Is it possible for "bad bands" to make it big after flopping?

[scorpionldr]

I know this sounds like a silly question, but I've always heard the saying, "you can do what you want with music, but if you suck the first time someone sees you, it's a guarantee they aren't going to want to see you a second time".

example: I'm into this whole kick of noise music. I release some tracks. Concensus is, it sucks, might be interesting, but sucks nonetheless.

years into the future, maybe I decide selling out hardcore, doing something like pop-house (ironically like skrillex or deadmau5 or maybe even David Guetta or Swedish House Mafia). Is it set in stone that I suck? Or is it possible that the suck just gets swept under the rug and I become a pop sensation?

Because I've always had this sort of thinking that once you make an artistic decision in a certain direction, most people will associate you only with that direction.......

 

[smogg]

Best way around that is a name change. They can't say you suck if they don't know who you are.

 

[scorpionldr]

Best way around that is a name change. They can't say you suck if they don't know who you are.

let's say just for the sake of threadlife that names can't be discarded.

 

[smogg]

Maybe if enough time has passed and the original stuff was so bad that no remembers it you might could pull it off. Or if not. perhaps a new "market" to unveil the new stuff?

 

[Meyatch]

If your new music was really good and popular, you will be a pop sensation before anyone figures out you released crappy music before. It would become a mild curiosity.

 

[DiabolusInMusic]

If you make electronic "music" like the artists listed you will definitely suck. Anybody with a handful of DJ gear can churn out electronic beats with relative ease.

Not one of the artists you mentions will still be even the slightest bit relevant 10 years from now, probably not even 5 years from now. So they suck.

Also, don't forget everybody, in every band, ever, sucks, including myself. Everybody in the world listens to awful music. No matter how good you are, somebody, somewhere will assuredly think your terrible.

 

[scorpionldr]

Maybe if enough time has passed and the original stuff was so bad that no remembers it you might could pull it off. Or if not. perhaps a new "market" to unveil the new stuff?

markets are a possibility. But for most noise/experimental artists, there's usually very little market appeal. Long story short I started my own one man project (was an offshoot of my own name) and it was one of these *** backwards ways of having a "band" while not actually having one.

Part of me wants to keep it and work its way into it's own sort of thing where eventually it may be well recieved (kinda like how venetian snares turned out), while part of me wants to kill it and go as mainstream as possible.

 

[smogg]

markets are a possibility. But for most noise/experimental artists, there's usually very little market appeal. Long story short I started my own one man project (was an offshoot of my own name) and it was one of these *** backwards ways of having a "band" while not actually having one.

Part of me wants to keep it and work its way into it's own sort of thing where eventually it may be well recieved (kinda like how venetian snares turned out), while part of me wants to kill it and go as mainstream as possible.

You are aloud to pursue both if you want.
(IMO as YMMV) Use different variants of the original name for each project. That way, there is no direct connection to the original failed venture. Present each project to its relative market and see what happens. Proceed based on how the projects are received.

There are only three possible outcomes.
A) They both succeed - be ready to work hard.
B) One works & one fails - simple decision here.
C) Both crash and burn - deal with it and move on.
Always remember, failures are not the end of the road. They are just stepping stones to a place you haven't got to yet.

Don't forget me when you're rich and famous.

 

[agreatheight]

Lots of bands overcome poor early releases or embarrassing projects.

Pantera & Tori Amos are two that come instantly to mind.

 

[Corevalay]

No matter how good you are, somebody, somewhere will assuredly think your terrible.

lol... so damn true.

 

[stambroker]

Lots of bands overcome poor early releases or embarrassing projects.

Pantera & Tori Amos are two that come instantly to mind.

David Bowie is another good example. His early material was incredibly mediocre but he grew legendary as he became more experienced and reinvented himself.

 

[groooooove]

when you think beatles, do you only think of their first album and "that" vibe?

 

[Roscoe East]

let's say just for the sake of threadlife that names can't be discarded.

Your name would have to become extremely well known before you would even have to worry about it being undiscardable.

Just make whatever music you like. The # of people who decided "you suck" based on your first album is miniscule compared to the # of potential listeners to your second/third/Nth album.

 

[DBCrocky]

No matter how good you are, someone on TB thinks you suck.

 

[Ayce]

One word (band)
Supertramp.
Their first album (Supertramp) tanked so bad, nobody knew who they were.

Indelibly Stamped did little to no better.

Crime Of The Century.....we all know where that went.

Crisis? What Crisis? bombed

Even in the Quietest Moments... away we go again

Most after that did well.

The first two were re-released after their success seemed assured. IIRC they didn't do so well then either.
A good marketer/manager can do wonders.

 

[geeza]

Lots of bands overcome poor early releases or embarrassing projects.

Ministry's first album vs. everything they did after that.