Views on bands continuing when members have passed away.

As others have said, depends on the band/members/motivation.

I may be wrong about this, but I don't see the Smithereens continuing with Pat DiNizio's untimely demise.....

 

I'd be glad if they made a tour out of the upcoming tribute show (or at least play the dates that were scheduled, one of which was Boston). The Snithereens had a pretty tight connection to their fans, and I think it would be a good healing thing to hear those songs one more time.

 

I agree. I'm sure at this point they're debating WHAT to do.

 

I think it depends. If there is a vital creative force that can bring something to the music, then it's OK with me. Many bands go through transitional periods where their style changes depending on who are members, etc.

The problem is when you have a band where all of the members never played on any of their albums.

 

Ye$, I agree. You $hould always$ que$tion the $urviving band member$' motivation$.

 

My personal conception of Guns N' Roses was able to accommodate the loss of Steven Adler but not of Izzy Stradlin.

I don't care who plays bass for Metallica. (Though I suspect Robert Trujillo is capable of killing a man with just his right index finger.) But Malcolm Young is not replaceable - even by a blood relative.

X without Billy Zoom or 10,000 Maniacs without Natalie Merchant... you guys are wasting my time.

 

no but 1976 would have been a good idea.

 

Is there a "When should the Stones have quit?" poll on the board? I'd like to vote 1972, please.

 

Seems ridiculous, but I liked Quantum Gate.

 

I have no problems with bands continuing. In end, it's their livelihood and choice, not mine.

 

The Beach Boys with Brian Wilson was always problematic. From very early on they had to reorganize themselves as a live act when Brian decided to stop touring. For most of the 60s and 70s onwards he was rarely performing live. From the 70s onwards, when he was performing live with them, he was barely contributing. Even now when he performs he’s barely engaged. The credibility of The Beach Boys as a live act doesn’t base itself on whether or not Brian is there. It never has.

 

Instead of the Toto bass player, how about Bill Wyman instead? No real outcry, clearly.

 

Points well taken, but I don't exclusively me The Beach Boys as a 'live act," but as a studio unit. To me, it's like imagining The Beatles continuing past 1969 without -- as an analog to The Beach Boys losing Brian Wilson -- Lennon or McCartney. At best it would be a head scratcher, a kind of "hmm..."

 

I don't think that I would have minded Wyman leaving, if I could have seen his solo tours. To my knowledge he has never played a Philly date.

 

Peter Hook & The Light - New Dawn Fades - Macclesfield 18 05 2015 - So This is Permanence

 

I've always thought this as well....who am I to say when a band should quit. We (fans) have no idea the surviving members financial situation, in addition to the fact that this is how they have always earned a living as well. If bands continue to tour and hardly anyone attends their shows, then that would be their answer.

 

I have to respectfully disagree about the weight Freddie carried within Queen. While in studio, it was pretty democratic (possibly to a fault), overall brand recognition, especially live; Freddie was the focal point. To quote another band that lost members over the years : "It's the singer not the song; that makes the music move along."

 

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Bill and the Rhythm Kings have played any North American dates, they mainly stick to the UK and Europe 'cos Bill doesn't like to fly (one of the factors in his leaving the Stones in the first place)

 

LIST OF SPINAL TAP DRUMMERS (ALL DECEASED)

 

The Hollies are regularly touring the UK (and elsewhere) in venues of similar size to the ones they've always played.

They are currently on their 4th lead singer, and the band has no original members (OK, Tony Hicks and Bobby Elliott have been there since 1963).

They still pull in the crowds.

 

That's a weird example. Saying Hicks and Elliott are not original members for the purposes of this thread is sort of like saying the Beatles should have hung it up in 63 because Stu was no longer in the band.

But we know what you mean.
That is not uncommon for groups that old.
There are more recent examples.
Foreigner is headlining a tour again this year. I don't know if Jones actually appears with them.

 

It was 'for the purpose of this thread'. I certainly count Hicks and Elliott as Hollies originals!

I believe also, there have been occasions when Allan Clarke had been ill, and unable to fulfil his singing role, several other singers have deputised for him in concerts over the years. Gary Brooker (Procol Harum) was almost lead singer in 1979, John Miles in 1980, and a couple of others along the way to add to Allan Clarke, Mikael Rickfors, Carl Wayne and Peter Howarth.

As long as Hicks and Elliott want to continue, and people want to see them, continue they should! (The last two studio albums with Howarth, while acceptable 'pop' music, don't really sound much like The Hollies though)

 

For me I fully admit that there is an emotional aspect to it, or if not emotional than just the subjective "how the band 'feels' without this specific person" thing

For example, I cannot get behind Stone Temple Pilots with this new singer because I just think he sounds like a Scott soundalike. However I don't mind Queen with Adam Lambert, because to me it seems like more of a tribute to the legacy, rather than an actual band - it is hard to explain. But some situations "feel" right and others don't

He hasn't died, but same principle - to me there is no Yes without Jon Anderson as the lead singer (at least nowadays).

It is a case by case thing, and its hard to pin down it all because a lot of times the personality and vibe and iconic stories of the band members is just as iconic as the actual music itself.

 

First, second (with Leavell and Williams) and last (with Trucks and Haynes) post- Duane ABB worked---up to a point, right?