I have all the Paul Rogers era stuff on vinyl. To me Rogers was and is Bad Company with him gone Bad Co. became some what of a bore. The original stuff is amazing though in a simplistic sort of way. While I generally enjoy more complicated, intricate material Bad Company are one of the exceptions for me.
I wholeheartedly agree. Even now, 40 odd years into their career, they are tight and Rogers sounds just as good as he did in the 70's. Such passion without all the show-off solos of other arena rockers.
My take on Bad Company is that they were very song oriented. You won't find 20 minute guitar or drum solos on their studio records. Everything they did was geared toward making quality songs,...as it should be! Mick Ralphs has amazing restraint. A lesser guitarist would have cluttered their songs up with elaborate leads that take away from the overall simplicity and effectiveness of their songs. Simple, yet effective. That's their style. And that's why it works so well, it's all about song quality.
I have all the Paul Rogers era stuff on vinyl. To me Rogers was and is Bad Company with him gone Bad Co. became some what of a bore.
You just summed up Bad Company perfectly!
Couldn't agree more.
I'm a huge fan of everything Paul's been a part of, not ONLY because of Paul of course, but he certainly plays a big part, being one of my absolute favourite singers.
So called "show off solos " are often times one of the most interesting and emotional parts of the songs. Without Rogers Bad Company went limp, IMO. I saw them live without him and they were just boring ....didn't help that show off Terrible Ted Nugent opened for them and just laid waste to the arena before they hit the stage.
Once Again... I love Paul Rogers Bad Company. But without him they seemed tame as a house cat next to the bengal tiger that is Ted.
Isn't Paul back with BC?