Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Discussions about the British rock group City Boy and music in general.

Moderator: rito

User avatar
PerG
Heavyweight
Posts: 1996
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 2:01 am
Location: location, location...
Contact:

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by PerG » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:23 am

City Geezer? :lol: (no offence!!)

There are examples with less than 2 former members in reformations... Two band members is half of the last previous version of CB. There are also examples of intact original bands putting out records with style changes and declining quality year after year and still keep their old name. So, who decides?

I mean, if it isn't any good why bother listening and get all worked up about it? :?:

Good luck Max and Roy! :cheers:

User avatar
Laurelei
Generalissima
Posts: 2061
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:06 am

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by Laurelei » Wed Feb 09, 2011 4:45 pm

Hello Guys,

Thought I would offer up my two cents here. If given my choice and if I have a vote, I like the name City Boy. BUT, what matter the name? I don't care what they call themselves, I would just really like to hear what they have, and hear some of the old stuff. Yes, the others will be missed (oh, to see Steve doing Moving In Circles live again!), but they are far from the first band that has reformed with less that the original members and made a good go of it.

Re: the nod to their beginnings and all the BITB ideas, how about LITB for:
Left In The Band
Last In The Band
Latest Incarnation (of) The Band??? :wink:

I do have one serious suggestion. Mad Art Show is an anagram of Thomas and Ward. Me likes the sound of that one.

If Mike signs on, the anagram seems to be Warm, Harmless Toad. :shock: Hmmm, doesn't have the same ring to it.

Jo 8)
Too damn hard...

User avatar
al
Heavyweight
Posts: 1832
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by al » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:15 pm

Why not City Boy II ?

Bev Bevan used the name ELO II.

User avatar
christian
Doctor Doctor
Posts: 548
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 2:01 am
Location: Zurich

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by christian » Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:29 am

Look at Uriah Heep - only Mick Box left and they are still respected as Uriah Heep

User avatar
al
Heavyweight
Posts: 1832
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by al » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:18 pm

christian wrote:Look at Uriah Heep - only Mick Box left and they are still respected as Uriah Heep

Exactly. Styx has just 2 original guys. It can be done :wink:

Come to think of it, earlier I said use the name City Boy II (Roman numeral) but if only Max and Roy were original members, then the name could be City Boy 2 :mrgreen:

ggggg
Narcissus
Posts: 137
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2000 1:01 am
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by ggggg » Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:33 pm

Hmmm, if you reform a band to play the original bands music I would think you would use the same name.

Unless, of course, they now can't because the other City Boy (rapper) is using the name or the other original members sue.

I vote for City Boy - that's what they were and should be if they can be.

User avatar
Robin_Shadowes
Heavyweight
Posts: 1111
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:20 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by Robin_Shadowes » Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:21 pm

ggggg wrote:Hmmm, if you reform a band to play the original bands music I would think you would use the same name.

Unless, of course, they now can't because the other City Boy (rapper) is using the name or the other original members sue.

I vote for City Boy - that's what they were and should be if they can be.


That's a valid point to take in consideration, that either they will be sued by the other half of the old members or by the rapper. But since the band was decades before the rapper using the name, they at least should have some chance winning that trial but I have to admit I don't know how big the rapper actually is since that kind of music isn't my cup of tea at all. Maybe he's a big shot like 50 Cent and Eminem, what do I know? If so that would probably work in his favour I suspect. Also remember that it's not always that the original line-up that counts as the classical one. Deep Purple, Genesis and Yes are excellent examples to prove that point.
"To hell with friends and NME's"

"It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both incisive probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper"
- Rod Serling

vitrola
Hap-ki-do kid
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:48 pm
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by vitrola » Fri Feb 11, 2011 4:01 am

Hi

a) Like Perg said: It's actually 50 % of the last incarnation. HAR is a great album and IP is a very good one. In IP Max contributed 5 out of 9 song, Roy on one but he sang lead vocals on 6 out of 9.
Do I consider HAR and IP non City Boy albums because Steve and Chris weren' there?
Absolutely not, Why? Because they sound like City Boy (of course Mike and Lol were there too).
"Exit the heavyheight" is a gem and is basically a Max's song sang greatly by Roy.

b)Max told us he has composed many song (15 or so) after City Boy's split, and Max many as well, it'd be like a greatest hist from the last 30 years. I think they could cut 15-20 decent new songs and they could still sound close to City Boy.
Of course that if Mike join them they would sound 100 % like City Boy.
But before to discuss the name issues, I'd prefer to hear the new album firt to know how it sounds like.

c) a bit tired of (possibly Mike). In what depends Mike joining or not? Is this one of the obstacles that mentioned Max because if Mike isn't there is more difficult to get some support from the record company? Just a question.

d)Someone mentioned that if Mike join without Steve involved would do 10 steps back in his career. First of all they released 2 great albums after Steve was fired, and second I think that to work again with Max (a great composer and keyboardist) and with Roy ( a great singer) is doing 10 steps forward. Mike has been working with people far awary from my likes, and some of them not very talented ones. It's be great to see what Mike could do in a new City Boy album after all the projects he has been involved after City Boy.

e) Why would Steve and Chris sue them for the use of the name if they didn't do it in 79 after being fired. After 32 years it'd pointless and I think both of them don't anything related (included a court case).

f) the point is not about the use of the name, is what they sound like using the City Boy name. I support Max and Roy in using the name because is the only way to get their stuff released. If Renasseince Records released IP is because there's a niche market for City Boy.

g) the closest thing to City Boy is Max, Roy and (possibly) Mike. But if he doesn't join, I'd support Max and Roy because is the last chance to put City Boy back in the market and if they tour this will be the best way for new people to know the City Boy catalogue and what great this band was. And, of course for us to hear new music from a new City Boy incarnation.

Cheers
Sebastian

User avatar
bertrand
Mr Shoes
Posts: 817
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:01 am
Location: L Isle- Adam France
Contact:

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by bertrand » Fri Feb 11, 2011 9:05 am

Remember ..."Martin Turner's Wishbone Ash","Les Holroyd's BJH","BJH through the eyes of John Lees" "John Kays'Steppenwolf"...
Queen+ Paul Rodgers,Thin Lizzy(without Phil Lynott) etc etc..
Image
--------------------------
I've seen that movie too

outoftune
Momma's Boy
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 6:54 pm

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by outoftune » Sun Feb 13, 2011 7:05 am

City Boy without Steve and Chris was a joke. Guys get on with the future.

User avatar
Robin_Shadowes
Heavyweight
Posts: 1111
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:20 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by Robin_Shadowes » Sun Feb 13, 2011 1:23 pm

That is perhaps a bit too harshly to depict it although I cannot deny I was disappointed when I originally found out they where not on HAR when it came out. As you know, back then there was no internet so I had no clue what had happened, if they had left themselves or been sacked. I still found it a decent album but it felt like the old magic was gone though.
"To hell with friends and NME's"

"It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both incisive probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper"
- Rod Serling

User avatar
Geir
Mr Shoes
Posts: 788
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Ringebu, Norway

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by Geir » Mon Feb 14, 2011 4:54 pm

Regarding a certain line-up of the band being reduced to a mere laughing matter:

"Heads Are Rolling" definitely took a different direction from the band's previous records, but it remains one of my favourite City Boy albums nevertheless. And while I mean no disrespect to Chris and Steve and what they could have brought to the table musically had they still been members of the band at the time, "Heads Are Rolling" in that case remains one of best jokes I've ever heard!

...How about simply seeing what Max & Roy eventually end up calling their project? Shouldn't we be less concerned about whether it resembles 1979 or 1980 the most - ...and more interested in what Misters Thomas & Ward may come out sounding like in the present day?!??

Oh, and a question for Chris while at it: If it were called something other than City Boy, would you actually consider laying down some bass tracks for Roy & Max's project? ...Perhaps I'm naive in asking such a question in the first place, but given how tight and creative you and Roy sounded as a rhythm section back in the day, it's hard not to!

Geir :D
...Anyone for tennis? (Or was it Dennis?)

User avatar
Laurelei
Generalissima
Posts: 2061
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:06 am

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by Laurelei » Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:52 pm

Geir, those are outstanding points and questions.

Jo
Too damn hard...

User avatar
Robin_Shadowes
Heavyweight
Posts: 1111
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 10:20 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by Robin_Shadowes » Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:59 am

After all the band name is not of as much importance. What is more important, even infinetively more important is that the project finally takes off ground. The old fans wants to hear them, not squabble about minor details.
"To hell with friends and NME's"

"It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both incisive probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper"
- Rod Serling

vitrola
Hap-ki-do kid
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:48 pm
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Talk of a reformation of City Boy

Post by vitrola » Tue Feb 15, 2011 5:48 am

Hi Robin

You're absolutely right. But for the project to take off ground they need the name like the water.
As I said in a previous message, if Renaissence Records released IP there's a niche market for City Boy's stuff. But without the name, I'm not seeing any chance of get their new stuff getting released. I'm talking from a Record Company point of view. Apart that the industry is going through a big crisis.
What happened years ago with Max's "Beginning to end"? Was there any interest from the industry to release it? I don't think so. I think Max had to released it by himself and an limited edition just for fans.
They're in their 60s, very difficult for Max and Roy to start with a new name. And their names themself (Max Thomas and Roy Ward) are not well known to release something under them. I wish they could it but nowadays sounds very difficult.
But the name City Boy can guarantee some sales, after all, and that's what matters for our Record industry.

Cheers
Sebastian

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests