Guitar Gear Forum

I mean, forever switched instruments.... for example... the switch up Metallica did at times... (Lars: Vocals; Jason: Guitar; Kirk: Bass; James: Drums) if they stayed with this lineup, would they still be Metallica??? But if something like that were to happen... would it still be the same band???

No, not in any meaningful way. Different band.

Still the same band.

Gov't Mule does the same thing - still Gov't Mule
(although Warren DOES stay on guitar)

Bugera1960 wrote:I mean, forever switched instruments.... for example... the switch up Metallica did at times... (Lars: Vocals; Jason: Guitar; Kirk: Bass; James: Drums) if they stayed with this lineup, would they still be Metallica??? But if something like that were to happen... would it still be the same band???

Wait, you mean modern Metallica has found a way to sound worse?!?!

Same band. The band's sound gets more dynamic, but is still said band.

I can play more than 1 instrument. Whether I do or not doesn't dictate anything other than my offering to the band.

If everyone in the band plays multiple instruments...same thing

benjamin801 wrote:No, not in any meaningful way. Different band.

This was exactly my thought.

So it isn't the members that make the band...but the instruments they play? Interesting interpretation.

soulsurfer wrote:So it isn't the members that make the band...but the instruments they play? Interesting interpretation.

Absolutely. A person's contribution to a band is a product of his interaction with the other members, but it's all filtered through the instrument he's playing.

Dave Grohl is a solid guitar player as well as a good drummer, but he brings completely different personality and ideas to the table in each case.

And that Steely Dan album where Walter Becker switched to guitar after decades of playing bass behind the Skunk Baxters and Elliot Randalls of the world was a total change of pace.

soulsurfer wrote:So it isn't the members that make the band...but the instruments they play? Interesting interpretation.

It's the expression through their instruments that makes the band's identity.

I've always said there are several bands in any group of players.

Love it!

I'm different. I guess I just see it more as a potential (expressed or not) element of the band. If a member leaves whether or not a new one replaces him/her the band is no longer the same band.

In VH for instance, when Eddie played keys on might as jump, it's still the same band to me. The sound is obviously different but that "sound" potential was always there as long as eddie is in the band.
Bands experiment with genres and new instruments all the time...I see them as the same band still.
Whether they swap instruments in a live show for entertainment purposes, or play a different instrument on a song on one album, or even completely change genres in an attempt to 'find themselves' , they are still the same band...just a different sound.

tl;dr -different sounds (instruments/genres etc.) doesn't a different band make. It's the instrumentalist that makes the band, not his instrument.
But I get what you guys are saying, the instrument and player are inseparable in the band setting.

The Beatles did all kinds of swapping , you'd have to read the studio track notes to know who was doing what they changed shit up so often .