Band member that contributed the least , but gladly rode the wave of success?

Relative obscurity goes with the territory of being a bass player but a good bass is the groundwork of a rock band. A band without a good bassist is like a house with a crumbling foundation.

John Deacon was Queen's secret weapon. I can't think of anyone else who created more memorable bass lines.

 

I’ve never seen anything indicating anyone wrote those but him.

 

I would argue that without Ringo, the "mania" wouldn't have happened. At the time (and with respect to Beatlemania, timing was crucial) there weren't any other drummers around Liverpool who had the consistency, timing, and "lock" Ringo had with the three guitarists.
One has to ask why it was, in those days, there were other songs put out by contemporaries of the Beatles that were comparably just as good if not better than some of the Fab' s records, but which never got the same level of recognition they might have if the Beatles had done them (?) If we start to deconstruct the magic formula of their success, it begins to become unclear just how the public might have reacted, and in turn, how history might have unfolded. Take the perfect example of the Beatles live performances featuring Jimmy Nicol on drums. The same excitement just isn't there (!), despite the fact that he was a competent drummer.

 

Surely Linda McCartney in Wings is a contender
Peter Tork in The Monkees too

 

The other 3 guys in Van Halen sure seemed to think Michael Anthony fit this bill...

 

Musically, sure. But Paul wanted her there, and that allowed him to do what he did with the band.

 

Percy was flouncy ?

D.D.

 

Art Garfunkel hasn't been mentioned yet?

 

Bernard Edwards. Deacon pinched one of his.

 

Ian Hill (bass) - Judas Priest

 

Sort of proves my point I think. To most outsiders he was 'just the drummer' but brought something unquantifiable to the group. Take him away, and it's not the same band.
I've found this a very interesting thread, most posters seeming to focus on what they consider to be someone's lack of musical ability. I would contend that for most bands, especially those that start out together, unless musical chops are necessary to play the music, there is an additional element to the mix of people, how they interact in a group situation. This is the 'x factor' that leaves with that member. I believe this is why The Stones are not the same band, arguably after Brian Jones, but definitely after Bill Wyman.

 

John Deacon also stole one from Vanilla Ice.

 

Very well phrased. Kind of like the aging ballplayer with so-so stats who's the clubhouse leader. I think the only people who could definitely give these answers are the band members themselves.

 

I don't get what people mean by this. Ringo was crucial to The Beatles taking off in America, the chemistry within the band, being appealing to people of all ages, keeping the focus on harmony, and allowing The Beatles to be as versatile as they were. I genuinely don't think they would've been the same band without him and may well have broken up much sooner. Before him The Beatles had several drummers who brought the group dynamics down, but Ringo elevated them to the level they needed to be in order to be the biggest band in the world.

 

What happened?

 

Yes, you'll catch some flack. Over on the Who's Next SxS thread, Roger's getting a lot of praise as a vital component to that album's success.

 

BA-LO-NEY

 

Noel didn't want to ride on the band's success, he thought he should be contributing more, which is part of what ended up breaking up the band. History shows he probably should've been a little happier riding on the band's success and pitch in his one or two songs, but...

 

I like the guy and I'm not bashing him, but Al Jardine. He was a rhythm guitar player and his lead vocals - which were relatively few including "Christmas Day", "Help Me Rhonda", Then I Kissed Her", and "Cottonfields" - could've easily been handled by Brian, Carl, or Mike. Actually, Al was more valuable AFTER the band was successful and some members self-destructed.

 

And lets not forget the most positive and my personal favorite Beatles song - Octopus's Garden ! It always lifts my spirits!

 

That's crazy in my opinion. Daltrey is a great singer. Just because a member doesn't write the songs or play an instrument doesn't mean that he's only "marginally important." If Townshend didn't consider Daltrey important he would have fired him back in the 60's. He certainly isn't a "weak link." He's one of the greatest rock singers of his generation.

 

This was the person that comes to my mind....

 

Yeah, who the hell needs a bass player anyway?

 

Apart from Under Pressure and Another One Bites The Dust, I can't think of anything memorable that Mr. Deacon brought to the table. His bass playing was *ok*, but not ground breaking IMHO

 

OMG