Rocks

Basically Toys In The Attic with cooler vocals. If you wanted to, in fact, you could correspond every one of these songs with a matching song from the last album ("Back In The Saddle" is "Sweet Emotion," "Rats In The Cellar" is "Toys In The Attic," "Sick As A Dog" is "No More No More," etc.). However, both fortunately and surprisingly, the songs aren't retreads; they're just more great melodies that happen to fit the moods presented on the last record. And that's okay. AC/DC did that for years, with dazzling results. Plus, as an added bonus, harmony vocals add a wonderful touch of class to "Sick As A Dog" and "Combination," and Steven's screaming reaches impressively painful-sounding levels in "Nobody's Fault" and "Back In The Saddle."
'Tis good, I inform ye. It might take you a little time to get used to the two mid-tempo sleaze funkers ("Last Child" and "Get The Lead Out"), but once you finally do, you'll realize that no other hard rock band can get your booty movin' like Aerosmith. Er....old Aerosmith. Some people (including legendary rock critic Robert Christgau) feel that this record is actually better than Toys In The Attic. Sometimes I do. It's darn good, regardless of its relative lack of radio classics. This isn't a very helpful review, is it? Okay, Aerosmith were a guitar-driven rock band; they weren't heavy like Black Sabbath or AC/DC, but they weren't light like The Rolling Stones, either. They were the middle point. Very exciting, energetic, and loud, with lots of fantastic two-guitar melodies played hard and sometimes funky. Are you familiar with the first Guns 'N' Roses album? The first six Aerosmith albums were supposed to be the blueprint, but, in my opinion, Axl and Co. didn't even come close to displaying the kind of unfaltering melodic sense that was second nature to this roving gang of thugs. Of course, now they both suck, so the question is moot.