Bands with dead lead singer

keefg

Heard an ad on the radio today for a Thin Lizzy concert coming up soon and it got me thinking.....How can they be Thin Lizzy without Philo?

For me Thin Lizzy was Mr. Lynott............and a few other musicians.

Can you imagine the Rolling Stones carrying on without Mick if he popped his clogs?

Or Ringo Starr pulling together a couple of random guitarists & bass player and touring as The Beatles?

In my opinion when the lead singer and main songwriter (especially someone as iconic as Phil Lynott) passes away, the name of the band should die with them. Otherwise (in my opinion) they are just a tribute band no better/worse than those Abba bands doing the rounds.

Anyone agree or are you happy to see a substitute singer?

GhostInTheRuins

I'm still not too sure what I make of the current Thin Lizzy. In a way I see them as being a tribute to Philo and the songs he's written but I'm not sure if I'd call them Thin Lizzy, maybe if Brian Downey was still touring with them I could because he was an original member. Funnily enough, 3 of the 4 current band members have been in Whitesnake with Scott Gorham being the only long time Lizzy member.

wet-paint

I've also wondered about it. Axel Rose owns the rights to the name Guns n Roses, and can put together any couple of session musicians, and go on tour as the 100% legit GnR.

tolosenc

AS I understand it, they don't actually write new songs, so are just a tribute band by the same name. There was a point where it was Gorham, Downey, Moore and a guy called Marco Mendoza on bass, that could alost pass for Lizzy.

GhostInTheRuins

obl wrote: »

AS I understand it, they don't actually write new songs, so are just a tribute band by the same name. There was a point where it was Gorham, Downey, Moore and a guy called Marco Mendoza on bass, that could alost pass for Lizzy.

I'd consider that line up to be more Thin Lizzy than the current one.

loyatemu

similar situation with the Beach Boys - current version features only 2 of the 6 core band members but not Brian Wilson. Mike Love owns the name and can pretty much tour with any bunch of musicians and call it the Beach Boys.

DerekD Goldfish

Most of the time its a terrible cash in but some bands can get away with it if the lead singer wasnt the most important person in the band in the first place.
The undertones go on without Ferghal Sharkey(granted he is quit not dead and Im must rather see TPE than the undertones) grand because the O'Neill bros were always the driving force in the band and AC/DC has had arguably more success since replacing their dead lead singer.

Nolanger

Alice In Chains
Big Country
Blind Melon
Drowning Pool

Yap Stam

C'mon now, 'Drowning Pool' were no Thin Lizzy- this is due to the simple fact that Thin Lizzy were in fact not a bag of sh1te.

Some singers do sound much like each other though- that guy out of 'Free' does sond a bit like Freddy Mercury- hence the reason he toured with Queen a few years back.

cornbb

I saw the Doors of the 21st Century (featuring Ray Manzarek and Robby Krieger) a few years back. They put on a fantastic show, Ian Astbury played a great Jim Morrisson. While the music was great and all, it did kind of have a tribute band feel about it though.

Nichololas

Joy Division => New Order

Has to be one of the only bands who became just as successful with new material after their lead singer died.

keefg

Enlil_Nick wrote: »

Joy Division => New Order

Has to be one of the only bands who became just as successful with new material after their lead singer died.

At least they had the good grace to change their name.