While listening to The Band: A Musical History (thanks again for the hook up, Chuck), I came to the realization that even though I've been a huge fan of The Band for decades, I've never truly appreciated just how important Garth Hudson was to their sound. He's rarely, if ever, mentioned when people discuss the most important members of The Band, yet they wouldn't have been as great as they were without him.

Another example (albeit an admittedly lesser one), is Michael Anthony of Van Halen. It was his harmonies, not Eddie's guitar, that made them unique. Without his voice backing DLR, they'd have just been another rock band with a flashy guitarist. I'm not taking anything away from Eddie's brilliance, but what made those songs so damn catchy and caused them to permanently lodge in your brain was Michael's harmonization.

What other such examples can you think of where an overshadowed band member was actually the heart of that band?

I have had a good number of realizations while listening to this. The first being that Dylan plugging in was basically taking his sound and upping the JAIL quotient. These dudes backed up THE HAWK! it don't get more jail than that.


To answer the question of the thread: Ronnie Wood. Not so important to THE SOUND, but there are no Stones post Some Girls, and Some Girls is a VASTLY different rekkid without RONNIE (speaking of JAIL)

Izzy Stradlin from Guns N' Roses.
He was the man that wrote the songs, for one thing.
Also, his Keef-like riffing gave real grit to what would have otherwise been fairly cliché metal arrangements. (Phil will argue with me on this, i know.)
When Izzy left the band, they began their swift, steep decline.

Jody Stephens from Big Star.
Yeah, the songs are king. But Jody gives the arrangements the muscle they needed to be lifted above the power pop fray, to make them majestic. Try to imagine "Back Of A Car", "When My Baby's Beside Me" or any of their songs without Jody. It's just not Big Star without him.

I'm glad this isn't all about the Wilson sisters.

I agree with this whole heartedly. While the first album is full credited to "Guns n Roses", the band schism starts at Illusion and his songs are the best across both albums. His '92 solo album was ignored, but it will likely better than anything off Chinese Democracy and it cost about $99 million less.

It's synergy, my friend. Any one Gunner without the rest is shite. But, their powers combined... It's second only to Zeppelin, according to Chuck Eddy.

John Paul Jones

his bass lines keep everything sturdy, his mandolin made III, his keys made them weird.

Three Chucks commenting on this must be a record, but I'll disagree with Chuck K on Izzy and agree pretty much everywhere else. Although 'Beggars and Hangers-on' had its moments. But with Chuck E, I agree they'll never equal what they all had together.

R.E.M. suffered irrepairably when Berry quit. He was their propulsion and what kept their sound from wandering too far into Stipe's navel. Since he quit the kit, they've had a lot of interesting, sometimes even lovely songs, but none of the albums have been exciting.

Shit, is irrepairably even a word? Irreprably? Irrepparably? Erpyburpy?

Yeah, REM's definitely the shining example of this. I would've never suspected a drummer would be THAT important to group cohesion, but there you go.

I imagine a similar fate would befall U2, if Larry, Mullen, Junior! ever retired to Graceland.

I think the "heart" or "glue" thing is a very important, often underappreciated aspect of why a band excels or does not...except for in rare cases of songwriting/performing/arranging excellence, it really comes down to the egos and talent in the room. Unless, like, Eno/Lanois are also in the room.

I lollered.

I looked it up, it's 'irreparably'. Now, whether to use 'irreparability' or 'irreparableness', that's your problem.