So, if you had a rock band and needed to replace a key member, would you want someone who sounds like you already? Or would you rather someone who brings a new element?

Do you think it makes a difference if you are a non-established band?

Or trying a comeback?

Do you need to reinvent yourself to have longevity? Have the Rolling Stones changed that much over the decades? Aerosmith? Has INXS been out of the spotlight too long to comeback without a big shake-up in sound?

If you were a singer/fronter auditioning for bands, would you want to stick with the same genre/sound? I do sometimes wonder why Marty tried out for INXS (as opposed to a Nirvana-type band) - purely career boost or was he looking for something different?

Whadya think? For INXS or in general. Does it depend on the band?

• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,CattyChat, 04:56 PM, 09-08-05
  • RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,cycles2k, 02:18 AM, 09-09-05
  • RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,jpl68, 05:00 PM, 09-09-05
• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,Shypappy, 05:12 PM, 09-08-05
• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,toddE, 05:23 PM, 09-08-05
  • RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,funkalicious, 08:54 PM, 09-08-05
    • RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,shanana banana, 08:50 AM, 09-09-05
• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,PhoenixMons, 05:29 PM, 09-08-05
• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,cheesybread, 05:44 PM, 09-08-05
• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,shanana banana, 06:11 PM, 09-08-05
• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,trigirl, 09:09 AM, 09-09-05
  • RE: Us vs Pretty Vegas,LaLaLisa, 02:50 PM, 09-09-05
    • RE: Us vs Pretty Vegas,photokitty, 07:59 PM, 09-14-05
      • RE: Us vs Pretty Vegas,LaLaLisa, 09:12 PM, 09-14-05
• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,LaLaLisa, 00:36 AM, 09-12-05
  • RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,trigirl, 02:06 PM, 09-13-05
• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,Loree, 12:37 PM, 09-15-05
• RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,Flipper, 01:42 PM, 09-15-05
  • RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,LaLaLisa, 02:05 PM, 09-15-05
  • RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,jpl68, 02:07 PM, 09-15-05
  • RE: Fitting In vs New Direction,photokitty, 02:15 PM, 09-15-05

Good post, LaLa. IMO, I don't think any big rock band should go in a totally new direction, for fear of losing former fan base or just not sounding like themselves. You just need to tweak the formula a bit, to go with the times.

I can't wait to see who INXS chooses & believe we'll get a real sense of whether INXS wants a comeback or not. I see it as follows -- if they pick . . .

J.D., they are serious about a comeback, because I truly feel J.D. is the only one who has "IT" & a lot to bring to the table. He can do their past hits JUSTICE, he has talent in writing & "sound/arrangement" to collaborate & add to INXS formula & J.D.'s stage presence & charisma is OFF THE CHARTS.

Marty, they are looking to go into a new direction & go for the grunge rockers. Marty has a huge fan base (not my preference, though) and Marty should not be willing to compromise his style & INXS shouldn't expect him to. Marty is talented & has great stage presence as well. I do not see INXS choosing Marty & would be shocked if they do, because it would be like oil & water.

Suzie, they just want to put out this one album & do a quick tour & retire. I think she would be a safe pick if INXS is happy to continue to fade away. She has a great voice & can sing the back catalog & whatever else they write for this album. She doesn't have the charisma & stage presence to be a serious front woman for a band.

MiG, likewise, they just want to put out this album, do a quick tour & "semi-retire." They can then do some local gigs in Australia here & there & make appearances. MiG just isn't right to front a rock band, he sounds best sitting at a piano, singing a soft melody.

So, in sum, J.D. is the only chance for a comeback to bring INXS back to the top. I would even go to their concert & fight survival in the mosh pit to see them with J.D.

I believe that a comeback requires new fans because it is the teens and young adults that are buying the CDs and concert tickets. I may purchase six CDs per year. My kids each buy 30 or 40. They have Rolling Stones and Aerosmith CDs but no INXS.

The Rolling Stones has timeless music that ensures them an endless supply of new fans among the CD buying teens and young adults.

Aerosmith kept writing new songs to keep themselves current and popular with the younger folks.

With one or two exceptions, INXS music is not timeless. They need new material on the radio and "Us" is simply not good enough.

As an aside, I am starting to think that JD and INXS are a fit because they will earn a decent living doing tours in Europe, Asia and smaller North American cities and that is the best that JD could hope for. Suzie, Marty, Jordis and Mig will do better without INXS.

Ummm, yes, yes, yes, and yes!! One of the few that analyze this exactly as I have. J.D. is not the "best" choice, but really the only choice if INXS wants to attempt to put out several records and maintain some semblence of their old self.

LAST EDITED ON 09-08-05 AT 05:14 PM (EST)

I wouldn't want my band's music to take any drastic turns.
I'm ok with adding new elements to your music, but the core of the music shouldn't change.
If you wanna change things up that much, it's time to create a new name for the new direction!

As for the singer, I wouldn't want the replacement to mirror what the former singer did! Ends up feeling too much like an impersonator IMO!

If I were INXS, I would want someone to go in a new direction. After all, they weren't exactly hot when Hutchence was still fronting them.

As far as Marty: I don't think the "grunge" scene really exists anymore, either. He is actually the closest thing to a new direction left.

In general, it is extremely difficult to return to fame. I have seen many bands sounding not-half-bad on "Hit Me Baby One More Time," "Bands Reunited," and "Re-Making." None of these people or groups (including the lovely and talented Taylor Dayne) have been able to make any sort of splash again.

I know this sounds rude, but I just don't think any of the remaining singers can bring INXS back (in the USA, internationally a different story). And maybe no one would be able to. It is very difficult.

Van Halen is the only band I can think of that was able to do what INXS is attempting, and that only worked on their first try (Hagar). Their second try (Cerone) didn't go so well.

As others have mentioned, if any band might have a chance at making a comeback with a new singer, it would probably be the abovementioned VH.

The Stones have never really gone away, plus they are huge legends. Their existing fan base keeps them going. Like the Eagles, most of their fans are still their original fans. I doubt either group has gained many new fans in the past 20 years.

Hi all -- great topic! I'm late for my dinner date but had to throw in 3 1980s bands that shared a lot of fans with INXS and have made nice comebacks -- enough to keep playing concerts, cutting albums and doing what they love to do:

Duran Duran
New Order
Depeche Mode

I loved these bands back then and they're still doing great and interesting stuff in my book -- even though my taste has evolved substantially since my days of singing Don't Change and Original Sin on my way to the beach.

G'night.

Hey Funkalicious --- I don't know that I would really consider those three bands a "comeback" -- I mean, sure, they are touring and making money and still perhaps releasing music, but I could name many, many bands who are still doing that and I wouldn't consider them a comeback either. There are lots of '80s bands that are still touring and people come out to see them as a nostalgia remember-your-youth kind of thing for a fun night, but to me a true comeback is actually coming back from essentially doing nothing to being at least as big or even bigger as you were before. That situation rarely, rarely happens, especially when you are replacing a key member.

To just be out there touring and perhaps making some new music that only old diehards will buy is not really a "comeback" and I don't see INXS breeching that. Anybody can simply get their band members back together and play around -- has anybody ever watched VH1s Bands Reunited?

Real comebacks I would consider:

Aerosmith
AC/DC
Van Halen
KISS

I'm sure there's others that I can't think of right now as well, but the list will be short versus just reunited bands.

Good questions...

I am NOT a fan of rock music by in large, but I have always thoroughly enjoyed INXS's music/style. As such, I would want INXS to stick to their style/music without trying to find a Michael Hutchence clone (sound or style). For me personally, I will usually pay attention to rock groups only if I like their music. It's very rarely the 'frontman' who gets me interested in a group (Green Day is about the only exception I can think of) - rather it's the music itself. As a fan of INXS who isn't a fan of rock music in general, I'm probably far less 'experienced' when it comes to who would 'work' the best for INXS. I know a good singer when I hear one (hey, I am a singer myself) and I know a good musician when I hear one (hey I am a musician myself), but I don't necessarily know a good rocker when I see/hear/smell one. I just know what I liked about INXS and who I think could reproduce that (and who would send me in the opposite direction).

Personally, I can't stand JD and probably wouldn't be very interested in INXS if they ended up choosing JD. He just seems so contrived/choreographed and his voice is utterly irritating. If I got to choose the new frontman/woman of INXS it'd either be Marty or Suzie because I think they are the most flexible and versatile and they are appealing on a number of levels (to me anyway). In the beginning my faves were Jordis, Ty, and Brandon. Jordis starting sucking and her performances leave much to be desired (she lacks emotion), Ty was too theatrical though he had arguably the best voice of the whole bunch, and I dunno what happened to Brandon (maybe it was the shoes?). I really starting digging Suzie and Marty as the weeks went on and like what the two of them could bring to the group.

I don't think it's as important that the frontman/woman have the exact same style as INXS/Michael Hutchence...so long as INXS itself doesn't start morphing into something new, I think the new member should be someone with a distinctive sound, is a good performer (without seeming as if he/she is 'performing', IYKWIM), and has a versatile voice more than that he/she is the most similar to INXS's style. I think Marty and Suzie are the only two left who fit that bill. JD would definitely be my last choice (one of my last choices of the whole 15, actually). Oh well, at least Britney, errrr...Jessica is gone

Got blog?

You could go in either direction I would think. However there could be some trade offs. Someone with a new sound and new direction might add excitement but the band would be quite different and the older music might have less relevance and/or create a divide in your fans (e.g. Van Halen). I would rather have someone who compliments the existing style while moving the band in new directions.

It does matter if you are established because the old music is still good and fans still like it. You want to be able to do it justice. Unless you no longer like your old music (e.g. Beastie Boys).

I don't think you need to reinvent yourself for longevity. The two examples you site haven't changed all that much over the years. The key in my eyes is making music that is relevant at the time you are making it. Also, staying with it over the years. Jon Bon Jovi , regardless of what you may think of his music, still sounds good (or the same) after their comback. Can you say the same for Vince Neil?

I see longevity in music the same as most other things. Hard work, practice, dedication, and taking care of yourself. It sounds a bit cliche, but you can't just party for ever.

I think I said this way back in week one (and was chastised for it -- lol) that INXS is basically a has-been band and I highly, highly doubt that no matter who they choose as a singer, it's not going to make a bit of difference -- there's no real comeback here. People have moved on. Sure, their back catalog is good but they're not "classic" everlasting like the Stones or Zeppelin or Van Halen. There will be a bit of a buzz initially, but I'll bet it fades away fast.

Seriously, the three who don't make it at the end ought to thank their lucky stars.

And if I'm wrong, I'll come back and say so. LOL

I think this is a great thread. I have been thinking about this too.

As much as I love Suzie, and do think she has a great voice for the band, I don't think she is a leader.

For me, it's between Marty and JD....for exactly the reasons that you indicate. JD could carry on where the band left off. He is fresh enough and young enough to pick up where Michael was starting to fade, but he could do the job. Marty is different and could take the band in a new direction while doing justice to the back catalogue. I think that when we see who INXS chooses, we'll know the direction that the want to go in.

I totally disagree with the post that they are washed up. Their body of work is amazing. I think a new spin on their songs could work.

LAST EDITED ON 09-09-05 AT 02:55 PM (EST)

A few people have said they hated, "Us." I gotta admit I liked it, but I might've liked anything they did, just being excited to see them all and Dave Navarro - man is he hot..........

Oh, where was I? Oh yeah, "Us." Anyway, not everyone liked it but it was kinda thrown together, not much rehearsal, in a completely new group configuration, sung on a Wednesday afternoon (how hard is to rock in the afternoon???) and most importantly - with nothing at stake for the singers - in short, not the best circumstances. Let's see what it's like on the album, but first impression of INXS on their own ain't universally overshelming. Maybe they know that and that's why they need a new fronter.

On the other hand, a LOT of people liked Pretty Vegas which was JD+INXS - so I think there is still plenty of INXS to draw new fans. I would love to see a Marty alone version of that song (and hell, MiG and Suzie can do one, too, but I'm not that impressed with their songwriting abilities - remember they also are the musical creators of "Stop! Go!")

That would be the most important test - not if they can sing the back catalog - but can they write anything that will bring anyone new to the fold?

added:

I can't believe what a dork I am but I got a seeing people write that they liked my question. "Good, LaLa. Good, Girl!"

>On the other hand, a LOT
>of people liked Pretty Vegas
>which was JD+INXS - so
>I think there is still
>plenty of INXS to draw
>new fans.

Uhhh, no, it was JD + House Band, wasn't it?

Yeah, Andrew Farris wrote the music, but that's not the same thing as saying JD + INXS.

"Uhhh, no, it was JD + House Band, wasn't it?"

When they put co-written by Andrews Farris & JD Fortune on a song, THAT makes it JD+INXS.

Maybe if I had looked at inxs.com sooner I'd have found these blogs...

Andrew Farriss 1 September 2005
Obviously having written for many years with Michael, the two of us found a very organic, simple, songwriting partnership that it was really based out of friendship since highschool. But what I'm doing now is taking into account the skills that I learned from working with Michael and my own song writing and then try to apply those skills with other very talented song writers whilse keeping in mind what would be good for INXS. There is the need to come up with the right balance between moving forward, embracing new ideas, and keeping true to what INXS has been about lyrically and musically and try to come up with something that we feel people would really get off on.

Stylistically , I've been going in all sorts of directions. At the moment I've written everything from ballads to hip-hop/reggae-hop to rock-hop to straight rock. There's some funk stuff, some INXS style riffs and lyrically I'm trying to stay true to - not only my own lyrical ideas - but my co-writers ideas as well. The songs are a combination of being about the world, some are silly, some crazy, some are sexy. I'm not sure how to describe them. But they're moving forward!

http://www.inxs.com/rockstarinxs/blogs_AF.php?id=56

Cool find LaLaLisa. So were Michael and Andrew the main songwriters for the band?

I have heard alot of talk that INXS would like to pick JD so they can guide and nurture him. It would be like their 2nd chance to do it right. They were not able to protect and save Michael. And they see alot of Michael in JD. So this would be their chance to help JD so he is pointed in the right direction. They really feel like they want to take care of him and they would be proud to be the ones to nurture his career.

Tim and Kirk did a radio interview with Marty, JD and MiG. And JD was quick to remind them that he really has nothing to go back to. He wants this so bad.

Suzie even said in an interview with an Aussie reporter that JD wants it the most. And she thinks INXS sees a bit of Michael in JD.

For INXS I don't think it's even about someone fitting in or to take them in a new direction. I think it's about do they want someone to front the band or to lead the band.

They are middle-aged millionaire old timey established rock stars, with a large, bankable catalog of old hits, so I think they don't want someone to assume leadership, they're looking for a front man. That being said, since Marty seems to make it clear (or has been edited that way a la Burnett) that he wants to lead them in a new direction, and since his style is so different, they'd be crazy to go with him. The guy is really talented and he should go see if Nirvana is hiring or if Burnett wants to do a Rock Star 2:Nirvana series.

On the other hand if they are just looking for a pretty, talented front man, Mig is their man, that's his job. Pay him and he can be Freddie Mercury, pay him and he can be Michael Hutchence. The problem with that is INXS will then be officially relegated to being a nostolgia act. One band from the 70's who made a mega comeback has been Santana, and they did it by keeping true to their original sound and infusing fresh new talent (but on a rotating basis).

That brings us to JD. He has a good Michael Hutchence like vibe, is good looking but not model handsome, and has convinced some people that he's unpredictable and therefore a rock star-like edgy bad boy. His original song was tailored to sound like an INXS song. By going with him, INXS keeps the vibe yet infuses new talent. The editing has been mostly about J.D., his journey from wily Survivor-like schemer to reformed, great guy INXS loving tempermental artiste. I recall that throughout the season he was described as "rivetting". So Mig gets the votes, but JD acts like the public image of a true "Rock Star". INXS gets someone who "wants the job most of all" so therefore he can be manipulated and made to behave like a good "front boy", but still act edgy and arrogant to make rock fans swoon.

Everyone gets a record contract, and goes on to fame and fortune and lives happily ever after.

Flipper

"Whatever!"