Aerosmith - Draw the Line
Facts
| Artist(s) | Aerosmith |
| Studio | Sony |
| Release Date | September 7, 1993 |
| UPC Code | 074645736426 |
Tracks
- Draw The Line
- I Wanna Know Why
- Critical Mass
- Get It Up
- Bright Light Fright
- Kings And Queens
- The Hand That Feeds
- Sight For Sore Eyes
- Milk Cow Blues
Similar CDs
User Reviews
Average user review:| Aerosmith's underrated album |
I guess the drugs were catching up to the band, and to many people, those nasty habits seemed to interfere with the music Aerosmith was making at the time. But to me... I honestly don't hear any slip-ups or any problems whatsoever with the music, so I don't understand how drugs were supposedly affecting the quality of the music.
The title song with its short and catchy riff is a classic, and "Sight for Sore Eyes" is very similar to the title song, and just as memorable. Tyler's vocals are really good on this album. "Milk Cow Blues" is a radically different and distinct speedy version of the blues. Really cool song.
"Critical Mass" has another solid vocal melody that's backed up with good guitar playing that has a jamming approach to it. It's the kind of song that reveals there's nothing quite like Aerosmith out there, and never will be. In fact, a song like this makes me wonder what so many people see in Guns 'N Roses, a band that supposedly were masters of the dirty rock and blues that Aerosmith was doing (and mastering) 10-15 years before Appetite for Destruction ever came out. There's some really cool drumming, harmonica, and guitar tricks in "Critical Mass" that a band like Guns 'N Roses would never be able to implement into their music.
"Kings and Queens" is a drastically different song from everything else the band attempted before. Well maybe that's not true, since it's pretty similar to "Dream On" in terms of moody atmosphere. But it's highly memorable and even though it was a hit, it doesn't get the appreciation it deserves. Maybe back in the day it did, but no longer.
Elsewhere songs like "Get it Up" are really bluesy and dirty in the guitar riffs and vocal delivery (downright MEAN, in fact) and "The Hand that Feeds" is memorable for the way Steven Tyler screams, and for that guitar riff that loops around in the chorus. The verse melody has grown on me after a few listens though. Maybe that's the thing that's making the album a tough listen for so many people- the songs just require a few listens to get into. Whatever the case, I think this is one of Aerosmith's best albums, right behind the first two albums.
July 2, 2008
| Aerosmith - Draw the Line |
| Not a Great, but Still Good (3.5 stars) |
It's worth owning simply for the part in the title track where Tyler's vocals suddenly reach their screeching best. February 2, 2008
| The line is drawn here... |
People are funny. Take Aerosmith's 1977 coked up rockfest DRAW THE LINE. The general consensus is it's where the band lost focus and started to come apart musically. Now REALLY listen to the album without the Behind The Music backstory. What do you hear? A straight up, tightly focused and high energy rock & roll album. In my opinion, only ROCKS edges out this baby. Sure, the song writing is better on TOYS IN THE ATTIC, but this packs a lot more sonic punch: The band rocks a deeper groove, Steven Tyler's singing is on a shrieking other level. If I have to choose between well-crafted songs and a harder, dirtier groove...I'll take the harder, dirtier groove. This is Aerosmith's truncated EXILE ON MAIN ST. It also reminds me of AC/DC's FLICK OF THE SWITCH. These three albums all have something in common besides B & W cover-art: They're all about big time rock acts stripping back all the hoopla and getting down to the rocking basics. With the exception of the dark and majestic "Kings & Queens", DRAW THE LINE exists only to rock and to periodically get funky. What's wrong with that? And who cares that the band was coked out of their gills when they recorded it? Substance abuse is many times the lifeblood of art. You might like the drug-free pop band Aerosmith became in their comeback years, but I'll take this scrappy late 1970s rock band thank you. January 24, 2008
| Oh dear... |
As a result, band members would fail to show up for rehearsals; Steve and Joe would often blackout during recording sessions; Steve's singing sounds tired and drags - can't even hit the right key; the guitaring is not at all the tight teamwork it once was - in fact it sounds as if the band don't even want to be there recording; At times, it feels as if each member is off in their own worlds while playing and resulting in a huge mess; the recording itself is very shoddy and is dire need of remastering. The work on her is so shoddy that even the band today express regret and shame over their sloppiness.
Every song on here has potential of being solid hits. Unfortunately, they all fall short of their glory in some form or another. The title track may give off a good feel that the album is going to be just like Rocks, but it all rapidly goes downhill from there. My personal favorites would be the title track, "I wanna know why", "Get it up", and "Kings and Queens" but even those songs feel like something is missing.
But I guess that's what happens when the drugs and excessive hard-living become more important than the music. Unfortunately, this would be the beginning of the end for Aerosmith. Pretty soon, the egos got the better of the band and split ups occurred. Steve wound up collapsing at performances from the drugs and the band would almost go bankrupt with their antics for the next decade.
If you're new to Aerosmith, I'd avoid this album for the time being. I would get aquainted with their first four albums before attempting this one. May 11, 2007
More reviews at Amazon.com ...
