So, was taking a look at one of those annoying slideshow lists today. This one happened to be "Ranking the best rock frontmen (and women) of all time" Ignoring some of their questionable selections (Bob Dylan, great/important musician...but great frontman??) it got me wondering, does this label only apply to the lead singer of a group, or can a solo artist be a considered one also?? I only ask as when I think great frontman, I think of the singer of an actual band (Freddie Mercury, DLR, Steven Tyler etc). A person that stands out among a solid band. A solo artist, to me, is his/her own thing and is always the sole focus (the aforementioned Dylan, Elvis, Morrisey etc..).

What say you?

I was pretty shocked when I saw Kenny Wayne Shepard open up for someone else, not knowing him too well at the time I was thinking to myself that the lead singer better watch it as the guitar player is amazing, then realized later in the show the guitar player was KWS. So yes a frontman can be someone besides the lead singer.

That's not exactly what I was asking, but I can sort of see your point. There are some bands where the guitarist is the big attraction, but would that really be a "frontman" per se? Maybe Yngwie?

That's a good question. If everyone is going to a show to see the guitarist in a band where everyone else is basically interchangeable, we'll use your example of Yngwie as that's a good one, is the guitarist the "frontman"? I'd say yes.

But in answer to your original question, I think it depends on the artist. Some singer/songwriters are certainly a successful solo artist, but not necessarily a good "frontman", to me that involves an extra something, a certain x-factor that some performing artists have that make them really connect with the audience, but some don't. So for example, Dylan and Morrissey can both be considered very successful performing singer/songwriters, but I only see Morrissey as a true frontman out of the two in the classic sense. But I guess all this would be subjective.

In my opinion, a frontman can by definition not be a solo act.

With a "frontman," being part of a group would seem to be implicit.

Thus my question, since that slide show included several solo artists among their "front men". So where would Bruce Springsteen fit in that equation? He has/had a well known group in the E-Street Band who backed him up but he was most certainly the focal point.

That's a good question. I guess Bruce would be considered a frontman, for sure, but there are other bands whose other members are much more prominent and involved in the writing of the music than Springsteen's E-Street, so in those cases, if one person is more conspicuous than the others, he/she would be considered the frontman/frontwoman. Springsteen is almost like a solo musician who happens to have a band. Same goes for Tom Petty, and others.

Are the "front men" the sole equity holders in the band?

Are the other band members just "hired guns"?

No. David Lee Roth and Sammy Hagar were frontmen for Van Halen.

By definition, maybe not. But John Fogerty is 100% of CCR. The rest of the band might as well have been Elvis's backing band or a cover band like they are now. John was lead vocalist, lead guitarist, and wrote every single original song in the bands history, with only a SINGLE shared writing credit.

This is a very good and interesting topic. I don't think there is a one size fits all answer.

There are bands where each member is perceived as equal. Remove just one band member and it's not the same. People pay a premium to see every member of the band. John Bonham is the prime example. No Bonham, no Zeppelin. A person who saw Zeppelin once has bragging rights over the person who saw Plant or Page 50 times from the front row.
Because of the musicianship of the band members, each contributes equally to the sound. They're all frontmen.

Take Paul Rodgers. Hr's fronted Free, Bad Company, The Firm, The Law and done solo work. He has such a domineering presence that they ALL sound like Paul Rodgers.

Rod Stewart and The Faces is an interesting one. First they are The Faces. Then Rod starts doing solo albums at the same time. Rod takes off as solo artist, the Faces quit recording as a band and become his backup band. From about 1973-75, until Wood left to join the Stones, Rod Stewart's live shows were Rod Stewart and The Faces, but they did not record as a band. There were only Stewart solo albums with The Faces backing him live.

As too a non-singing musician as frontman. Only one that comes to mind is Nugent in the mid-seventies. He may sing 2 songs in a show. The singer, Derek St. Holmes?, was irrelevant. Everybody eyes are glued on Ted from the first note to the last.

Don't forget:

"Santana is an American rock band formed in San Francisco in 1966 by Mexican-American guitarist and songwriter Carlos Santana. The band has undergone multiple recording and performing line-ups in its history, with Carlos Santana the only consistent member."

Scotty Moore would like to have a word with you.

I know what you're saying but not really the same thing. This is more like, how much does it really matter if you see Van Halen without Michael Anthony. Are you still getting 100%?

Thems fightin words.