it weren't for Peter you never would have made that acclaimed solo record in 78' that has granted you a steady revenue stream ever since. Paul also tells thew story of how Peter couldn't possibly have written anything important on the song, it must have been all Bob Ezrin, Ezrin deserves near equal credit I'm sure and a healthy helping to Stan Penridge too for whatever his contribution was, but the man who co/wrote sang and breathed life back into a rock n' roll white elephant was Peter Criss.

His greatest sin? As far as I can tell it's that he doesn't play like Bonham and for reasons known only to them the three other founding members are and were obsessed with the plodding English brick layer who made all those Zepplin records so dourly un-danceable and gave birth to what is now known as "Butt-rock"

But believe me when I tell you this, Peter Criss has been vindicated as a drummer musician and member of KISS once and for all,

"Huh?" you say? Yep, it's on the KISS KLASSICS RE-RECORDED record that Peter once and for all is proven to be MORE imprtant than Paul Stanley to the original sound, to the point where I would say: Paul Peter and Ace or Gene Peter and Ace will sound more like KISS than any combo that doesn't include both Peter and Ace, go listen and you'll hear what I mean....

Without Peter's reckless Brooklyn swing and unorthodox, click track abandoning, "hey f*ck you I felt like playing it" drumming KISS doesn't sound like KISS! It's the missing ingredient that no one wants to admit.

Technically Peter has never been a great drummer, even his teacher, Jerry Nolan of the New York Dolls and Johhny Thunders and the Heartbreakers, who was a seminal, highly influential and one of the top 3 punk rock drummer of all-time, admits it. But it doesn't matter, it never mattered, Peter's volatile stick's manship paced KISS in a way no other band's drummer did, even Paul (Who apparently hates Peter and his playing) pays Peter this unintentional compliment in his book, "Peter wasn't like other drummer's....he was downright erratic....instead of creating a foundation for us to lean on, he ran along side us" Paul was trying to degrade Peter, but unknown to him he was decoding the Rosetta stone of the "KISS sound"

Peter Criss still struggles with being given any credit for one of Rock's greatest bands although his musical intuition did more to create the sound we all love than anything Paul Stanley ever did (Paul...you are NOT a producer, please stop)

So let's see some love for the Catman going forward, and remember the greatest favor he ever did us was hating John Bonham (His playing, appearently they were drinking buddies for a minuete)