| Living_on_my_Hair |
05-10-2013 08:18 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon
(Post 1128260)
Yeah, but does that apply for integral members? Have The Stones ever performed without Keef, Queen without Brian May, GnR without Slash etc.? Oasis did have some changes, was it always both Gallaghers?
Certainly these bands won't perform without their lead singer, but what about bass players, drummers etc.? Just curious.
And I'm not talking about line-up changes, like Aerosmith played with two different guitarists in the early 80s (without the integral Joe Perry).
|
Whilst I do think there's a big difference between performing without a founding/integral band member whilst they are still officially a member (and have not left/been fired/died etc and so need replaced ), those examples you gave aren't really the best to give.
Queen have had a couple of lead singers since Freddie died, and still successfully performed and toured as Queen. GNR have performed live (even back in the glory days) without key members such as Duff, Izzy or Steve due to various drug issues. And obviously we all know about today's incarnation of GNR too. I also think Liam would have kept the Oasis name and carried on if contractually he was able to, both brothers still play Oasis tunes at their shows.
I've seen 'stand in' musicians live for bands such as Metallica (when Lars was injured) and Aerosmith, when Perry was AWOL..
Everybody is replaceable to a certain extent - the new incarnation or lineup of a band may differ considerably, but they are still ultimately replaceable (Van Halen, Iron Maiden, ACDC etc)
Andi |
