Yeah, The Clash after Mick left. Some might say Dumptruck after Kirk Swan left, but I thought they kept on ... umm ... truckin' pretty well. Enjoy the music!
All joking aside, I would say that they were a lesser band without Stan Lynch. I might own one album of theirs without Lynch on it.
Neil Young & Crazy Horse. Just doesn't have the same sound, lacking something when Poncho Sampedro left.
New Order without Peter Hook. His bass chords, made in heaven, were often the basics of their songs. Hooky is seen (at least, by me) as one of the best bas guitarists ever, so a NO without him,...well,...
Honestly, I think they had already lost their way. Pinder was in the band when they made Octave, which showed their inability to recapture the magic of their prime era following that hiatus. I loved some of their later hits (Your Wildest Dreams is a top 5 Moodies song in my book), but the consistency was gone. My pick would be Queensryche when Chris DeGarmo left. Granted, the last album with him, Hear in the Now Frontier, was a clear drop from everything prior, but they fell even farther right after and have never recovered. Even when he came back briefly, the magic was long gone.
Ryan Adams & The Cardinals after Ryan left. The Cardinals tried to back another musician, Gin Wigmore, but quickly lost their way.
Free. They were losing their way with Kossoff tbh, but they lasted, what, one album with him ailing before two moved over to Bad Company and Free were finished.
'Syracuse, eh? Since I discovered Ultravox during the early Ure era (and I do love the Foxx stuff), I'd say Cann's dismissal was important, because he was the key experimenter in the band.
I agree more with the firing of Wright. I think the Wall was great, but it more about being grander in heft than the other albums. Straight through it isn't as consistent as their albums just previous to this. I think it's extremely rude that others have just stated that Led Zeppelin just gave up after Bonham died. I think it's more fair to say that they all agreed to band couldn't continue without him. I do think it's fair to say the members lost their way. Each went in different directions immediately after. But did they really just give up? Did the Beatles just give up, also? Bands end for a lot of reasons. A death is one of them. I think most of us think CCR would have left a much better legacy if they disbanding when Tom left. They didn't and they realized they should have. Continuing with something that won't work is usually the correct course of action. I doubt Page, Plant or Jones have ever thought it would have been right to continue. Even through the years and it's now been well over 40 years.
Thats an interesting one, since she contributed little in terms of playing or writing. However, Billy Corgan put a great deal of stock in her opinions and tastes, and she was pretty much the only person who could convince him that his weaker ideas sucked.
Bruce Springsteen after dumping the E Street Band in the late 80’s. The Other Band had its moments but didn’t bring the same spark.
I feel like G&R without Izzy lost something really important. Losing Slash was the coup the grace, but I think the damage was done with Izzy’s absence.
Metallica without Cliff Burton. They made their absolute essential albums with him in the band. Kill em All, Ride the Lightning and Master of Puppets are essential albums for the libraries of anyone that likes rock music. Then Cliff died. The band continued on with a new bass player. They released an album that some regard as being as good and essential as the first three (others don't like it as much or at all). They then began releasing a steady stream of albums that may have had an occasional moment of good music but were not even kind of in the same league as the albums with Cliff.
