Bands or musicians who strayed far from their roots

Maybe some wouldn't know or agree but I think Grand Funk strayed from their original sound and never really recovered.
They started out with more psychedelic blues rock music and then tried their hand at main stream pop with songs like "Were An American Band" and doing a cover of Locomotion..
If you were into their earlier stuff you would know that when they decided to change it wasn't impressive and a downfall even though some like those tunes..
But I think alot of bands tried to fit into the late 70's and 80's by trying something new..

Whoever mentioned Pantera was spot on. Whether the band at the time would admit it or deny it they did have a glam metal style going on in the 1980s. I continually have to inform metal fans who think Cowboys was their first album the true facts.
Power Metal was actually the first album with Phil Anselmo. Cowboys was the first album on a major label. Major label is the key word lacking in a lot of assumptions. They took on a much heavier, sound and to be honest I am glad they did but I do enjoy listening to their glam albums. Dimebag or Diamond Darrell as he was known then put out great riffs even on those albums.

sigh

Aktivator said:

really but its okay for two guitarist?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Aktivator said:

How about 10 guitarists?

Click to expand...

Not so much. But it is possible.

Aktivator said:

guess you hate Robert Fripp and the League of Crafty Guitarists?

Click to expand...

No, I don't hate that stuff at all. It's interesting in it's own way but not nearly as engaging as a rock band to me. But depending on the mood and what I'm doing I wouldn't rush to turn it off.

Aktivator said:

Completely disagree with your take on the Allman Brothers I've seen them with just one drummer its not the same.

Click to expand...

I thought I said The Allman Brothers were one of the few bands I know of that do something interesting with two drummers. Jamie Muir era Crimso is another one.

Aktivator said:

I love classical music so maybe that is why extra musicians enhance the sound in my eyes. There are plenty of pieces written for 2 of just about any instrument. Those pieces sound hollow when only on is playing them.
so should an orchestra have only one violin or one cello player? yeah the others don't add an enhancement to the overall sound?
How about a marching band? only one drummer? for real?

Click to expand...

Classical music is a whole different animal. Even though the musicians are often playing the same notes (or at least trying to) classical compositions are made around a balance of x ammount of string players against x ammount of horns with x ammount of percussion etc. Ideally you hear classical music in live performance with all these instruments in the same hall creating a sound that often far surpasses the sum of it's individual parts. The beauty in a lot of this is not so much perfect syncopation as the differences in attack and even timbre of several of the exact same type of instrument playing for the exact same notes in the percise timing and dynamic signature. You might try to get with amplifacation, delay or other electronic gimmickry but the human 'foibles' are what make the several instruments really stand out even though they are aiming for the 'same' sound.
Construction of a symphony unit is often as important to the overall effect as how good the individual players are.

As for two bass players, two drummers, two keyboardists in rock music these are all theoretically enhancements. However, I have not heard additional rythm players or keyboardists really add to hardly any composition. In theory it seems there should be a few examples and I'd be interested in hearing what you think they might be but to my experience you can have two or perhaps even three guitar players in rock (other forms like bluegrass afford higher numbers), or four or even more singers but anything else (with the exception of drummer percussionist arrangements) is either superfluous or cluttered sounding to my ear at least.

But, to each his own. I was manily talking about rock here.

Magic said:

Aerosmith comes to my mind. They completely strayed from their guitar driven cock rock roots to a more pop/commercial sound.

Click to expand...

Thank MTV

Kink Floyd said:

Chicago - Originally a Prog/Jazz-outfit, now a Soft Rock Vehicle.

Click to expand...

Thank MTV

R. Evans said:

Yes went from this

​

to this tripe!

​

Click to expand...

Thank MTV

TheWhalerfan said:

Def Leppard. Start out as hard rock band, after success and a few albums end up wayyy too soft. Bleh. Waste of talent.

Click to expand...

Thank MTV

Powerage said:

Whitesnake, brilliant blues band in the early days, to absolute ****ing pants with 1987.

Click to expand...

Thank MTV

Big Ears said:

Phil Collins went from drummer and second singer on the great Nursery Cryme and Selling England By the Pound albums to solo performer on the nauseating singles, You Can't Hurry Love and Another Day in Paradise.

Click to expand...

Thank MTV

TheWhalerfan said:

Heart. No brainer for most (what ones remain) fans. Begin as talented hard rock outfit, end up bubble gum mush. Worked to pad bank account for a few years, but eventually made the band name somewhat of a joke - synonymous with the word sellout.

Click to expand...

I saved this one for last, because it's easily the most degrading thing I've ever seen a band have to do in order to be seen on the Antichrist of Music, MTV.

Nancy Wilson is a damned fine guitarist and they reduced her to a Barbie Doll with fake boobs and skin tight clothes and put her out in front, because she was more aesthetically pleasing than Ann Wilson.

Never mind how she plays, how does she look?


And never mind that Ann Wilson has one of the most powerful, yet beautiful voices in the history of rock. All that mattered when MTV came along, according to someone, (don't know who) she was 'overweight'.

For the most part, all Ann's shots were closeups, and when there were full shots of her, she was always wearing something flowing and billowy to cover up the fact that she wasn't built like a Barbie doll.

And on top of all that, Ann Wilson is beautiful. She always has been, and she always will be.

I'm usually very slow to anger, so, yea, I'm sorry for going off like this, but it's infuriating to me that that these wonderfully gifted women were degraded in this way.

Thank MTV

Thank you MTV. Now kindly get off the air and die in a fire while you're at it.

I'm too numb anymore to be angry. I witnessed music go from exciting and multifaceted pure creativity to popamole garbage appealing to the least common denominator in one decade. The anger is over. The waiting for the next phase begins.

Spot on Vehicle. Well said.

I think theres a big difference between a bands experimentation and a genres evolution or modernization, but modest mouse changed alot if you look at their first works and then the post-2000 albums. same with the vibe pipe.

TheWhalerfan said:

Heart. No brainer for most (what ones remain) fans. Begin as talented hard rock outfit, end up bubble gum mush. Worked to pad bank account for a few years, but eventually made the band name somewhat of a joke - synonymous with the word sellout.

Click to expand...

That's a bit of an overreaction. Yes, they sold out and they are the first to admit it. But they weren't bubble gum unless the only thing you listened to were a few of the hit singles. All three of those huge selling late 80s/early 90 albums had some good material on them, but only power ballads seemed to get released as singles.

Their material since those days, starting with Desire Walks On in 93 and more recently Red Velvet Car, Fanatic, and Jupiters Darling has been really good overall, and definitely nothing like These Dreams or All I Wanna Do Is Make Love to you (a song which Ann Wilson has disowned).

Ann Wilson's voice makes the vast majority of their material highly listenable.

Riff Raff said:

Risks are not always worth taking. Some bands need to know when is a good time to take one and be aware of the fact they are responsible for what their experiment could do in terms of the fanbase. Most risks have definitely not paid off. Plenty of examples of it include Megadeth with Risk, Metallica with St Anger, The Haunted with the Unseen album trying to sound like Tool, Morbid Angel trying to mix death metal with industrial and electronic techno sounds, Celtic Frosts Cold Lake to an extent even though I liked that album.

One thing that bugs me is how bands get such a holier then thou attitude that they take a risk and expect every fan to be accepting of a change. Open mindedness is obviously something fans need to be more of but at the same time some bands seem to have big enough egos that they expect everyone collectively to embrace the new sound. Lars is the most guilty of this calling everyone closed minded for not liking the St Anger drums which is rightly hated on because the idea of an album built on first song takes is pathetic anyway.

Point I am really trying to make is I respect bands who want to expand their sound or explore uncharted waters but at the same time, don't expect everyone to just get on board with it blindly...unless they are a particular fanboy.

Click to expand...

Funny enough over 4 years later and I still actually do believe a lot of this. Only thing though is I respect experimentation a lot more and several albums I once hated I do enjoy now like Risk. Albums like ST Anger, Lulu, that Morbid Angel album not so much.

I am with Soot in regard to Aerosmith changing their sound except I personally now prefer their 70s sound but Nine Lives is still an album I respect greatly. I think the term sell out is thrown around far too often by people who are simply salty over a band changing sound without much thought to it being what they want to do. Fair enough if it is a case of money grabbing that is a sell out move but its also selling out to pander to the fanbase in terms of musical sound if its not actually what they want to do.

Vanilla Ice of course..epic example, right?

ffs..joking.