whys joe perry get all the fame?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tom18222
  • Start date Start date
T

tom18222

yes
i saw aerosmith a few months ago. i dont understand why joe perry gets all the guitar fame, i mean i know hes backsup singer and stuff, but Brad Whitford literally plays just as many-if not more leads than perry does, he seems to be a better face, i guess?
 
Its kind of the same situation in the Rolling Stones, Ron Wood is a killer on guitar-they both share lead duties-but Keith Richards gets the same credit as Joe Perry.
And it for sure isn't for Keith having the 'better face'!!!! :eek:
 

Attachments

  • s head.webp
    s head.webp
    17.7 KB · Views: 163
Joe Perry does more of the writing.

At least, that is the way I've always understood it.



Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
 
Keith is a character, that's why he gets more props, and Joe is an anamoly of aging. I think he's 94 and still looks 35.
 
They both decided long ago that Joe would play lead even though Joe wasn't the better player. They both write; however, Joe does contribute more in songwriting.
 
i think the Tyler Perry thing was going first. I don't know their story, I have the Making of Pump and watch it now and then.

its obvious, at least then, Tyler was the creative one, Perry threw in a few and the groove just worked... the others fit in, as they are.

they talk about this same question I think in the movie, Tyler's opinion of each of them and what they bring to the table of the band.

the movies about a 5 out of 10. I mean the talking part sucks, thier sitting in these goofy looking postures in chairs in this stupid glaring brite-white fake room or something with too much makeup on...

but the real studio HR clips are great tho.... I'd think any HR head would enjoy the movie.

and us novice's can see for yourself! how the PRO's actually used and placed toilet paper on the YSM10's.

being a monitor slut, that was worth all $8 for the movie!:p
 
Steve & Joe were the "Toxic Twins", and the others were just kinda the not-as-interesting 3.

I dunno, like the Mick & Keef thing mentioned above, they're just kinda the attention-grabbing duo. I'd throw Axl & Slash (circa 86-91) in that mix too.
 
I think Brad Whitford is probably a more technical guitarist but Joe's playing is a better fit for their songs. I dunno, that's the impression I always got. Funny though, when both Joe and Brad Whitford were gone from Aerosmith, they were replaced with similar type players. And that Jimmy Krespo (name?) guy had more of the Joe Perry/slash hat look thing going on.
 
Joe, and Steve are the frontmen. Not every performer is a good frontman. It takes more than being the "better player". Joe is a better entertainer. It's about chemistry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top