Thought this might make an interesting topic.

This is obviously highly subjective to one's personal opinion.

When I say disappointing as a solo act, it could mean either you thought their songs were disappointing creatively or either sales were disappointing and their album(s) ended up being flops.

A couple I can think of off the topic of my head:


Christine McVie from Fleetwood Mac. Only 1 Gold record, which she made back in 1984 as a solo act.

Andrea Corr from The Corrs. I personally did not like her solo debut album at all. She released a follow up, but now she's back to performing with The Corrs again.

Terry Ellis from En Vogue. She released a solo album back in 1995 and it ended up being a bomb. She went back to En Vogue eventually.

Also, wouldn't Lauryn Hill from The Fugees be considered a disappointment to some? Her solo debut was a platinum smash and then she just disappeared.

And then there's Nicole Scherzinger from The Pussycat Dolls. She had success with the group and I was looking forward to her solo debut, but I guess her label really mismanaged her and her album was a massive bomb. Now she's more of a reality TV/competition star.

Peter Cetera - Chicago
Bruce Dickenson - Iron Maiden
Rob Halford - Judas Priest (some of his side projects were 'okay')

^^ Good one with Cetera. He had only 1 platinum record after he left Chicago and that was 30 years ago. And that album was a hit only because he had that duet with Amy Grant and Glory of Love.

All his future albums were disappointments. He's 72 now and I can't really say he had a successful solo career. He should have gone back to Chicago. At least they're still performing regularly.

Without giving it too much thought, I imagine the vast majority of artists who leave successful bands go on to somewhat disappointing solo careers. For every Peter Gabriel or Beyonce out there, there's probably about 100 who didn't live up to expectations. Heck, despite all of their individual successes, you could put all four Beatles on that list.

Ozzy Osbourne.

He was the singer for one of the darkest, heaviest bands to come along. Real innovators with a singular, dangerous vision. When he went solo, he turned into an 80's metalhead cartoon. Prince of Darkness my ass. Prince of marketing is more like it. Nothing he's done as a solo artist is as dark as Sabatage. Yes, some of his solo work is good, and the Randy Rhoads material stands out in the genre, but the whole thing is a very profitable joke.

And of course, nowadays he's known as the mumbling buffoon who shouts "Sharon!!" and who foisted Zakk Wylde on us.

Obviously, I'm talking about being disappointing creatively here, as Ozzy's solo career has made as much as ten Black Sabbaths ever would.

Mick Jagger
Keith Richards
Ron Wood
Mick Taylor
Jimmy Page
Glen Frey
Crosby, Stills, Nash(individually in comparison to Neil Young)
Paul Kantner
Paul Rodgers( this one is a little different. Does forming a band to do your solo albums count?)
Joe Perry

Ozzy raises the question of artists in a well known band who became bigger than the band ever was. Rod Stewart, Joe Walsh.

Roger Waters from Pink Floyd.

Peter Wolf and the rest of the J. Geils Band were hopeless without each other.

Jane Wiedlin

I kind of like some of her solo stuff, but unlike Belinda Carlisle, she was a commercial flop as a solo artist.

Chemical Wedding would have been a fucking killer Maiden album.

Blizzard and Diary are really great albums. Bark is pretty good, and Ultimate Sin has some good songs, but after that his solo work took a downward trajectory.

Although I like his solo stuff, Morrissey never equaled his work with The Smiths.

Paul McCartney also.

He had a really good three album run to close out his solo career (for now).

Bruce Dickinson solo > Iron Maiden with Blaze Bayley

A second vote for Roger Waters from Pink Floyd

I might slightly disagree with that. Or at least I'd put it this way: when I went to see Morrissey live a couple years ago, I really didn't care if he played any Smiths songs or not. He's just got so many great tunes from his solo career--and his solo stuff got a little harder-edged here and there, too. You're probably right, but it's a pretty close call for me.

I think you hit the nail on the head though. Killer songs from a long solo career but his albums with the Smiths were better overall.

Glenn Danzig (Love the first 4 Danzig albums but they can't touch The Misfits & Samhain material.)
Siouxsie Sioux
Peter Murphy

I remember seeing a music video from his Outrider album. It was so awkward to watch a (Performance) video where the lead singer is hardly shown.

Third.

I'll also put a second vote out there for Sting. After those first 3 albums things went down hill fast. But I'm reading good things about his upcoming album. Supposedly a back to the form of those first three.

That said, Outrider was a very good album. One side hard rock, the other slow blues. I remember I had the cassette, and would keep rewinding the blues side.

I prefer Morrissey over The Smiths also. More variety.

Pete Townsend? Some great singles, but overall, pretty disappointing.

Sting is an odd case---it seems like after the Police broke up, Sting lost any desire to really rock out. Other artists like Joe Strummer and Paul Weller went on to solo careers, and although they kind of mellowed out, they occasionally put out some rocking tunes. The Police had some really punk-ish, rocking songs (that Sting wrote)---but did Sting EVER do any real rockers after The Police?

Given the sound of both GITM and Syncronicity, I've never expected Sting's solo work to be anything other than an extension of those albums. They had not recorded punk flavored songs like Fall Out since they started enjoying success on top 40 radio. Closest we got was the couple oddities on each album, usually sung by Andy or Stewart. Honestly, I had never heard those first punky non-album singles until that Message in Box release.

This .. easily. Accident of Birth and Chemical Wedding are fantastic records .. the others are all pretty damn good too