when famous bands first started out

[richardjones89]

everyones heard of the phrase 'everybodies got to start somewhere' right?

well, listening to some very early recordings of the manic street preachers back from as early as 1989 - before anybody had ever heard of them - its interesting to see how far they have progressed since then. it shows that when all bands start out they lack quality in a few areas and need work, even the world greats (which may be in your cases)

im talking about the sort of songs that go on bands first ever demo tapes, or something similar, before they reach recognition. the stereophonics did some amazing rock and roll stuff when they were under the name of tragic love company.

has anyone ever heard any early demos of their favourite bands and thought: 'this isnt that good compared to what they can do now?' or 'they sounded just like a normal band' or anything else?

[bassist15]

Acually ive heard some of the opposite too. Ive listened to some of the tracks off of Jaco Pastorius' demo and they saw almost better in their raw form. He also has a song or two that he never recorded again. And Ive also heard that the famous funk star Betty DAvis' demo was filled with superstars that didnt appear on her debut album.

[WJGreer]

As you imply, figure that prior to their first album, most bands have a lot of music that they write, play, and build in their local scenes over a long period of time, possibly years, and then finally record it. The second and third albums might have some of that tried and true stuff too, especially if the band is so prolific that they had way more good music than could fit on the first one.

By the time a band reaches its third, fourth, fifth recording, you are almost certainly hearing music that was conceived completely in the mere months since the previous one was done. That difference in "marinating time" is a lot of what I think makes most bands' early stuff among its best.

My opinion of Pearl Jam's "Ten" - from what I know about the legend and lore of the scene in Seattle at that time, the band can't have been together for very long before they recorded that album, and I am unaware of anything before it, independent or otherwise. Yet, it is so staggeringly good. They really put something special together in a very short period of time. And IMO they have never matched it.

[richardjones89]

yes thats quite a good point. many bands when they record new material sound condensed and simplified, which may be down to the fact that their older material is much more devloped and spent ages on.

some people could use this as an excuse to say that bands are 'sold out' or changing their sound too much. i see another reason behind the less technical developed music now. thanks for your opinion