Hidden Treasures - Follow-Ups

[Scott]

I have a widely accepted and scientifically proven theory regarding albums that precede a bands biggest success. And that is that these albums are often better than the most succesful album of their careers. So what about albums that follow these massive successes? What happens to a band after the success? The only way to find out is to listen to some samples. So here are 4 tracks from albums that followed a bands biggest seller.


So, did they sustain their success? Go a total different direction? or fall flat? What follow up albums are your favorites or are the worst?


PLAYLIST --> http://www.podsnack.com/CA69EFD9E8C/avkm0ccu

	Fleetwood Mac Tusk 1979 1 - Sisters Of The Moon More than any other Fleetwood Mac album, Tusk is born of a particular time and place -- it could only have been created in the aftermath of Rumours, which shattered sales records, which in turn gave the group a blank check for its next album. But if they were falling apart during the making of Rumours, they were officially broken and shattered during the making of Tusk, and that disconnect between bandmembers resulted in a sprawling, incoherent, and utterly brilliant 20-track double album. At the time of its release, it was a flop, never reaching the top of the charts and never spawning a true hit single, despite two well-received Top Ten hits. Coming after the monumental Rumours, this was a huge disappointment, but the truth of the matter is that Fleetwood Mac couldn't top that success no matter how hard they tried, so it was better for them to indulge themselves and come up with something as unique as Tusk.
	Queen A Day At The Races 1976 2 - Long Away In every sense, A Day at the Races is an unapologetic sequel to A Night at the Opera, the 1975 breakthrough that established Queen as rock & roll royalty. The band never attempts to hide that the record is a sequel -- the two albums boast the same variation on the same cover art, the titles are both taken from old Marx Brothers films and serve as counterpoints to each other. But even though the two albums look the same, they don't quite sound the same, A Day at the Races is a bit tighter than its predecessor, yet tighter doesn't necessarily mean better for a band as extravagant as Queen. One of the great things about A Night at the Opera is that the lingering elements of early Queen -- the pastoral folk of "39," the metallic menace of "Death on Two Legs" -- dovetailed with an indulgence of camp and a truly, well, operatic scale.
	Rush Signals 1982 3 - Countdown Instead of playing it safe and writing Moving Pictures, Pt. II, Rush replaced their heavy rock of yesteryear with even more modern sounds for 1982's Signals. Synthesizers were now an integral part of the band's sound, and replaced electric guitars as the driving force for almost all the tracks. And more current and easier-to-grasp topics (teen peer pressure, repression, etc.) replaced their trusty old sci-fi-inspired lyrics. While other rock bands suddenly added keyboards to their sound to widen their appeal, Rush gradually merged electronics into their music over the years, so such tracks as the popular MTV video "Subdivisions" did not come as a shock to longtime fans. And Rush didn't forget how to rock out -- "The Analog Kid" and "Digital Man" were some of their most up-tempo compositions in years. The surprise hit, "New World Man," and "Chemistry" combined reggae and rock (begun on 1980's Permanent Waves), "The Weapon" bordered on new wave, the placid "Losing It" featured Ben Mink on electric violin, while the epic closer "Countdown" painted a vivid picture of a space shuttle launch. Signals proved that Rush were successfully adapting to the musical climate of the early '80s.
	AC/DC For Those About To Rock (We Salute You) 1981 4 - Put The Finger On You AC/DC's hot streak began to draw to a close with For Those About to Rock We Salute You. While Back in Black was infused with the energy and spirit of paying tribute to Bon Scott, it became apparent on the follow-up that the group really did miss Scott more than it initially indicated. Brian Johnson's lyrics started to seem more calculated and a bit clichéd, lacking Scott's devil-may-care sense of humor. And the band itself slowed down the tempo frequently, sounding less aggressive and inspired. There is still some decent material here

[RJhog (Admin)]

I didn't really make any notes while I listened to this yesterday, so the details may be sparse.  But I did enjoy the four song playlist.

Tusk is one I never have owned.  I do remember my cousin having the vinyl.  All I really remember hearing him play on it was the title track.  I agree that with Niels that Buckingham is very talented, but don't sell John McVie or Mick Fleetwood short.  I've seen them live twice in the last five years and they are a terrific rhythm section.  Just listen to the bass line on many Mac songs.  For Queen, I probably would have gone with the follow-up to News Of The World.  That is probably my favorite album of theirs, but it's neck and neck with The Game.  As usual, can't say much about Rush, I'm still relatively new to them as a band.  And I have never really gotten in to the Back In Black follow-up. However, the post Bon Scott version of AC/DC has had a resurgence of late in my book.  And I just might give this one another spin soon, thanks to this reminder of that.

Let's see, Niels said Hysteria, but I'd say it's follow up, Adrenalize.  To me, it's a drastic drop off overall from what came before it.

Kiss' follow-up of Destroyer was Rock And Roll Over.  The only drop off there was in the production, and I don't mean the sound of the album, I mean all the added stuff.  Other than that, RARO is fantastic.

There's Van Halen II.  Again, no drop off for me.  But then there's also 5150.  I think it's a fine album, but I'd rather hear DLR fronted VH over all.

Cheap Trick followed up Dream Police with All Shook Up.  ASU is a good album, but not in the same league as Dream Police.

Nice topic.  Can't remember if you've done a series on first albums after a lead singer change, but that would be a good topic as well.

[Jon]

"Tusk" is a very hard to get into. It doesn't flow properly, some songs jar you out of reality and you're left wondering what the hell you just listened to. Big undertaking after "Rumours" and it just doesn't quite gel. Not a horrible album, but I don't think that people were ready for something so experimental.

Queen doesn't count since it's wrong. Still, this is a great song, one of those songs you might not notice upon first listen.

"Signals" was unexpected. So unexpected after "Moving Pictures" that I hated it when it was released. But after a few more listens, thos has become one of my favorite Rush albums. Not the top favorite, but in the top 7, easily.

As for AC/DC, definitely not a dud. Nice continuation off of BIB. I believe Rolling Stone gave this 4 or 5 stars in the magazine. Plus, without this album, there would be no cannon fire at the concerts!!!!!!

At this time, I'm not doing the followup since I'm DEEP into a series. DEEP. I'll get to eventually, I'm sure.

Albums that were letdowns?

Anything be the Moody Blues after "Long Distance Voyager". 

Anything by Michael Schenker after "Assault Attack".

"Panorama" by the Cars. After "Candy-O" it's quite a departure. Not that it's a bad album, but it's a WTF album.

I'm sure there's more, but that's all I got right now.