I guess this is fairly open topic, talk about some aspect of this concept.
What do you do when your favorite band changes its singer?
Have there been any bands who have changed their singer for the better/worse?
Best/Worst singer change?

Anyway the general idea is to open up this discussion, because Im curious what people have to say about this. Because its one thing to change a drummer or a bass player, or an ok guitarist, a band can replase them and move on, but it is to a much less extent for singers. Yes there have been some good changes ie, Paul Di Anno - Bruce Dickinson, Tom Greely - Mat Barlow as well as probably a few others.
Overall I would say if you change your singer you change the most 'human' element of the music, very few bands do it and maintain their album sales and quality.

BTW - Tarja Turunan - Anette Olzen was a great move by Nightwish

Its hard , there many reasons why
usuualy there 3-5 good albums, long tours and band is tired of something , vocalist wanna leave try something alse, rest etc
there can be fight in band
there can be alco, drug death case
there can be band wanna evolutiion new sound
etc there meny there isnt one reaosn why they do it

Hm, Angela Gossow replacing John Liiva in Arch Enemy turned out badly, imo. They lost their charm with the change..

In most cases, these changes are shitty. It depends at which stage you get into a band. I can barely stand listening to Sabbath without Ozzy. Dio was the sign of a new age for the band, but his vocals don't pass to what Sabbath was. You couldn't remake Vol. 4 with Dio... it would sound hideous.

For some extreme metal bands, some people can't really tell the difference. In my opinion, losing the singer is usually something hard for the band. Guitarists can always be replaced, but a specific voice can't.

Imagine Shining with Mikko Aspa... would still be kinda weird...

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 13:24

Hm, Angela Gossow replacing John Liiva in Arch Enemy turned out badly, imo. They lost their charm with the change..

I would agree with you, I know many won't, but definately Stigmata was a favorite of their albums. John Liiva has a certain charm to his voice. He sat nicely in the background and let the Amott brothers take over. Which is what make Arch Enemy good imo.
Angela is good, she has a good style, but i find her sometimes a little screechy and a little too dominate over the Amott brothers at times.

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 13:24

Hm, Angela Gossow replacing John Liiva in Arch Enemy turned out badly, imo. They lost their charm with the change..

Yes I agree, but they have more fans now, all wanna see here not her music
Same was Nightwish case

Written by TheBigRossowski on 30.09.2009 at 13:37

Guitarists can always be replaced, but a specific voice can't.

Not always. When a guitarist has a signature sound it is hard to replace him. Just listen to Megadeth as glaring example.

Mayhem getting Attila was a plus, same with Rob Lowe joining Candlemass.

Written by Dangerboner on 30.09.2009 at 13:56

Mayhem getting Attila was a plus, same with Rob Lowe joining Candlemass.

I definitely agree with Rob Lowe he has added so much more too their music in the last few albums.
Attila has been good for Mayhem too, I agree... But Rob Lowe is a great call.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 30.09.2009 at 13:50

Written by TheBigRossowski on 30.09.2009 at 13:37

Guitarists can always be replaced, but a specific voice can't.

Not always. When a guitarist has a signature sound it is hard to replace him. Just listen to Megadeth as glaring example.

Well, yeah...not ALWAYS... but for the most part. That's a replaceable sound, whereas, a voice can't be mimicked (generally...of course there are always similarities).

And Attila was the best thing that happened to Mayhem, I agree!

Another plus: Mortuus/Arioch becoming the Marduk vocalist

Minuses: Corpsegrinder replacing Chris Barnes, Jason replacing Chalky (Psycroptic), Bush replacing Joey (Anthrax)

Written by ToMegaTherion on 30.09.2009 at 13:40

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 13:24

Hm, Angela Gossow replacing John Liiva in Arch Enemy turned out badly, imo. They lost their charm with the change..

I would agree with you, I know many won't, but definately Stigmata was a favorite of their albums. John Liiva has a certain charm to his voice. He sat nicely in the background and let the Amott brothers take over. Which is what make Arch Enemy good imo.
Angela is good, she has a good style, but i find her sometimes a little screechy and a little too dominate over the Amott brothers at times.

Yes, you're definitely into something. I actually got the impression that she was trying to play a role in the music, but instead can't keep up and only drags the music down.

Written by TheBigRossowski on 30.09.2009 at 13:37

In my opinion, losing the singer is usually something hard for the band. Guitarists can always be replaced, but a specific voice can't.

I definately agree, sometimes singer have such a unique voice that when a band looses them it never sounds the same again. The Gathering have struggled, as have Tristania on two counts Vibeke and Morton. Exodus have struggle without Steve Souza (even if his is a wanker), Miden when they lost Dicko in the 90s. Priest as well.
Usually the singers that replace these guys arn't bad by any means, but some vocalists are unique and unreplaceable.

Well vocalist can kick all band away and strat new one whit new mussiacns like Udo Dirchsneider , even Tarja if she wanna go in old NW way she could do it

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 14:06

Written by ToMegaTherion on 30.09.2009 at 13:40

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 13:24

Hm, Angela Gossow replacing John Liiva in Arch Enemy turned out badly, imo. They lost their charm with the change..

I would agree with you, I know many won't, but definately Stigmata was a favorite of their albums. John Liiva has a certain charm to his voice. He sat nicely in the background and let the Amott brothers take over. Which is what make Arch Enemy good imo.
Angela is good, she has a good style, but i find her sometimes a little screechy and a little too dominate over the Amott brothers at times.

Yes, you're definitely into something. I actually got the impression that she was trying to play a role in the music, but instead can't keep up and only drags the music down.

Definately agree, one thing I think in extreme metal not just with Arch Enemy, if a singer is going to play a big part in the music they need a certain uniqueness to their voice and they need to have variation. Angela is a domate singer but without much versatility. She was good on Wages of Sin, mainly because she didn't try too much, but sat back and let the band do the bulk of the work.

Written by TheBigRossowski on 30.09.2009 at 14:01

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 30.09.2009 at 13:50

Written by TheBigRossowski on 30.09.2009 at 13:37

Guitarists can always be replaced, but a specific voice can't.

Not always. When a guitarist has a signature sound it is hard to replace him. Just listen to Megadeth as glaring example.

Well, yeah...not ALWAYS... but for the most part. That's a replaceable sound, whereas, a voice can't be mimicked (generally...of course there are always similarities).

And Attila was the best thing that happened to Mayhem, I agree!

This is exactly why I specified in the introduction "ok guitarists", because definitely some can not be replaced. Another example here would be Iced Earth, Schaffer has an interesting technique (Largely because it was self-taught). Usually it is guarists that have an unusual technique, or they are particularly gifted.

I find Arch Enemy better with Gossow on vocals compared to some in this thread Liiva lacked a certain power, Wages of Sin to me is their best material and Gossow plays a good part in that. Another good change for me was the addition of Bjorn Strid in Disarmonia Mundi.

Written by ToMegaTherion on 30.09.2009 at 14:14

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 14:06

Written by ToMegaTherion on 30.09.2009 at 13:40

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 13:24

Hm, Angela Gossow replacing John Liiva in Arch Enemy turned out badly, imo. They lost their charm with the change..

I would agree with you, I know many won't, but definately Stigmata was a favorite of their albums. John Liiva has a certain charm to his voice. He sat nicely in the background and let the Amott brothers take over. Which is what make Arch Enemy good imo.
Angela is good, she has a good style, but i find her sometimes a little screechy and a little too dominate over the Amott brothers at times.

Yes, you're definitely into something. I actually got the impression that she was trying to play a role in the music, but instead can't keep up and only drags the music down.

Definately agree, one thing I think in extreme metal not just with Arch Enemy, if a singer is going to play a big part in the music they need a certain uniqueness to their voice and they need to have variation. Angela is a domate singer but without much versatility. She was good on Wages of Sin, mainly because she didn't try too much, but sat back and let the band do the bulk of the work.

Yeah, you're right, it does work well on Wages of Sin. Unfortunately I think the album is boring nontheless. The potential was there, but I feel it's too predictable and "soulless". I think she does a great job on Doomsday Machine though. Overall it's a good album.

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 14:23


Yeah, you're right, it does work well on Wages of Sin. Unfortunately I think the album is boring nontheless. The potential was there, but I feel it's too predictable and "soulless". I think she does a great job on Doomsday Machine though. Overall it's a good album.

As i said she is good, I like Doomsday as well, it had some good songs. "Soulless" maybe, I supose it didn't have the same feeling of earlier albums.

I do agree with one previous coment by the guy a favor of Angela "Liiva lacks a certain power." It depends from what I have seen of Liiva live, which is only on You Tube, he lacked charisma on stage and seemed a little stiff. But on the albums he was a much different and better singer.

Bad Replacements: Morbid Angel (Vincents leave), Cannibal Corpse (Barnes leave), Grave (Sandströms leave), Sepultura (Cavaleras leave).

Good Replacements: Dark Tranquillity (Stanne- Friden), Amorphis (Tomi Joutsen), Mayhem (Attila -when he is in the band).

Written by ToMegaTherion on 30.09.2009 at 14:29

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 14:23


Yeah, you're right, it does work well on Wages of Sin. Unfortunately I think the album is boring nontheless. The potential was there, but I feel it's too predictable and "soulless". I think she does a great job on Doomsday Machine though. Overall it's a good album.

As i said she is good, I like Doomsday as well, it had some good songs. "Soulless" maybe, I supose it didn't have the same feeling of earlier albums.

I do agree with one previous coment by the guy a favor of Angela "Liiva lacks a certain power." It depends from what I have seen of Liiva live, which is only on You Tube, he lacked charisma on stage and seemed a little stiff. But on the albums he was a much different and better singer.

Yes, so I have read in various interviews and that was one of the reasons why he was dropped.. I guess he's a calm person who just don't shows the enthusiasm as appearent as others. Playing live is a big deal for many musicians so it's understandable that they wanted a different frontman, all though it was a big stab in the back for Liiva.

Written by Deadmeat on 30.09.2009 at 14:33

Bad Replacements: Cannibal Corpse (Barnes leave)

I must disagree, Cannibal Corpse were awful back in the days of Barnes, they aren't exceptionnal now but they are better. I think Six Feet Under is much better than old Cannibal to so his leave had a double bonus. However, I couldn't agree more about Cavalera, Sepultura died when he left.

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 14:37

Written by ToMegaTherion on 30.09.2009 at 14:29

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 14:23


Yeah, you're right, it does work well on Wages of Sin. Unfortunately I think the album is boring nontheless. The potential was there, but I feel it's too predictable and "soulless". I think she does a great job on Doomsday Machine though. Overall it's a good album.

As i said she is good, I like Doomsday as well, it had some good songs. "Soulless" maybe, I supose it didn't have the same feeling of earlier albums.

I do agree with one previous coment by the guy a favor of Angela "Liiva lacks a certain power." It depends from what I have seen of Liiva live, which is only on You Tube, he lacked charisma on stage and seemed a little stiff. But on the albums he was a much different and better singer.

Yes, so I have read in various interviews and that was one of the reasons why he was dropped.. I guess he's a calm person who just don't shows the enthusiasm as appearent as others. Playing live is a big deal for many musicians so it's understandable that they wanted a different frontman, all though it was a big stab in the back for Liiva.

Live can be a very difficult thing, but in the case of Liiva I don't necessarily think it was a bad thing because it made the Amott brothers take more control on stage. And lets face it... the main reason people listen to Arch Enemy is for the Amott's not Angela or Liiva.

Written by ToMegaTherion on 30.09.2009 at 14:42

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 14:37

Written by ToMegaTherion on 30.09.2009 at 14:29

Written by GamlaSonn on 30.09.2009 at 14:23


Yeah, you're right, it does work well on Wages of Sin. Unfortunately I think the album is boring nontheless. The potential was there, but I feel it's too predictable and "soulless". I think she does a great job on Doomsday Machine though. Overall it's a good album.

As i said she is good, I like Doomsday as well, it had some good songs. "Soulless" maybe, I supose it didn't have the same feeling of earlier albums.

I do agree with one previous coment by the guy a favor of Angela "Liiva lacks a certain power." It depends from what I have seen of Liiva live, which is only on You Tube, he lacked charisma on stage and seemed a little stiff. But on the albums he was a much different and better singer.

Yes, so I have read in various interviews and that was one of the reasons why he was dropped.. I guess he's a calm person who just don't shows the enthusiasm as appearent as others. Playing live is a big deal for many musicians so it's understandable that they wanted a different frontman, all though it was a big stab in the back for Liiva.

Live can be a very difficult thing, but in the case of Liiva I don't necessarily think it was a bad thing because it made the Amott brothers take more control on stage. And lets face it... the main reason people listen to Arch Enemy is for the Amott's not Angela or Liiva.

Yes, what you say makes sense, I agree it probably was for the better for both parts, but just commented it must suck for him to get booted by his friends. Hm, I'm not sure if the average AE fan cares more about the Amott's or Angela, people tend to think the front(wo)man is most important, don't you think? I mean, teenage girls is fascinated by Angela "omg she can growl and she's a girl shes my idol" etc. Of course, anyone with a clue about Michael's history would see the obvious choice.

Written by Haddonfield on 30.09.2009 at 14:41

Written by Deadmeat on 30.09.2009 at 14:33

Bad Replacements: Cannibal Corpse (Barnes leave)

I must disagree, Cannibal Corpse were awful back in the days of Barnes, they aren't exceptionnal now but they are better. I think Six Feet Under is much better than old Cannibal to so his leave had a double bonus. However, I couldn't agree more about Cavalera, Sepultura died when he left.

you cannot deny that The Bleeding is their best album. it is the only CC album that has almost no fillers. todays CC have a much better production and are a bit more technical. but back in the 90's when Barnes was in the band they managed every new record to sound different from the previous. on the other hand in the era: 1998-2004 all CC albums sounded exactly the same. the differences were only in the riffs. Barnes was something special for CC, he putted a lot of effort in the band. surely he was a strange character but musically imo he helped the band much more than fisher.

Written by Deadmeat on 30.09.2009 at 14:57

Written by Haddonfield on 30.09.2009 at 14:41

Written by Deadmeat on 30.09.2009 at 14:33

Bad Replacements: Cannibal Corpse (Barnes leave)

I must disagree, Cannibal Corpse were awful back in the days of Barnes, they aren't exceptionnal now but they are better. I think Six Feet Under is much better than old Cannibal to so his leave had a double bonus. However, I couldn't agree more about Cavalera, Sepultura died when he left.

you cannot deny that The Bleeding is their best album. it is the only CC album that has almost no fillers. todays CC have a much better production and are a bit more technical. but back in the 90's when Barnes was in the band they managed every new record to sound different from the previous. on the other hand in the era: 1998-2004 all CC albums sounded exactly the same. the differences were only in the riffs. Barnes was something special for CC, he putted a lot of effort in the band. surely he was a strange character but musically imo he helped the band much more than fisher.

I must admit that I haven't heard the Bleeding, hearing Tomb of the Mutilated was enough to put me of the Barnes period. I thought Vile was an Ok album but agree that after that, the band didn't vary much and fell into the realm of the forgotten, except for die hard fans. Their later release was a good surprise however, the only album of Cannibal Corpse I've heard that I would actually classify as good. I'll probably give The Bleeding a listen now though.

Written by Haddonfield on 30.09.2009 at 15:01

Written by Deadmeat on 30.09.2009 at 14:57

Written by Haddonfield on 30.09.2009 at 14:41

Written by Deadmeat on 30.09.2009 at 14:33

Bad Replacements: Cannibal Corpse (Barnes leave)

I must disagree, Cannibal Corpse were awful back in the days of Barnes, they aren't exceptionnal now but they are better. I think Six Feet Under is much better than old Cannibal to so his leave had a double bonus. However, I couldn't agree more about Cavalera, Sepultura died when he left.

you cannot deny that The Bleeding is their best album. it is the only CC album that has almost no fillers. todays CC have a much better production and are a bit more technical. but back in the 90's when Barnes was in the band they managed every new record to sound different from the previous. on the other hand in the era: 1998-2004 all CC albums sounded exactly the same. the differences were only in the riffs. Barnes was something special for CC, he putted a lot of effort in the band. surely he was a strange character but musically imo he helped the band much more than fisher.

I must admit that I haven't heard the Bleeding, hearing Tomb of the Mutilated was enough to put me of the Barnes period. I thought Vile was an Ok album but agree that after that, the band didn't vary much and fell into the realm of the forgotten, except for die hard fans. Their later release was a good surprise however, the only album of Cannibal Corpse I've heard that I would actually classify as good. I'll probably give The Bleeding a listen now though.

till the last months i had heard only Butchered At Birth which imo is nothing spectacular. so i also thought Barnes was an idiot and nothing more. but the bleeding is an excellent album with only bad point it's production which is not that great. it has the most anthems that CC have put in one only album ever. also their first release with Barnes, eaten back to life, is ASTONISHING, old school DM, in a great way. those 2 albums are Barnes's best imo and please check them out cause they are the reason why when fisher came this band was already a big name in DM.

Written by Dangerboner on 30.09.2009 at 14:05

Bush replacing Joey (Anthrax)

I disagree there. The reason why ANthrax sucked ass during most of the Bush period (not on the Sound Of WHite Noise though) is that their songwriting was just downright crap (like on State of Euphoria and Persistence Of Time)

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 30.09.2009 at 15:45

Written by Dangerboner on 30.09.2009 at 14:05

Bush replacing Joey (Anthrax)

I disagree there. The reason why ANthrax sucked ass during most of the Bush period (not on the Sound Of WHite Noise though) is that their songwriting was just downright crap (like on State of Euphoria and Persistence Of Time)

Yeah I know. Bush still sucks though

Written by Dangerboner on 30.09.2009 at 15:49


Yeah I know. Bush still sucks though

No, he doesn't
He's a brilliant vocalist. I can fully understand why Metallica wanted him on vocals originally.