• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

When does a band cease to exist?? isnt reunions pathetic?

R

Realbmansweden

Well-known member
Messages
91
Reaction score
0
Trophy Points
6
When does a band cease to exist??

In my opinion Black Sabbath died when Ozzy left and Guns n Roses died when Slash in 1996 left them...

and those "get-together-after-30-years-apart"-tours gives me the creeps, when suicidal heroes of the past theme up 60 years old, when people loved them for there "die young"-style back then...and now they are just old stoners with nothing to give anymore, like superman without his super-powers....

its like a tattoo of a dragon with the text "die hard" on an old dying mans fat chest...its lost its point...
Some people is meant to "die" young and never come back...


Do you people agree with me??
 
every band should quit after their fifth album. mostly they lose it after that...
 
I would like to say that they should stop after their 3 album after the album that had the hit that made them big,
because most of the bands release a load of albums before their big break, especially in the rock and hard-rock genre...

then there are eceptions like iron maiden and Ozzy for example that have about every third album that is good...
or em i wrong?

and i just hate the bands that sellout and get a "new" style and then try to do a back-to-basic album like three albums after that and dont get it right because they have forgotten what they stand for from the beginning...
 
I was about to come in saying that some of them are still kick ass all those years later, but I just realized that both of the classic rock concerts I went to this year had bands that never broke up...?_?...

You're pretty much right about almost all reunion tours.
 
You have to look at each reunion.

Van Halen for example....Its just for money. They say that it is permanent and they will be doing a new album eventually. Well.. In my opinion if that was the plan why the hell wouldn't they do an album first and then tour? Well because the money is in touring. And since they know themselves that this won't last they need to get the money quick while they can. I doubt they will stay together for a full world tour.
 
I think a band ceases to exist the second they burn out creatively. That varies from band to band but the second a band loses the ability to produce a proper album then that's game over from my POV.

Sure they can carry on touring, but then you get the undignified situation where the band plays their shite "new" songs next to their classics, which are the only songs most fans want to hear anyway.

Not sure how I feel bout bands getting back together again decades later. I mean there's are plenty of bands today who can't stand the sight of each other yet have put that aside knowing they can cash in.

But then there's the one Led Zeppelin show for charity. I mean how people here can honestly say that if they managed to get hold of some tickets to see that show that they wouldn't be excited about it?
 
I think you are right for the most part, and sadly most bands I love seem to go downhill after album 3. I really enjoyed the Sabbath reunion in 98 though. They rocked pretty good for a bunch of old coots :D
 
Yep, the Black Sabbath reuninon in 98 was one of the few reunions that actually worked...

but what about the dudes that keep hangin on then?
like iggy pop and The Rolling Stones....
i think that they are really pathetic, iggy going on 100, and stones going on 150, and the most amazing thing is how they survived all the drugs they taken over the years without being drooling vegetables....
 
I have to chime in and mention the Deep Purple reunion of 84. It has to be one of the most successful reunions of all time. Their tour in 84/85 was huge. And they did new material too that is still played today.
 
i'm going to totally disagree with the premise for the sole reason that i'd do all sorts of unspeakable horrors to get some led zeppelin tickets right now.

i mean... any other time and i would probably agree with you

but not at the moment

i am INCAPABLE


...i'm gonna go take a cold shower
 
Deep Puse who are they? Rolling Stones, Awesome they're on the "Wheelchairs & Canes" tour right? Ziggy Pop sunday mornig comic strip right?
 
Bands will die, but many of these bands are still performing. Also, many bands that have been broken up for ages, are still very much alive.

Joy Division: Although Curtis is dead, the band lived on as New Order.

Iron Maiden: Never died, only went through a dead "period" with a few loser albums.

KISS: Died the moment Eric Carr died. The reunion was fine, but I lost interest as soon as Ace Frehley left.

Motley Crue: Were dead from the moment Tommy and Pam did their sex tape.

The Cure: Faded, didn't die.

Metallica: Napster killed them.

INXS: What the hell were they thinking when they thought that the death of Mike Hutchence wouldn't stop them?!

The Rolling Stones: Talk about a pointless act! They pretty much lost all relavance when Wyland left.

Led Zeppelin: Still relavent, still powerful, as the reunion concert proved.

Megadeth: As long as Mustaine still wants to kill his former Metallica bandmates, they're not dead.

Fall Out Boy: THEY'RE FREAKING ZOMBIES!, even if they formed recently.

Black Sabbath: Died when Ozzy left, were ressurected when Ozzy returned.
 
Grievous Angel Draven said:
The Rolling Stones: Talk about a pointless act! They pretty much lost all relavance when Wyland left.
Click to expand...

Wyland? do you not mean Wyman?

excuse me for being anal :)
 
Pink Floyd's 2005 reunion, albeit brief, was very satisfying.

I'm all for bands reuniting for whatever reason. If its for money or for love of the music or boredom, I don't care. If I don't like the band, I will totally ignore it, but if I love the band then I'll be excited. I'm happy to see these musicians get together and have fun making music again. I don't see anything wrong with it. Cream's 2005 reunion was very successful. They released a very enjoyable double-live album. I own it and love it.

I'm a deep appreciator of music. I investigate the albums that aren't always considered "classics", in hopes that I'll find some lost treasures and more often than not I do. For example, the Black Sabbath album "The Seventh Star" yields some forgotten gems. I don't look at it as a Black Sabbath album. I see it as a lost album by a band that never really existed. To me, the Ozzy-era sabbath is the only real sabbath, but that doesn't make the other albums not worth listening to.
 
Heinrich said:
every band should quit after their fifth album. mostly they lose it after that...
Click to expand...

Ah, but that would have denied us great works like:

The Who
Quadrophenia,

Pink Floyd
Meddle, Dark Side of the Moon, Wish You Were Here, Animals, The Wall

U2
Achtung Baby, Zooropa, All You Can't Leave Behind, How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb

Yes
Going for the One, 90125, Talk

Rush
Everything after Hemispheres, not the least of which is Moving Pictures

Led Zeppelin
Physical Graffiti, In Through The Out Door

KISS
Rock And Roll Over, Love Gun
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom