It is currently Mon Mar 16, 2020 5:15 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Go to page 1, 2  Next

Is it? (see topic header)
Poll ended at Sat Apr 01, 2017 5:04 pm
No way 31%  31%  [ 4 ]
Yes 15%  15%  [ 2 ]
Kinda 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Definitely not 31%  31%  [ 4 ]
Never heard of them? 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I don't care anyway 23%  23%  [ 3 ]
Total votes : 13
Author Message
Post subject: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 5:04 pm
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:51 pm
Posts: 25350
Location: Witness Protection Program
...if Bobby Colomby is the only original member...


....and Bo Bice from American Idol is their lead singer?

_________________
Being able to play and enjoy music is a gift that's often taken for granted.

Don't leave home without it!


Top
Profile
Fender Play Winter Sale 2020
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 5:09 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 5:59 pm
Posts: 3439
Location: ohio
Not without david clayton thomas


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 5:17 pm
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:38 am
Posts: 12975
Location: Canada
Nope. It's Bo Bice singing Blood Sweat and Tears with Bobby Colomby. If I sang with Ringo I don't think that would make us The Beatles. It would be me and him singing The Beatles. With two more band members I guess it would be okay to call us the Fab Four though. lol:

FSB
Well, maybe the Fab Three. :P

_________________
Hello, big guitar. Meet my little fingers.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:57 pm
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:37 am
Posts: 205
Location: North Versailles, PA
No


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:58 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star

Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 7:37 am
Posts: 4099
Location: New York
Poll needs an option for "What does it matter at this point?"

They're just cashing in on the name everyone knows.

_________________
Please subscribe to my Image Channel!
https://www.youtube.com/user/b7567


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:15 pm
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 7:16 pm
Posts: 18659
Location: In this country town, where the laughter sounds...
Nope! I saw the real BS&T in 1969 just as the cover song "You've Made Me So Very Happy" was released by BS&T.

_________________
"Electric Lady"
Image


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:44 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 1:50 am
Posts: 5667
Location: Arizona USA
From their website...

Over the years more than a hundred seventy five musicians have flowed through the ranks of the various iterations of the BS&T. The most commercially successful version of the band was in fact, our second line-up.

What endures today is the evolution that concept… along with an amazing roster of the most talented and entertaining musicians we have ever had.

BS&T has never stopped touring. It didn’t go away. You can call it a renaissance, or the newest version of… but it is simply Blood Sweat and Tears at its best“.

Bobby Colomby

_________________
Marky

Remember the music is not in the guitar


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 3:41 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 2:11 pm
Posts: 820
Location: Iowa, USA
So far I'm the only "I don't care any way" vote up there.
Is ANYONE still really anyone once even one member of any well known, popular, well established band is missing?

Would Led Zeppelin be Led Zeppelin if little Jason would have replaced his Dad the day after the funeral? Unfortunately...no. Would I still accept them using the name Led Zeppelin and still listen to them...absolutely. So; who cares?

I've seen Lynard Skynard four times (with 3 different Van Zant brothers) never once with Ronnie....loved every freaking second of every freaking show.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 4:46 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:52 am
Posts: 3840
Location: Colorado Springs
Is it Deep Purple without Blackmore? Is it Yes without Jon Anderson? Is it Ratt with only the original drummer? In those cases, the answers are "probably", "yes" (no pun intended), and "no", respectively. My guess is that most people coming to see BS&T are just looking to see live versions of their great songs and don't know who the original members even are -- I don't. And any true hardcore BS&T fans that are bothered by the new lineup are up to speed on the lineup and smart enough to make a decision on whether the gig is a fair trade for their dollars or not...

_________________
Laughing out loud with fear and hope, I have a desperate plan ...


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 7:39 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:50 am
Posts: 192
White Dog wrote:
So far I'm the only "I don't care any way" vote up there.
Is ANYONE still really anyone once even one member of any well known, popular, well established band is missing?

Would Led Zeppelin be Led Zeppelin if little Jason would have replaced his Dad the day after the funeral? Unfortunately...no. Would I still accept them using the name Led Zeppelin and still listen to them...absolutely. So; who cares?

I've seen Lynard Skynard four times (with 3 different Van Zant brothers) never once with Ronnie....loved every freaking second of every freaking show.

Are the Rolling Stones, the Rolling Stones without Brian Jones?


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 1:52 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:48 am
Posts: 26417
Location: Tombstone Territory
I live in a military town and years ago, the installation's MWR office (morale, welfare, and recreation) arranged for a free outdoor concert in the city park featuring Grand Funk Railroad. I was pumped to see them again after all these years until I learned that Mark Farner was no longer affiliated with the band. I didn't even bother to get tickets and I have no regrets. Later I talked with my peeps who did attend and they said unanimously that the act was but a pale imitation of the original trio.

Who'd be up for a Cream reunion concert that didn't include Eric Clapton among the band members?

Arjay

_________________
"Here's why reliability is job one: A great sounding amp that breaks down goes from being a favorite piece of gear to a useless piece of crap in less time than it takes to read this sentence." -- BRUCE ZINKY


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 2:23 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:38 am
Posts: 12975
Location: Canada
I can understand reasons why a band may or may not be accepted under the same name. In this neighbourhood the Guess Who fall into that category. Elsewhere, Earth, Wind, and Fire also do. As with others, The Glenn Miller band has been riding on that trail forever. Here we have some identity that tells us what is expected per se. Sometimes worse, and often better. Although, it's hard to argue previous success. IMHO.

For me key figures are important to representing the original name. After this famous group had personnel changes, The Platters had many versions of their name shared. There were several corresponding groups performing Only You (And You Alone) at the same time. Audiences were both entertained and confused. It was like having more than one traveling Harlem
Globetrotters. The difference is that the Globetrotters are under the same management and company with an unmistakeable identity. The Platters groups were similar but they certainly did not sound alike even though the name was there. The Platters spent many hours in court over disputed ownership of the name Platters. Although not new, this was a well publicized fact that made an impression for future groups to be wary of.

Maybe, bands need a key figure name like Mick Fleetwood, Elvis, and Santana for example. Their names go with whatever band they gather(ed). Other bands sometimes keep the original name; but, (usually for legal reasons) they add "with so and so", especially, if a key figure is replaced. They do this in the movie industry where the big star may be credited with "special appearance" or "with" or a similar introduction. This practice is usually to give the lesser experienced equal credit or sometimes to protect the star's reputation should the show be less than desired. Similar consideration works for celebrity bands too.

Then there's the wonderful activity of deciding what members of the band are to be included or excluded when it comes to awards. I'm not going to open that Pandora's box. I will say that it would be ridiculous to call the inventors The Original So and Sos in the beginning, much better to let the fans know the difference later on. :wink:
It seems that fans are more willing to accept fewer changes in a band, so maybe the original name could be retired and changed to reflect an association if and when more than 50 % of the original group is gone . . . or maybe just do the Levon Helm evolving thing and simply call it "The Band".

After all, I'm going to hear the band, not the name, and I don't expect the same performance unless it's staged. I do want the music to rock, however, and I wouldn't expect a lesser result with the original band name particularly if equal prices are attached. A lesser result with a different name, and I can be expected to be more forgiving. Show me something better and you can call your band whatever ya want. That goes for recordings too.
:P YMMV.

FSB
Just don't call me late for supper.

_________________
Hello, big guitar. Meet my little fingers.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 6:30 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:51 pm
Posts: 25350
Location: Witness Protection Program
Legally, Bobby got the name trademark :

https://books.google.com/books?id=bmMg4 ... 3F&f=false

_________________
Being able to play and enjoy music is a gift that's often taken for granted.

Don't leave home without it!


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:15 pm
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:38 am
Posts: 12975
Location: Canada
Miami Mike wrote:
Legally, Bobby got the name trademark :

https://books.google.com/books?id=bmMg4 ... 3F&f=false
Good to know, Mike. With that I took to reading Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood,_Sweat_%26_Tears where there is a pretty extensive background on BS&T. This great band has entertained us with about 140 members over the years. Talk about a history of Blood Sweat & Tears! The article from Wikipedia mentions that David Clayton-Thomas had to get licensing rights to work out a problem with billing and promotion that promoters continued to put forth on their insistence when David was hired. I'm sure this is a common concern.

To his credit, Bobby has definitely been associated throughout not only in the performance, but also the management and producing, and he has kept the band alive. It still remains, however, what or who is the band in question? I dunno. Get a license, play the songs, use the name. :wink:
Great thread, Mike. :D

FSB
Would the Righteous Brothers be the RBs with Bill Medley and no Bobby Hatfield? :roll:

_________________
Hello, big guitar. Meet my little fingers.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Is it really still Blood Sweat & Tears?
Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:02 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 6:51 pm
Posts: 25350
Location: Witness Protection Program
Fender Strat Brat wrote:
Would the Righteous Brothers be the RBs with Bill Medley and no Bobby Hatfield? :roll:




No and Bo Bice is not a great singer, IMO.

"Harold Elwin "Bo" Bice, Jr. is an American singer and musician who was the runner-up against Carrie Underwood in the fourth season of American Idol."

_________________
Being able to play and enjoy music is a gift that's often taken for granted.

Don't leave home without it!


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Fender Play Winter Sale 2020

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: