"Frayed" or not!

[tornandfrayed]

I need input from all of you and this could also open up an interesting topic.

My old band "Frayed" broke up. There was talk of two of the members using the name and continuing, that did not occur. I recently tried to contact them to see if they minded me using the name and building a new project.

What do you think? What is the best way to handle this? Would it be appropriate for me (sort of Vocals, lyrics) to continue using the band name and try to find new players? What do you guys (gals) think about this topic? How have any of you handled this in the past?

It has always been my opinion that when the band broke up you should find something new. In this situation I thought about keeping the name alive and pushing on.

What is the best way to handle something like this?

[lonewolf]

The same thing happened to Forces in three different time periods. We finally agreed to put it to bed, unless a majority of the original players got back together.

If the other original members don't mind, then go with it. If they have a problem with it, you should respect their wishes, although they can't legally keep you from using it without a trade-mark.

[Jim Price]

I agree with Lonewolf, if the other guys don't mind, go with it.

I personally think that once a band loses over half of their original line-up, a name change is probably in order, especially if a pivotal member of the line-up leaves and the total identity/sound of the band is changed.

There is currently a developing situation on the area scene where a singer of a popular regional band is moving on, and the band is keeping the name with a different singer; the old singer WAS this band, and the remaining members (only two original members left after the singer leaves) should contemplate a name change. (More on this once official announcements of the change are made.)

[wake up drumming]

This is a cool topic. Many bands carry on the name with only one or two original members left. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It's a very touchy subject and a real important one as well. I feel that if ONE person is in charge of writing all the music, lyrics, doing booking, promo, etc. and decides on a moniker to go by than it's ok. (kinda like Foo Fighters where Grohl does everything). It's basically a solo project but he probably felt that "The Dave Grohl Project" would sound silly.

On the other hand, if what you have started was a band, where everyone contributed equally to all functions of being a band, everyone put their own stamp on songwriting, recording, promo, etc. then CHANGE THE NAME. The fans you had are smarter than what you think and will catch on really quick. A lot of times the band will never re-capture the chemistry, and if you don't have it then you're just kidding yourself, hurting any integrity you did have, and trying to fool the fans. (don't beat a dead horse).

Prime example: I don't care what Axl Rose says, Guns N Roses will always be him, Duff, Steven, Izzy, and Slash. He's become a joke and if you can't pull it off on that large of a scale it probably won't work on a smaller scale either.

Just my 2 cents though.

[str8h8]

Dave,

As one of the former members of Frayed (originator of the name) it doesn't matter to me if you continue to use it. I think I had already addressed this with you in a previous e-mail? But anyway, carry on and good luck with it!! As a friend and former bandmate, you have my support.

[tornandfrayed]

My former band mates have been nothing but great about this. They have never been anything but encouragement.

My personal philosophy has always been new band, new name. For some reason this situation seemed to make me think differently. I am not sure what caused this. That is why I am trying to get input from other members.

Keep it coming, this is cool!

[Chevelle7982]

Dave, I have had discussions about this with former band members through numerous other bands. I had always been the originator for our band names for whatever reasons, I never minded the use of the band name but I have always made it clear that they were not permitted to use my lyrics or song titles. This has never once been a problem either. Good luck man.

[ToonaRockGuy]

I personally think that once a band loses over half of their original line-up, a name change is probably in order, especially if a pivotal member of the line-up leaves and the total identity/sound of the band is changed.

*COUGHMollyHatchetbunchofgravy-trainingretardsCOUGH*

I actually got banned from Molly Hatchet's message board for asking them to change their name, since there's nobody from the original band (or the second lineup) left. Dicks.

[Imgrimm01]

Our situation is this , Originally the band was an instrumental trio " The brothers Grimm " when I came on board we became THE GRIMM , we run the band as a TOTAL democracy and we have had some member changes and swaps etc... But to me ( Only my opinion ) the name THE GRIMM goes with Kent as long as Kent is in the band it will prob. be THE GRIMM . I think it depends on the members of each individual band and what they can agree upon.

[tonefight]

I would say if you will have the same sound and style than it may be Ok, but if its going to be something totally new then you need to put the old name to rest and start new. If you are going to be the only original member what part did you play in the original line up? Will someone regognize the sound of the new lineup or will something be missing? It may be easier to get started if the name is regognized though?

[HurricaneBob]

git er done........

[dayzichick]

My advice is if the other band members don't mind, and it seems like they don't, and you are playing the same style of music, that you should keep the name. Brand recognition is hard to earn and once you get there, you don't want to lose it. Also, something to think about is the club owners. If they were used to hiring you as the known name and now you are starting all over, they may see it as you also need to create a new following, leading some club owners to possibly not pay you as much as before. Just a thought. If you are completely changing the style of music though, you'd almost have to change the name. Ribbon Grass recently struggled with this in a way, we didn't change members (this time) but after 9 years of existence some people say to us, "Man I've never come to see you guys before because I thought you were blue grass or country." So, we sent out an e-mail and asked all of our fans if we should change the name. We got an overwhelming "no" In every reply people said that we were too well known in the Johnstown area to change our name now. And after 4 years of me being the lead female vocal, people still think I am the girl who sang with Ribbon Grass before and I just changed my hair color. So that tells me that the members of the band aren't as memorable as the name.

[tornandfrayed]

I had a couple of people ask me if I was going to continue using the name "Frayed". The thought had not crossed my mind til that point.

Originally my idea was not to use the old name.3/4's of the band would be different. I won't use it.

Thanks for all the input and insights!

[J Michaels]

git er done........

I don't care who ya are, that's funny.......

[Punkinhead]

without rehashing everything thats been said and having a redundant post, I'd say if the songs you play are the same, and the originals are the same, then keep the name....if not, it's a different band, so you should change it, otherwise you will mislead former fans that don't care for the new you....