Should a band die when it's singer does?

[AndyR]

For me (a bit like what Ferryman says, I guess), it's all about "who is the creative force in the band?"

Who writes the songs, drives the arrangements, leads the march through the public eye...

It could be more than one person, it could be, or include, the front man/woman. But if you take that person or those persons out of the band, then it's something else, and the band knows it.

When Bonn Scott died, it was obvious they would/could carry on. It would be different, but it would still be AC/DC. And that's kinda what happened. I suspect that it could have continued if Angus had died, but I wouldn't want to put money on it. But it would probably have stopped if Malcolm had died - it's his band, he's the driving force behind it, he's the one that makes the band sound like AC/DC.

Then there's some bands that can't imagine continuing if any one of them dies. Eg Led Zeppelin - after a few weeks they announced that that was it, they couldn't imagine being Led Zeppelin without Bonzo. I think these bands are the ones where internally they all regard each other as vital cogs in the machine. I actually imagine that if Adam Clayton had succumbed to alcohol, U2 might have stopped - I have a feeling that U2 is one of those types of band. I saw them interviewed together recently, and they were quite candid (Bono admitted that the rest of them think he's a bit of a nob for some stuff he does, but accept that he does it - they all nodded/laughed), and they all seemed to be saying that U2, the four of them together, is bigger/stronger/etc than the four of them alone. A band like that, especially one that has lasted so long (with success), would find it hard to replace anyone. The magic would not be there, and there'd be a big ghost on the stage, in the rehearsal room, recording studio, etc.

But bands where it's a bunch of crazy individuals, one of them dying might not stop it. Eg. Why did The Who continue without Keith Moon? I suspect there are all sorts of reasons (one of which might be that they'd already been wondering "wouldn't it be nice to have a sane person behind the drum-kit?"). My personal view, in this case, is that The Who ended up "being" Pete Townsend (late 60s, early 70s) - he was the one with the creative vision, driving the output - and it would continue as long as he wanted it to. I suspect that he would have replaced Roger Daltrey if he'd died instead - they might have struggled with audience buy-in more than they did (or than AC/DC did with replacing their dead singer).

The Doors - I guess it was all going a bit crazy anyway - but is there any way that The Doors could have continued without Jim Morrison?

Queen. How can you (or the band) possibly imagine Queen without Freddie Mercury? I know it's been done with Paul Rodgers, I've got the album, it's OK, but it ain't Queen. George Michael could have done it vocally, and then later, the bloke from The Darkness might possibly have filled more of the shoes than anyone else... But whoever did the job would have to be able to carry the songs, the audience, the history, AND the relationship with the remaining band members.

And then, Thin Lizzy... well, Thin Lizzy, the one that hit the big time, was Phil Lynott. The songs, the persona, everything. The rest of them were very able side-men. As good as they were, they couldn't have generated Thin Lizzy's output without Phil Lynott the songwriter and frontman.

The thing is, for me, though, is that it's entirely up to the survivors themselves. They can carry on if they like, if they can, then it's up to me whether I like what they're doing and buy in to it...

[Blooby]

I actually saw Thin Lizzy post-Phil in a seedy bar in Florida.  No, it wasn't Thin Lizzy, and I didn't think so at the time, but it was very entertaining.  It was an "arena rock show" in a club that held 200.  I believe it was John Sykes, Marco Mendoza, Tommy Aldridge, and Scott Gorham. Sykes actually phrases vocally quite a bit like Phil, but it was no Lizzy as it was way too heavy.  I had a buddy who was a Lizzy nut, so I took him for his birthday. Would have LOVED to see Phil back in the day, but I got on the bus a little late.

I'm torn in situations like this for bands I like.  Yes is a perfect example. I can't wrap my head around Jon Anderson being ousted from the band, but if I ever want to hear those songs performed live again, there isn't a whole lot of choices.  I guess I just go with my gut on a case by case basis.

Blooby

[Mike_S]

I saw Lizzy about 15 years ago in London Brixton Academy - long after Phil died - and they were great. I'd say they were even better obviously if Phil had not died but it was still a very worthy gig. One of the guitarists was singing i think it was John Sykes. The way lizzy do it (or did it) is very good its more about continuing as a tribute to the great mans legacy and if its done well then i can't see a problem.

I think bands have to be careful though if they continue putting out new material and it is suddenly of a lower standard because of the loss of a vital cog. I think they should have the grace to just let it go. For me AC/DC are guilty of this, I think Bon Scott would be turning in his grave if he heard some of the later AC/DC stuff.

[AndyR]

I used to feel that way about AC/DC, Mike...

I stopped listening to them with the release of "For Those About To Rock"... I knew virtually nothing about them from then on until a year or so ago.

Then I got the Plug Me In DVD set for Christmas...

And then I finally understood that for many people AC/DC is the one fronted by Brian Johnson.

I've got all of the albums now. Some of them seem like "treading water", but there's always some good stuff on them.

I originally hated FTATR because it was so far from the Bon stuff. I'd been not too happy with Back In Black because it sounded like BJ was trying too hard to be "Bon". I've since discovered that this is because a reasonable majority of BiB is Bon Scott material. The album was already planned and aimed at that sound, it was "part 2" of the transition they were making with Mutt Lange. The job was "turn this into a mega act", and "part 1" was Highway to Hell, but it soundwise it didn't quite get to where they'd expected, the BiB sound was what they'd been after. Also, what I hadn't realised, most of the BiB material was already written when Bon died. BJ was given Bon's lyric book to try and figure out how to complete the songs.

When they got to the next album, FTATR, there was nothing left of the input Bon had left behind. So they sat down and rebuilt the thing from scratch. Unfortunately for me, I still wanted to Bon, so I thought the album was complete tripe. But when I listened to it a year or two ago, I was dumbfounded... it's BRILLIANT, it's the old AC/DC and the new AC/DC. Turns out I missed quite a lot by not accepting it when it came out!

Although I still personally much prefer the band's vibe and the humour of the Bon Scott years, I have to admit nowadays that in the bigger scheme of things, the Bon Scott years were "early AC/DC" prior to their main success and the majority of their career.

I always did think "good on em" for carrying on. But now I find myself actually liking and appreciating the music they came out with!!

[Hook]

sometimes

[AndyR]

sometimes

Ha! Ha!

Best response so far

[Mike_S]

Hehe... that made me chuckle. 

I hear where you are coming from though Andy R... I actually really like Back in Black myself.

[Gnasty]

This was just revealed not long ago about Bon Scott.
I think any band member can be expendable.

http://m.classicrockmagazine.com/news/acdc-thought-of-firing-bon-scott/

[AndyR]

Oh yeah, I love Back In Black too. But, at the time... I dunno, I was 17, it wasn't quite the same. We could hear it was good, we were relieved it was good, but there was something missing.

What we didn't realise, I spose, was here was our favourite band about to get BIG, and we'd be left behind because we couldn't get over the idea of no more new songs like "Can I Sit Next To You Girl", "Squealer", or "Rock and Roll Singer". (We hated the obviousness of "Let Me Put My Love Into You", "Given The Dog A Bone", and "You Shook Me All Night Long" ... great music, but no more laughs).


(The reason I sound so informed on this subject is that I'm actually trying to write a "Bon Scott AC/DC" song at the moment, and FAILING miserably )

[AndyR]

This was just revealed not long ago about Bon Scott.
I think any band member can be expendable.

http://m.classicrockmagazine.com/news/acdc-thought-of-firing-bon-scott/

Interesting - I nearly mentioned this earlier, but a biography I got at the same time as the Plug Me In DVDs showed how Bon Scott had become a liability by the time he died, and they were wondering how/if to replace him. They weren't convinced that the make-over (with Mutt Lange and record company) was actually going to work with Bon carrying on as he was. He was going to be too pissed, or he'd slip up and say something that buggered the PR, ... he was turning into a liability just when they could almost taste the big time. I can't remember, it was a few years ago now, but I seem to recall he was aware of the problem as well. (Don't remember reading about heroin though).

Incidentally it was also reading in the book about how Brian Johnson fitted in and why that made me give him another go, so I went out and bought all the CDs.