# Bands with multiple members



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

When does a band cease being a band? They may carry on and play the songs but is it anymore than a tribute band at some point? Certain criteria would apply I suppose but if you take a band like Uriah Heep who have had 25 different members over the years, is that really Uriah Heep any longer?

I could come up with some more bands. Sometimes you get one original member staying on through the years but it can get ridiculous


----------



## fraser (Feb 24, 2007)

uriah heep- they were awesome once.

consider this however.

how about bands that are pretty much the original lineup
yet are little more than tribute acts.
like- dare i say it- zz top?
those guys havent made a zz top album since 1978 lol.


----------



## Xelebes (Mar 9, 2015)

To me it doesn't matter. Hopefully all members have been trained by the previous members. They are quite literally small orchestras. Go see them for the tradition that they keep alive.


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

I don't think that they cease to be bands, they just cease to be relevant. Hard to define where the line is though.

Seem to me that, at one point, pretty much everyone who had ever been in Steppenwolf (except for John Kay!) was touring in a band called Steppenwolf.


----------



## 335Bob (Feb 26, 2006)

The Guess Who without Cummings/Bachman. Perfect example of a band name used without it being the "band".


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

GuitarsCanada said:


> When does a band cease being a band?


When people stop paying their hard earned money to come out and see them. Then they'll cease being a band . . . Simple as that.


----------



## leftysg (Mar 29, 2008)

I believe this thread could be subtitled " the Song Remains the Name"!


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Rush.

When that Peart guy joined the band, it was over for me.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

LOL, Rush was born when Peart joined.

The Platters is another group that basically became an employer. People came and went but the business carried on.


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

Except for Ian Anderson and Martin Barre, Jethro Tull has had a revolving door. There's even a family tree of sorts in the liner of one cd. Nevertheless, Jethro Tull is Jethro Tull. One of my all time favourite bands.

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## Guest (Apr 29, 2015)

The Allman Brothers. 20 members over the years.
Not including others for live performances.


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

Blood, Sweat and Tears

There have been over 100 different band members! They are listed by year! David Clayton Thomas is the only original member! That's insane!

- - - Updated - - -

They're listed by year on Wikipedia!


----------



## Hamstrung (Sep 21, 2007)

There's no hard and fast rule as I see it. As has been pointed out in the above examples I believe a band can maintain its name as long as the primary creative contributors are still in it. Of course as with many things there's a sliding scale. 

A few examples:
AC/DC: Every member except Angus has been replaced as some point. However, no Angus, no AC/DC. I doubt there'd be much debate there. 

Motorhead: No Lemmy, No Motorhead. If you ain't into them I get it. Those who care know what I mean. 

Van Halen: Many a thread has been exhausted on whether they still qualified after DLR first left, I came to accept Sammy as the lead singer back in the day. It wasn't easy. Remember Gary Cherone!? I have a really hard time with the current lineup for reasons already discussed in other threads but I grudgingly accept that it's Van Halen.

Lynyrd Skynyrd: I've heard that they have a contract that stated the band couldn't continue as LS unless at least one original member was in it. I believe that's exactly the case at the moment with them however I'd feel like I was watching a tribute act if I were to see them now. 

Pink Floyd: Debate rages over whether they should have continued both after Sid Barrett and after Roger Waters left. Considering the output post Barrett I dismiss the first debate. Though Waters was a key contributor to PF in lyrical and thematic content to me it was Gilmour and Wright who made the music worth listening to and thus I give them a pass. Others disagree. All I can say is listen to both Waters solo stuff and post Waters Floyd and Gilmour solo. Who sounds more like Floyd?

Led Zeppelin: Could you still call 'em that with Jason Bonham on drums? Hard to say. It would have been more interesting if that "reunion" happened 25 years ago when there was potential for new creative output. As it was only a "one off" I can still call it Zeppelin for nostalgia's sake.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Im in the 3rd version of sparrows, but I would say that it's still very much the band. The only original member is the band leader. Basically a lineup change per 30m of music, but the band still sounds like the band.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

GuitarsCanada said:


> When does a band cease being a band? They may carry on and play the songs but is it anymore than a tribute band at some point? Certain criteria would apply I suppose but if you take a band like Uriah Heep who have had 25 different members over the years, is that really Uriah Heep any longer?
> 
> I could come up with some more bands. Sometimes you get one original member staying on through the years but it can get ridiculous


You are dating us again, Scott. Uriah Heep and other bands of their age started when we were kids.


----------



## Hamstrung (Sep 21, 2007)

Budda said:


> Im in the 3rd version of sparrows, but I would say that it's still very much the band. The only original member is the band leader. Basically a lineup change per 30m of music, but the band still sounds like the band.


This brings up a good point. At which point does a band embed itself in the collective consciousness? The first concert? The first album? The first hit?
The idea of whether a (for lack of a better term) local band is accepted as such when line changes occur is subject to the same forces I imagine but on a much smaller scale. 

As with many, if not most bands there's an early period of lineup changes while trying to establish a sound, get the right personnel, get a contract or create a "buzz" however after all this happens people will accept what they see as the "original" version as it's presented to the world beyond their local scene.

Nirvana comes to mind here. Another band that lived and died with it's principal creative contributor.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

the only original member since kk downing left priest is ian hill. all the other positions have had multiple people filling them. 
glenn tipton is not an original member
dave holland was like the 3rd or 4th drummer, and he's gone anyhow, he's a no good pedo
halford is not the first singer, and he was temporarily replaced by ripper owens. who kicked ass, btw.

but what about say....ozzy? he's known for picking the best guitar players to work with. ozzy might be the show, _featuring_ "guitarist of the moment", but the truth is, lots of that music is written by his axe man. look at blizzard of oz, for example. then listen to bark at the moon. then ultimate sin. then no rest for the wicked. all of them are way different, all of them with a different guitar player. it's all ozzy, but then again, it never was all ozzy, ever. how does that fit into this?


----------



## leftysg (Mar 29, 2008)

Yes! Yes! Yes! Squire, White, Bruford, Wakeman, Moraz, Downes, Kaye, Anderson, Davison, David, Howe, Rabin, Banks, Sherwood and others. Perpetual Change but All Good People and great music!


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Mooh said:


> Except for Ian Anderson and Martin Barre, Jethro Tull has had a revolving door. There's even a family tree of sorts in the liner of one cd. Nevertheless, Jethro Tull is Jethro Tull. One of my all time favourite bands.
> 
> Peace, Mooh.


I like Tull a lot also.

It's funny, but it's not uncommon for people to think Ian Anderson is actually Jethro Tull.

In my opinion they're not far from being correct.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

leftysg said:


> Yes! Yes! Yes! Squire, White, Bruford, Wakeman, Moraz, Downes, Kaye, Anderson, Davison, David, Howe, Rabin, Banks, Sherwood and others. Perpetual Change but All Good People and great music!


I'm a big Yes fan. For reasons I don't understand, I can accept almost anyone being replaced in Yes. The Trevor Rabin albums were brilliant.

Yet, I'm a huge Steve Howe fan so I'm curious as to why Rabin was able to offset my natural resistance to change.

I do prefer Bruford to White but again, I loved Tormato and that was White.


----------



## fraser (Feb 24, 2007)

cheezyridr said:


> the only original member since kk downing left priest is ian hill. all the other positions have had multiple people filling them.
> glenn tipton is not an original member
> dave holland was like the 3rd or 4th drummer, and he's gone anyhow, he's a no good pedo
> halford is not the first singer, and he was temporarily replaced by ripper owens. who kicked ass, btw.
> ...


classic ozzy was when he was with sabbath-
so tony iommi.
who also played at one point, with jethro tull.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Deep Purple.
Ian Paice was the only original member left after Jon Lord retired from the band, and he's since passed.
But even with only one drummer, there have been three guitarists on record, plus Joe Satriani filling in on live dates.
Four lead singers (Joe Lynn Turner briefly for an album that sounded more like Rainbow--and they once had a bass player who also sang)
Three bass players.
two Keyboard players.

That puts it at 13--way below other bands mentioned here--but in a way if it's not Mk I or II it just doesn't feel like Purple to me.
And even those two versions sound quite different with Blackmore & Lord exploring different sounds--but they also tie the lineups together along with Paice.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2015)

Steadfastly said:


> You are dating us again, Scott. Uriah Heep and other bands of their age started when we were kids.


I seen them at Rn'R Heaven in '85. Still have a drumstick from Lee Kerslake.
Who also co-founded 'blizzard of oz' with Ozzy..



Milkman said:


> It's funny, but it's not uncommon for people to think Ian Anderson is actually Jethro Tull.


I thought the same of Kim Mitchell/Max Webster when I first heard them.

'oh btw .. which one's Pink?'


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

cheezyridr said:


> but what about say....ozzy? he's known for picking the best guitar players to work with. ozzy might be the show, _featuring_ "guitarist of the moment", but the truth is, lots of that music is written by his axe man. look at blizzard of oz, for example. then listen to bark at the moon. then ultimate sin. then no rest for the wicked. all of them are way different, all of them with a different guitar player. it's all ozzy, but then again, it never was all ozzy, ever. how does that fit into this?


Ozzy, as the name implies isn't really a "band", like say, Metallica. Its all about him, and whatever hired guns he signs a contract with. Its not equal billing, and im sure it isn't equal revenue splits /creative input.
Dio was the same way...which is why I never understood the animosity for Viv Campbell when he left Dio....It was never called "Ronnie and Viv", he was a hired gun, paid whatever RJD felt like paying him, and retained for however long RJD wanted him. essentially a glorified temp. How much loyalty should a temp feel if an opportunity to become a partner should come along? People take music and celebrities far too personally/seriously. Its 90% business.

- - - Updated - - -



cheezyridr said:


> the only original member since kk downing left priest is ian hill. all the other positions have had multiple people filling them.
> glenn tipton is not an original member
> dave holland was like the 3rd or 4th drummer, and he's gone anyhow, he's a no good pedo
> halford is not the first singer, and he was temporarily replaced by ripper owens. who kicked ass, btw.


The bulk of Priests recorded work was with Tipton, so I consider him an original. In the same way I think of Collen as a core member of Def leppard and Bruce Dickinson as the singer 99.9% of people associate with iron Maiden, even if they may not have been truly original. Heck some bands started off in high school...I wouldn't count every player who played with them then as original members.
are Paul and Ringo original Beatles, or were Pete Best and Stuart Sutcliffe?


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Hamstrung said:


> Van Halen: Many a thread has been exhausted on whether they still qualified after DLR first left, I came to accept Sammy as the lead singer back in the day. It wasn't easy. Remember Gary Cherone!? I have a really hard time with the current lineup for reasons already discussed in other threads but I grudgingly accept that it's Van Halen.


I think Sammy was great. It was just a shift in gears at the time.
Gary got a bum rap, IMO. 1 cd wasn't a fair test. the market timing was all wrong for it, no one really cared. he never got a chance to "find his legs" in the band and figure out how he was going to blend his own personality in with that of his 2 predecessors, and finally, why did we let EVH off the hook? Clearly the writing for that cd was GARBAGE. If anything, it showed how much EVH relied on Sammy for songwriting, or was in the middle of another of his benders at the time.

As much as ppl like to slam Sammy, EVH is not an easy person to work with...and Sammy not only fit in, but collaborated to give them the most success that theyd ever had. I loved VH in the '80's (both iterations), but EVH post-Sammy is far less musically interesting (even with DLR) than Sammy post-EVH ie Chickenfoot.


----------



## Hamstrung (Sep 21, 2007)

Diablo said:


> I think Sammy was great. It was just a shift in gears at the time.
> Gary got a bum rap, IMO. 1 cd wasn't a fair test. the market timing was all wrong for it, no one really cared. he never got a chance to "find his legs" in the band and figure out how he was going to blend his own personality in with that of his 2 predecessors, and finally, why did we let EVH off the hook? Clearly the writing for that cd was GARBAGE. If anything, it showed how much EVH relied on Sammy for songwriting, or was in the middle of another of his benders at the time.
> 
> As much as ppl like to slam Sammy, EVH is not an easy person to work with...and Sammy not only fit in, but collaborated to give them the most success that theyd ever had. I loved VH in the '80's (both iterations), but EVH post-Sammy is far less musically interesting (even with DLR) than Sammy post-EVH ie Chickenfoot.


Check out Sammy with his latest project "The Circle". Basically covering stuff from his career. Looks like a fun band to see.

http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/th...bonham-to-release-at-your-service-live-album/


----------



## davetcan (Feb 27, 2006)

Let's not forget Mick Abrahams, the first album is one of my favourites.



Mooh said:


> Except for Ian Anderson and Martin Barre, Jethro Tull has had a revolving door. There's even a family tree of sorts in the liner of one cd. Nevertheless, Jethro Tull is Jethro Tull. One of my all time favourite bands.
> 
> Peace, Mooh.


----------



## butterknucket (Feb 5, 2006)

Are there any bands that don't have ANY of their original members?


----------



## Lord-Humongous (Jun 5, 2014)

I was in Sudbury in around 2000 and Glass Tiger was staying at my hotel. The girl at the front desk mentioned that the closest relation to the original band in the line up was the lead singer's little brother. I never verified this but thought it was a little odd. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

April Wine is another one of these bands, I believe. I'm not certain how many members have come and gone since the beginning but they have certainly changed over the years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Wine


----------



## jayoldschool (Sep 12, 2013)

I was waiting for April Wine. What's going on with his search for a new lead vocalist/guitar?


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Hamstrung said:


> Van Halen: Remember Gary Cherone!? I have a really hard time with the current lineup for reasons already discussed in other threads but I grudgingly accept that it's Van Halen.


I think Gary Cherone could have worked out much better if it was handled better--like better songs for starters
Cherone is a talented rock singer--who meshes well with a hotshot guitar player--and it should have worked.

When they announced it I thought it made more sense than Sammy--and nothing against Sammy.
But then the album came out & it sucked--but it wasn't Gary Cherone's fault


----------



## Hamstrung (Sep 21, 2007)

zontar said:


> I think Gary Cherone could have worked out much better if it was handled better--like better songs for starters
> Cherone is a talented rock singer--who meshes well with a hotshot guitar player--and it should have worked.
> 
> When they announced it I thought it made more sense than Sammy--and nothing against Sammy.
> But then the album came out & it sucked--but it wasn't Gary Cherone's fault


Good points. Cherone was (hopefully still is) a good singer. I like Extreme (gonna see 'em this summer at BMF in Kitchener) but at the time I'd just got used to and liked some of the Sammy era VH "For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge" was a pretty kick ass album, then they go and change again. The result as you pointed out was a poor effort. When you make such a drastic change on the back nine of your career you have to come out pretty strong. They didn't.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

leftysg said:


> Yes! Yes! Yes! Squire, White, Bruford, Wakeman, Moraz, Downes, Kaye, Anderson, Davison, David, Howe, Rabin, Banks, Sherwood and others. Perpetual Change but All Good People and great music!


You forgot Horn.

But you probably remember a couple I wouldn't have - so the win for you! Nicely played.

I don't mind bands carrying on - even being tributes to their former selves. But when they publicly throw their collective toys out of the tour bus, not good. The famous Pink Floyd fight over the name. And now, another favorites of mine is doing that: Queensryche.

I saw both PF and R Waters live and both were great shows. But I actually thought RW was more like 'the old PF' because he had a guy who sounded alot like Gilmour singing when needed, but Gilmour had no one that sounded like Waters when needed. 

I still get chills thinking about that RW show - they did DSOTM in its entirety live and the whole show just blew my mind. Kinda nice to have 2 PF's to get to see, if the chance comes around.


----------



## davetcan (Feb 27, 2006)

Diablo said:


> are Paul and Ringo original Beatles, or were Pete Best and Stuart Sutcliffe?


At what point was Paul not an original member. He and John started it off, added George, then Sutcliffe on bass and later Pete Best on Drums. Sutcliffe came up with the name `Beatals`I believe.


----------

