Nah, no setup... I was just thinking about it and thought they fit the criteria. I would argue that Journey was not really "known" with Gregg Rolie as their singer. In fact, if you ask the majority of people they don't even know that the band existed before Steve Perry.

 

There is a lot of truth to this one. ^ :thumb:

In a way, Fleetwood Mac does, but they were relatively unknown to Americans in their earlier format, so I didn't really think of them.

 

Bob Welch probably kept them afloat in the lean years but was just one of the members who sang lead before he left for a solo career. I thought it was ashame that when they were inducted into the Rock n Roll HOF, that Welch was not included. Even though their peak popularity was after he left the band.

I actually enjoy both versions of AC/DC. Also one of my favorite albums ever is the 1st Van Halen one. Though I still really liked the Van Hagar version and own quite a few LP's/CD's etc..Sabbath was Ozzy only for me. But I did like a lot of Dio's solo stuff too. Journey in my mind is/was Steve Perry. I cannot stand the band impersonating them now. JMO. :thumb:

I touched briefly on that earlier, and it kind of has me torn. The guy sounds very faithful to the AIC I always loved, but it still just feels like a tribute band doing old covers. A really good cover band, but still a cover band.

 

It doesn't really fit into the phenomena I'm talking about here, given that AIC has been shelved for a decade. I look at this much in the same way as I view what Queen is doing with Paul Rodgers, or to a lesser degree, the INXS thing.

What I have heard from the new AIC sounds more like Cantrell's solo stuff then it does classic AIC. Not that that is a bad thing as I am a huge Cantrell fan but I just don't think AIC when I hear them.

As an EWF fan I cannot really get into their current lead singer. If Maurice White is not out front its simply a cover band.

I touched briefly on that earlier, and it kind of has me torn. The guy sounds very faithful to the AIC I always loved, but it still just feels like a tribute band doing old covers. A really good cover band, but still a cover band.

 

It doesn't really fit into the phenomena I'm talking about here, given that AIC has been shelved for a decade. I look at this much in the same way as I view what Queen is doing with Paul Rodgers, or to a lesser degree, the INXS thing.

Tribute band? I disagree. Jerry Cantrell is and always was the creative force behind AIC. Besides the riffs, the signature melodies are and always have been Jerry. Some of you AIC fans may scream blasphemy when I say this, but Layne Staley was irrelevant as far as I am concerned. Very few musicians in heavy rock are as creative as Cantrell. I love the new AIC.

Well, not always the death, but often. Every now and again it happens. A popular band loses its front man for whatever reason. Invariably, the quality of that band's music drops off considerably after the change. However, in many cases, fans of the band just go right on, blissfully buying the records and scarcely acknowledging anything has changed. I understand this. They're fans, and fans are usually loyal to a fault.

 

For the record, I'm not talking about situations where bands from the old days reform and try to cash in on the summer reunion tour circuit, often with only one or two original members. That's a whole 'nuther awful trend all its own. I'm talking about bands making the switch at the height of their career/popularity.

 

Let's examine some notable examples of this phenomenon:

 

AC/DC: The poster child of this problem. Take Bon Scott -- incredibly distinctive, with a delivery chock full of personality. He dies, and Malcolm and Angus go get some dude who can go along with the signature AC/DC sound to a degree, but is a very poor imitation of Scott. To me, I always come back to the funny line from Beavis & Butthead, where they suggest Johnson looks like he's in the middle of a bowel movement when he sings. Well, he sounds like it too, and the results smell like it as well. And while AC/DC may still be a fun band to see in concert, anyone who would dare argue the quality of the band's work in the post-Scott era is even remotely close to the music they did when he was alive is just flat-out insane.

 

Van Halen: Poster Child No. 2. With David Lee Roth, Van Halen was fun and exciting, and musically glorious. Without him, they became cheesy and pretentious, totally losing touch with what made them great to begin with. I blame a lot of this on Sammy Hagar, whom I've always thought sucked. But it's not all on him; I don't blame him for jumping at a great opportunity when he did. No, the bulk of the blame falls on the shoulders of the band's namesake, two brothers who apparently woke up one morning and decided they were going to take themselves far more seriously than they should, and apparently thought Van Halen's real destiny was to be deep and ponderous, as though they were embarrassed about their DLR-era work.

 

Lynyrd Skynyrd: Band makes great music, and becomes rock'n'roll icons and the face of the southern rock genre. Band has plane crash, killing lead singer, among other members. After a few years of a hiatus, some of the remaining members have the brilliant idea of "Hey, let's just go get the former lead singer's little brother to take his place -- it'll be like nothing ever happened," ignoring the fact that not only was Ronnie Van Zant the face of the band, he also defined their sound with his songwriting, and little brother can't hold his jock. The results are, predictably, awful. When Gary Rossington and Billy Powell finally leave this mortal coil, Ronnie's going to be waiting for them in one of Heaven's back alleys with a tire iron for what they did to his band.

 

Occasionally it works. Think Journey, Black Sabbath. I'm not sure what to think about this new Alice In Chains album. What I've heard of it sounds good, but I'm a Layne Staley loyalist. Plus, AIC hasn't really done anything prominent for a decade, so it really doesn't fit with what I'm talking about anyway.

 

But anyway: What's missing? What goes wrong when the lead singer is changed out? Should we, as fans, feel like we're being sold a bill of goods when we go to see Aerosmith without Stephen Tyler? (Not that I would anyway, but it's a contemporary example that looks possible.)

 

What are some other bands who've made this leap, and why did/didn't it work?

Where do i start?

Sabbath: Jim knows I have been a Ozzy fan since we were kids, but Sabbath with Ronnie James Dio was excellent.

AC/DC: I like Bon and Brian Johnson. Back in Black is a great record, although grossly overplayed by FM radio.For Those About to Rock also very good.A lessre known record, Flick of the Switch, one of my favorites. Saw AC/DC in 1991, great show. Very few live acts are as tight as they are live. As long as they enjoy what they are doing, more power to them. I wish I could make a good living playing music. It works because Angus And Malcomb have always been the creative forces that drive AC/DC.

Skynyrd: Since the death of Ronnie, Steve Gaines, and Allen Collins ( Billy Powell and Leon Wilkerson have since passed on also), Their original music has not been very memorable,poor modern country music. But their constant touring for the last 20 or so years has given many Skynyrd fans like me the chance to enjoy their music live. I was 5 years old when the plane went down in McComb, Mississippi. I actually met Garry Rossington and Billy Powell in 1993.

Van Halen: Their decline in recording creativity started one or two records( DiverDown and 1984 ) before Roth's departure. Decent records, but not quite ton the level with VH1,VH2,WACF, and Fair Warning. I did not care for the Van Hagar stuff, although got to catch them live in 1992. Good show. I also enjoyed Hagar's solo stuff pre-Van Halen. And for some of you that go even farther back, I really liked Montrose ( Ronnie Montrose's band with Hagar on vocals.)

I am of the opinion that a band can withstand personel changes as long as the creative forces remain intact. Metallica has flat out stunk on record and live since Cliff Burton was killed in 1986, and he was the bass player. But everyone that really knows their origins, knows Burton was the driving force behind them. Iron Maiden is an exception to MY opinion. Bass player Steve Harris has been the creative force since their inception. When vocalist Bruce Dickinson left Maiden in the late 90's, they were just a shell of themselves. When Dickinson returned a few years later, they continued their previous success (worldwide, not just the States), and may have surpassed it in some parts of the world.

Judas Priest popularity decreased quite a bit when Halford left. Although i saw Priest with Tim Owens on vocals and loved it, Halford was and is a big part of their creativity since he returned.

For you "somewhat" underground metal fans, Sepultura declined dramatically when founder, rythym guitarist, vocalist, Max Cavalera left in 1997. He was the main creative force behind Sepultura.

I could go on for days. I will stop now.

Blind Melon comes to mind. When Hoon died so did the band despite any attempts they've made since then.

 

The DeLeo brothers have struggled without Weiland. Army of Anyone was tolerable which featured the frontman from Filter (whose name escapes me right now) but none of it was better than the worst from STP. Luckily they are back together and almost finished with their new album. Weiland did alright without them in Velvet Revolver but nothing to write home about but I'm sure some of you Slash lovers will disagree with me. His solo work wasn't anything worth much either. Weiland and the DeLeo's truly need each other.

 

Audioslave is alright from time to time but they don't shine a light on what Rage Against the Machine conquered. de la Rocha has all but disappeared without them despite his attempts at a solo career as well.

Queen the bass player will not ever, and has never played with the band.

I would have done the same thing. How Paul Rodgers name was ever even mentioned is beyond me.

I think Journey is Perry and Schon, without one or the other it is just either a cover band or a Steve Perry Solo album. I do think VH was still a great band with Hagar, the 4 releases they put out were some of the best they did. Diver Down was just as bad as VHIII, a very weak album. 1984 had one of their best songs Drop Dead Legs too bad they never played the song live. Nothing will ever compare to the energy they had on Fair Warning though. They will never be the same without Mikey in the band though. At least with Sammy they changed the set list up some from show to show with DLR it was the exact same show every time, same songs, same order and same BS in between.

Another band was Molly Hatchet, Danny Joe Brown could not be replaced. Jimmy Farrar had a couple of good songs with them but DJB's vocals were a huge part of the sound of that band. Now they have no original members in the band and still tour under the Molly Hatchet name, what a joke that is.

Tribute band? I disagree. Jerry Cantrell is and always was the creative force behind AIC. Besides the riffs, the signature melodies are and always have been Jerry. Some of you AIC fans may scream blasphemy when I say this, but Layne Staley was irrelevant as far as I am concerned. Very few musicians in heavy rock are as creative as Cantrell. I love the new AIC.

 

:scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :puke: :puke: :cry:

 

 

 

While I will agree that Jerry Cantrell is the most important factor in AIC, Layne is and always will be Alice in Chains. It's not about how Layne sounded when he sang his songs, or whether or not someone could come in and do that. It's more about the presence Layne brought with him. For someone to be so deep into his own demons and addictions and give you what he gave you was unbelievable. To me Layne is in a select group that would include figures such as Jim Morrison, Kurt Cobain, Jimi Hendrix, etc. You didn't go to an Alice in Chains concert in the early to mid 90's thinking, hmmm, I wonder how Layne is going to sound tonight. You came because you had no idea what Layne would do. He is the epitome of my ideal front man. One who does not care about critics, does not care about perfecting notes, or nailing everything. But, one who is just there, in the moment, in his own opiate fueled euphoria, giving you all he has with nothing but pure emotion. That is something you can't practice, and as crazy as it sounds, the formula that has created but destroyed a lot of great bands. What made Chains so good was the duel vocalization between Staley and Cantrell, and although the new guy may be able to hit some notes and possess that AIC sound, it is no where near the same.

 

 

If ever you need to see my case stated anymore, go watch Alice In Chains, Unplugged. It wasn't great vocalization, it wasn't spot on performing, it wasn't any of that. BUT, what it was is magical. It is something you can feel, and is something that can cause something to come over you. That's what somebody like Layne Staley does, and no one can ever argue that. If someone wants to hear a good cut on the radio, then they may prefer the other guy. If you want to know what true greatness in music is, for reasons that are hard to explain, you have Layne Staley.

Blind Melon comes to mind. When Hoon died so did the band despite any attempts they've made since then.

 

:thumb:

Getting back on my Doors comment, I wrote it wrong...RockMom, if you ever see this again I was speaking of the fact with Jim being gone replacing him and I said No way, no one could replace Jim. I'm a huge fan.

 

I have Riders on the Storm in my car and play it almost every day.

Getting back on my Doors comment, I wrote it wrong...RockMom, if you ever see this again I was speaking of the fact with Jim being gone replacing him and I said No way, no one could replace Jim. I'm a huge fan.

 

I have Riders on the Storm in my car and play it almost every day.

 

I knew what you meant Larry, and it was crazy that Ray and the guys thought they could actually have success without Jim.