How do you feel about touring band members being replaced?

[MirrorMask]

This conversation needs its own thread because I think the discussion has merit. I am too lazy to start one though.

Well, I'll do it then.

This is what started the discussion in the Queensryche thread:

When did this become a thing where band members are interchangeable? No problem with someone wanting a break if they’ve just had a kid but when did it become fine for the band to just carry on playing shows with a replacement? When I was growing up every member of the band was important and if I went to see Bon Jovi I expected to see the proper band. If people were having kids or whatever I assume they arranged the touring accordingly.

This isn’t just Queensrÿche by any means but I still find it strange that you can say to your fans that founding member Scott Rockenfield needs to take some paternity leave but don’t worry, we’ll just get a stand in drummer for a few shows like it’s a normal job where you get holidays and paternity leave and the company keeps running.

I totally get why bands do it as they basically make their money from touring now and it’s their livelihood but when did it become ok and fans wouldn’t really care? Can you imagine Dream Theater touring and telling fans (often long after they’ve bought tickets) “oh by the way John Myung won’t be playing the first few dates because his wife just gave birth so we’ve got some no name session guy in to fill in?

How do you feel about what is becoming more and more a common practice, such as "Uh well, this band member has personal issues or other commitments, we'll just tour with someone else"?

[The Curious Orange]

If you go to the theatre to see a play, there's a good chance that the actor that you wanted to see will be replaced by their understudy for that performance (especially if you're going to the matinee). In many ways it's the same thing.
I think touring for bands has become a different thing than it was years ago. Bands have a longer shelf life, and a lot of them are older, with family commitments and health issues. They've seen what been away from families for years on end did to the previous generation of rockers and don't want to repeat that pattern.
Bottom line though - it's all about money. I was reading about how the Grateful Dead turned up in Europe in 1972 and said "right, now where shall we play?" - they arranged the shows once they got here. That doesn't happen these days. Tours are planned years in advance - more than enough time for life to interfere, especially when it comes to children.
A few years ago, managers and promoters would have told band members they WOULD tour, regardless of what was going on. With a band like Queensryche, I can't see it making that much difference to what is already a relatively small venture - it's not like Scott's no-show is going to ruin the band's reputation and cost them their fan base.
What does annoy me is your big, stadium filling A-listers, your Beyonces and Beibers, cancelling sold out shows at the last minute because the dressing room is the wrong shade of pink or some other shit. They shouldn't be allowed to get away with that behaviour.

[RoeDent]

It certainly undermines the solid structure of a band, especially if they're just starting out. See The Sea Within as a recent example, where they toured with Casey Macpherson on vocals instead of the studio album's main singer, Daniel Gildenlöw. If the band is that easily interchangeable, it's not going to be taken seriously as a full-time band.

[ChuckSteak]

I don't feel anything. It is none of my business. Either you go see them with the replacement or you don't, it is as simple as that. Your decision.

[ariich]

It certainly undermines the solid structure of a band, especially if they're just starting out. See The Sea Within as a recent example, where they toured with Casey Macpherson on vocals instead of the studio album's main singer, Daniel Gildenlöw. If the band is that easily interchangeable, it's not going to be taken seriously as a full-time band.

I disagree. I mean, if I'm particularly keen on seeing particular members (this applies especially to vocalists who are often very distinct, but can apply to others too) then I might feel a bit disappointed, but it wouldn't be fair to expect anything of the band. Music composition and live performance are clearly two very different things. If bands never allowed members to balance their involvement with other commitments and family lives as they need to, then many brilliant composers and producers would be excluded because they aren't able to tour extensively.

Orbs toured a couple of years ago, and their keyboardist was effectively on maternity leave having just had a baby, so my brother filled in on keys (he plays with Dan Briggs in Nova Collective). If they hadn't done that, the alternatives would have been: 1. don't tour, 2. for her to tour with a baby, or 3. kick her out of the band and replace her. The latter two should be unacceptable to any decent human, and the first would have been a terrible idea.

[MirrorMask]

I think the issue is the contrast of two perfectly reasonable situations:

- A band is a band because of the members that make it up and the creative balance is not equiparable to a business or a store, where a clerk is sick or on holiday and another one shows up. One becomes fan of a band made up by certain individuals and those individuals are those people want to see perform their songs.

- In today's music industry, you have to tour tour tour to have a revenue, and a tour cancellation costs money and maybe future opportunities.

I remember some years ago Epica had finally an US tour lined up, and Simone Simmons (the singer) fell ill, and they went on and toured with Amanda Sommerville. Bold move on their part, but I guess it would have been a financial disaster for them to pull out of the tour.

In the end, it depends band by band and member by member. The almost-original poster made the question about John Myung being replaced, but I think that as annoyed and pissed as I would be, I would still be going.

In the scenario where I like a lot the new album and DT announce the only foreseeable date in my country in my hometown, and I want to see them again, and suddenly Myung drops out, I would still be going, 'cause I'd still get a concert and Petrucci would be there and James would be there singing. It would not be the same, I'd be annoyed, but I'd still be going because in the end that's the cold truth: you either accept it and go, or you don't. Writing on the band's Facebook won't do anything about it.

[cramx3]

Depends on the band and musician. I saw Amaranthe with a replacement singer and they hadn't announced it so it was a surprise when they hit the stage and whoa who's that singing?! And it really felt like a light punch to the gut. I was totally not in the show for the first couple songs just wondering who this guy was and what's going on with the original singer plus wait this guy sounds different. Eventually I got over it and the show was mostly fine overall, but I did t like the idea of a replacement. Having said that, some band members arent the most important and easily replaceable.  Kamelot toured the US this year with a replacement drummer. He was fine and didnt take away from the music or show at all.

I think it's fine for some members and some bands, but I think it's pretty tough to tour with a replacement singer or maybe even a lead guitarist or other musician if they were the focal point of the music.

[Kwyjibo]

Ayreon does this all the time when playing live, so no problem for me. 

[Mladen]

I don't feel anything. It is none of my business. Either you go see them with the replacement or you don't, it is as simple as that. Your decision.

This is a healthy attitude that I'm also leaning towards. It would depend on who is being replaced and why, so that I can make my decision if the concert is worth going to or not.

[Anguyen92]

I mean one band (I guess you can say project instead) I follow lately is Owl City and the studio material is mainly by one guy, Adam Young, who plays all the instruments and does the majority of the recording.  Naturally, he's going to have a revolving door of touring musicians.  The only constant touring musician is Breanne Düren who does keyboards and vocals.  Don't think the majority of Owl City fans care that much, they are mainly there for Adam Young and they probably think if the touring musicians is playing with Adam Young, that player has to be at least competent.

As for me, all I ask is that the key members are still in the band and the touring members are competent enough to play their stuff and I'll be the judge on whether I want to go or not to their show.

[Stadler]

I don't feel anything. It is none of my business. Either you go see them with the replacement or you don't, it is as simple as that. Your decision.

This is a healthy attitude that I'm also leaning towards. It would depend on who is being replaced and why, so that I can make my decision if the concert is worth going to or not.

I think this is right.    I saw AC/DC in '88 with Stevie Young instead of Malcolm (and with Simon Wright), and while I wish I saw Malcolm (and Phil; they are the backbone of the band for me) I don't feel like I "didn't see" AC/DC.   

I think where I start to maybe change my opinion is with the singer;  I get if AC/DC goes with Brian, because Bon died, and I get going with Axl - he's not an unknown in any way, shape or form - to finish the tour in a tragic circumstance.   But I kind of lose interest when you have a band like Great White, who're on their 46th singer, 45 of whom are not Jack Russell.   

I have absolutely zero problem with Kiss using Eric Singer and Tommy Thayer (having seen the last tour with Criss - who was an embarrassment) and the last tour with Ace (who was okay) I understand what they're doing.  I think I'd be pissed though if that wasn't Gene, Paul, Eric and Tommy and they tried to gloss over a personnel change with the makeup.   I also was a little turned off by DJ Ashba stepping up on the piano with the black leather pants, no shirt and black tophat during November Rain. 

[Samsara]

I posted this in the other thread, but it is appropriate here:

As for members departing, to me, it has become standard practice. Very few bands refuse to perform when there's money to be made. They just move on. I don't like it personally, but I understand it. THese days, touring is where the money is. Not album sales. Back in the 80s and early 90s, it was flip-flopped. You made more on the records. So keeping touring commitments and using fill-in members is something to be expected.

[Grappler]

I don't mind it when bands are up-front about the situation and advise fans appropriately - so and so can't tour, but they've recommended this person to handle their duties and it isn't left open-ended.  Life happens and most fans are pretty understanding, though replacement singers are certainly more jarring than inserting a different musician into the lineup.

[El Barto]

I thought about this the other day with Queensryche. I don't care about Kelly Gray taking over on guitar. In fact, I always liked the guy. I consider it an improvement. I'll pass on it because Rockenfield isn't playing, though. At times I find him boring, but other times he's the star by a huge margin. Without that possibility I'm out.

I said years ago that Rush should have toured with a 4th member to sing what Geddy could not. I still think that would have been cool, and would have opened the door to hear lots of stuff we really can't anymore. In that case it simply would have been an addition, and not all that different than them touring with an 8 guy string section. It's really a pride issue, I think. Years ago I saw Ian Anderson's band play Thick as a Brick, and that's exactly what he did. Ian's still the front man. He still sings a lot of it and plays flute. Sideshow Cecil is there to handle half of the vocals and it was a massive improvement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-n5UdWWqBI&index=4&list=PLfUEPq8SzJ7VDWtAOH1-SCYH3-G-fcTIU

[Samsara]

most fans are pretty understanding, though replacement singers are certainly more jarring than inserting a different musician into the lineup.

Yep, and it really comes down to the band. Some are really a one-man show. Others are a more collaborative effort. And other still have started out one way and evolved to the other way. So replacing pieces is not an exact science, and it just depends on the makeup of the band.

Warrant comes to mind. That band was Jani Lane. He wrote all the songs, and was the face of the band. When he died, really, Warrant should not have continued. But how do you say that to four other guys who spent a lifetime making that band their business? You can't (well, you can, but obviously fan opinion isn't going to change their minds).

Look at Soundgarden. Chris wrote 90 percent of their material. Now he's gone. Should SG continue? I say absolutely not, because while you could replace Chris on stage, you couldn't in the studio. Whereas Alice in Chains it worked, at least for me, because while AiC sounds a bit different, Jerry has always been the majority songwriter. So like it or not, that band, with two of four original members left, still "works" as Alice in Chains (again, for me).

Queensryche...lol. No. That band is strange. I mean, most people think of Chris and Geoff, and they were, starting with Empire, the majority songwriters (with Michael being one of the main songwriters from the EP-Mindcrime). But what goes understated is just how much each member is vital to capture the feel of that band, and with this iteration of the band, particularly Scott. He hasn't been in the band for a year and a half, and you can tell the rhythmic feel is way off. Casey does a great job, but drummers have a particular style, and Casey's is unique to him. The "most replaceable" guy in QR is Eddie, and ironically, he (and Whip) are the last two original members standing in that band.

So it is really subjective.

[425]

In the end, it depends band by band and member by member. The almost-original poster made the question about John Myung being replaced, but I think that as annoyed and pissed as I would be, I would still be going.

I agree with this. There are obvious cases of band members who are hugely important to the concert-going experience. The obvious case is, say, Iron Maiden without Bruce Dickinson. That would be an entirely different show. And there are cases where you can come close to seamlessly replacing somebody, especially if that person doesn't play a leading role in the band or, is, say a bassist in a band where the bass isn't a huge element (sorry bassists!).

Obviously, there are situations where it's unavoidable. If the tour is days away and the guitarist breaks his hand, I don't know what else you can do, financially, besides bring in a replacement. Canceling the tour, losing out on that revenue and sinking that cost would be financially crippling to probably most bands out there. But that doesn't mean fans shouldn't be disappointed (uncalled for to blame the band for something that's not their fault, but that's not the same thing as disappointment). After all, there is a reason why you would pay a lot more to see a show by Dream Theater than a show by a skilled cover band (even if that band's singer did a perfect JLB impression). You want to see the people who made the music performing it, not just "these songs, played live, by anybody."

[Cool Chris]

If you go to the theatre to see a play, there's a good chance that the actor that you wanted to see will be replaced by their understudy for that performance (especially if you're going to the matinee). In many ways it's the same thing.

It's not though because

You want to see the people who made the music performing it, not just "these songs, played live, by anybody."

We want to see James/JP/JM/MM/JR perform live because they wrote the album, not because they are the five best, most talented performers. We identify the music with those guys. So while we might be disappointed if we bought tickets to see Olivier on stage, he didn't have anything to do with the writing of Hamlet. He was cast in the role by the producers. Unless you are the Monkees, bandmembers played a significant part in the creation and perpetuation of their entity. They aren't part of the production. They are the production. It's not black and white, but there is a gray difference in there somewhere.

On the whole I don't like the notion of the 'Revolving Door' band. I get that guys quit, or are fired, or might miss a show because they want to be there when their kid is born. But I have no idea how people identify with a band like Yes.

My own personal experience is limited to being at the first Nightwish show with Floor. If I didn't get online that day, I would have been pretty shocked to see someone other than Anette come out to sing. It was still weird standing in line thinking they just sacked their singer within the last 24 hours.

[bosk1]

My own personal experience is limited to being at the first Nightwish show with Floor. If I didn't get online that day, I would have been pretty shocked to see someone other than Anette come out to sing. It was still weird standing in line thinking they just sacked their singer within the last 24 hours.

I tend to agree with you, Chris.  But as to your specific example, I know that for me, I would have felt like I was getting a HUGE free upgrade in that specific scenario.

[MirrorMask]

My own personal experience is limited to being at the first Nightwish show with Floor. If I didn't get online that day, I would have been pretty shocked to see someone other than Anette come out to sing. It was still weird standing in line thinking they just sacked their singer within the last 24 hours.

I tend to agree with you, Chris.  But as to your specific example, I know that for me, I would have felt like I was getting a HUGE free upgrade in that specific scenario.

Think back of when in Ozzfest 2004 I believe Ozzy got sick and since Priest were on the bill, Rob Halford stepped in and sang the show. I, personally, would have LOVED IT, and counted myself very lucky. Other people certainly must have felt ripped off (well, ripped off maybe is wrong 'cause Ozzy got sick, but maybe they would have preferred a cancellation).

[ariich]

My own personal experience is limited to being at the first Nightwish show with Floor. If I didn't get online that day, I would have been pretty shocked to see someone other than Anette come out to sing. It was still weird standing in line thinking they just sacked their singer within the last 24 hours.

I tend to agree with you, Chris.  But as to your specific example, I know that for me, I would have felt like I was getting a HUGE free upgrade in that specific scenario.

Think back of when in Ozzfest 2004 I believe Ozzy got sick and since Priest were on the bill, Rob Halford stepped in and sang the show. I, personally, would have LOVED IT, and counted myself very lucky. Other people certainly must have felt ripped off (well, ripped off maybe is wrong 'cause Ozzy got sick, but maybe they would have preferred a cancellation).

Similarly Metallica at Download festival when Lars was taken ill. Only show he's ever missed. Totally unplanned. Thankfully enough drummers knew the songs well enough to play a really fun set - some drummers did a better job than others but the experience was so exciting and unique.

Obviously that's quite different to what we're mostly talking about in this thread, but still.

[Cool Chris]

My own personal experience is limited to being at the first Nightwish show with Floor. If I didn't get online that day, I would have been pretty shocked to see someone other than Anette come out to sing. It was still weird standing in line thinking they just sacked their singer within the last 24 hours.

I tend to agree with you, Chris.  But as to your specific example, I know that for me, I would have felt like I was getting a HUGE free upgrade in that specific scenario.

It was not only an upgrade, but an amazing experience, seeing an established band nail their performance with a singer they brought in 48 hours prior. I had never seen them live, so had no basis for comparison. I had the impression Tuomos was a dour chap, but he was all smiles. And I only knew Floor superficially, mainly from Ayreon. It was touching to see her on their subsequent stop take a moment to thank the fans for making her first NW show a positive memorable experience.


On topic, yes I think we are talking about replacements, not people who miss a show due to illness. If it came down to a show being cancelled or performed with a Scot Halpin fill-in, I think I'd take the fill-in every time. When we start talking about bands cycling through members and it starts to affect their identity, I feel differently.

[Samsara]

Ok, so you mean routinely replacing people - again, it happens, particularly with acts that are older. It just depends on what you feel as a fan you can stomach. Is Kansas really Kansas without Livgren and Walsh? Not to me. But then again, they ARE Kansas, they do tour as them, and loads of people go see them. i mean, replacing guys in the band who don't do much of the writing, or whose sound isn't critical to the band's style really, at least to me, is what it is. But its when you replace people who are responsible for the uniqueness of what made a band great to begin with, is where the trouble is.

But again, its all simply subjective. I mean, Judas Priest has survived with Rob, then without KK, and now without Glenn. I am not a hardcore Priest fan, but I am a fan. Is it different? I am sure it is, but at my "level" of fandom of that particular band, I doubt I will be able to tell a difference when I see them this month. And that's not a disrespect to Glenn or KK. Its just that I am not as intimately familiar with their catalog and band to really tell the difference. With Queensryche, I certainly am, and have clear lines on what I do, or do not, support, and what I feel about it.

But it all depends on the individual and their experiences.

[Stadler]

My own personal experience is limited to being at the first Nightwish show with Floor. If I didn't get online that day, I would have been pretty shocked to see someone other than Anette come out to sing. It was still weird standing in line thinking they just sacked their singer within the last 24 hours.

I tend to agree with you, Chris.  But as to your specific example, I know that for me, I would have felt like I was getting a HUGE free upgrade in that specific scenario.

Think back of when in Ozzfest 2004 I believe Ozzy got sick and since Priest were on the bill, Rob Halford stepped in and sang the show. I, personally, would have LOVED IT, and counted myself very lucky. Other people certainly must have felt ripped off (well, ripped off maybe is wrong 'cause Ozzy got sick, but maybe they would have preferred a cancellation).

See, I would have loved that (and I was going to post about Halford filling in for Dio when his contract ended on that tour in '92 in Costa Mesa).   I think that is different than a roadie stepping up and playing anonymously, or having a member behind the curtain (as I'm convinced Kiss did with Peter Criss on that Kiss/Aerosmith tour.)

[RoeDent]

At what point does the band cease to be the band though? Theoretically you could keep replacing members of bands over time, so a band can continue in name in perpetuum, just by replacing one member with another when said member leaves, dies, or whatever.

[Phoenix87x]

Depending on who is getting replaced, I just will not go see them on that tour.

[MirrorMask]

At what point does the band cease to be the band though? Theoretically you could keep replacing members of bands over time, so a band can continue in name in perpetuum, just by replacing one member with another when said member leaves, dies, or whatever.

I think again the answer is case by case. There is no clear cut answer that applies to all the possible situations that can arise, and the timeframe in which the changes happen and the reasons why are huge variables.

DT could go on gradually replacing again the drummer and the keyboard player, and as much as it sucks, even the bass player. In 5 years Jordan retires. After 2 album Mangini does. Another 2 albums and Myung quits. I can't see however the band going on without Petrucci, or feeling like it's DT since he's the major driving force in songwriting, and also James leaving would be a huge blow to the identity of the band. Sure, James goes, a 35-40 years old vocalist come in and suddenly they have a lifespan of 5 more albums, but after all this time, it would just sound totally different with another one, ANYONE, on vocals.

[Stadler]

At what point does the band cease to be the band though? Theoretically you could keep replacing members of bands over time, so a band can continue in name in perpetuum, just by replacing one member with another when said member leaves, dies, or whatever.

Yes does not now have any original members.  I do not at all consider them to be "illegitimate".  Steve and Alan have, in particular, paid their dues. 

[Adami]

At what point does the band cease to be the band though? Theoretically you could keep replacing members of bands over time, so a band can continue in name in perpetuum, just by replacing one member with another when said member leaves, dies, or whatever.

Yes does not now have any original members.  I do not at all consider them to be "illegitimate".  Steve and Alan have, in particular, paid their dues.

Stratovarious is another odd one. No original members. In fact, the core previous member...Timo Tolki, was also not an original member. So it's been a LONG time since they've had any original members, but now no one in the band was even on the first three albums.

[Samsara]

See for Stads and Adami though, that works for you guys. But for others, they probably don't consider that to be those particular bands. I mean, who wrote the YES classics, and who performed them. If those individuals are gone, then for some, so is what was "truly" the band.

It's the unanswerable question. Just like when someone asks myself or another lawyer a legal question, the answer usually starts with, "it depends." And in this case, it depends on each person, individually.

[Adami]

See for Stads and Adami though, that works for you guys. But for others, they probably don't consider that to be those particular bands. I mean, who wrote the YES classics, and who performed them. If those individuals are gone, then for some, so is what was "truly" the band.

It's the unanswerable question. Just like when someone asks myself or another lawyer a legal question, the answer usually starts with, "it depends." And in this case, it depends on each person, individually.

Oh I didn't say it worked for me. I totally lost all interest in Stratovarious in general. I was just pointing out the odd case of a band with no original members. Not approving of it.

[Samsara]

See for Stads and Adami though, that works for you guys. But for others, they probably don't consider that to be those particular bands. I mean, who wrote the YES classics, and who performed them. If those individuals are gone, then for some, so is what was "truly" the band.

It's the unanswerable question. Just like when someone asks myself or another lawyer a legal question, the answer usually starts with, "it depends." And in this case, it depends on each person, individually.

Oh I didn't say it worked for me. I totally lost all interest in Stratovarious in general. I was just pointing out the odd case of a band with no original members. Not approving of it.

Sorry bud! Misunderstood.

[Adami]

See for Stads and Adami though, that works for you guys. But for others, they probably don't consider that to be those particular bands. I mean, who wrote the YES classics, and who performed them. If those individuals are gone, then for some, so is what was "truly" the band.

It's the unanswerable question. Just like when someone asks myself or another lawyer a legal question, the answer usually starts with, "it depends." And in this case, it depends on each person, individually.

Oh I didn't say it worked for me. I totally lost all interest in Stratovarious in general. I was just pointing out the odd case of a band with no original members. Not approving of it.

Sorry bud! Misunderstood.

All good. And good song too.

[TAC]

I don't mind it when bands are up-front about the situation and advise fans appropriately - so and so can't tour, but they've recommended this person to handle their duties and it isn't left open-ended.  Life happens and most fans are pretty understanding, though replacement singers are certainly more jarring than inserting a different musician into the lineup.

In total agreement with this.

[El Barto]

At what point does the band cease to be the band though? Theoretically you could keep replacing members of bands over time, so a band can continue in name in perpetuum, just by replacing one member with another when said member leaves, dies, or whatever.

Yes does not now have any original members.  I do not at all consider them to be "illegitimate".  Steve and Alan have, in particular, paid their dues.

I would agree with that. And yet I won't spend any money to see them after Squire died. They might still be Yes, but they're not the same Yes.

I've actually seen Metallica on multiple tours with John Marshall on guitar. Just a Dallas fluke, I suppose. One of them was a unique experience with multiple guests coming out from the package lineup to replace Hetfield. Most memorably Kid Rock's midget running around screaming "yeah motherfucker!" all the time. I'm glad I got to see it. It was not a Metallica show, though. I certainly wouldn't have gone to see it if I knew what it was going to be, enjoyable though it was. Thankfully they came back a month later and put on an even more memorable show.

[ytserush]

As usual, it depends on the band and/or who might be replaced.