What if??? - The 2010 Classic Petra reunion 84', 85' lineup

[Shell]

Oh, my, such traitorous comments are likely to get you banned.

You should know by now it doesn't take a whole lot to stir things up here.

[Jan]

"The fact that Greg performs more all over the world is another."

Brent, you always have these little interesting tidbits of information. On the Farewell DVD, I thought Greg didn't sound very good, like he was out of practice or had lost alot of voice quality over the years. So I just assumed he was doing something other than singing these days. Very interesting to hear he has been performing all over the world. Maybe he was only out of practice on the Petra songs.

[separateunion]

"The fact that Greg performs more all over the world is another."

Brent, you always have these little interesting tidbits of information. On the Farewell DVD, I thought Greg didn't sound very good, like he was out of practice or had lost alot of voice quality over the years. So I just assumed he was doing something other than singing these days. Very interesting to hear he has been performing all over the world. Maybe he was only out of practice on the Petra songs.

He probably didn't have a lot of practice time with the band.

[brent]

I can tell you that it is not from a lack of chops and ability. His tracks that he recorded for us are stellar. His latest CD, "God Only Knows" shows that he is solid as well.

[sue d.]

Brent wrote:

The fact that Greg performs more all over the world is another.

He does? I don't see any international dates on his tour sched, and none for 2010.

[sue d.]

BForm wrote:

I know far more people that were fans of the early 80's Petra but fell out in disgust after Greg left than I know fans of the later years.

In disgust? What do you mean? This was all 'before my time,' so I'm sincerely asking.

[shawnpfan01]

I can tell you that it is not from a lack of chops and ability. His tracks that he recorded for us are stellar. His latest CD, "God Only Knows" shows that he is solid as well.

I second that.

[BForm]

[quote="sue dIn disgust? What do you mean? This was all 'before my time,' so I'm sincerely asking.[/quote]

Yeah, it's really true. At least in my experience. A lot of Petra fans from that era just didn't like the transition in sound. John's voice was just too edgy for their liking. They felt like he was screaming rather than singing. After growing accustomed to Greg's pure vocals, many were pretty disgusted with the new sound.

I can understand their point. John's gravel voice was hard for me to get used to as well. It took a while but I grew to love it as a completely different sound rather than constantly trying to compare it to Greg's. Don't get me wrong, John did sing with a very beautiful, pure voice on some songs. It's just that he prefers the edgier sound, as I've heard him say a number of times.

[pmal]

My opinion on this is the same its always been. Greg and John are both equally important in the history of Petra. There's no reason to compare the two. Both were a different era in music, stylistically, if that's a real word. I remember the first time I heard Petra. I was in 6th grade in 1986 and got Captured in Time and Space on cassette. I remembered having to beg my mom to let me get it because she had heard "some bad things about them", which of course later turned out to be total crap. But anyway, I got my wish and I got it. It was my first exposure to Petra and had never heard even one of their songs on the radio. I thought it was pretty good but I didn't think it was all that great because I just didn't appreciate that type of sound, especially live, with all the keys and synthesizers. I hardly ever listened to BTTS until much later in my life but the first time I heard This Means War I was absolutely floored with how great it was. I had never heard John sing before and from the very first words of This Means War to the end of that album, I was hooked. At that time in my life, that was what good music sounded like, at least as far as I was concerned and based on what was popular secularly at the time. I didn't listen to Greg's stuff until several years later when I appreciated the classic rock sound. That was when I started listening more to the older music and in some cases enjoyed the music more. That Petra and Greg concert trodland uploaded from NY in 1983 is awesome and I would have absolutely loved to here that in HQ sound.

I guess what I am saying is, since I grew up loving John, I can totally understand how those who started listening to Petra in 1980 would like Greg better and those who started listening in 1988 would like John better. I think that's personal taste/style and nothing else. However, the people that shunned John lost out big time in my opinion.

[quote="sue dIn disgust? What do you mean? This was all 'before my time,' so I'm sincerely asking.

Yeah, it's really true. At least in my experience. A lot of Petra fans from that era just didn't like the transition in sound. John's voice was just too edgy for their liking. They felt like he was screaming rather than singing. After growing accustomed to Greg's pure vocals, many were pretty disgusted with the new sound.

I can understand their point. John's gravel voice was hard for me to get used to as well. It took a while but I grew to love it as a completely different sound rather than constantly trying to compare it to Greg's. Don't get me wrong, John did sing with a very beautiful, pure voice on some songs. It's just that he prefers the edgier sound, as I've heard him say a number of times.[/quote]

[brent]

To quote Obama, "Let me clear." I am not saying one was better than the other. Nobody can really make a good argument either way. Both incarnations fought different battles, played different music to different audiences, in different economic and CCM climates.

Few bands have had more than one life with two lead vocalists out front. Petra obviously got more recognition from the industry with John. This can be attributed to many things. The industry had more rock acts (thanks to Petra), the customers were used to it (and had more choices) and Petra had labels with more money and influence. Remember, it is a boys club where friends nominate and vote for friends because friends do stuff for friends.

I don't think that Petra was nominated or won artist of the year with Greg during the NSD or MPTY years because the industry still did not know what to do with them, because the moms, dads and churches were still on the fence if not boycotting. The retailers and publishers would have been up poop creek without a paddle, losing sales on church music, Sunday School material, Bibles, etc if they had pushed them as hard as "Amy Grant" or "2nd Chapter of Acts".

If you think about it, five years from now will be the golden age for the last gen Petra to return. 10 years is good time away.

[Dan]

I've come to the conclusion that the huge separation in sounds between the singers, means the only thing shared between the two incarnations is Bob Hartman and the name Petra & and a small snippet of JL in 84.

Sound influence came from these recording wise:

Classic = GXV,Slick,Hartman & JDB mainly 81,82,83,(84 lawry)

Modern/dream team = Schlitt/Hartman/Elefante/Lawry 87,88,90,91 & 93.

I guess it comes down to which Petra you like, as for me I grew up with the dream team, that's my taste... I do care about Petra's classic lineup and look forward to seeing for the first time.

They kind of aren't the same band.
Can we really compare?

[Preacherman777]

A couple things on the last post. One, your leaving Louie Weaver out of both incarnations of the band, which seems a little odd to me and second, the principle songwriter remained the same as well, so the two different bands approach doesn't work that way either.

Also, it should be understood that the "Dream Team" term is a little offensive to those of us who feel the classic line up was every bit as much of a "Dream Team" as the later version.

[Dan]

A couple things on the last post. One, your leaving Louie Weaver out of both incarnations of the band, which seems a little odd to me and second, the principle songwriter remained the same as well, so the two different bands approach doesn't work that way either.

Also, it should be understood that the "Dream Team" term is a little offensive to those of us who feel the classic line up was every bit as much of a "Dream Team" as the later version.

I should have titled it sound & style. Louie didn't play on many records & never contributed to writing any songs.

As far the dream team label offending you goes, grab a Kleenex.

[brent]

Brent wrote:

The fact that Greg performs more all over the world is another.

He does? I don't see any international dates on his tour sched, and none for 2010.

I was addressing the last five years. Greg was very active. Not all dates were published.

[brent]

A couple things on the last post. One, your leaving Louie Weaver out of both incarnations of the band, which seems a little odd to me and second, the principle songwriter remained the same as well, so the two different bands approach doesn't work that way either.

Also, it should be understood that the "Dream Team" term is a little offensive to those of us who feel the classic line up was every bit as much of a "Dream Team" as the later version.

Ok, so are we now limiting ourselves to addressing records only or are we free to include the live bands? The reason why I ask is because Mark Kelly and Louie didn't really play much on the JDB records. Mark played more than Louie did. Nobody but Bob really played on the last Greg record. I think JL told me that he contributed some and that was it. Everything else was by non-Petra personnel.

That Greg/Bob/Mark/Louie and JohnS band was HOT back in the day. Slick was the glue that made it all stick together. He played with soul and was tasty. For that time, Petra was cutting edge to a kid who was fed Amy Grant on the radio. The only edgier band that I knew of (and didn't like at all) was The Resurrection Band (Rez).

By the time that Petra Next-Gen came around, the culture had changed, bands like Def Lepard were hitting the mainstream. Stryper's "To Hell With The Devil" was out. Christian rock and metal had arrived. BTTS was a wimpy record by comparison, sounding as if it should have followed NOTW. IMO, they should have ran out of the gate with a full-out hard rock record to keep up. Instead they released a filler album that made die-hard fans like me almost give up.

Nobody can say that the stage shows didn't improve in the John years. Some of the most interesting performances I saw were when Orta was in the band. He was new, sloppy and still being broken in. That new blood made for some great playing. I didn't like how they butchered the tunes sometimes, but the energy was there. Changing the tunes up seemed to be what that version of Petra was all about. They needed to be relative. If I had to compare those two versions of Petra, OLD WINS.

One Songwriter and still have two different bands, multiple sounds, etc. Writing is just one part of it. Bob may have written the lions share of the tunes, but the players, producers, engineers and AR guys contributed and put their personalities on them. Louie did not contribute to the writing process from what I have been told. He was the human drum machine (when he got to play) until Wake Up Call.