• From: BELGIUM
  • Registered: 2007-01-27
  • Posts: 3,403

Topic: The evolution of a band.

PINK FLOYD: from a psychedelic band to one of the biggest bands ever.
THE BEATLES: from a bunch of friends who started with "catchy tunes" to "genial songs" AND MOST IMPORTANT = THEIR EVOLUTION.
You are as good as your last album. They started with LOVE ME DO, and EVERY ALBUM was better than the former albums.
MY QUESTION: IS THIS STILL POSSIBLE IN 2009?

[color=blue]- GITAARDOCPHIL SAIS: TO CONQUER DEAD, YOU HAVE TO DIE[/color]   AND [color=blue] we are born to die[/color]
- MY GUITAR PLAYS EVERY STYLE = BLUES, ROCK, METAL, so I NEED TO LEARN HOW TO PLAY IT.
[color=blue]Civilization began the first time an angry person cast a word instead of a rock.[/color]

gitaardocphil's Website

  • From: Renfrewshire, Scotland
  • Registered: 2006-03-04
  • Posts: 1,359

Re: The evolution of a band.

Nice question, Lieven. I think it's much harder these days because fewer bands have the staying power of the ones you mention.  Most bands now only last a couple of years and then they're gone. U2 and Green Day are two I can think of that have hung in there. U2 have certainly changed over the years. Green Day are getting more and more vocal on the world around them, which is good. Both bands still do it for me.

Is anything really made up of zeros and ones??

alvee33's Website

  • From: Bellevue, WA
  • Registered: 2006-06-15
  • Posts: 3,336

Re: The evolution of a band.

I think the Beatles are the last band to ever make a complete transformation from one style to the next.  The really were evolutionary.

When I think of failed attempts at it, I think of Metallica, and Van Halen.  Both bands went away from what it was that made them great, to no good effect.

Someday we'll win this thing...

[url=http://www.aclosesecond.com]www.aclosesecond.com[/url]

jerome.oneil's Website

  • Registered: 2007-03-24
  • Posts: 1,108

Re: The evolution of a band.

There doesn't seem to be as many real bands anymore (signed and successful anyhow). By real, I mean a bunch of guys who decided to get together and make music. Who got together because of common interests and were friends as well as band mates. It seems more "formula related" today at least on the national signed acts level. Seeking a pretty boy lead singer or hired gun guitarists. Does anyone think a band based on personaliites as well as musical insterests/abilities is important or more likely to succeed in teh long run? Is this why there is less longevity with bands?

I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused.
Elvis Costello
  • Registered: 2009-04-19
  • Posts: 77

Re: The evolution of a band.

oh i disagree. yeah there are way more manufactured bands now who are just in it for commercial value but there are still so many groups of mates who make amazing music. it's unfair to look over them even if they are outnumbered now. it's so important - it definitely makes the music better. we should be praising them and giving them the support they need instead of lamenting the good old days. it may be true but it won't help.

"In a mad world it is the mad who are sane" Craig Nicholls