This is only our opinion… it is neither right nor wrong.

Were KISS Scared to Record Rock And Roll Over? Do You Care? On Three Sides of the Coin

In episode 33, July 23, 2013, we talk about a recent interview Paul Stanley did with Geoff Barton of Classic Rock Magazine. “We were scared to record Destroyer follow-up”. The Starchild says: “Quite honestly, we were chickenshit. We were scared of where we had gone with Destroyer. We’d traded off the rawness of Kiss for something more cinematic. Bob Ezrin was a visionary. Without him, we were back to creating within our own boundaries. Rock And Roll Over was our 180-degree turn to get back to what the band sounded like live. It wasn’t rocket science.”

  • I made another art piece.It’s good for a laugh.If you enjoy please


  • 2N

    Great show guys and one that kind of sets off a number of possible branch-out topics for future shows. I’m only half way through the episode but thought I’d get this down before I forgot! Anyways, one thought which has just occurred to me (almost 40 years later) is — and believe me I realize how ridiculous this is going to sound — how much do Paul and to a lesser extent Gene “get” what KISS is supposed to be about, if nothing else than to the majority of KISS fans? How else can one explain the ridiculous, almost schizophrenic musical (and non-musical) journey this band has been on basically since ‘Destroyer?’ I’m with you, I certainly throw RARO in with those first three albums as they have always been what KISS has been about to me (and I’m pretty sure I’m not alone). Other notable inclusions into that group to varying degrees: Love Gun, Creatures, Revenge (off the top of my head, there are probably a couple more). Idea for next producer (if there is one) — how about a producer who grew up a KISS fan — somebody who has a solid grasp of what this band is supposed to be about to the majority of die-hard fans. Who that would be, I don’t know. When asked to give a reason why he/they’ve decided to self-produce their most recent albums, Paul quite often replies: “Who knows KISS better than us?” Well, I’m not sure the answer is as clear cut as he might think. The further we go along, it seems that maybe Ace was the one that “got it” all along.

  • 2N

    Another possible idea for a topic — do you think that with some of the things that Paul says, it’s just a case of an interviewer catching him on a bad day or is there something deeper at play here? Or is it just for the shock factor? You’re right, he is quite often very calculating in what he says and then you’ll get this crazy bombshell of a statement — and it’s usually a real ‘shot across the bow’ at a certain individual or band. Why does he feel the need to have to call somebody out or try to emulate a certain musical style as often as he does? And this has gone on pretty much throughout the band’s entire history. Inferiority complex? Psychological imbalance? Would be an interesting discussion…

  • Ken

    I think Paul threw Eddie Kramer under the bus for two reasons.
    1. He produced Ace’s great solo record.
    2. He came out and said that Alive was fixed up quite a bit.

    • Michael

      Or it is possible Paul was just saying what he has really felt.

      • I think Paul is saying exactly how he feels. Paul’s produced albums(Sonic Boom,Monster) show us how he thinks R&RO should sound.I’m not sure if he is referring to how he felt then ,now or both. Remember these would still be the same songs,maybe not as raw but we would have never known the Kramer version.Then when we heard them on Alive II we would discovered the”live” versions,unpolished,faster. Ezrin did Destroyer over. What was once sacred can now be re-edited without much hupla. It would be interesting,probably not profitable to hear Paul’s interpretation..