No! In America, Ringo was pretty essential to their mystique. In the early “Ed Sullivan” days, most Americans (esp. males over the age of 17) couldn’t tell the other three apart. I don’t think they could’ve gotten away with fobbing Jimmy Nicol on a Shea Stadium audience.
Actually, Malcolm sat out the Blow Up Your Video tour in '88, leaving Angus as the only original member on the stage. It was still decent. In the studio, though, Mal is essential.
ZZ Top is the only band I can think of that has never had a lineup change. If Frank Beard got hit by a bus, I wonder if they’d replace him? If it were Gibbons or Hill, forget it.
Come to think of it, I don’t think the Beastie Boys would survive a personel change.
As long as Tony Iommi is on stage, it’s Black Sabbath. I think around 30 or so people have actually been in the band.
As long as Lemmy is singing and playing bass, it’s Motorhead to me.
KISS is Paul Stanley and Gene Simmons, and whatever two guys are on stage with them.
Rush is a unique case, having a essential non-original member (Neil Peart), although some may argue that it isn’t Iron Maiden without Dickinson. It certainly wasn’t Maiden with Blaze Bayley.
And can anyone say with a straight face that that’s the Dead Kennedy’s without Jello Biafra?
Pearl Jam lost Dave Abrussi (sp?) on the drums, and never missed a beat.
Bad Religion has had a couple different drummers, and you really couldn’t tell.
I’m a drummer too, but I think we are easily replaced in the band setting.
I am surpirsed no one has mentioned Van Halen and their THREE singers, David Lee Roth, Sammy Hagar, and the lead singer of Extreme (Gary Cherone). DLR was original, Hagar was original and Cherone was basically similiar to Hagar.
Hagar is back in the lineup after he told a magazine that he wont do anyone “corporate rock” again. I guess he needed to pay the mortgage on Cabo Wabo. Eddie Van Halen looks like Kieth Richards now and he has throat cancer, and divorced valarie Bertinelli which deserves a swift, hard kick in the ass by me if I ever see him in public.
King Crimson wouldn’t exist without Robert Fripp.
Emerson, Lake and Palmer could have survived the loss of Greg Lake pretty easily, IMO. He wasn’t a virtuoso with his instrument like the other two were, and much as I like ELP, lyrics are big weak point for them. Carl Palmer’s absence showed when they were Emerson, Lake and Powell.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned YES yet. In their 36-year career every* band member has been replaced at least once and the band kept moving on. Sure, people in YesFan circles will debate which incarnation was best (me, I like Anderson, White, Squire, Wakeman, and Howe), but basically the style and creativity of the band continued. YES is a musical concept as much as anything.
- actually the only time Chris Squire left the band, the remaining members reformed under another name – “Anderson Bruford Wakeman Howe”, but it was still very much YES music
Fairport Convention without Richard Thompson is another.
I think it’s arguable that the Who were backwards in the usual conception of the rock band, in regard to talent. Moon is considered a drum legend, Entwistle was extremely talented as a bass player, Townsend is seen as a competent guitar player, and Daltry is known to have had his share of bad nights as a vocalist. The thing that compensated for everything was the song writing and arranging. Have you heard Live at Leeds?
I agree wholeheartedly. Recently Queen was “touring” near me in the DC/Baltimore area and I was totally perplexed. What? Queen is touring? But Freddie is still dead, right? So who’s singing Somebody to Love, Brian May?
There was a joke (perhaps made by the band itself) that said the only reason Powell was hired was so that the band didn’t have to change their logo.
Interesting take.
One could make the case that Genesis didn’t survive losing Peter Gabriel. Genesis Mark I was a very different band from Genesis Mark II, although both were quite good. In fact, I can’t think of any other band where this sort of change has occurred and both versions were decent.
Genesis Mk III without Collins, however, sucked big time.
I never like Chicago without Terry Kath. Of course, I never liked them after their fourth album with Saturday In The Park came out, but that’s a different thread.
Well, I think that Cream could have lost Ginger Baker and not suffered too much. Who’d have passed on them if they had had a different drummer?
I also think that the Who are still the Who; I believe that Pete Townshend actually thinks so, but won’t say it. What can he say, Keith and Entwistle were non-essentials?? Even in their heart of hearts, Moon and John were thinking that “they” were what the Who was all about.
Taking the clip from Woodstock for our sample, do we even remember those two?
Rush can’t lose anybody. Geddy is their singer, Alex cannot be replaced on guitar, and Neil is their songwriter/drummer.
Beatles couldn’t take the hit.
Even with Ronnie James Dio, I never thought that Black Sabbath was Black Sabbath anymore.
hh
Yeah, the Beatles could have lost Ringo. Ringo was their replacement drummer. Nothing against Ringo, but they could have picked any number of solid musicians to replace him. They mercilessly kicked out Pete Best just as they became stars, if Ringo gave them any trouble they would have done the same with him. Luckily Ringo knew how to get along with people, by the end he was the only one who was still friends with all the other members.
Also, the Beatles probably could survive the loss of Stu Sutcliffe.
Two examples of what couldn’t be:
The Grateful Dead without Jerry Garcia.
Jethro Tull without Ian Anderson.
I respect your opinion on the Waters-less Floyd, however, although you may not like it much without Roger Waters, the music buying public in general didn’t seem to have a big problem with it. I know people who hold the opinion that PF was dead once Barrett left.
Personally I didn’t have much affection for a Momentary Lapse of Reason, but the Division Bell is a favourite album and much more likely to get played than anything solo by Roger Waters. YMMV.
While it’s true that it’s not Dead Kennedys without Jello, Jello alone is not Dead Kennedys. I saw him play with the Melvins as his backing band, doing DK songs, and it was amazing, but not DK. I think Jello and East Bay Ray were the essential members, and that ship has long sailed.
Some may argue that Metallica has been a shadow of itself since Cliff died, which is probably true considering what genius could have been. Still, I think all you need to keep “Metallica” going are Lars and James.
I wouldn’t have guessed that Bill Berry (the drummer) had such an influence in REM, but apparently he did 'cause man have they sucked hard since he retired. Maybe he was the one who could tell Stipe to shut up or something.
IMHO, of course.
My attitude is, in general, no man is an island. However, if a band’s front man is unusually talented or has a distinctive sound that is associated with the band, replacing him is amost always a mistake (consider the nosedive Motley Crue’s popularity took when they temporarily replaced lead singer Vince Neil). OTOH, consider what happened when Judas Priest replaced Rob Halford with Time Owens: although an excellent sound-alike, fans often complained that JP sold out to nervous corporate interests when Halford came out of the closet (not to mention the fact that fans were much more accepting of Halford’s homosexuality than expected). And consider Van Halen: say what you want about the arrogance of David Lee Roth, but admit he was their best lead (not interested in the never-ending fight on this point, btw).