features

Coffee Shop: Is it better for a band to go out on top or fade away?

Alternative Press - Tim Karan on 11/1/09 @ 1:00 AM - altpress.com

Last week was a rough one for band break-ups. After much speculation, Armor For Sleep announced that they had disbanded, shortly followed by the news that Copeland had done the same. For this week's Coffee Shop, we want to know if you think it's better for a band to call it quits while still at the top of their game or if it's better for the band to continue running its course after the spotlight has dimmed. Let us know what you think!

Note: Try to keep it friendly, everyone! Posts that are threatening or obscene will be deleted.

Comments

Post a Comment

kacixlayne Posted 11.01.09 at 01:02AM
I think if a band still loves to make music and they still love making music together, fading spotlight shouldn't matter. As long as they remember why they were making music together. Break up and disbanding should only happen is there is that disconnect from the music and each other.

rokhedthrabit Posted 11.01.09 at 09:51AM
i think it depends on the situation with the band. if they just really cant stand each other, they should announce they're done and let people know so they dont have to deal with all the speculation. if they're just involved in other projects or uninterested musically, fading out is a good option because then they can live there lives without questions about the breakup hovering over them constantly

gmonkey1655 Posted 11.01.09 at 11:17AM
It definitely does depend on the situation. I don't want to tell a band to stop doing what they love just because they are no longer in the spotlight, but take in consideration bands like From First To Last and Hawthorne Heights. After unfortunate band member losses, their popularity has dimmed and don't seem to be making as good of music as before. And unfortunately I feel Chiodos may be heading down the same path.

69sarahjane Posted 11.02.09 at 12:06PM
It's better for a band to stop while they're on top so everyone will remember them for how kickass they were. If they slowly fade away and then call it quits everyone will remember them for what they became.

BadBadBrain Posted 11.03.09 at 03:07PM
I personally think that it's much better for a band to call it quits at the height of their popularity as opposed to just sticking together for the sake of sticking together. Cap'n Jazz, Bear vs Shark, Hot Water Music, & Operation Ivy all disbanded before their music careers really had the opportunity to take off, before they became "famous". And then there's bands like Rancid, Alkaline Trio and Weezer, credit to them for still being together for 10+ years, but after awhile the music becomes stale and they tend to make the same record over & over...It sucks to think about your favorite band breaking up, but I think it sucks even more having to stay in a band that your hearts not in anymore.

thisisalliedeen Posted 11.05.09 at 09:26AM
i think if a band loves what they're doing, they don't need to worry about going away because they'll always have a loyal band of follwers whether on myspace, facebook, or twitter. but i think they should go away at the height of their career, so their loyal fans can still want them to make more music, but then other people who liked one or two of their songs comes back in 5 years and goes "what ever happened to this band?" and then they end up really liking their music and becoming a bigger fan than the ones who followed that band from their beginnings.



  |     |   Share   |   Print this article