Quote:
Originally posted by Rick and Roll
ooh such bile and venom! 
|
Nah. It's all toung-in-cheek dude.
Quote:
Originally posted by Rick and Roll
Anyway, Ian Gillian is not Sabbath!
|
Huh? You lost me on that one Rick.
Quote:
Originally posted by Rick and Roll
At least he can sing. You don't like Rainbow?
|
At least they didn't call themselves "Deep Purple".
Quote:
Originally posted by Rick and Roll
Tony and Geezer did some great work after Ozzy left. That's the basis of Sabbath there, not who sings.
|
I agree. But the basis of Dio IS the singing. That's why it shouldn't be called "Sabbath" at all. They should have called themselves "The Tony Geezer Dio Band" or something like that.
Quote:
Originally posted by Rick and Roll
Some bands sound the same after the singer changes. Comparing Sabbath after the change and Journey after the change is not comparable. Journey went into a whole different area.
|
I wasn't comparring anything. Just making a point. The bands, although the names were the same, were markedly different. When I think of "Black Sabbath", I don't think of songs with Dio vocals. Just like when I think of "Journey" songs, I think of songs with Greg Rolie vocals. That's all. Although when I think of "Dio", I think of Heaven and Hell songs....does that make any sense?
Quote:
Originally posted by Rick and Roll
It's the same tired Fish/Hogarth and Gabriel/Collins argument. If a band changes, most of the time it's not the singer's fault. That's overrated. I always look at "Calling All Stations" as an example.
|
I don't blame Dio. I've just never cared much for him. (can you tell?) And you're right about the Gabriel/Collins thing there. No contest in my opinion. Why did Collins keep the name "Genesis"? He shouldn't have.
Kev