What's in a name eh???
Posted by Chief Kamanawanalea on 14 August 2008 - 8:10pm.
What should the rules be about bands trading on their name when most of the original members have left. See below: This isn't really the Happy Mondays is it? (Made more confusing by playing a Black Grape song): -
Now be warned grim footage ahead - don't think anyone would consider this shambles The Stone Roses would they?
But then some bands (The Fall, Primal Scream) seem to keep going with an ever-changing line-up and no one cares... so what are the rules? Is there a cut-off that is allowed before a band have to change their name (The New Oasis anyone???)
Bookmark/Search this post with:
- More from Chief Kamanawanalea.
- Login or register to post comments
That fat bald roadie
was getting abit above his station was'nt he?
Wonder
if the day will come when nobody batters an eyelid when a rock band tours with no original members. Or even playing old material.
Okay it is expected of Drifters-style Motown bands in the past but if you consider that the Manchester United team of 2008 has completely different players and manager from 1988 why could it not happen in the rock world. Some would say it has almost happened with Brian Wilson concerts.
It's already happened
Menudo were a latin pop boy band when any time a member turned 16 they had to leave and get replaced by someone else. Frank Black mentioned them in the track "I Heard Ramona Sing", the gist of the song is that he wished that The Ramones would do the same as Menudo and continue even after the members left.
I know I am on a Fairport day, but...
.....here's Simon Nicol on this subject:
"I'd like Fairport to become the first band to be like a male voice choir, carrying on through changes of personnel but retaining it's identity. After all, no-one bats an eyelid about a brass band playing on long after all the original members are gone. Why shouldn't there be a Fairport Convention in fifty or a hundred years?"
Chiling thought, eh, Guys?
It's also a way...
... of the descendants of the original band to benefit by licencing the name of the band, website, performance royalties, etc.
Bit more difficult with bands like Emerson, Lake & Palmer unless they change to ELP and only pick musicians with those initials - like they did when Cozy Powell joined the band. The Trans-Siberian Orchestra tours as two bands at Christmas in the USA; west coast and east coast to double the money. Think of the possibilities for the Polyphonic Spree.
And there is also the "collective" model
Isn't that how Lambchop and Willard Grant Conspiracy describe themselves, allowing Messrs Wagner and Foster to turn up with nearly almost anyone and still be "the band".
I suppose
it depends on who are the dominant personalities of a band.
I think it is quite sad that Rick and Bruce are playing gigs now as "From The Jam". The Undertones without Feargal is also a bit strange especially as they have a new singer who copies his warbling vocals to a tee. Although the rest of the band is the original line-up it does come across as a bit of a tribute act.
Buzzcocks does work with Pete Shelley and Steve Diggle being the only orignals.
Ramones managed without Dee Dee, The Who went on without Keith Moon although they never really did much of any cop afterwards.
The Clash defintely should have called it a day after Topper and Mick Jones left.