A band is still a band is still a band until....

tybird

Yellow Ledbelly wrote:

I know what you are saying that is true, but AIC and Blind Melon in particular were more readily and almost completely identified by their singers. There are some groups that could pull off losing their singer, replace him and move on, but those just aren't two that I think can or should

The problem with those two examples (you are correct in your argument about them being the face of their bands) is that both singers had very unique and easily identifiable voices.

eyedclaar

facepollution wrote:

I hear where you are coming from, but at best Layne wrote maybe a third of the material, and a lot of those would be co-writing credits. I don't want to take anything away from the guy, cause I think he was an incredible singer and writer - but the truth is, Jerry Cantrell was responsible for the vast majority of AIC's songs. Not only did he write most of the music, and the majority of the lyrics, but he also did far more singing than one would expect from most 'backing singers'. It is for this reason that I think it is ok for them to go on under the same name. Having seen the band with William DuVall, I don't think it's the same, but purely from a selfish point of view, I would rather have the option of hearing those songs live, than not. I fully understand why that might not work for some people though.

I think AIC are an exception to some extent, becasue Jerry was more than just the guitarist in that band. I also think you have the problem, that if they renamed themselves and continued to make AIC-sounding music, they would be accused of not evolving or riding on the coat-tails of that sound - catch 22 kind of situation.

Oh and I don't like to be picky, but Layne didn't write the music to Nutshell.

I have to agree here. Cantrell was easily the biggest songwriting aspect of AIC. Plus, I could teach a total novice to play the guitar as well as Layne in about 10 minutes and I'm a gee-tar hack.

Jeremy1012

eyedclaar wrote:

I have to agree here. Cantrell was easily the biggest songwriting aspect of AIC. Plus, I could teach a total novice to play the guitar as well as Layne in about 10 minutes and I'm a gee-tar hack.

I dunno man, the riffs on Hate to Feel are pretty cool.

Tone

I see AIC as Staley and Cantrell's voices harmonising... just incredible to hear. Staley live was mesmorising to watch. I just don't think I can listen to AIC without their voices together, to me it doesn't work. Same goes for Blind Melon. I think both bands should change their names and start again.

Same goes for INXS. That Rockstar INXS had me wanting to punch the Farriss brothers, Pengilly & Beers into the middle of next week. INXS is not INXS without Michael Hutchence and I don't accept a non-Australian singer fronting them either... sorry.

When something's over, it's over.

augustwest

when people stop showing up, the band no longer exists

live music is better

elmer

Yellow Ledbelly wrote:

To start:
Is Axl's current GNR really GNR without Slash, Duff and Izzy?
Is Alice In Chains still really Alice in Chains without the voice of Layne?

I for one cannot turn my head and pretend Chinese Democracy is a GNR album any more than I think Blind Melon's new stuff is Blind Melon

Yes.
No.

Axl, thank God, didn't die. Shannon did!

mouthfulofsoup

Yellow Ledbelly wrote:

but I do feel like it kind bastardizes the history of those bands in a way.

Exactly. Everything Blind Melon did is gold. While not a large one, their catalog is flawless. Throwing some new kid in all these years later & putting out a new album under the same name taints the perfection that we've all come to love as BLIND MELON.

The other 4 members have every right to go on playing music & doing what they do best, & I'm sure they wanna keep the amazing music alive, but they chose a piss poor way of doing so. Start another band with a new singer & a new name...but to make some crappy ass new album under the Melon name with some wannabe Shannon on vocals is an insult. This Faux Melon can never hold a candle to anything Shannon touched...the fact that it will be lumped in with their stuff is so beyond sad. :(

NewJPage

Yellow Ledbelly wrote:

I really don't have a problem with what they are doing either, but I do feel like it kind bastardizes the history of those bands in a way.

Here's another: What if Keith Richards told Mick to piss off and refused to play with the Stones ever again. To me, any incarnation of the Stones without both Mick and Keith couldn't be called the Stones

as for the stones...their most popular and influencial and important member (at the time) died (brian jones), and they got a new guitarist and played a show the VERY NEXT DAY. they, of course, are still the stones, but some of the freaks think their only good shit was done when brian was still in the band.

keeponrockin

I don't think Axl's new GN'R is GN'R. It isn't that band without Slash, I'm sorry. I could even make the arguement for Izzy.

Alice In Chains, it's not Jerry's fault Layne fucked up. He should be able to continue what he started.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

lead singer and lead guitar arent replaceable. everyone else is.

usually

g under p

markymark550 wrote:

That may be the exception that proves the rule. Although, if it weren't for his gimmick of wearing the schoolboy uniform thing, he wouldn't really be the face of that band, it would be Brian Johnson.

......And don't forget that hat or whatever you call that thing on his head. One of the best voice replacement choice for Bon Scott which has kept this band alive for almost 30 years now.

Peace

g under p

aspoonfulweighsaton wrote:

See I completely disagree. There are some bands where the drummer writes all the music and lyrics. Yet we have the mentality that drummers are completely interchangeable. Just because the singer is front and center doesn't mean they can't be replaced in the same manner.

In the case of a band such as RUSH.....take away Neil Peart and RUSH is history. I'll be seeing them this Sunday here in S. Florida for near 40 times now and without him this band doesn't exist.

The same could be said for Phil Collins and GENESIS.

Drummers the HEARTBEAT of any band, and without that heartbeat the band has no soul and is therefore dead.

Peace

g under p

MrSmith wrote:

lead singer and lead guitar arent replaceable. everyone else is.

usually

This I have to disagree with, note in my above words.

Peace

reggie500

g under p wrote:

In the case of a band such as RUSH.....take away Neil Peart and RUSH is history. I'll be seeing them this Sunday here in S. Florida for near 40 times now and without him this band doesn't exist.

The same could be said for Phil Collins and GENESIS.

Drummers the HEARTBEAT of any band, and without that heartbeat the band has no soul and is therefore dead.

Peace

Posting this on a Pearl Jam message board is strange. According to your logic, the band would be dead as soon as dave Krusen left. All of these 'rules' about who or what makes or breaks a band are just opinions, and the only thing that any casual listener will care about is if the songs are good. If any of these reconstituted bands make good albums and play good shows, they will probably succeed. From what I can tell, Alice in Chains and Blind Melon both seem to be succeeding at it because they still play well and at least one of them (blind melon) has already made a good album. That is also just my opinion....

g under p

reggie500 wrote:

Posting this on a Pearl Jam message board is strange. According to your logic, the band would be dead as soon as dave Krusen left. All of these 'rules' about who or what makes or breaks a band are just opinions, and the only thing that any casual listener will care about is if the songs are good. If any of these reconstituted bands make good albums and play good shows, they will probably succeed. From what I can tell, Alice in Chains and Blind Melon both seem to be succeeding at it because they still play well and at least one of them (blind melon) has already made a good album. That is also just my opinion....

I still stick by bands such as RUSH and GENESIS that their drummers are the most important element. As for Pearl Jam that's another story that you probably cab answer better than I.

Peace

JSP552003

mouthfulofsoup wrote:

Exactly. Everything Blind Melon did is gold. While not a large one, their catalog is flawless. Throwing some new kid in all these years later & putting out a new album under the same name taints the perfection that we've all come to love as BLIND MELON.

The other 4 members have every right to go on playing music & doing what they do best, & I'm sure they wanna keep the amazing music alive, but they chose a piss poor way of doing so. Start another band with a new singer & a new name...but to make some crappy ass new album under the Melon name with some wannabe Shannon on vocals is an insult. This Faux Melon can never hold a candle to anything Shannon touched...the fact that it will be lumped in with their stuff is so beyond sad. :(

+80000000000000

i also agree that AiC should have changed their name...
i mean would you wanna see soundgarden without cornell? zeppelin without plant? stp without weiland? now some of these guys may have written more than layne did in AiC or shannon did in blind melon but i think you get the point...it just doesnt seem right. AC/DC is the only case where its worked as its already been said but i definitely prefer the bon scott era by far (only johnson album worth anything is back in black imo)....i mean billy howerdel was the main writer for APC and he could have just as easily kept the name but he didnt i.e. Ashes Divide (the album is great btw) and i respect him for that...and as far as GnR and Axl, i think it should have just been a solo project but everyone knows it really is anyway

********************************
edit
********************************
and before someone jumps in with "what about led zep without bonham?" i know i know and that was cool because they didnt try to record under the name..and i didnt have a problem with AiC touring with Duvall(sp?) but i dont think it would be right if they recorded under the name AiC...same goes for blind melon...ya sure tour for a tribute, but like mouthfulofsoup said above, dont record new music and taint the legacy haha (and yes i have a heard a few new blind melon songs)

facepollution

Jeremy1012 wrote:

Yeah I included Nutshell by mistake. It was his lyrics though and as far as I'm concerned, lyrically AIC's most beautiful song. His songwriting contribution to the band is all to often overlooked. The fact is, he was the face, heart and soul of the band for me. The songs that Jerry wrote, he wrote them to be sung by Layne. I don't have a problem with the guys touring and stuff and I don't blame people who want to go and see them, it's just not for me. I hear they do a tribute to Layne with some sort of visual backdrop? That would kill me.

I can respect that, it's a personal thing I guess. I bet most of us here have sat in the dark in a state of utter misery listening to Nutshell at some point in our lives. I think perhaps a few years back I might have agreed with you because music was my life (it still is to a large extent), I'd lost a childhood friend to suicide, and I was pretty depressed. But having moved passed that grief, I now look to music for its uplifting qualitites, even a song like Nutshell is pretty cathartic, despite how depressing the subject matter. With that in mind, the AIC show I saw in London was more of a celebration of the music; DuVall seemed like a mouth-piece for the fans who wanted to express their love of the music, rather than a guy just standing in for Layne. Not to sound too cheesy, but I kind of came out of it with that 'life is a beautiful thing' feeling.

reggie500

JSP552003 wrote:

+80000000000000

i also agree that AiC should have changed their name...
i mean would you wanna see soundgarden without cornell? zeppelin without plant? stp without weiland? now some of these guys may have written more than layne did in AiC or shannon did in blind melon but i think you get the point...it just doesnt seem right. AC/DC is the only case where its worked as its already been said but i definitely prefer the bon scott era by far (only johnson album worth anything is back in black imo)....i mean billy howerdel was the main writer for APC and he could have just as easily kept the name but he didnt i.e. Ashes Divide (the album is great btw) and i respect him for that...and as far as GnR and Axl, i think it should have just been a solo project but everyone knows it really is anyway

********************************
edit
********************************
and before someone jumps in with "what about led zep without bonham?" i know i know and that was cool because they didnt try to record under the name..and i didnt have a problem with AiC touring with Duvall(sp?) but i dont think it would be right if they recorded under the name AiC...same goes for blind melon...ya sure tour for a tribute, but like mouthfulofsoup said above, dont record new music and taint the legacy haha (and yes i have a heard a few new blind melon songs)

I don't know....I feel the opposite to you on this. To me, I respect melon more for making a new album rather than resting on past laurels. It seems to me that they took a big risk and it worked, at least on the level that it's a good album (i heard the whole thing...amazing). I was at a show when Nico came on stage and sang with them and then Shannon's mom came on stage and gave her support. i thought it was going to be weird to see them, but when Nico and Nel came on stage, it just all came together and made sense. I read an interview with one of the band members who said that they spent a lot of time thinking about the name issue and then went with their gut feeling about it. They said that if they changed the name, every time the new name was printed it would say 'formerly the dudes from blind melon', so they felt like they could never get away from it. All the arguing over band names is just semantics in the end...what really matters is peoples hearts and intentions. Has anybody ever thought that because of these band's reunions that more records will be sold and more money made to be given to the deceased members families? I bet Nico will be better off because of blind melon's reunion....

facepollution

reggie500 wrote:

All the arguing over band names is just semantics in the end...what really matters is peoples hearts and intentions.

Yeah you hit the nail on the head there. It seems a lot of these people only really have a problem with them recording under the same name, but why? If you[i/] know it isn't exactly the same then what is the problem? So what if some new fan doesn't realise at first that the singer is new - I'm sure it won't take them long to find out. And I totally agree reggie, the thing that should be most important is the intentions.

Jeremy1012

facepollution wrote:

DuVall seemed like a mouth-piece for the fans who wanted to express their love of the music, rather than a guy just standing in for Layne. Not to sound too cheesy, but I kind of came out of it with that 'life is a beautiful thing' feeling.

That is kind of awesome to be honest. I still don't think I could do it though. As for the Nutshell thing, yes. I have sat in the dark in the darkest mood of my life listening to that song. It's not something I want to repeat but I don't think I could go and see another singer doing it with Alice, even for an uplifting experience rather than a depressing one. DuVall does a good job from videos that I have seen. If I saw Aaron Lewis or that guy from Seether singing it, I'd probably punch them out.