>While Def Leppard eventually glammed it up, their image from
>the getgo and even in the hysteria-days (¤see the videos for
>Animal or Pour some sugar...) was that they were regular
>working class rockers... with perms. They didn't have a
>''star'' or a leader. The NWOBHM-movement that they helped
>pioneer was like that in general:Tygers of Pan tang, Diamond
>Head, Angel Witch and pre-Dickinson Iron Maiden were like that
>too. Sheffield is not the Sunset Strip; it doesn't work to
>look like Vince Neil or act like Axl Rose when you go to the
>local pub and needless to say, that attitude manifested itself
>in the general image and performance style of the band. NWOBHM
>was very "punk" in that regard.
>
Punk had as many frontman types as most other rock forms to me.

>And this is just nonsense:
>
>>for better or
>>worse the singer does make/break the band.
>
>Wer'e not talking Springsteen/Dylan here or even Cobain/Corgan
>(=the type of personality based, singer-songwriter nonsense
>that ruined the *sound* of US "alternative"), wer'e talking
>"heavy rock" (VERY wimpy heavy rock in the case of "Hysteria"
>but still...), a genre where it is often the guitarist that is
>the "star" or where numerous bands (more extreme metal in
>particular) even suscribe to the "faceless" garage-rock
>aesthetic where the band as a *unit* and their combined sound
>is stronger than any individual parts.
>

first of all, I said 'most times', there's not a ton of top-tier bands where the lead singer isn't an asset or a strength.

I can't really comment on the extreme metal stuff because that's not my lane.

And the shit that ruined the "sound" of US 'alternative' wasn't personality-based singer-songwriters, it was due to the same shit that ruins anything else: corporation-induced overexposure, homogenizations/copycats, death/drugs, etc.

The 'singer-songwriter' dudes were either dickheads from the jump like Corgan or cats that never had the chops or were even really even musically related like Evan Dando.

But STP to Bush to Creed to Nickelback isn't a personality/singer-songwriter driven arc.

>Look at the popularity of Metallica; I'd even argue that the
>lack of personalities in that band was their most important
>non-musical aspect; they brought the underground, no
>star/personality aesthetic of the underground mainstream. I
>never heard anyone who held that against the band.
>
Oh Metallica had personality, it just didn't surface until later & revealed itself to be pure douchiness.

I'm not a big Metallica fan. I recognize their importance but outside of Ride The Lightning & Master of Puppets I don't really enjoy them for full albums, those are on a pure musical level.

I've never liked Hetfield's voice or given his lyrics any thought.

>Look at Mötley Crue:vince Neil was NEvER as cool as Nikki Sixx
>or Tommy Lee.
>
I mostly thought Motley Crue sucked outside of about five songs, which puts them above Poison, Warrant, Winger & them but their legacy is more 'rock & roll lifestyle' shit than actual music.

>van Halen may have had a charismatic singer in Roth but let's
>be real:Eddie was the star and the fact that they continued to
>be popular even after the EXTREMELY uncharismatic and dull
>Hagar replaced Roth proves my point.
>
Eddie was the star, sure, I never said that the guitarist couldn't be the or a star.

I said the success/quality of a band often lives/dies with guy up front for better or worse.

And Van Halen was never the same post-Roth so that's a double-edged sword for your point.

>AC/DC even survived losing one of the best frontmen and
>RAWK-singers ever and replaced him with a dude that was pretty
>much a regular joe. Why? Because it's Angus and Malcolm's
>band-''everyone'' knows that.
>
But Bon Scott was in fact a great frontman & the work suffered as a result, particularly after the initial 'something to prove' burst of 'Back In Black' and the next album's title track.

Saying that a guitarist like Eddie Van Halen or a band as powerful as AC/DC can 'get by' for a bit without their original singer/lyricist is almost proving *my* point, it takes an all-time great guitarist or one of the most powerful hard-rock backdrops ever to overcome such a thing.

Jeff Beck couldn't do it & neither could The Doors.

>There are also lots of exceptions of course but in those
>cases, the singer is often a driving force in the
>songwriting...
>
>Basically, I think you are applying classic rock/pop
>aesthetics to the wrong genre.
>
What 'genre' is Def Leppard in the overall scheme of things?

The difference between 'Hysteria'-era Def Leppard & 'Slippery When Wet' era Bon Jovi is almost negligible to me.

I would take the album that inspired this post over a compilation of my favorite songs from those two bands over the course of their careers without hesitation.