There are plenty of examples to show that a band member can pass away or leave a band, and the band goes on without a flaw. But what does a band do when it’s founding member and lead singer, both one in the same, dies? Evidently they go on without a stitch. This, I believe, is a show of disrespect towards the person. I am talking about Drowning Pool. Dave Williams died suddenly in 2001 just before going to Wisconsin for Ozzfest that year. What the remaining members decided to do was replace the founder/lead singer and try to live off the fame of the name that is Drowning Pool. Now, he isn’t the first lead singer of a band to die and have the original band continue on, this happened with AC/DC back in 79’ when the original singer of the band, Bon Scott, died after a long night of drinking. In this case, the remaining members found a replacement but did not change the name. This is because Malcolm and Angus Young founded the band originally and were in the position to keep the name. But to just level the argument, the name change is more of a judgment thing. Metallica hasn’t changed their name and they have been through four bassists and two guitarists. The original founding members, James Hetfield and Lars Ulrich, have been with the band for its 20+ year span. Nirvana disbanded when Kurt Cobain died ten years ago of an overdose, Blind Melon broke up when Shannon Hoon died of an overdose, The Red Hot Chili Peppers stayed together after losing their original guitarist to an overdose, Alice and Chains split after Layne Staley died of a heroin and cocaine binge that left him dead and SNOT went their separate ways after lead singer Lynne Strait died of, surprise, an overdose. In a couple of these instances, bands broke up because they were no longer the original band and they felt that they could not, in any way, replace the original member that made them what they were. In the other instances where members died and the bands went on, a huge legacy was built before the members died or left. Metallica had three huge albums before the original bassist died in a bus accident, and then went on to have 6 more albums before switching bassists again. The Red Hot Chili Peppers also built a huge fan base before their original guitarist died. AC/DC had a full decade of hit CD’s before Bon Scott died and were justified in keeping the name. And back to Drowning Pool. They had one CD as the original band and it sold a million copies after a year and a half on the charts. The platinum mark came after Dave Williams’ death in 2001. Was there a legacy to keep for the remaining members of Drowning Pool? Only for the couple hundred thousand that loved their gritty music. It certainly didn’t measure up to the legacy of albums that both Metallica and AC/DC had when they had to make the choice to go on.

So in conclusion, don’t take this post too seriously. I just heard the new Drowning Pool recently and was very disappointed with the song. It is terrible. In light of this event, I began to think about bands and their troubles and what they do to recover. I am just getting my thoughts across to you.

this should be moved to music

i actually agree with you on this one now, having mulled it over. while i still think drowning pool carries the same sound, sort of, that they had before, a lead singer is a huge part of what makes or breaks a band, and they are a defining part in what the overall sound of the band is like. i still like drowning pool, and like the new single, but yeah, maybe they shouldve changed their name, they were famous, but not that famous yet. rage lost their main man who also was the person/thing that everyone thought of when they thought of rage against the machine. they changed to audioslave and were just as successful. so i now agree with you bear, and no i dont hate you.

The new single is good, but bland, I'd have to hear the rest of the CD. I really like Drowning Pool, but I don't know if I'll like them as much now..:( I think it's ok that they went on after Dave died.

Also, you should break apart your post with some spaces between every 4-5 paragraphs, it was kinda hard to read.

I havent heard the new song yet, but I think that they should chang to a diffrent name. I loved Rage and was in shock when I heard that Zack de la Rocha left the band in late 2000. they where right to make a new name and i think that Drowning Pool should do the same. I think that if there new CD is good they might be able to pull it off, but if its bad then it will be a real shame. I dont think that Adioslave could ever live up to what rage ever was and I dont think that there CD was that great anyways.

thats exactly it, without zach rage isnt the same, and the name change and sound change was good. i still like drowning pool, but they arent the same drowning pool i originally became a fan of.