Why do bands lose their magic?

[Zzzptm]

Doing all the title track rankings got me to fire up the latest releases from The Damned and The Stranglers - Darkadelic and Dark Matters, respectively. These were albums from bands with long years in the rock and roll trenches and the albums themselves stand up pretty well. Another band I love, Igor & The Red Elvises, can still turn out clever tracks that are crowd favorites after decades in the biz.

Of the bands in the title track rankings, I have to say that Motorhead had the most consistent output, with strong albums coming out at every phase of their career. So why is it that bands like Black Sabbath, Judas Priest, Deep Purple, Iron Maiden, and others lose the script and head into the ditch, musically speaking? Is it internal conflicts? Record label pressures? People deciding to just phone it in and pick up a check? Desperate attempts to mimic ancient activity like a cargo cult without solid results?

 

[Charger]

Now this is a question for the ages.

I don't think there's a single band out there that hasn't had a drop in quality at some point. Hell even DIO had Lock Up The Wolves.....ofcourse a big reason for that was the hiring of the very young and inexperienced but clearly quite talented guitarist. Also the change in musical direction did not work.

That usually seems to be the main reason the magic goes...bands trying to reinvent themselves when in reality there would be absolutely no reason for it. Black Sabbath ofcourse is the prime example of this with Technical Ecstacy and Never Say Die. But ofcourse their problems ran deeper with drugs and alcohol and personal issues.

Line up changes are another thing. And sometimes a loss of a member can have huge effects. I've seen a lot of people saying Metallica for example would have never EVER done an album like the S/T one if Cliff would have still been alive and they would have carried on with the thrash sound. I dont' know...it was clear that both Lars and James were very intuned with the business side of things and knew what kind of music would help them grow.

In Maiden's case I think Steve at some point just became content in doing long proggy stuff because maybe it came easier for him than writing good solid fast rockers...and maybe he thought that it's what fans wanted...but after several albums of the same it gets boring.

Quite often it does seem to be that if a band changes their style drastically it's usually when things go belly up. Priest is a prime example on this.... Point Of Entry was their first experimental album and it was a turd...they recovered but then they did Turbo which was a huge turd...And now with 80% of what made Priest Priest is gone their music has become rather soulless and doesn't contain any magic at all. Firepower was a  good album, but it surely does not contain any what you'd call Priest Magic...and the new song is...well...more of the same soulless meh.

For Purple I think it was the internal battles that brought that band down. Having two strong characters in one band can have it's issues...But with Steve they found a new lease of life that turned out to be huuuuuge boost for them...


All in all I don't think there's a one single reason for bands losing their magic. But quite often it comes down to trying to reinvent themselves and line up troubles....

[Zzzptm]

... and line up troubles also happen when band members start asking about how much they're getting paid for all this that they're doing. Or when and where the payments, if any, are about to happen. Thinking of how Gillan ended with Ian running out the back door as the band were getting the bad news from management in the front room and then *bam* he's in Black Sabbath for an album and then gets a phone call and *bam* off to the Deep Purple reunion.

And why reunite that lineup? Because, nice though Hush was, the kids want Smoke on the Water. In Deep Purple's case, they didn't get the real magic until after the Mk1 lineup made its exit. A similar story with the arrival of Bruce Dickinson in Iron Maiden.

Going back to Black Sabbath, the chance to do a tour with Dio gave both Iommi and Dio a bit more of a concert draw. But when Ozzy's people let it be known they'd be open to him doing some gigs, $$$ meant Dio had to exit. And when Ozzy did his reunion records with Sabbath, they weren't anywhere close to the stuff from the 70s. Did it matter? What does everyone want to hear at the concerts? The hits, man, the oldies! New stuff just confuses everyone.

For a band to keep putting out new stuff, year in and year out, when most audiences want the oldies anyway seems to be an exercise in futility. Let the magic go and live in the past every night, easy money.

So when I think of Ronald Isley, who had actual hits in every decade from the 1950s to the 2020s, there is a man who has worked HARD all his life. I've seen kids going nuts over his recent material and when I play them Shout and tell them it's the same guy, every mind in the room is blown, mine included. This is a guy who has paid his dues and stayed relevant all his musical life, pretty much. Ronald Isley is an example of someone for whom the new musical directions actually work.

[Vyn]

...the chance to do a tour with Dio gave both Iommi and Dio a bit more of a concert draw.

Several years ago, some rag was interviewing Graham Nash and David Crosby. Of course the topic of a CSN&Y reunion tour came up, and Crosby gave the single most non-bullshit answer that spoke directly to how it's all tied to the money. Paraphrasing: "Only if Neil says yes. CSN might draw 10,000 people. Neil can fill a stadium all by himself.".

Neil never said yes.

[Zzzptm]

Neil Young, like Robert Fripp, is one of those musicians whose stands on principles entertain me more than the music they create.

Neil Young himself is interesting for this discussion because he was feuding with Geffen Records in the 80s. In the course of the feud, he deliberately made non-rock, uncommercial albums that are rated as some of his worst work. It wasn't like he'd lost his magic. He was deliberately holding it back.