The Beatles
retired
- Joined
- May 1, 2010
- Posts
- 1,328
- Reaction score
- 0
Wow, no love for Rush. Sold out shows every time I've seen them in Chicago, and Geddy is always in key and sings the whole show no problem (while playing his bass and the keyboards). What more can you ask for?
Also, STEVE PERRY? Are you serious? Journey was a struggling band (although a good one) until Steve joined, so he took over (as the better singer LOL) for Gregg Rollie and turned them into a mega success. Their new singers add nothing special. I sure as hell wouldn't pay to see them live. It just shows Steve isn't so easily replaceable!
I think successful bands have singers that are part of a larger puzzle, and they sing as themselves and are not trying to be something they aren't (like a lot of singers nowadays). I could argue Mick Jagger is a bad technical singer but he fits perfectly with the Stones as their frontman. Same thing with Bob Dylan, he sings out of tune and slurs his speech. But his music is great because he is himself. All because his singing gets on my nerves sometimes doesn't mean he would've been better bringing in a better technical singer while he sat back and played guitar/harmonica.
I think mega successful bands that have been brought up in this thread (Styx, Maiden, Journey, AC/DC, etc) would not have been successful if their frontmen sucked monkeybutt and weren't unique in some shape or form. (I think their frontmen kick(ed) some serious butt) I think a personal taste of not liking a particular singer doesn't mean they would be better with a different one. I guess that's why I can't think of any for the question at hand.
If a rush came anywhere near my city, id go see them without a second thought.

