When is the band not the band?

When is the band not the band?

Author
Discussion

Russ35

Original Poster:

2,545 posts

245 months

Sunday 2nd November 2008
quotequote all
On Wednesday I'm going to see Queen + Paul Rodgers, and it's got me thinking. When should a band not use a name?

Is having Brian May and Roger Taylor sufficient to still use the Queen name?

I heard something on Planet Rock this morning about Nazareth having a problem with an ex-member who left 18years ago using the band name, even though Nazareth are still playing.

There have obviously been some casses where it has ended up in court to decide, Pink Floyd, Status Quo, Lynyrd Skynyrd (must have 2 members of the pre-plane crash line up in the current line-up to use the name).

So when should a band stop/continue using a name?

ferg

15,242 posts

263 months

Sunday 2nd November 2008
quotequote all
Good point.

I think so long as the paying public know what they are getting, it's fine...provided all the band members are happy with the situation...

Some bands continue to tour with no original members, so.......

Hard to stop a band using a name just because one or two members are not there.
Quo?
Queen?
Zep?
AC/DC?
The Undertones?
smile

Fittster

20,120 posts

219 months

Sunday 2nd November 2008
quotequote all
Not all members of a band are equal. Although I'm not a fan lets use Oasis as an example, quite frankly the band is the Gallagher brothers, the other are just making up the numbers.

The front man and main song writer(s) are the key elements in a band/

Baby Huey

4,881 posts

205 months

Sunday 2nd November 2008
quotequote all
I'm old enough to remember when a band reforming was considered sacrilege.

I'm 36. Still quite young actually.

In the eyes of music fans the worst thing a band could do was reform, even if all the original members where involved. Queen with Paul Rogers, Led Zep with whoever, don't bother. It isn't them.

Twit

2,908 posts

270 months

Sunday 2nd November 2008
quotequote all
Baby Huey said:
In the eyes of music fans the worst thing a band could do was reform, even if all the original members where involved. Queen with Paul Rogers, Led Zep with whoever, don't bother. It isn't them.
Agree, not the same band, doesnt mean you can't enjoy them, I saw the Wonderstuff on Friday, only two originals left, the other two are dead, but great fun! Having said that I don't think Queen can be Queen without Freddie Mercury, he was just too integral - luckily I saw them - the shambles belting out the new songs (which wouldnt even have been presented to band members in their prime) simply isnt Queen.

Edited by Twit on Monday 3rd November 09:31

smiller

11,900 posts

210 months

Sunday 2nd November 2008
quotequote all
I'll tell you what; Deep Purple without Blackmore is not Deep Purple.

I admire Steve Morse for his technical abilities, but otherwise it's just wrong.

RedYellowGreen

470 posts

236 months

Sunday 2nd November 2008
quotequote all
Guns n roses. 'There' new album Basicly an Axl Rose solo album.

Edited by RedYellowGreen on Sunday 2nd November 23:57

neilr

1,527 posts

269 months

Monday 3rd November 2008
quotequote all
IF they didn't use the original name though, they couldn't rake in the cash in nearly the same way. Not that I'm suggesting the music industry is run and populated by money grabbing scum that don't care for the music in the slightlest.

Queen should let it go IMO, I love Queen, but its only Brian and Roger now, I suspect Paul Rogers ego may now be playing the bass in lieu of John Deacon thoiugh.


Reforming with all the original mambers - Questionable at best, Cynical cash in at worst.

Reforming without original members (barring death of course) - Cynical cash in all round.

Same goes for 'This is our last tour ever, you'll never see us live again etc" Yes I'm looking at you Don Henley and friends. How many last ever tours can the Eagles do? Lets just hope its less than the number of greatest hits albums they've released. Great band in their prime though.

Asterix

24,438 posts

234 months

Monday 3rd November 2008
quotequote all
I'm off to see Rogers & Queen soonish.

Hope they're alright (now).

neilr

1,527 posts

269 months

Monday 3rd November 2008
quotequote all
After slating them for doing what theyre doing, I have it on good authority (from a friend who has seen them) that they are very good.

Russ35

Original Poster:

2,545 posts

245 months

Thursday 6th November 2008
quotequote all
Well I started this thread by mentioning Queen + Paul Rodgers, so I suppose it's only fair that I post something having seen the concert last night.

Thought it was excellent. Being a Queen fan and a Free/Bad Company fan I suppose I was always going to enjoy it. Hearing the Queen songs sung differently is strange, but I'd rather have that than somebody attempting to imitate Freddie. I think they played the music a bit more rockier to compensate for this.

Although the highlight for me was the 3 Free\Bad Company songs (Seagull, Bad Company, All right now). I think this was due to them being very rarely seen or heard, compared to the Queen songs.