|
Page 3 of 4
His fears may not have been unjustified. Court depositions reveal Scholz had been a thorn in CBS's side since the beginning, when he took exception to an early print campaign with the slogan, "Better music through science." CBS Records Group president Walter Yetnikoff testified that Scholz called him at home and told him to change the ad "or else." This was before the first LP was released--such chutzpah! Yetnikoff also related, "He told me from time to time that I could go fuck myself. He'd complain about the color of the sky, all sorts of things." Sources close to Scholz suggest that Yetnikoff couldn't accept Scholz's "I'm president of my company, you're president of yours" manner. The Goudreau album promo campaign may have been CBS's attempt to bypass the difficult Scholz.
Scholz clearly brought pressure to bear to modify the Goudreau promotional campaign, and fretted a good deal about the effect on third album sales. Yetnikoff testified Scholz asked him not to re-sign Goudreau as a solo artist (a Scholz source disputes this). There is also a charge that Scholz demanded CBS pull the plug on the Goudreau album once it was done, using the third Boston LP as a hostage.
In the wake of the Goudreau album, with his suit with Ahern resolved but the bruises still soft, Scholz moved to consolidate his control of Boston. "In the spring of 1981, Scholz requested that Goudreau resign from Boston," says a Sib Hashian complaint, "and further demanded at a meeting of Boston that the other members of Boston enter into a written agreement giving Scholz control over future use of the name Boston and production of further albums under the name Boston. At this time, Brad Delp stated that he was 'quitting' the band."
For Delp, the split into camps must have been especially hard--he had done a lot of work on the Goudreau project and was even related to Barry by marriage (Goudreau today: "He's part of the family and he's still part of Boston and the whole thing is uncomfortable for us"). Even after he finally returned to work with Scholz, Delp continued to do demos with Goudreau until mid-1986. Just how long Delp was out of Boston is unclear, but Scholz did attempt to work with another singer, and even prepared a demo tape with a Coke/Pepsi blind test to see if CBS staffers could tell the difference ("I always could," snored Sheehan ).
With Goudreau and Delp out, Scholz formalized his relationship with the two other Boston partners, Sheehan and Hashian. The Hashian complaint charges (and other sources confirm) that Scholz "threatened that there would be no further Boston albums unless Hashian and Sheehan signed an agreement written by Scholz and his attorneys." Was the threat to do a Tom Scholz solo album a serious one? Hashian: "We were petrified of that situation. When you lose all your voting rights and power...." Scholz did indeed write his own view of Boston's power structure. Hashian's complaint says the deal stipulated, "Scholz will be granted sole and exclusive use of the name Boston and the authority to manage its affairs and to receive funds." The new agreement also formalized Scholz's obligations to Sheehan and Hashian: Scholz would be obligated to include them on at least some tracks on future recordings, and they couldn't be reasonably excluded from touring. Perhaps the most interesting thing about this deal is that in formally taking the reins, Scholz gave up the money: Scholz, Sheehan and Hashian would split the new profits equally. Scholz would get producer fees (which Hashian now alleges are "unreasonably large") and his publishing, but given the club he was wielding, Tom seemed to be giving generous financial terms. Even when Goudreau was asked to resign, he was given a share of future Boston earnings and has already received money from Third Stage. This is consistent with every view of Scholz. Even his most serious critics admit money plays no role in his motivations- Failure to grasp this would become a major miscalculation by CBS.
Even before he had restructured the band, Scholz had begun recording the third album, and got off to a "flying start" with the song "Amanda," finished in 1980. Writing that obvious smash had a profound impact on Scholz's attitude toward the album: "I must admit that when I started it, there was a motivation to show that I could do it again, strictly an ego motivation. But once I got 'Amanda' done, I felt I had to complete the album in a way that would do justice to that song, because I wasn't expecting it to work out that well. It set a standard for everything else I had to do."
Under the new deal, Fran Sheehan and Sib Hashian were in there too, helping Scholz thrash out ideas. This has become a sensitive issue for all concerned, since Hashian's complaint against Scholz charges "Scholz engaged in a course of conduct calculated to denigrate and defame Hashian's contributions on the first two LPs in the public eye .... Out of personal pique, ill will and malice to Hashian, Scholz and MCA excluded Hashian from being pictured, featured or even mentioned on the album cover." This sets up some problems in documenting who did what on the first side of Third Stage. Sheehan and Hashian insist they worked on "seven or eight" tracks. Neither is listed in the LP's credits. Hashian's complaint implies his playing was perfectly adequate and that later disagreements about how to respond to the CBS lawsuit caused his omission, but all sources point to musical dissatisfaction long before legal fighting set in. The Tom/Sib argument revolved around Scholz's theories about where to place a drum beat: only by placing them slightly out of time would the feel he wanted come through. This is a generally accepted truth of drumming, from AI Jackson to Alex Van Halen, but Hashian never saw the point and apparently chafed under Scholz's suggestions. Jim Masdea knew exactly what Scholz was talking about and was ready to help apply his theory. By natural osmosis, Hashian receded and Masdea came around.
|
Articles 
