• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Bands that dramatically changed their sound for the better?

The doo-wop Parliaments' transformation into acid funk rock Funkadelic's transformation, into flashlight wielding disco - mmm, no not disco - the most danceable funk of Parliament, while keeping the rock sound of Funkadelic. Not to mention the arena rock outer space spectacle that the Parliafunkadelicment thang P-Funk Earth Tour was. Or Bootsy.


Notice the lyrics

Notice the bass line

Notice Boogie Mosson on Rickenbacker and Eddie Hazel at 2:51
 
Last edited:
But as a rock group? They were never as good after "the bends".

The Bends was my favorite Radiohead album for a long time, but in the last 6 or 7 years, that has become Kid A, followed by In Rainbows. I wasn't one of those fans that didn't understand their new direction, I welcomed it - I just thought The Bends was a better album overall.

But over the decades (wow, crazy to think I saw them perform 26 years ago in 1995!), I've come to appreciate Kid A a lot more, and it's the album I return to more often. Songwriting-wise, In Rainbows was their peak for me (I'd say that album was from their 3rd phase of sound transformation that started with Hail to the Thief).

I understand their sound became less guitar based, but I don't know that makes them any less of a rock group.
 
Come to think of it, both the Ohio Players and Kool and the Gang made the switch from obscure jazz bands to the 70s funk, and Kool and the Gang went from hard funk to crossover disco. Of course, whether the change from funk to disco is surely debatable, but it made them more money.
 
I'm a child of the 80s; I love the 80s. But 70s Genesis was still better to me (and this is including the 3 albums with Phil on vocals). And I like Duke (1980) as well, but their stuff after that album was mediocre, at best.

Has anyone mentioned Journey yet? They sound fully transformed from their first few albums.
Journey is a good one. I can't get through a single song of their very early stuff. They're still selling out stadiums playing their 80s stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrotherRay
The original Moody Blues were a good English R&B band, then recorded a good pop song "Go Now" and morphed into a dreamy early prog-rock band.

Status Quo who had a psychedelic/pop hit with "Pictures of matchstick men" in 1968 turned into a three-chord boogie band to huge success.

Ten Years After though, were a really good jazz/blues influenced band that ended up after Woodstock making a career of boogie rock which kind of wasted Alvin Lee's jazz chops. Understandable from the $ POV though.


TYA were GREAT live though.
 
And I'll throw out another - Simple Minds. Their first 3 albums were a hodge-podge (or Reel Cacophony - hehe) before they meshed out their style, which then changed again after the hit their peak of popularity (Don't You...) when their original drummer and bassist had both left the band. Now they're a lyric/guitar driven pop band - not bad, but not what they once were (in my opinion, but then I might be bitter that they won't do a decent tour here in the States...)
 
  • Like
Reactions: J-Bassomatic
The Bends was my favorite Radiohead album for a long time, but in the last 6 or 7 years, that has become Kid A, followed by In Rainbows. I wasn't one of those fans that didn't understand their new direction, I welcomed it - I just thought The Bends was a better album overall.

But over the decades (wow, crazy to think I saw them perform 26 years ago in 1995!), I've come to appreciate Kid A a lot more, and it's the album I return to more often. Songwriting-wise, In Rainbows was their peak for me (I'd say that album was from their 3rd phase of sound transformation that started with Hail to the Thief).

I understand their sound became less guitar based, but I don't know that makes them any less of a rock group.
First, totally! Yea, I get it. I agree, other than imho what I liked best of theirs was the bends. I put that album on quite a high pedestal.

It isn't the lack of guitars later on. It's not even the genre... which was no longer rock for the most part, although that alone is enough for them to no longer be as good a rock group after that date... but again this thread topic isn't limited to rock music. Music group? Yes. Rock group? no, but again that is not what is what makes them less great to me after that change.

However, on the bends, the group sounds like a cohesive mesh that is amazing to me, and the input of various licks per player is very strong all over the bends, and the listening and jamming along and creativity together is amazing... to me. The chemistry is incredible there...

The later albums had less of that even magical chemistry between all of the members, imho, to my ears. It's not that they couldn't do that, they chose not to so much, clearly, due to the style of music they were playing.

So this is partly due to the direction of musical style they went forward in... which is not rock, for the most part. It's naturally a style of music that requires a different type of communication and cohesion - one that is more planned out, more carefully orchestrated, more like what contemporary "classical" music composers have been doing for a few decades now. It's amazing, and musically more impressive, but they were no longer as amazing of a rock group after The Bends.

To be clear - I am not criticizing them negatively. As a classical musician myself who focused on "new music", which is very much like what they did over the last few albums, I have immense respect for what they do and I love it. So my opinion here is subjective in teh thread. I feel that their change was not for the better afterwards. That's the thing with music - it's subective! I think my reason for feeling this is because they were SUCH a GREAT ROCK BAND before this... and then when they went in a new direction, they lost that magic, to me, imho.

They are still one of the 2 most impressive groups to me that started 2-3 decades ago and are still going strong. The other is Muse. That's within a very limited category for, since there are obviously many more than that. Just being topical here :)

What's awesome is that you and I are both huge fans of theirs, in all of their genres! Pretty cool :-)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Relayer71
Except both of these bands went downhill not uphill.

In your personal opinion, which is all any of us can present. I personally prefer the Nicks/Buckingham era Mac, although I like the early era as well.

Floyd, can't stand Waters but don't like anything post-Waters, and I like the Syd era. I know you didn't mention Floyd :)

I haven't followed R.E.M. enough to even know if they've changed, but they were great when I saw them live in '99...
 
Souxie and the Banshees...started as an inspired amateur throw-together outfit of some of the earliest Sex Pistols followers, long on ideas but short on execution skills, but that was the whole idea of those times— just get in there and do it instead of standing around with your hands in your pockets. Though they were of the London punk scene, they weren’t a punk band, drawing inspiration from all sorts of sources, and after some personnel changes they got it sorted out, bit by bit, album by album, and it really came together on Juju, their fourth.
Juju is a legendary album.
 
In your personal opinion, which is all any of us can present. I personally prefer the Nicks/Buckingham era Mac, although I like the early era as well.

Floyd, can't stand Waters but don't like anything post-Waters, and I like the Syd era. I know you didn't mention Floyd :)

I haven't followed R.E.M. enough to even know if they've changed, but they were great when I saw them live in '99...


I actually deleted that comment after I thought about it.
 
Last edited:
i thought miles was a good choice until someone mentioned that jazz artists probably aren't the best examples, and they probably aren't. there are some thoughtful mentions in the thread, but i'm with the folks who point out all of the subjectivity involved. some of these acts are not exactly household names even though they might fit the OP's intent.

i voted "the beatles" --- they're probably the best, G.O.A.T. example of an act that "dramatically changed their sound for the better."
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobyoung53