This would similarly describe AC/DC Bon Scott or Brian Johnson, yet they were indispensible to the total band package. Van Halen was a “sum greater than parts” band, and Roth also brought in the bulk of the songwriting and melody crafting, he could write hooks with the finest Madison Ave jingle-crafters. We saw what putting a “better” technical singer like Cherone did…
OK, I think I may have a contender or two. The British prog rock band Nektar had not one but two of the six original band members (Mick Brockett and Keith Walters) listed as “non-performing band members”. They apparently did lighting and other effects.
“Hey, I’m in a band and I don’t even play anything!”
Easier for Rutherford … he used a double necked 6/12 string guitar/bass combo !
There’s Harold Melvin and the Blue Notes. They went through several lead singers (including Melvin), but their only successes were in the early '70s, with Teddy Pendergrass as their frontman. (Melvin, who controlled the band, refused to change the name.)
Booker T. Jones of “Booker T. and MG’s” was primarily a keyboardist and guitar player. He played a lot with guest musicians and singers.
Mentions of some synthetic bands but none so far for the most famous of them all: The Monkees.
Well, this is going to be difficult. All 4 had some experience in music beforehand.
Most people would automatically think of Peter Tork. And they would be wrong. Tork had done folk music well before the show. In the process he befriended Stephen Stills, including a cross country road trip from NYC to LA! Stills was approached about doing the show and he recommended Tork. Note that Tork’s Monkees character is partly based on his folk music persona.
Michael Nesmith worked as musician before the show and his post-Monkees proved his skills. Different Drum anyone? Plus he was an innovator in music videos.
Davy Jones was a serious pop idol wanna be with a good track record in stage musicals.
Even Micky Dolenz had a band, recorded a couple songs (which weren’t released until the Monkees hit), etc. He was also Circus Boy! But still …
Yeah, I’d go with Dolenz as the least of the 4. (And of course is the last Monkee standing.) If he hadn’t gotten the gig his musical career would have gone nowhere. The other 3 were likely to continue to get reasonable work in ;music even if fame wasn’t on the cards.
One problem with analyzing the Monkees musically is that the show dodn’t match the actors up with their best instruments. Dolenz had to learn the drums from scratch.
They matched him up with lead vocals, which was a brilliant move. The Monkees would have ended up as poor man’s Herman’s Hermits if Jones sang most of the songs.
Joe Russo’s Almost Dead is close (doesn’t have the “and”). Russo is the drummer, and while he sings in some songs, he’s not the main vocalist.
I remember an old Pet Shop Boys video “West End Giiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrls” and buddy always standing behind - sometimes at an angle to - the singer, and I’m like ah, yes, one of those John Oates types. Heck, he might be a major song contributor / composer for all I know.
Animal?
Sure, he had energy.
Peter Tork said that if the band had been matched to their actual skills, the lineup would have been Michael Neismith on bass, Davy Jones on drums, Tork himself playing lead guitar, and Mickey Dolenz singing lead vocals. But the showrunners thought that Davy Jones was too short, and would have disappeared behind the drum set.
Yes, I always thought that Dolenz was a terrific vocalist.
Since we’ve already brought in singing duos, I have to vote for Sonny Bono. It’s not that he’s bad compared to Cher, he’s bad period. He could write a competent pop song, he could produce it, he could manage Cher’s career, but AFAICT the only reason he was allowed anywhere near a microphone was to keep her calm during a performance, and she eventually was able to get over her nervousness.
The Spencer Davis Group
What about them?
If you’re talking about Chris Lowe, he actually cowrites most of their songs and plays keyboards. I don’t know how good he is, but he probably has some real skills.
Lynn Barber, writing for the London Observer on July 1, 1997 stated that “The genius of the Pet Shop Boys was to combine these polar opposites: Neil’s wistful introspective lyrics and Chris’s mindless, cheerful, upbeat rhythms. They would never have been in the Top 10 without Chris; they would never have engaged an intelligent audience without Neil.”
His image as “the guy standing in the back doing nothing” was a deliberate choice, I think.
even 1970?
I know he’s admitted having confidence issues, always feeling he wasn’t good enough.
Disclosure: As soon as I saw the thread title, I thought “I’m going in there to defend Meg White”.
Not a technically brilliant drummer, sure. But nobody else could have done what she did in The White Stripes, especially live. I saw them eight times. They did not use set lists at all. Jack would just do his thing, throwing in random cover versions and whatever he felt like playing, and she would watch him like a hawk and play what was required. The electricity between them was so exciting to see.
Look up any old videos of them playing live together and check how she watches him. This is just one example - check the last 40 seconds or so: https://youtu.be/kjC8zKByvls
I have gone on to see Jack’s other projects live many, many times. His most recent tour is closest to re-creating the edginess of those White Stripes gigs - no set list apart from the opening two songs, and Daru Jones is certainly a better drummer than Meg - but the White Stripes live was a special and unique experience that I’m very, very glad I got to see.
Oh, yeah. I only saw them once – I believe it was a New Years’ show with the Flaming Lips at the Aragon, but it’s possible I’m conflating three different shows there (actually, that was correct, according to Google. NYE 2003->4) – but the first thing I thought to myself after hearing them for a song or two was how in the hell do two people fill the room with so much glorious noise and energy? I mean, they had presence . Just off-the-charts chemistry and both of them equally mesmerizing to watch do their thing.
Hell, they barely faced the audience; they mostly just faced each other, and played together. It was a unique thing to see by the standards of large name rock concerts, not really like anything else at all. They’re impossible to compare to most other acts.
I was a rabid Beatles fan from their first appearance on The Ed Sullivan Show when I was a kid. IMO, Ringo was crucial to the success of the Beatles, not only for his drumming but also for his personality—he has always been a laid-back, almost sad-sack, jovial guy, who always played well with others (on and off the stage). This blended well with Paul’s hyper-enthusiasm, John’s caustic wit, and George’s cute timidity. As a kid, I related best to Ringo, though I appreciated the others’ talent and songwriting prowess.
Ringo is a fine drummer. His strong sense of rhythm, simple precision, and unique style always served the Beatles’ songs first and foremost. He wasn’t flash. Flash would have lessened the Beatles’ melodies.
Ringo’s deep groove, in-the-pocket drumming, jovial personality, and camaraderie were significant factors in elevating the Beatles to superstardom. It helped make them one of the most influential bands in history. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
BTW, 82yo Ringo is about to begin a new tour. The dude’s got staying power.