Do just the frontmen make a legit rock band ?

[The Bat]

Black Sabbath survived without Ozzy. So there's that hole in that theory.

That's your opinion...I think they SUCKED without Ozzy!

[The Bat]

my question was from a different perspective .......
Can the lead singer and perhaps another member of the band leave and take the band name with them ?

When you put it that way Mike...I agree. They Band(or the Singer) shouldn't continue with the name.

[Hector]

Hmm, take away Brian May,Jimmie Page, The Edge, Pete Townshend, Andy Summers, heck, even Pete Buck and you have a bunch of kaput bands. A real band is the sum of its parts, no matter who is there.

Exactly my good man...exactly.

[txteach]

U2 is a mediocre band without the Edge. The guy sang and played organ,piaon and guitar. If Bono left and called himself U2 it would not be any good. Now if Bono and the edge left they would do fine with 2 studio musicians helping out.

[The Bat]

I would concede to a to a large extent that some Bands are meant to be together. As Hec mentioned...Queen is one of them. ALL are EXTREMELY talented beyond compare. But I must also add...that Freddie's Vocals contribute a VERY LARGE part to their distinctive sound.

[Hector]

I would concede to a to a large extent that some Bands are meant to be together. As Hec mentioned...Queen is one of them. ALL are EXTREMELY talented beyond compare. But I must also add...that Freddie's Vocals contribute a VERY LARGE part to their distinctive sound.

No doubt...completely agree with you.

[EMCE Hammer]

This thread is moving a little off topic --- which is fine, but I think some of you are missing my original question.
You guys are naming bands like Queen and Van Halen which moved on without their lead singers and the band continued.

my question was from a different perspective .......
Can the lead singer and perhaps another member of the band leave and take the band name with them ?

In other words ......

Imagine David Lee Roth in the mid 80's calling himself Van Halen with a new band.

I think a perfect example of what you're getting at is G'n'R. The answer is a resounding 'NO!'

Page/Plant or Townsend/Daltrey - a resounding 'YES.'

Depends:-)

[huedell]

Again---another issue that comes down to taste/opinion.

Usually its hard to replace anyone anywhere without
some kind of noticable style change.

[Earth 2 Chris]

The Eagles are Don Henley and Glenn Frey. They are the only two original members left, but as the others came and went, they stayed, and the band still sounded like the Eagles. They write the majority of the songs as well.

But it depends on the band.

Chris

[jwyblejr]

That's your opinion...I think they SUCKED without Ozzy!

Never said I liked them. I said they went on without him.

[MegoMonk]

I think it depends on the band. Ian Anderson IS Jethro Tull. Lemmy is Motorhead. Axl Rose is NOT GNR. Mike Love is NOT the Beach Boys.

I really found it amusing last year how some people got so excited about Chinese Democracy. It is a good album, but it is not really GNR.

Townsend and Daltrey is not the Who, it is the Two.

[The Bat]

Never said I liked them. I said they went on without him.

Which is the point Mike was originally making...should the Band keep the name without the lead Singer?

Or...to look at it another way...should the lead Singer keep the name if one or more Band members leave? Bands often change Guitarists....Mick Jagger poached Ron Wood from Rod Stewart's Band Faces.

Another factor I guess would be if the Singer was the only song writer in the Band. My feeling is that a lot of People are quite capable copying Guitar Cords & Riffs. Therefore...they are more replacable than the Frontman.