Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Are They Real Bands, or Tribute Bands?


Recommended Posts

Thank you all for the warm welcome posts!

 

Mike Rivers -- years ago I spent a month in Wales, Scotland and England, with the last 4 days in London. The hotel clerk kept telling us we needed to go to "Lester Square" but we couldn't find it. On the last day we asked him to point it out on our map, and it was "Leicester" and we had a good laugh because we had gone there a few times to listen to the buskers, watch the artists, and join the street party. ;)

 

Craig, yes it gets complicated. But with no original members, IMHO it's pushing the point.Perhaps it depends on how famous the individual members are.

If Mick and Keith were replaced in The Stones would they still be The Rolling Stones?

 

If The Miracles went out without Smokey Robinson, are they still The Miracles?

 

The Doors couldn't be the Doors with out Morrison.

 

Van Halen weren't Van Halen without David Lee Roth, when he was replaced with Sammy they became known as Van Hagar.

 

Yet Jay And The Americans had two different "Jays" in their hit making days, the second one was really "Dave" but changed it to "Jay" and now in their post-hit 'has been' career they have a third Jay.

 

I don't know that they do, but groups who didn't have household name members could replace all the members and we wouldn't be thinking "The Miracles ain't The Miracles without Smokey." How about The Buckinghams, The Seeds, The Box Tops, The Pretty Things, Beau Brummels, and so many other big but not the biggest acts of their day?

 

Years ago I was in a house band in a Hotel in Miami and on the weekend the 'has been' acts came in. I don't mean 'has been' as an insult, they all did a fine job. Many of them had a number or all different members. We opened in concert for The Association when "Cherish" was #1 on Billboard, when they played at the hotel in Miami years later, not one member was original. Were they still "The Association" or a tribute band? The "Ghost Band" moniker was long gone, and "Tribute Band" not yet invented. They did a nice job, but I was disappointed that none of the guys I met when they were a hit were in the band. It would have been nice to see if they remembered us.

 

When we opened for The Kingsmen, Jack Ely had already left the group and "Louie Louie" didn't sound the same. According to WIki there have now been 23 members of that band. I think there is one original member.

 

The Kingston Trio had about 15 members and all three originals are dead. So are they a Ghost Band?

 

When we were in negotiations with Motown, they insisted we change our name and Motown would own the new name. That way they could replace members at will, and have 4 bands with the same name touring at the same time. The negotiations failed over a number of different points, that wasn't one of them.

 

As you and others pointed out, it's complicated. We all have equally valid opinions. Me? As soon as the featured soloists are gone, they go in the Tribute Band bin, and when all the original members are dead, they are a Ghost Band to me. But that's just me and not the definitive truth, merely my opinion. And there is nothing wrong with three guys saying they are The Kingston Trio, as the record company or publisher probably owns the name anyway. Like I said earlier, "Nice work if you can get it." But they are a Ghost Band to me.

 

One more thing: I don't consider symphony orchestras 'tribute bands'. Symphonies have traditionally been associated with the cities or states that they reside in. The members come and go, like a sports team. And since conductors are free to interpret the musical pieces they aren't trying to play it exactly as Beethoven or Tchaikovsky or Dvorak performed it. Instead of "tribute bands", I think they are "cover bands", covering the originals, note for note, but not exactly like the original. Tempos have changed, instruments have changed, and tastes have changed over the centuries.

 

Insights, incites and opinions by Notes

 

 

 

 

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

An element of orchestras is that their sound, as a rule, is determined more by the conductor than by the players, assuming the players to all be A-level individually; in some ways like the Wrecking Crew, who mostly did what the producer or A&R guy requested.

 

Regarding "real" vs "tribute", I would consider it to be real (or at least ghost) if there has been a continuous personnel roster since the original "hit" was published. Exceptions for obvious star-named (like Jay and...). So by those criteria, I considered Kansas to be legitimate with John Elephante; Crazy World of Arthur Brown was still legit even after the loss of Vincent Crane. Chicago? Hmm. Technically, still Chicago, but I admit it was never quite the same after the death of Terry Kath, let alone the departure of Peter Cetera.

-Tom Williams

{First Name} {at} AirNetworking {dot} com

PC4-7, PX-5S, AX-Edge, PC361

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, now this has me thinking about ethics.

 

Is it ethical for a group of no original members, or no original lead voices to go to a theater and charge big bucks for a name only?

 

Is it ethical for someone to pay $100/each to see the Kingston Trio, thinking it's the 'real' Kingston Trio when all the members are dead?

 

Or is it ethical to pay $100/ea to see Jay & The Americans when neither recording Jay is going to be singing?

 

Would that be any different in principal to pay $100/ea to see the Rolling Stones with a different singer substituting for Mick Jagger?

 

Perhaps I'm thinking too much, but the public paying premium prices doesn't know that the singers they heard on the records they purchased are not going to be there. They will go believing that they are seeing/hearing the people on their recording or on the radio that they loved.

 

So does this border on fraud? Deception?

 

You can hear a tribute band, which is essentially the same thing, for half the price, so is the public being ripped off?

 

I think that is a worthy discussion. What do you think?

 

Insights and incites by Notes

 

 

 

 

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If Paul and Ringo reformed the Beatles with two other guys and played Beatle music (including John and George songs) would not they sell out any stadium in the world in 5 minutes. I don"t think anyone would feel ripped off.

 

I"d buy a ticket ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I'm thinking too much, but the public paying premium prices doesn't know that the singers they heard on the records they purchased are not going to be there. They will go believing that they are seeing/hearing the people on their recording or on the radio that they loved.

 

So does this border on fraud? Deception?

 

You can hear a tribute band, which is essentially the same thing, for half the price, so is the public being ripped off?

 

I think that is a worthy discussion. What do you think?

 

I think it depends on whether they're paying to hear the songs, or see the people (or both). As long as the marketing is upfront, then the people can decide...as someone else pointed out, some of the originals don't have the chops they did, so people might get a more satisfying experience from younger musicians. But ultimately, if the performances are good and people have a good time, mission accomplished.

 

I also think this is a case where if a band can get an endorsement from the original musicians ("look, I can't stand up any more and I took way too much acid in the 60s, but the remaining members think these guys rock and we're happy to carry on our tradition"), that would give an air of legitimacy, and serve as a sort of "good housekeeping seal of approval."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Paul and Ringo reformed the Beatles with two other guys and played Beatle music (including John and George songs) would not they sell out any stadium in the world in 5 minutes. I don"t think anyone would feel ripped off.

 

I"d buy a ticket ;)

 

Well, they just had a mini-reunion after a McCartney concert, and the audience went bonkers with delight. So it seems you've hit the nail on the head. This also underscores my previous post...if people are paying to hear the songs, they'll get the songs, but they'll also get at least some of the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I'm thinking too much, but the public paying premium prices doesn't know that the singers they heard on the records they purchased are not going to be there. They will go believing that they are seeing/hearing the people on their recording or on the radio that they loved.

 

So does this border on fraud? Deception?

 

You can hear a tribute band, which is essentially the same thing, for half the price, so is the public being ripped off?

 

I think that is a worthy discussion. What do you think?

 

I think it depends on whether they're paying to hear the songs, or see the people (or both). As long as the marketing is upfront, then the people can decide...as someone else pointed out, some of the originals don't have the chops they did, so people might get a more satisfying experience from younger musicians. But ultimately, if the performances are good and people have a good time, mission accomplished.

 

I also think this is a case where if a band can get an endorsement from the original musicians ("look, I can't stand up any more and I took way too much acid in the 60s, but the remaining members think these guys rock and we're happy to carry on our tradition"), that would give an air of legitimacy, and serve as a sort of "good housekeeping seal of approval."

 

I definitely think the marketing must be up front. When my friend was so excited to see The Kingston Trio, I read the ads, there were no disclaimers. She believed she was seeing 'the real' Kingston Trio and paid big bucks to do so. IMHO that's not ethical.

 

I didn't have the heart to tell her she was not seeing what she thought she was. I think that would have been cruel.

 

When there were 4 groups called "The Platters", another 4 "Temptations" and so on, touring the country, there was no disclaimer. I'm a friend of one of the lead singers in one of the touring groups (he's now retired).

 

The ABBA Experience came to town and boasted "One of the original members" (a saxophonist), so that was honest, but I don't recall seeing many other bands do that. Queen did it with Paul Rogers and Adam Lambert (Queen+___) and that's OK.

 

Notes

 

 

 

 

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When my friend was so excited to see The Kingston Trio, I read the ads, there were no disclaimers. She believed she was seeing 'the real' Kingston Trio and paid big bucks to do so. IMHO that's not ethical.

 

I didn't have the heart to tell her she was not seeing what she thought she was. I think that would have been cruel.

 

Did she enjoy the show? If not, was it because it wasn't the "real" group, or was it just a bad show? Or maybe she hadn't heard the Kingston Trio in more than 50 years and discovered that she just didn't care for their music any more? Nostalgia just ain't what it used to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When my friend was so excited to see The Kingston Trio, I read the ads, there were no disclaimers. She believed she was seeing 'the real' Kingston Trio and paid big bucks to do so. IMHO that's not ethical.

 

I didn't have the heart to tell her she was not seeing what she thought she was. I think that would have been cruel.

 

Did she enjoy the show? If not, was it because it wasn't the "real" group, or was it just a bad show? Or maybe she hadn't heard the Kingston Trio in more than 50 years and discovered that she just didn't care for their music any more? Nostalgia just ain't what it used to be.

 

True, she loved it. But she paid over $100 believing they were the 'real' guys. And that belief is what created the value of the price of the ticket.

 

If you paid for a Fender Stratocaster but eventually found out it was a fake, would you feel cheated? Even if you liked the guitar?

 

Personally I feel uneasy about that kind of deception. There are tribute bands around she could have heard for the price of a mixed drink or a glass of wine.

 

Am I being too ethical for the entertainment business? After all, fantasy is our product.

 

Insights and incites by Notes

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I"m sure that I read an interview a while back where the (aging) band member was suggesting that he would like to see other people carry on performing under his band"s name using a franchise model. Maybe it was Gene Simmons?

 

Reality and public perception are not always the same thing. In a much smaller version of this situation, a few years ago a band that I have performed with for 20+ years was inducted into a local hall of fame. Though I had slugged out many gigs, contributed to the band"s arrangements, co-wrote original songs and an recorded our album of originals, in the ceremony"s program I was mentioned as just one of many musicians who had had the 'opportunity' to appear with the original band members, while the keyboard player who had played with them for about three years was the one who was inducted along with the other three members that I play with. .... When you think of Batman, which actor comes to mind? Probably the worst but first one - Adam West.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, what if you found you bought a Gibson guitar that you loved very much and spent $2000 for it. You needed some work done and the guitar technician informs you that it is a very good Chinese copy and you can get another just like it for $400.

 

If there are no original members left, what is the difference between spending $100/ticket for the name of the original band or a $5 drink to hear a very good tribute band. You are paying for the name. But like the Chinese copy, you aren't getting what you paid for.

 

What if there is only one original member, and it isn't one of the lead voices? I'd still feel ripped off. That would be like buying that cheap Chinese copy that had genuine Gibson tuners on it.

 

I notice in our local theater, the one that had the Kingston Trio (in name only) is having "The ABBA Experience" this year. That's truth in advertising, at least you aren't thinking you are getting the real thing. They are also having what seems like a night of Elvis impersonators. That might be fun.

 

But if I buy tickets to the Rolling Stones and either Mick or Keith had been replaced with a sound-alike, I would want my money back.

 

Am I being too critical? Perhaps.

 

If I were in the faux headline band, I would think it unethical.

 

Insights and incites by Notes

 

PS when I think of Batman, I think of the comic books of my youth. When I think of James Bond I know it's Sean Connery. The rest were impostors, but at least they plastered their name, "Roger Moore as James Bond" or something like that.

 

If it's not the real thing, let me know it's not the real thing, and then if I still want to pay the big bucks for it, it's my decision.

 

Insights and incites by Notes

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if I buy tickets to the Rolling Stones and either Mick or Keith had been replaced with a sound-alike, I would want my money back.

 

But you are OK with Ron Wood and Daryl Jones in the band, correct? I think you are stating what a lot of people are trying to communicate in this thread: band identity is not distributed equally among the people that make up the original band. It's a combination of when they got famous, how much success they have had, who does the lead singing, and how much you actually identify with the band members as opposed to the songs, etc.

 

I think the "real thing" is purely subjective. I think there are less than 20 rock bands that had a billboard charting album out before 1979 that still tour and have their original members. I don't think you'd call ALL of the rest of them inauthentic. You have to use your personal metric.

 

 

"For instance" is not proof.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True. But if there are no living members, or if the 'up front' personalities are no longer present, IMHO they have become a tribute band, and have no reason to charge premium prices.

 

The Beach Boys are going out with one original member, and Brian Wilson isn't in The Beach Boys, nor is he allowed to go out as The Beach Boys. I wouldn't pay premium money to hear them.

 

The Temptations are touring without the lead voices of either Eddie Kendricks or David Ruffin, and only one original member, the baritone voice of Otis Williams. Are they the "real" Temptations or a tribute band? Now I know Otis deserves to be called "A Temptation" but what about the 20 or so others that have come and gone?

 

This is like going out as The Miracles without Smokey Robinson.

 

The aforementioned Kingston Trio and so many others have no original members. IMHO there is nothing wrong with going out and playing "The Music Of ____" or "The ________ experience", but to pretend you are the 'real thing' to me is unethical.

 

And there is a line between what I call a tribute band and an original. That line is probably different for most of us, and I may be stricter that others.

 

Replacing Ron Wood in the Stones would be OK with me. Replacing Ray Davies in The Kinks would be unacceptable.

 

When you replace the neck and other parts of a Tele or Strat it becomes a "Parts-caster" and won't sell for the price of the original unless someone really, really famous for improving those guitars puts his or her name on it.

 

Insights and incites by Notes

 

 

 

 

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...