Rant: Band names

[mikechamp]

I believe a band's name* is truly one of the contributing factors to their historical success, i.e., longevity. Some of the band names I'm seeing these days are just too weird. I don't understand, in a day and age when a lot of music is market researched/tested, somebody in marketing doesn't stand up and say, "Woah! Let's go with something a little more catchy or memorable than ____." It also seems that, more often than not, length works against a band.

Look back through history. The Doors, The Beatles, The Police, Genesis, Rush, Pearl Jam, Metallica, The Cars, Heart, etc.

As a negative example of this theory (and this is not a slight on the band, as I have never heard a microsecond of their music), Neutral Milk Hotel. Who thought of that, and what does that even mean?

On the flip side, I don't believe The Lumineers' band name works against them at all. I don't like their music, but thumbs up to the band name.

There are certainly exceptions to this theory. Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers come to mind, though it does have a person's name in it, so it falls in a gray area.

Yes, as time goes on, names get taken. But we're talking about creative people here! We can do better! All I'm saying is, give yourself a chance! Don't shoot yourself in the foot with the starter's gun.

Am I the only one who has thought about this? If so, at the very least, it felt good to rant about it.

*The exception to this theory is a person's name, like Jimi Hendrix or Eric Johnson. Those can go either way, but you can't get upset at someone for their name.
**Again, this isn't a commentary on a band's music. It's about their chances at being historically successful (i.e., longevity).

[The Third Man]

I've always been grateful for the fact that R.E.M., one of my all-time favorite bands, opted to go with that name and not some of the other options: Cans of Piss, and Negro Wives. I don't think Cans of Piss makes Automatic for the People.

[mikechamp]

You bring up a good point about alternatives. I was thinking about this, but didn't type it in the original post:

AC/DC

Pretty easy to remember; it even rhymes. Now, imagine if they went by the name "The Electrical Currents"? or something non-electrical related, like "Hydrochloric Acid Containers"?

It's just not as catchy.

[IMADreamer]

I very much agree with your premise. That band Panic! At the Disco, came out a few years ago and I thought to myself, stupid name, won't make it. That's one of the best recent examples I can think of.

[mikechamp]

I very much agree with your premise. That band Panic! At the Disco, came out a few years ago and I thought to myself, stupid name, won't make it. That's one of the best recent examples I can think of.

Good one! I had forgotten about them, but remember having a similar thought at the time.

[The Third Man]

There's also The The and !!! (which the band requests be pronounced chk-chk-chk). Google and the internet are powerful enough that you won't have a problem finding info on either or discussing them online, but I don't think either did themselves much of a favor as up-and-comers.

I'll take a stupid band name over a stupidly long band name, though. ...And You Will Know Us by the Trail of the Dead, seriously?

[Jocephus]

what about "the band"

[The Third Man]

what about "the band"

I think that one's great because it says so much about them. They pretty much exemplify professionalism, competency, strong songwriting, intra-band democracy. Nothing flashy about them.

[Jocephus]

what about "buddy guy"...what if his name was "guy buddy", would his music still be considered good?

[The Third Man]

I'm not sure, but Buddy Guy is rad.