Under those criteria I would say rock is dead.

ZZ Top fits all the criteria you mentioned.

Im going scorpions and Poison

Relevant?

probably foo fighters even though I hate them.

They seem to be the only rock band anyone knows about these days.

I understand what you're trying to do, but #3 doesn't make sense for many bands.

Some examples;
Neil Peart didn't join Rush until its 2nd album.
Bruce Dickinson didn't join Maiden until the 3rd album

They had some success before those guys joined, but most don't consider the original lineups their prime days.
Would you ignore the Beatles unless Pete Best was included?

I know these examples don't meet your other criteria, but they show the absurdity of that requirement

Scorpions have had dozens of line up changes. Best with Michael Schenker or Uli John Roth.

I didn't know CC DeVille was back. Does rule 3 require the same members the whole time?

This thread feels like a Vid/o-din co-production!

Pretty sure it happened on the last couple of tours as well.

Tool

Dinosaur Jr? Saw them open/play with my past/late fiancé(I miss you Gina) with Janes Addiction at capital theater, what a show....

There's no need for name calling.
Oh, wait.................

The Monkees.

U2 has essentially all original members. There were a couple of other guys in the very, very beginning, but it's been the four main guys since 1978. And people are still semi-interested when they come out with new material.

And as far as that Beatles as a boy band narrative, it's just a bunch of bullshit. Yeah, they were four guys. That's where "boy band" label ends. Are you suggesting that they were like New Edition or Backstreet Boys or some other manufactured crap filled with non-instrument playing and non song-writing glorified karaoke singers? The Beatles have been broken up for 50 years, but if they had the 101st reissue of any of their material tomorrow, it would still get attention and sales. Even people who claim to hate the Beatles love a band who loves the Beatles or was influenced by them in some way. Think of the Beatles as the Addams Family pinball of music. Sure, music existed before the Beatles, but it would never be the same once The Beatles were on the scene.

I dont know that semi interested really makes them relevant.

The last tour they played Joshua tree complete to get people in the seats as bands past their prime tend to do.

Does Ozzy count?

Vids playing a good Odin today. Lol
Slim pickings for sure based on your criteria.
AC/DC is mine - their latest album is actually pretty good and charted well. Not sure if they count due to member death. Oh well, the 90 yrs olds are proud!!!

*I’m waiting for the still relevant early 90s hip hop artist topic next. (my fav era)

Too many line up changes due to Sharon not paying royalties and stealing lyrics from band members.

Rammstein is good, but kind of niche-y. I doubt if I could find a single person who has heard of Rammstein.

With all those rules, there’s just nothing there. It’s over.

Acdc just got a #1 billboard album in like 30 countries last week including the US so I’ll say them.

“Relevant” is a dumb word anyway when discussing rock. Not sure what it’s supposed to mean. Not sure if you noticed but most people under 40 don’t give a shit about rock any more. Hard to see any “relevance” in the genre.

Rule #3 is also beyond stupid. Tons of bands have released their most successful and “relevant” work without “original members.” Acdc, The Rolling Stones, Metallica, Pink Floyd, Van Halen, the beatles, deep purple etc etc come to mind without even breaking a sweat.

This thread is stupid, as are most that try to intellectualize rock.

Rock is dead, long live rock!

Doesn't fit #3

Tony Bennett.

Rules #3 kills all my picks. Glad to see you back, Vid!!!!

Muse

Technically the first Foo Fighters album was all Dave Ghrol, so I’d give it to him.

That being said, Nine Inch Nails ftw!!!

Hawkins wasn't in the band till album 3. Please. We have to follow these dumbass rules for some reason.

What I’m saying is, if the first Foo Fighter album was just Dave, as long he’s still with them, it fits.

I think Vid meant to do a "which bands have had original members the longest" thread but had a stroke halfway through.

That list pretty much begins and ends with ZZ Top. Can't say much for their "relevance" as they haven't had a good-selling album in about 30 years.

My favorite band, Radiohead. Fits all the criteria.

Ahhhh....duh, totally correct my fault.

Don't say that, than he can repeat his "ZZ Top was only good before the synthesizers & drum machine" routine!

Not sure if it counts for relevance, but they sure do get used a lot for commercials. Beer, cars, motorcycle insurance... Plus constant radio play.

The last time i saw Ozzy in concert, he paused mid-song and apologized for his "singing like shit"

He should've been apologizing on every tour since 1976 then!

THats "relevance" for ya...

WHen it comes to rock, nobody knows what it means. But it sure makes you sound smart!

And ZZ Top rules. Don't get me wrong.

I don't even know what "relevant" even means.

Billboard charts? Commercials? Sporting event crowd hype?

Rock is personal for me. I dont care if the masses buy it or not. Rock n Roll saved my soul!

I nominate Sunn O))). 1998. Original members. New material. Drone metal guitar sustain = relevant (to me!)

The criteria sort of pushes you towards mediocre 90's bands. I mean 1980 was 40 years ago. Anyone who had a hit song then is at retirement age and only playing because they like it.

The best musician I can think of that fits the criteria is Joe Satriani. But do people consider him relevent? Meh. He's definitely still touring. Also sort of cheating since he is a solo act.

Other bands/musicians that I came up with are Meatloaf, Steve Vai, Beck, and They Might be Giants. Honestly I 'd drop some cash to play an Istanbul multiball.

Du Hast Mich at Rammstein!

I’ll throw Green Day out there, though I’ve never been a huge fan.

Pearl Jam?
They are old , original members (don’t know , maybe). I think they are still making music , relevant? Who knows? But they could possibly be the once popular shitty band that is still around that you are looking for.

LMAO!

Tenacious D I believe fits all requirements, lol.

How about Clutch?

I think you might have to consider Los Lobos. One or two people switched before their first album recorded in 77. All the original members since then.