| re: Should Meat and Jim... | |
|
Posted by: |
Rob 07:51 pm UTC 02/16/10 |
| In reply to: | re: Should Meat and Jim... - John_Galt 09:13 am UTC 02/16/10 |
| Totally agree with this. Meat could still do a great job on the new songs with Jim in the studio (or at least listening to/okaying the vocal takes if he wasn't up to actually producing) and if truth be told, Meat is probably the most likely way that Jim would get his new stuff released. It's all very well people suggesting names that Jim should give his songs to, but there's no guarantee that any of them would want to record a Steinman song right now, given the length of time since he last troubled the charts. > > Yes. If Jim's health permits, I'd love to see him work on > an album of new songs "written and produced" by Jim > Steinman. > > I'm still not sure what kind of Steinmaniac would be > against hearing new recordings from Jim Steinman... > regardless of who is doing the vocals. Meat Loaf's vocals > on Bat III weren't terrible and I think Jim could get more > artistic license working with Meat than virtually any > other recording artist of renown today. > > To be honest, I also think it might be nice to diversify a > bit. I'm not sure how much sweat and heartache went into > Broadway's Dance of the Vampires, but I bet it took its > toll on our favorite songwriter. No matter how much you > try, artistic endeavors can crash and burn, but I think > that's particularly true when dealing with stage shows > with folks with even slightly different visions and ideas > about what is ideal. Maybe I'm just anti-social, but the > collaboration part seems so essential and so difficult. > > At any rate, let's say the musical version of Bat turns > out to be a confusing patchwork of recycled themes and > songs from Neverland that bewilders audiences, but the new > Meat Loaf and Jim Steinman record tops the charts with a > new single called "What Part of My Body Hurts the Most" > (with additional versus and an expanded more Steiny clever > bridge), you'd probably be a lot less disappointed than if > the only thing you'd been working on was the musical. > Let's say the musical thrills, but the album sucks because > Meat can't sing and Jim's cast of studio musicians are all > geriatrics. Then the songs can be some lost treasure for > artists to discover and re-record someday. > > If Jim can't do it for health reasons or wouldn't enjoy it > because he's just not interested anymore, than fine. But, > if he'd like working on a new album -- even if its just > for fun -- I'd love to hear it. > > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Should Meat and Jim... - John_Galt 09:13 am UTC 02/16/10 |
| Next: | re: Should Meat and Jim... - RSG 08:26 pm UTC 02/16/10 |
| Thread: |
|