Bands/artists who would have been worse if they had never had any commercial success

Some bands seem to be spurred by massive success to achieve ever-higher heights. The Beatles are the obvious model here. Had they stayed a club act there'd likely have been no Rubber Soul, no Revolver, etc.

To continue with the blindingly obvious, the Stones also. No "Satisfaction," no "Gimme Shelter," no Exile on Main Street.

Can we think of other examples of bands who achieved success, then made even better music while trying to top that success?

styx, sonic youth

blur's reaction against (and desire to transcend) the music that made them successful provided their best material

Make a case for SY, kamerad; I can't see it.

I'm not really getting the question ... isn't this true of every successful band?

For one thing, successful bands can afford to spend the time and money needed to push themselves creatively, e.g. studio time, producers, better instruments, not having to work a day job, etc.

blur's reaction against (and desire to transcend) the music that made them successful provided their best material

RONG!

I'm not really getting the question ... isn't this true of every successful band?

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

haha geir

"the great escape" is actually my 2nd-favourite Blur record and a thing of brilliance pretty much from start to finish...but that album was only made because Parklife had left them with nowhere to go but to expose the horrors within!

The Turtles would have remained a smart-ass surf band.

Collective Soul

Kenickie would've remained a ho-hum riot grrrl act (with above average songwriting, to be fair) if they didn't part ways with Slampt and make a go at chart success. Compare the early EP version of "Skateboard Song" to the re-recorded At The Club-era b-side version to see how well a bit of instrumental prowess and major label sheen complemented their personality and gave them a chance to let loose in a silly way, freed from the pressure to be all angsty and indieserious on record.

I can't figure out whether the Police belong here or in the other thread.

T Rex

Modest fucking Mouse.

I can't figure out whether the Police belong here or in the other thread.

― Doctor Casino
We can all agree that the Police could have been a better band than they actually were, but under what circumstances? Aye, there's the rub.

Well, basically on the one hand they're a classic "band turned against each other by success, touring etc" but there was a dramatic evolution in their sound that seems to have been in conscious dialogue with their growing pop-radio and arena success. Like a lot of people I kind of prefer the first record or so, but there's something pretty accomplished about the last few hit singles that's really great and hard to imagine coming from a scrappy nobody band.

I'm not really getting the question ... isn't this true of every successful band?

For one thing, successful bands can afford to spend the time and money needed to push themselves creatively, e.g. studio time, producers, better instruments, not having to work a day job, etc.

These are all good points, Barry, but do you really think that marketplace success is an unqualified good for art in every case?

I doubt Beach Boys would ever have had the chance to create "Pet Sounds" and "Good Vibrations" had they not built up a reputation as a commercial success beforehand.

Same about Marvin Gaye and Stevie Wonder. Motown obviously would never ever have let them release "What's Going On" and "Music Of My Mind" had they not been huge commercial successes for Motown already.

Scott Walker.

do you really think that marketplace success is an unqualified good for art in every case?

Certainly not. See: The Replacements.

Marketplace "success" vs. The Replacements really doesn't jibe. Although, I wouldn't include them anyway because there aren't any 'Mats records I think are mistakes.