Bands/Artists who would have been better if they had never had any commercial success

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

This is all about your feeling/suspicion about artists. Those whose potential was ruined by success. So that could include people who did go on to have a long and successful career, and you reckon they would have stayed quality if they hadn't had to produce commercial work, as well as artists who simply dried up once they got very big.
I would kick off with The Doors. Lots of potential, never fulfilled because Jim Morrison's ego swelled to meet the size of his fame.

― Vanny, Monday, 17 November 2003 19:05 (twenty-two years ago)

Elton John

― Pete S, Monday, 17 November 2003 19:13 (twenty-two years ago)

Nas?

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Van Hellen De Generes

― Huckleberry Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Van Der Graaf Generator were better before they got all big in Italy.

― Matt Helgeson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:21 (twenty-two years ago)

Nick Cave

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Actually, I think that Nas would have been better if Illmatic would have blown up....then he would have skipped his Nastradamas crap and also skipped the portentous God's Son "hey the righteous prodigal son prophet has return from the jiggy wilderness and I bring you children words of wisdom" crap.

― Matt Helgeson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Pink Floyd - shit for almost their enire career

― Pete S, Monday, 17 November 2003 19:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Ryan Adams?

― Vanny, Monday, 17 November 2003 19:37 (twenty-two years ago)

The Rapture.

― Dean Gulberry (deangulberry), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:44 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm pretty certain I've seen this question somewhere before, because someone won by naming The Strokes.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Eminem, no question, esp. when you consider that the sole subject of his last two albums has been Eminem, pop star/Everlast beefer/ICP beater-downer/Father of the Year. Granted, MMLP was a pretty great "concept" album, but other than "Stan" and "Kim" he just hasn't been the same as a lyricist since the Slim Shady LP.

― Josh Love (screamapillar), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Louis Armstrong

― Pete S, Monday, 17 November 2003 19:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Elvis? Would more time have been worth never having to make a comeback? (I'm assuming that the artists make enough to continue living/recording, just not the megabucks)

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Spohie Ellis Bextor

― tate, Monday, 17 November 2003 19:59 (twenty-two years ago)

(it's possible that the problem is, if there's no Elvis, what the hell have we been listening to for fifty years?)

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 17 November 2003 19:59 (twenty-two years ago)

If Elvis had never had any success (the response to the sun 45s was earthquake-like) he would have stayed a truck-driver. He just wasn't committed to music. It was only when it dawned on him he could get hot chicks much better that he pursued that route.

― Pete S, Monday, 17 November 2003 20:03 (twenty-two years ago)

If Elvis had never been, we'd be listening to a whole lot more stuff of The Roots/Erykah Badu/Floetry variety. The man stole from a culture and fed it to his... a bit like how the British conceptualise a genre, which the Americans take, build on and sell back to us. A little like Ralph Lauren.

― Hamster, Monday, 17 November 2003 20:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Genius steals....and for 2 years Elvis was a genius.

― Pete S, Monday, 17 November 2003 20:44 (twenty-two years ago)

cat power(chan marshall)
bob dylan

― kephm, Monday, 17 November 2003 20:46 (twenty-two years ago)

speaking of Ralph Lauren, I was watching QEFTSG on the weekend, and they were saying "Lorin" and I've always said "Lawrr-ennn"
who's right?

― Huckleberry Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 17 November 2003 20:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Elvis = Ralph Lauren

....does not compute....

― Matt Helgeson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 17 November 2003 20:50 (twenty-two years ago)

on what planet did Cat Power blow up huge commercially? Also, how do you think she would have been different if she hadn't had this massive success?

― Matt Helgeson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 17 November 2003 20:51 (twenty-two years ago)

Success in itself is not a negative thing.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Monday, 17 November 2003 20:52 (twenty-two years ago)

people also typically underestimate Elvis's country and bluegrass influences, which were easily equal to his blues influences. And if the King has saved me from listening to Floetry, then I owe him alot.

― Matt Helgeson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 17 November 2003 20:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Obviously, Geir. The Beatles didn't exactly tail off, did they?

― Pete S, Monday, 17 November 2003 20:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Jurassic 5.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Monday, 17 November 2003 20:57 (twenty-two years ago)

The Beatles having commercial success was nothing but a good thing, because it led to a lot of acts being musically influenced by them.

Good music having commercial success is always a good thing.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Monday, 17 November 2003 21:03 (twenty-two years ago)

Rod Stewart.

― Gear! (Gear!), Monday, 17 November 2003 21:06 (twenty-two years ago)

Good music having commercial success is always a good thing

I agree, but isn't the question whether the success itself can negatively affect the artist's subsequent albums?

I think the correct answer to this thread is: Guns n' Roses (but heck Axl may have gone crazy later on either way, but the power drunk meglomania brought on by Appetite couldn't have helped matters much)

― Matt Helgeson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 17 November 2003 21:08 (twenty-two years ago)

guided by voices. not that they had big commercial success or anything, but i'd say that the diehard cult they've acquired has gone to robert pollard's head and back, and helped to ruin whatever magic he had.

in other words, he'd have been far better off if 200 kids weren't coming up to him every night for the past 10 years telling him he's a genius.

― fact checking cuz, Monday, 17 November 2003 21:10 (twenty-two years ago)

also, making 25 albums a year tends to spread yr songwriting a little thin

― Matt Helgeson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 17 November 2003 21:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Killing Joke --- had they not scored a hit with "Love Like Blood" on the Night Time album in 1985, there never would've have been the slightly bad Brighter Than a Thousand Suns and the entirely abortive Outside the Gate. Ah, if only....

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 17 November 2003 21:58 (twenty-two years ago)

200 kids? More like 200 sad late-thirty-somethings with drinking problems.

― hstencil, Monday, 17 November 2003 21:59 (twenty-two years ago)

i think a better question would be which bands/artists would have been worse if they had never had any commercial success

― Felcher (Felcher), Monday, 17 November 2003 22:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Frank Zappa.
Nas (amen to what was said upthread).
Simple Minds ("Don't You Forget About Me" killed them aesthetically).
U2.
The Kinks (it was all downhill from "Lola").

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Monday, 17 November 2003 22:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Hoddle and Waddle

― Pete S, Monday, 17 November 2003 22:31 (twenty-two years ago)

++on what planet did Cat Power blow up huge commercially?

she was on the cover of close to 200 magaznies in 2002.

++Also, how do you think she would have been different if she hadn't had this massive success?
eddie veder and foo fighter boy woulld not of crapped all over the new record //i dont really give a sh*t anyways

― kephm, Monday, 17 November 2003 22:34 (twenty-two years ago)

John Lennon (success+fame made him very lazy)

― Vanny, Monday, 17 November 2003 23:00 (twenty-two years ago)

ODB

― Siegbran (eofor), Monday, 17 November 2003 23:02 (twenty-two years ago)

M*tallica

― Leee Majors (Leee), Monday, 17 November 2003 23:04 (twenty-two years ago)

re: Cat Power, 200 magazines does not = records sold

re: "foo fighter boy" only played drums, which he is good at, which resulted in her actually having a good beat on a couple of songs, which is a change for the better for her. If you're mad that she "sold out" and had some well known people on her records, just say it, but I fail to see where you could show that the record was "crapped on" by Grohl. As for Vedder, I've listened to it a bunch and can barely tell he's on it....

― Matt Helgeson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 17 November 2003 23:40 (twenty-two years ago)

I have to second the U2 and Metallica.

― Francis Watlington (Francis Watlington), Tuesday, 18 November 2003 02:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Flock of Seagulls

― A Nairn (moretap), Tuesday, 18 November 2003 02:44 (twenty-two years ago)

maybe cat power and killing joke could work together, completing the grohl circle.

― Dean Gulberry (deangulberry), Tuesday, 18 November 2003 04:18 (twenty-two years ago)

rem
madonna
m.a.r.r.s
oasis
moby

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Tuesday, 18 November 2003 05:02 (twenty-two years ago)

+++If you're mad that she "sold out" and had some well known people on her records, just say it, but I fail to see where you could show that the record was "crapped on" by Grohl.

YAWN. MAD? erm NOPE. REALLY. OK. its a long story really. YAWN

― kephm, Tuesday, 18 November 2003 16:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Not that he hadn't had any commercial success prior to it, but "(Everything I Do) I Do It To You" didn't exactly do any favour to the later musical output of Bryan Adams.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Tuesday, 18 November 2003 23:46 (twenty-two years ago)

five years pass...

REM, Metallica and Guns n' Roses are perfect answers.

The Beatles is spectacularly wrong; they would have been a much, much less awesome band if they hadn't been spurred by their very success & high expectations to attempt to produce the very best music they could possibly make, and to top each release with something even more amazing (at least until 1968 or so). Ditto Dylan.

Nirvana might have had a long and fruitful career if their bid to take over the world with Nevermind had failed.

There's got to be a long list of bands who ruined themselves trying to replicate the hit they once had.

― staggerlee, Saturday, 14 March 2009 19:31 (seventeen years ago)

Radiohead and Blur. Because they started hating their brilliant style once they got the popularity they deserved, and have never even been close to being as great later.

― Geir Hongro, Saturday, 14 March 2009 20:50 (seventeen years ago)

I'm pretty certain I've seen this question somewhere before, because someone won by naming The Strokes.

But see, to be better without success a band must be good in the first place, therefore the Strokes is not a good answer.

― ilxor, Saturday, 14 March 2009 22:24 (seventeen years ago)

Talk Talk (and also another reason for Radiohead) as EMI would never ever have let them make "The Colour Of Spring" and "The Laughing Stock", and thus become worse, had they not had commercial success with their first (and superior) couple of albums. :)

― Geir Hongro, Sunday, 15 March 2009 21:16 (sixteen years ago)

Devo.

Originally a subversive art project that talked about undermining paternalism and mocked individualism as an alternative form of conformity, while exploring quite radical song structures and costumes/imagary intended to create discomfort and unease.

Later, they became a kooky commercial parody of this with songs riddled with the exact kind of paternalistic advice they originally opposed. Obviously there's some good stuff there but who really wants to hear Mark Mothersbaugh telling us for the umpteenth time what we "gotta do". What bullshit.

"Whip It" pretty much marks the exact moment when this switch occured. Their (failed) attempts to recreate this commercial success meant that they never moved forward creatively again, only backwards.

― everything, Monday, 16 March 2009 18:59 (sixteen years ago)

LCD Soundsystem

― mehlt, Monday, 16 March 2009 21:29 (sixteen years ago)

Devo OTM.

― ilxor, Monday, 16 March 2009 21:49 (sixteen years ago)

Simple Minds ("Don't You Forget About Me" killed them aesthetically).

I'd say Steve Lillywhite did with "Sparkle In The Rain" already.

― Geir Hongro, Monday, 16 March 2009 23:26 (sixteen years ago)

three years pass...

As stated earlier, Guns'N'Roses is the correct answer.

― Poliopolice, Wednesday, 23 January 2013 05:41 (thirteen years ago)

Green Day

― billstevejim, Wednesday, 23 January 2013 05:51 (thirteen years ago)

Van Der Graaf Generator were better before they got all big in Italy

lol

― my father will guide me up the stairs to bed (anagram), Wednesday, 23 January 2013 08:26 (thirteen years ago)

Commercial success wasn't a problem for U2

Become the biggest band in the the world was.

― Master of Treacle, Wednesday, 23 January 2013 21:58 (thirteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.