Customer Reviews

Chicago XXX

5 star:		(73)
4 star:		(42)
3 star:		(24)
2 star:		(23)
1 star:		(10)

 

 

It's hard to believe that while Chicago has been a consistant concert attraction over the past several decades, the band hasn't released a full album of new material since "Twenty 1" 15 years ago. Well, the wait for an all-new Chicago album has finally ended with "Chicago XXX", the band's 30th release overall.
Over the last 35+ years, there has been a divided opinion amongst Chicago fans over the band's musical style. Many prefer the progressive eclecticism that was a hallmark of their early years while others lean towards the ballad-heavy pop songs that became the norm from the early '80s onwards.
If your a fan of the Chicago's early years, "XXX" is definitely not recommended. However, those who prefer the ballads and catchy pop numbers will be find plenty to enjoy here. The album basically follows the same formula that the band has followed over the last 20 years in that they have created another collection of inoffensive songs that are geared towards radio play and the charts. While this isn't neccesarily a bad thing per se, the album does come off as sounding like a band treading water and repeating themselves without breaking any new ground. Basically, if your familiar with any or all of Chicago's output since Jason Scheff joined, you'll know exactly what to expect here because it's more of the same.
What we have here is Chicago continuing to play in the safe zone with a pleasing collection of mostly radio-friendly tunes that'll keep their fans satisfied. "Chicago XXX" isn't by any means the band's greatest masterpiece nor is it an excellent album overall. It does have its share of shining moments though.

As an ending footnote: How about dusting off the unreleased "Stone of Sisyphus" album and releasing it to public. Now, THAT would be an anticipated Chicago release.

1) Insert CD into player
2) Adjust volume to "High"
3) Advance to track 7
4) Hit "Play"
5) Enjoy the ride
6) When the CD reaches the end, rise, stretch
7) Go to step 3, repeat

I guess I'll never hear another Chicago II, III, or V again. I even liked Chicago 17. There was still enough rock and upbeat jazz (We Can Stop The Hurtin; Stay the Night; Along Comes A Woman). Oddly enough, sap songwriter Cetera leaves the group but the sappy stuff not only survives, but it dominates.
No more jazz. No more R & B. Just pop music for the masses.
Since it's been 15 years since the last "new" release, I guess I'll be dead (or close to it) before the next one. As far as I'm concernced, their best work is way behind them.
So long Chicago.

The Pros: Tracks 7-12 are listenable.

The Cons: Where oh where do I begin...

1) This is a Chicago album right? This album features session cats more than it actually features members of the band. When I buy a solo album by a favorite musician I expect him/her to be backed up by session cats. When I buy an album by a band, I expect the band to play on their own album-- not predominantly outside musicians. Am I expecting too much here? A band that traditionally kept things "in house" and only occassionally brought in guest musicians-- is it too much to ask and expect them to actually go back to keeping their music "in house"?

2) The track order. Okay whose bright idea was it to stack five or six ballads in a row? Tracks 7-12 are at least respectable and listenable but the listener would never know that if he/she started listening to the album from the beginning as it would put him/her to sleep well before it got to the meaty stuff.

3) The production. It's clean, it's polished, it's pristine... Trouble is, it's SO clean, SO polished, SO pristine any and all emotion is stripped completely from the music. There is no feeling here. It's all superficial, the depth and emotion of the album is completely AWOL-- this I don't blame on the band, but on producer Jay DeMarcus, who over-produced the album to the point where it was/is emotionally STERILE.

If you want to listen to Chicago, they did put out some pretty good albums, this isn't one of them-- it can't be, because it isn't even really Chicago (if you read the liner notes you'll realize that). Don't waste your time or money on this. It's better than Chicago 19, but then again getting a filling is better than getting a root canal-- I wouldn't exactly be rushing off to my dentist for either!

Having grown up with Chicago since they were known as CTA, I have been disappointed more than once over the past several years by a directionless, seemingly musically uninterested bunch. I loved Chicago when they really were Chicago-prior to Terry Kath's tragic death, admiring everything about the way they made music. When Terry died, it seems the other guys' souls died with him. Since then, they have become nothing more than a caricature of their former selves. Chicago XXX is certainly no exception to my observation. Play it safe, rake in the big bucks, keep the money train rolling-it's worked for quite a while, but at what cost to the formerly devoted fans of a band that WAS truly original. The lyrics of the opening song on Chicago XXX say a great deal about the group itself-it's still not to late to FEEL, guys! Chicago XXX does not disappoint me as much as I might have expected, but I guess I don't feel as much as I used to about them and the complete mockery they have made of a once GREAT band.

After nearly 40 incredible years of non-stop touring and hit-making albums, Chicago has done it to their fans again. They've delivered a "refined" -- yet familiar -- pop-rock sound to their music. Sparked by solid song-writing, smooth multi-layered vocals, trademark horn lines and crafty guitar riffs, "Chicago XXX" is a kaleidoscope of sorts, taken from several periods, from a band that never seems to tire (nor we of it). I also think this release has the strength and variety to appeal to the average music fan in general.

Ballad-dominated at first, the album evolves with more livelier tracks. Whether it be a heartfelt power ballad "King Of Might Have Been," the jazz/rock masterpiece "90 Degrees And Freezing" (where old-school Chicago meets 2006), the pulsating rocker "Where Were You," or the mid-tempo R&B stuff like the gritty "Lovin' Chains," a foot-tapping "Come To Me, Do," and the compelling AC single, "Feel," of which there are two versions (one sans horns), "XXX" has it all! Even a "Night And Day" (1995)-sounding piece that's "Better." Not to mention guest appearances from country artists Rascal Flatts and newcomer Shelly Fairchild in separate ballad duets.

A lifelong Chicago fan, my initial impression was how producer Jay DeMarcus (Flatts bandmember) went to great lengths to modernize the band's sound. Sonically, I find this album as good or better than any I've heard. And, while some may describe DeMarcus' approach as "overproduction," I think it gives the listener more to hear all the time. Buy this album. Give it some ear time -- it's full of gems. Horns are everywhere, leaving little doubt as to XXXactly which band you're hearing. All in all, it was worth the wait!

Well its safe to say Chicago will never make an album of equal greatness of their 1970's work. And it also seems as if they dont care to i dont understand these guys someone else mentioned that they complained about having been forced somewhat to make the same cheesy sappy stupid ballads over and over again. Finaly now they are able to write the kind of music they want and what do they do they go right back to making the same cheesy pop. This album sounds just like a continuation of Chicago-21. Jason Scheff's annoying whiney voice unfortunately dominates most of the album. He has been singing the same song since he joined the band there is no other way around it. Ive never understood the Women that cant get enough of these ballads its almost as if they think that these songs were written for them. Trust me they werent its all about money however if some people had better taste this kind of music would not be made because people would have the good sense not to buy it and that would force Chicago to start writing better music. Im telling it like it is this is not my opinion i have heard the album over a few times and this is exactly the situation. Not to mention the music nowadays is recorded way to loud and with too much treble. The single from the album Feel yes its kind of catchy but in no way is this a Chicago song it sounds like something the Back Street Boys would record 10 years from now. There are two decent songs to be found on this album and wouldnt you know they are both Bill Champlin songs. Already Gone and Better are the best two cuts here the cheesy harmony bits on most of these songs make me cringe. This review might seem harsh but im telling it like it is. Thank god for Chicago's first 7 albums and a few good moments but most of everything beyond 1982 is brutal. Journey did the same thing once Steve Perry joined that band in 1978 they went down the same cheesy path. It all most makes me wonder if Chicago hates their fans what other reason could they have the release this crap and that is exactly what it is no opinons just crap Period!!!! who ever produced this album should be shot he has no idea what he is doing the sound here is way to sterile and loud. I see above that more people rated this album higher than lower are some of you on glue seriously or is your taste in music really that bad. Maybe one day Chicago will release something worthwhile in the mean time we have their first 5 albums to listen to.

.
Some of you may wish to buy this Chicago album because, foolishly like me, you want to listen to the music and songs of the guys in 'Chicago', but you get to listen to the compositions of :

1- 'Dannay Orton',
2- 'Blair Daly',
3- 'Greg Barnbill',
4- 'Dennis Matkosky',
5- 'Chas Sandford',
6- 'Jay DeMarcus',
7- 'Brett James',
8- 'George Hawkins Jr.',
9- 'Marcus Hummon',

who are not in the band.
With only 1 song (out of 12) written entirely by a band member, apparently either the band are no longer capable of making music or the producers think so.

If you, foolishly like me, buy this album to hear the band play, you have to listen to:

1- 'Lee Thornberg' : trumpet,
2- 'James Matchack' : Keyboards,
3- 'Jay DeMarcus' : keyboards,
4- 'Tom Bukovac' : guitar,
5- 'Dan Huff' : guitar,
6- 'Dean DeLeo' : guitar,
7- 'Yankton Mingua' : guitar,
8- 'Jack Kincade' : guitar,
9- 'Jay DeMarcus' : guitar...
10- 'Steve Brewster' : drums,
11- 'John Brockman' : drums,

and listen to the vocals of :

12- 'Shelly Fairchild',
13- 'Rascal Flatts',
14- 'Gary LeVox',
15- 'Jay DeMarcus',
16- 'Joe Don Roony',
17- 'Bobby Kimball'
18- 'Joseph Williams';

So in the eyes of Mr Jay DeMarcus, the Producer of this album, allegedly by Chicago, 16 additional musicians and 9 song writers were necessary to do the job that the band themselves were, in his eyes, incapable of doing!!

Jay DeMarcus himself has played guitar, and keys, as well as treating us to some singing. I am glad he had some fun, but I was not paying to hear him and his other 15 friends he called to the party at the expense of Chicago. If I had wanted to listen to all those other 25 people I would have asked for their names in the shop, not ask for Chicago. Is it too much to ask to be listening to Chicago's music when we get a `Chicago' CD?

I am not referring to the quality of music here, which is purely a matter of personal taste but, good or bad, I wanted to listen to 'Chicago'. I don't mind if I don't like the songs, as long as it is THEIR music. But apparently, in the eyes of the producers and financiers of this album, there is not a viable 'Chicago' anymore which they can trust to write and record its own music; only a name to milk ... as they did with Chicago 19 and 21, but far worse this time.

I do not mean to offend the taste of those who find the music on this CD pleasant enough to enjoy it; I do however mean to offend that faithless producer, Jay DeMarcus, who has made an art of mediocrity and lack of vision, and has offended the band by showing clearly that, as their producer, he believes that the compositions and playing of all those other musicians would somehow be better for the album than that of the Chicago themselves.
His treatment of Keith in particular is almost unbelievable: 6 guest guitarists?? He has not let Keith play on at least 9 of the songs!
And he has not let Tris play drums on 4 of the songs!
This is a joke...

Not sure how Mr DeMarcus can say he is proud of the boys! He seems to me to be ashamed of them and prefer to hide and burry them under the works of others. If he was proud of them he would not disempower them in this fashion and make a sad joke of them on their last album.

But the band themselves, whom I had continued to love for decades, should have known better, after a thinking pause of 15 years, what to choose to go out on, and what legacy and memory to leave behind; cause they are not going to get a chance to do another album after this. A bunch of the usual type ballads, indistinguishable from any out-takes from any of the albums from 16 to 21, written AND performed in great part by others, is an unworthy epitaph, for a band that used to be more than just a brand name for a bunch of writers and players to sell their stuff under.

Conclusion :

1- If you are a fan of the Chicago 1 to 7, entirely avoide this album and save your stomach a lot of churning.

2- If you are a fan of the Chicago 8 to 11, you may find a couple of nice pieces here that you might enjoy, such as the one by Robert. Borrow it from a friend for a listen.

3- If you are a fan of the Chicago 12 to 17, you will find several pieces here that you will enjoy very much. Worth buying for occasional listening.

4- If you are a fan of Chicago 18 to 21, you are not going to care who made the songs and who played them and you will totally love the whole of this album, which is more of the same. It has some good playing by some people, just the sort of songs you enjoyed on those other albums, and good production. Buy it and love it.

Have had this CD for less than 3 days, mind made up, best of this genre that I have heard this year.

Some die-hard Chi fans are berating this effort because it doesn't duplicate the sounds of CTA-II-V-VII-VII (Guercio) or the 17-21 (Foster) sounds. I knew that Scheff and Champlin had the makings of giving this band new life, given the right production and management.

This band has finally, (under Jay DeMarcus production) with XXX, come into their own. Of note, checking the Rascall Flatts website, DeMarcus profile shows that Chicago and David Foster were two of his major influences. It shows on this production.

The STRONG voices of Lamm, Champlin and Scheff, with the addition of TOTO members Bobby Kimball and Joseph Williams, and the Rascal Flatts singers makes for as strong a vocal production they have done since Cetera's departure, breaking new ground for the band. Instrumentally, the bands already strong skills are supplanted by some of Nashville's best hired guns on guitar and drums.

Stylistically, they cover Trip-Hop-Pop, Power Ballads, Power Pop, New Country, Jazz Fusion, and Blues Rock. This kind of diversity is unheard of in todays' music scene.

"Love Will Come Back" with Rascal Flatts on vocals has the makings of a new country hit. Expect it to be the most added song to New Country playlists

"Caroline" as the makings of a Power Pop anthem. Renegade rock stations stand the best chance of adding this to playlists.

"King of Might Have Been" is another stand-out, Scheff power ballad.

"Feel", the first single, has the best chance on the Adult Contemporary scene, with its updated beat and production values.

"90 Degrees and Freezing" is a Lamm Jazz-Fusion piece which reminds you of the roots of the band back inthe 60's and early 70's. Maybe Jazz and Public stations will play this, too complex and tight for AAA, too hip and edgy for AC.

Other material is very good, not just "filler" but it's doubtful any of it will ever get airplay.

All in all, a very pleasant surprise to critical listeners. No corners were cut on this production, and Warner/Rhino seems to be doing a good job at promoting it. Just hope they can break them back into the spotlight.

For a band that has complained so much over the years about being pigeon-holed for power ballads and being at the mercy of the corporate music scene, this album is a monsterous letdown. Possessing their own label they are pretty much free to record and release whatever they feel like. One of the wonders of the modern music industry.

What do they do? Revert to a corporate sound, utilise outrageous amounts of outside writing, and use a heaping helping of studio musicians rather than the more than capable memners of the band itself. What's the released product? An over-produced collection of sappy corporate music recorded by outside musicians with the Chicago name slapped on it that sounds like everything they have so apparantly despised over the years.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those people who bashes their later work. I enjoy elements of every era as a matter of fact. This however is inexcusable. It's time for Chicago to be Chicago and stop acting like victims. Only they truely have control over that.