Why Can Some Bands Change Members And Others Can’t?

[@marcussandstrom983]

Loved to watch what was happening in the store behind you, a lot of young people picking up vinyl records ❤😊

[@neilbottles2597]

I love at the 6 minute mark,Anthony is helping that young man pick out a Germs record! Cool stuff!

[@de_Thannberg]

In the digital age, I see a young teenager picking up vinyl records in the background, and I think to myself that young people have ears too.

[@miketheyunggod2534]

Is Brendon talking to Henry Winkler?

[@jonjackson5372]

I can deal with members of a band changing as long as their new music is quality and the production is good. As long as the songs are good and performed well, that’s all that matters.

[@RobDawg881]

Great White and Jack Russell's Great White touring and recording new music at the same time was a unique situation. RIP Jack

[@andrewmachado6988]

I’m fine with members changing. What I don’t like is what exactly Brendon said, when there’s no original members left.

[@RobDawg881]

Foreigner and Autograph, for example.

[@toms4442]

Lou Gramm playing solo is more Foreigner then the current version.

[@esteeb67]

I think it depends on a couple of things... 1) How integral the member is to the band (real or perceived). 2) How popular the band is at the time (ie, ACDC had really just hit the world stage when Bon died... so Brian coming in did little damage except to some of the hardcore fan base) 3) the strength of the songs that they produce after I do favor classic lineups typically, but I do accept Deep Purples changes. They navigated them all well and still deliver the same defining sound, but maybe with some new sonics. I don't like it when they sort of turn into a cover band (Journey, Foreigner). First, they replace their iconic and highly identifiable singers. Then other band members leave and you have no idea who the heck you are going to see live. Then it is surprising when a member that most people don't know is essential leaves like Phil Rudd from ACDC or Matt Sharp from Weezer and the band struggles to find their footing after the change. Ultimately, when changes are made those who remain and are added still need to have the magic sauce.

[@RyBuys]

Love the channel and love the different takes on things. Been subscribed for awhile now. Just wanted to thank you for the inspiration to finally get my music channel up the other day. I've wanted to do it for awhile now. You and a few other channels helped push me to finally do mine. Thank you again, I look forward to more of your content. ✌🏻

[@denisespainhower2153]

Totally agree in reference to Van Halen with Gary Cherone. The album ( VH 3) was mostly lackluster. But the live show on their tour was fantastic. EVH seemed inspired and played with fire. Gary sang both DLR, SH and the songs from VH 3 with excellence.

[@arispanagiotopoulos2533]

There are some bands where a certain member usually the frontman / frontwoman has such a strong personality and character, such an iconic stage presence and usually an iconic voice as well that is impossible to find an equally suitable replacement and everyone would always compare the new member to his / her predecessor. Iron Maiden and Judas Priest are two excellent examples of two bands which couldn’t replace successfully their respective frontmen and their popularity suffered as a result. Bruce Dickinson’s and Rob Halford’s statuses and personalities were so huge that fans never accepted their replacements plus although decent Blaze Bayley and Tim “reaper” Owens had neither the charisma nor the stage presence and immense talent of their predecessors.

[@jacobjimmie7500]

I'm all for it, bands should be able to continue after a member quits, or passes. It's their band too. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't.

[@ChrisPropfeMusicallyObsessed]

I’d have to agree about Generation Swine. I thought that album was pretty good too.🤟🏻🤟🏻

[@johnmiller3689]

Prime example for me, Genesis, even bigger after Gabriel left and I find myself listening to more Phil Collins, like Duke, W and W and Trick of a Tail, than Gabriel era. They also fit the discussion as well with Steve Hackett leaving, his guitar sound was missed more than the loss of Gabriel for me

[@RickroxxUsa]

Cool video , dig the videos in the shop, cool vibes . I like Roth era better , but also love Sammy. The Motley album and time period with Corabi was awesome and it’s easier to say now they should have kept Corabi, but let’s be real. Everyone was waiting for them to get Vince back all through that time. To play the what if game…Loved Vivian Campbell in Dio but the guitar player they would have retained their hard rock side would have been Adrian Smith. Yes, it was discussed. I think Adrian Vandenberg would have been a great choice as well.

[@jazzpunk]

I got to thinking back when a change actually helped - Deep Purple? Gillan/Glover changed the band's trajectory. When they "left", I was pretty pissed. I like Coverdale/Hughes...but after BURN, I was done for awhile. Rick Derringer replacing Ronnie Montrose in The Edgar Winter Group was a win-win. Not a step lost with Derringer & we got the MONTROSE debut album. Replacing a drummer like Moon & Bonham? Good luck, right? Another that irked me for awhile was Bobby Caldwell's departure from Captain Beyond on their follow-up to their iconic debut. Over the years, I came to like SUFFICENTLY BREATHLESS...but not as a 14-year old wanting more of the debut. ;-)

[@NicholasPayne-uq2rt]

I think with Marillion their first three albums with Fish needed him as lead singer but Clutching At Straws didn't especially which made the transition easier. Sex Pistols too as Sid Vicious was as much an icon as Johnny Rotten it still worked. I think when a band is reduced to just the lead singer it just becomes a solo career. Without the lead singer it can be good as long as there is a unique element with the new guy.

[@georgeprice4212]

Two bands that I love actually fit in each category, and one of the two bands does fit in both: the one that fits in both? AC/DC. (Successfully, but tragically, switched vocalists. But, for some reason, when they switched drummers, that’s when they faltered). The band that didn’t quite get it to work? The Who (nothing against Kenny Jones, especially since I absolutely love both the Face Dances and It’s Hard albums, but Keith Moon’s shoes are hard to fill…only Zack Starkey has ever been able to successfully fit in.)

[@jazzpunk]

Agree about Kenny Jones...love him in the Faces. I dunno, with The Who he seemed too much of a backbeat player. Moon was the anti-backbeat drummer. Mitch Mitchell was another. Someone like Peart woulda been the guy to replace Moon...& Bonham. ;-)

[@georgeprice4212]

@ true, but Peart’s songwriting would have been out of place in either The Who (especially with Townshend being the main writer) or Zeppelin (although some songs were credited to the entire band as writers, so that might have worked a bit better).

[@johnnycashlives316]

Ozzy did a 15 minute guitar solo.

[@ChrisNorwood3]

It should be more about the music than whoever is playing it. I used to think that if a band is constantly replacing everybody, then the music couldn't evolve. But now I think that replacing people can be part of the evolution and not a deterrent. Right now, REO Speedwagon are facing a real red-tape bummer in that they can no longer be called REO Speedwagon. I'd like to hear the bass player's reasoning for not allowing them to go on without him before making any judgements.

[@ciaranmeeks9431]

I think it has a lot to do with how big a band has become when they try to make the switch. Smaller acts can generally get away with it as they're still building their brand and their audience may not be as precious about the lineup as they would be if they were further along in their evolution. This isn't an absolute of course, but again it's generally true. Bigger, more established acts generally have that double-edged sword effect to deal with where their audience considers the lineup to be almost like part of their own family - on one hand it's great as it inspires loyalty and devotion. On the other hand, any changes should they arise can result in a mass emotional meltdown and abandonment. Very few bigger names can weather this, although there are exceptions, namely AC/DC who found lightning in a bottle twice. At best, most either split their audience (Van Halen/Iron Maiden), or implode entirely regardless of whether the change is an improvement or not (Motley Crue).

[@johnp8688]

A big change in Maiden when they got Blaze they also didn't use Martn Birch on those 2 albums, that made a big difference and Brave New World then started the Kevin Shirley era

[@adalbertovalentin8112]

I think if motley Crue change their name of the band. That album of 1994 will be a ass kicker to the grunge stuff. I love that album.but the moneykier of Vince Neil don't let it bride. Same story like Van Halen old fans.

[@DrVVVinK]

About what you're saying the beginning of side projects forming and such, one very weird example of this I believe are the Foo Fighters. Originally started as a solo project for Dave playing all the instruments himself. But over the years it kind of became Nirvana without Kurt.

[@Matias-music-71]

Make me wait more than 45minutes , I want my tickets refunded .., and no it is not weak , I have to show up to work on time so I can buy tickets to your show .., respect your fans and go out on time !

[@jpcastrianni]

Guns ‘n Roses goes on on time now because it’s all about the money. The amount of union overtime fees that had to pay back in the day was ridiculous.

[@klipkultur3680]

Sammy and the rest of Van Halen were just lucky to find each other...

[@RobDawg881]

Could Bon Jovi change vocalists and still be Bon Jovi? Jon's struggles were documented and his recovery was courageous. However, insert a younger vocalist with the same band...does it sell, especially to the die hards?

[@davidgallistel2083]

Bon Jovi was always Jon and his backing band. He even had his own record contract separate from the band dating back to the debut album. Maybe not fair to the rest of the band, especially Sambora as a co-songwriter for many of their hits, but that's the way it was. Can't replace Tom Petty in Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers. Can't replace Jon Bon Jovi in Bon Jovi.

[@JasonEubank-df8rb]

I Can't see Def Leppard with any new members except the five members they already have. I don't think most people would care if Motley Crue fired Vince Neil and got a new singer that was really good.

[@patrickshannon4516]

It really depends on the members they change John5 who is one of the best guitarist of all time can go to any band because that guy can play anything. But you can't always take someone out of a band and expect them to still sound good. Sometimes it does damage and sometimes it doesn't.

[@tapanim6576]

😎👍

[@Duqsteel1115]

I’m with Anthony. The Van Hagar stuff just doesn’t rock like the Roth years. I’m also not a fan of long solos too. I think changing members works as long as the songs are still good. Dio with Sabbath, Dickinson with Maiden, etc.

[@arturodouglas2484]

What do you guys think of GnR after they changed drummers from Steve Adler to Matt Sorum? I prefer the Adler era but saying that Sorum is a great drummer.

[@VitoF-i7z]

Love Adler, don’t think he would have been up to playing UYI material.

[@arturodouglas2484]

You’re so right, Sorum is light years ahead of Adler technically speaking but I just loved Adler’s single kick drum and more simple drumming style it suited GnR in that era, but yeah I totally agree with you. Keep Rockin’ VitiF-i7z 🥁🎸

[@gideonlapidus8996]

just imagine if Ian Anderson wasn't in jethro tull anymore, how could it still be jethro tull?

[@arturodouglas2484]

I have to agree too disagree, Bon Scott doesn't sound like Brian Johnson to me but they both suit the band AC/DC. love the channel Brendon 😀🎸

[@richardhenle2650]

It's different for every band, I mean for many of the 80's band no way could you change say the "Lead singer", I mean Duran Duran with someone new? Depeche Mode without Dave Gahan, and others wouldn't work, now in those cases you could change a member here and there and carry on, DD did that a few times. But again case by case, U2 I don't think works with anyone changed in that band, because of their distinct contributions to the sound and how far a long they are. Yes Larry missed a tour but they will not record without a member or if it comes to that I think U2 will be a done deal. INXS was a strange one for me because I was into this band from album one, nothing ever changed, which is odd for a big group like that but they were a different animal, similar to U2 in many ways they had a "sound", but they were on the slide in popularity and getting to that stage where it was a big question if there were going to be anything but a nostaliga band, and for guys in thier late 30's especially it did not sit well, rumor is Michael was going to leave, but they had just signed a deal so I don't buy it. Though I liked JD and that album mostly they had to end.

[@cdman40]

I think if the main members of band change then the band is done most of the time.

[@jasonpp1973]

Steely Dan should have stopped as Steely Dan when Walter Becker died 2017. After that, I think of it as a Donald Fagen solo band.

[@gideonlapidus8996]

emerson lake and palmer without Greg Lake, not ELP anymore

[@KingBrunoTheQuestionable]

3 bands that changed lead singers and became more commercially successful but the music started to suck : REO Speedwagon , Doobie Brothers , Genesis

[@corvettemustang1]

for me guns n roses were rock and roll sleeze rock if you will and if they didnt screw up as bad as they did the original band could of been a modern day rolling stones

[@Hwy13La]

Some bands are a sum of their parts . Sex Pistols and Motley Crue for example . When the attitude and personalities sorta trump the musical abilities, you gotta have it or the inabilities will be obvious . John 5 , way to accomplished to be in Crue . Not a knock on Mick , in a weird way , it’s a compliment..

[@gideonlapidus8996]

like for me, deep purple without Ian gillan , is no more deep purple

[@StevenDavid-4q2]

I rather listen to Hagar with Van Helen than with Roth. Some bands can't find "the right" replacement for a band member leaving for whatever reason.

[@lylesberg1885]

Speaking of guitar solos. Billy Idol needs to play more songs and tell the guitar player to stop wankering around for so long

[@Matias-music-71]

when there is no original members left or the only one left really was not such an important part of the cog .., I am out .., I also don't like when they just become a cover act and do nothing new with new members , then it is just parody ,