Somebody is lying like a rug. But Richie's the one who has told this story consistently over the years, and more to the point, the timeline fits.

Got revisionism, Paul?

P.S. Dave Sabo was an inexperienced underaged temporary fill-in, and he knew it. The guitarist Richie actually replaced left at the last minute to join a cover band!

If you weren't interested in blues-oriented guitarists, Paul, why did you audition Robben Ford? And wouldn't you have auditioned for Howlin Wolf if the worst outcome would be free a trip to where you could make additional professional contacts, plus the ability to mention it on your resume? Spare us your injured innocence!

Based on the common knowledge that Paul is an asshole. Read the article in Rolling Stone about KISS that came out last month. Gene is all about the money, but he's open abut it. Paul is a liar and makes shit up about Ace and Peter. The best is claiming that Peter didn't write "Beth", but he did. The guy is a dick. He's constantly changing his story on any issue to fit his needs.

Umm... Richie's timeline is the one that's wrong, the audition was in 1982, because Creatures was released in 1982. So, I believe Paul on this one.

Seriously, can you read? And what do you have against KISS?

It clearly says RICHIE was the one claiming than KISS wasn't blues-based enough, not the other way around. It's Richie claiming Bon Jovi is more based in the blues than KISS, which is bullshit. Richie was the nobody who had nothing under his belt and who keeps saying he didn't want the gig. Which is obviously bullshit, since he flew to the audition.

Again, I believe Paul is telling it like it happened, Richie just wants to make himself look good.

Ice

He may have flown to the audition and been a nobody at the time but there are plenty of reasons why he could have walked away from it as much as been turned down for the role. Without having been there, it's all speculation so take the blinkers off and consider the simple fact that there would have been no Bon Jovi (as we know it) if that decision had not been made, regardless of who made the call.

I'll just add that trying to start a topic based on pure speculation to have yet another dig at Richie's questionable character is going a tad overboard, much like the 'dissection' of his remarks in the interview being discussed in the other thread.

I'm sure the boys in KISS are absolute saints so it simply must be Richie that's lying. :roll:

Paul is the ONLY reason KISS still exists. And Peter didn't write Beth, it was Stan Penridge. And Penridge has said so. He also said Peter didn't write anything on any of the songs they "collabarated". If Peter was a songwriter, how come he never wrote a song by himself? Because he can't play any instruments. He's not capable of writing a song.

"how much of it was Peter really responsible for, if any?"
Penridge:
"Beck was written, almost word for word, from Mike Brand's responses to his wife's constant calls that interupted our rehearsals. It got to the point where I wrote down his remarks over a period of 3 or 4 days in what I called my "wizard book". It was merely a small notebook I carried to jot down silly sayings, sketch in, anything....to save ideas. If you look at the lyrics and view them as a hen-pecked hubby's remarks to his nagging wife you'll see what I mean. Just pause after every sentence and pretend there's a bitch at the other end of the line. You'll catch it - I'm sure. Absolutely not responsible at all. Another poorman's copyright by me in '70."
http://kissmonster.com/interviews/in...idge082000.php


I've read all the KISS books and Paul's is the most believeable. Ace and Peter are the ones making stuff up and Gene exaggerates everything. Kiss & Tell shows how much Ace lies in his book, as the same stories are there, only twisted so that it makes Ace look like the hero. And this from a guy who says he can't remember anything about the 70's or the 80's.

Paul isn't the asshole, he's the reason KISS kept going. And he's the reason it will keep going, despite the "real fans" who think Ace and Peter could still have something to contribute. Peter couldn't play a concert if his life depended on it. Ace probably could, but only the songs he remembers. Which aren't too many in numbers. And even then, his playing is touch and go. Just listen to the recent performances. I'd rather listen to a tribute band.

Ice

Those are Paul's words, verbatim.

Funny, Peter seemed to play the drums just fine for KISS for years while they were one of the biggest bands out there. Let's be honest, writing "Beth" doesn't make someone a musical genius. Hell, you or I could sit down one night and write that song. But why now, so many years later, is Paul trying to take credit for it? Because whether Paul likes it or not, and sad as it may be, it was probably their most successful commercial song, and all these bad feelings came up again because of the Hall of Fame debacle. Far from even belonging on any KISS greatest hits, but it is what it is.

I don't disagree about Paul being the main reason KISS still exists, though let's be serious - Who would care about KISS without Gene?

How is Paul taking credit for Beth?

No, mine. I just happen to agree with Paul.

But he didn't. He was good in the beginning, but after Love Gun he hardly played on an album and live he sounded bad. The tempos were all over the place and the producers (even Vini Poncia, who produced Peter's solo album) didn't want him to play on the albums. The reunion tours sounded horrible. The triggered sounds made it painfully obvious how bad Peter had become. The solos were actually pathetic.

Yep. But it still takes skill to play a musical instrument. Something that you can play melodies and chords on. Not drums. Plus, at least three people have been on record saying that Peter didn't write it. Why would you doubt people who have nothing to gain (in the 70's all members of KISS got a fixed 25% of everything, Penridge still got royalties, Ezrin gets royalties) by telling the truth?

He's not! He doesn't have anything to do with Beth, and he never said he did.

It's not the first time this has been brought up, it's been discussed for decades. Look it up. They were talking about it in the 80's, when Peter's solo albums all flopped.

Many don't care about KISS _with_ Gene. I'm sure that they will find replacements for both Gene and Paul in the near future.

Ice

He misread the article in RS. He didn't claim he wrote it, just said that Peter didn't.