Geoff Tate to Rocklahoma, "You Guys Suck"

That's not the way partnership law works at all. Tate would be entitled to 25% of what Queensryche is worth - which is calculated in numerous ways. No one cares who did what work or wrote what - that's why you have a partnership agreement. If Geoff wanted to, he could have set up an agreement where he controlled the name and the majority of the profits. I doubt that's true and I doubt there is any kind of formal agreement at all when it comes to ownership of the name. It's also problematic for Geoff that his wife managed the band - that leaves him open to all types of claims of breaches of fiduciary duty on the part of his wife who is conflicted.

Musically, I lost any interest in Queensryche with Empire but legally, they are still entertaining!

Good thing I'm not a lawyer...

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Good thing I'm not a lawyer...

HA!

No worries man. I am sure none of this Queensryche business will be cut and dried. The legal reality of this type of situation is usually very different from what the various parties will say in public.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

I don't think that's true. If they're 4 equal partners, there has to be just cause and cases pleaded by each party (I'm assuming 2 parties/entities at this point) and a judge will have to rule. If Tate can prove that for all intents and purposes he drove the boat and was the creative force, while the other 4 contributed minimally and just enjoyed the benefits of ownership, then Tate has a chance.

Unless they wanted to and were bullied out of that creative process. There is that possibility. There have been plenty of rumors that DeGarmo left the band because Tate and his wife were usurping control of everything. What happened after he left is indicative of there being some truth to that.

Witchfinder wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Good thing I'm not a lawyer...

HA!

No worries man. I am sure none of this Queensryche business will be cut and dried. The legal reality of this type of situation is usually very different from what the various parties will say in public.

Yeah, and as always, both sides think they're in the right.

I still think that, on the surface, the band was nuts for pushing him out. It's like throwing the captain off the side of the ship and thinking it's just going to steer itself if they let a guy stand at the wheel.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Good thing I'm not a lawyer...

Sucks when there is a lawyer on a forum, huh? Because we're all here blissfully ignorant, thinking we're oh-so-smart with our replies and speculations, and then the lawyer comes in and ruins all the fun by pointing out how wrong we are. Haha.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Good thing I'm not a lawyer...

HA!

No worries man. I am sure none of this Queensryche business will be cut and dried. The legal reality of this type of situation is usually very different from what the various parties will say in public.

Yeah, and as always, both sides think they're in the right.

I still think that, on the surface, the band was nuts for pushing him out. It's like throwing the captain off the side of the ship and thinking it's just going to steer itself if they let a guy stand at the wheel.

Agreed. For better or worse, Queensryche is Tate.

Eyesore wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Good thing I'm not a lawyer...

Sucks when there is a lawyer on a forum, huh? Because we're all here blissfully ignorant, thinking we're oh-so-smart with our replies and speculations, and then the lawyer comes in and ruins all the fun by pointing out how wrong we are. Haha.

That's what lawyers do, we make everything worse and take all your monies.

Witchfinder wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Good thing I'm not a lawyer...

HA!

No worries man. I am sure none of this Queensryche business will be cut and dried. The legal reality of this type of situation is usually very different from what the various parties will say in public.

Yeah, and as always, both sides think they're in the right.

I still think that, on the surface, the band was nuts for pushing him out. It's like throwing the captain off the side of the ship and thinking it's just going to steer itself if they let a guy stand at the wheel.

Agreed. For better or worse, Queensryche is Tate.

It's like - HAVE A MEETING!! LOL!

If the band felt like they were offering music and Tate was rejecting it in favor of controlling everything himself, and stifling the vision/creativity of the other members, then try to hash it out even if you have to use lawyers.

If the band wanted to go back to the Metal sound, then write some music and offer it to the album. To hear Tate's side, he HAD to write/control everything (outside writers, etc) because nobody else would contribute.

If the band wanted to change management, and the manager is Tate's wife, there are still ways to approach that other than kicking out the guy who, for better or worse, came up with the concepts/ideas that made you guys your money (Mindcrime & Empire). Those 2 albums are what keep them touring year after year.

The other band members' drastic actions tell me that there is a lot more to this situation than Tate is letting on. It can't be as simple as Tate lays it out.

Eyesore wrote:

The other band members' drastic actions tell me that there is a lot more to this situation than Tate is letting on. It can't be as simple as Tate lays it out.

Well, we are talking about musicians here. Musicians are compulsive, emotional, short-sighted at times, and selfish. I can see it being a being a case of, for better or worse, enduring years of:

- Tate's wife is manager (perceived preferential treatment)
- Tate's daughters are involved in business aspects
- Tate's an egotistical jerk (years of praise from his voice/status/ideas)
- The "we'd be better off IF..." mindset

....and then blowing up.

If they think they're going to accomplish anything of note without Geoff Tate, they're sadly mistaken. The albums may not have been well-received by established fans, and they may have not sold large numbers of copies. But, Tate still maintained a creative streak. He still maintained Queensryche's penchant for not repeating itself. He still maintained his voice (for the most part). He still tried to make Queensryche viable and vital. The other 4 would barely contribute any music, then simply show up to tour (Tate's side, I know).

But, when both sides have spoken, the favor goes to the guy who can express himself and come across like he knows exactly what he's talking about...and Tate does.

And that all may very well be true. I really don't care what either side does. If it's good, I'll buy it.

We still haven't heard anything really official from the other guys, so I'm interested in hearing their side, if they give it.

I'll actually probably be kind of upset if there are no more Queensrÿche albums, because reading the reviews on Amazon from people who haven't realized things have been dismal for the past 15 years is continually amazing and entertaining. I love the one from the guy who mailed his copy of 'DTC' back to Geoff.

Witchfinder wrote:

Why would anyone assume that Tate would win the name? I assume the person with the rights to the name will win it. Of course, nobody knows who that is at this point. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the amount of songs someone writes has ZERO bearing on the control of a band's name. The court will not care at all about that. If this is a partnership with a 4 way ownership then Geoff is SOL. Of course, bands and musicians never organize their business relationships properly or cleanly so this will be a major cluster foxtrot.

thank you. While the songwriting that Tate has added may determine future success of lackthereof, ownership is completely another thing. I am glad he is gone. I think he was ruining the band and was using the name because it was a bigger draw than his.

exact33 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Why would anyone assume that Tate would win the name? I assume the person with the rights to the name will win it. Of course, nobody knows who that is at this point. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the amount of songs someone writes has ZERO bearing on the control of a band's name. The court will not care at all about that. If this is a partnership with a 4 way ownership then Geoff is SOL. Of course, bands and musicians never organize their business relationships properly or cleanly so this will be a major cluster foxtrot.

thank you. While the songwriting that Tate has added may determine future success of lackthereof, ownership is completely another thing. I am glad he is gone. I think he was ruining the band and was using the name because it was a bigger draw than his.

They'll do nothing of note without him...IMO. I'll gladly be proven wrong, but I don't see it happening.

Just to throw it out there, I enjoy the hell out of the new incarnation of accept. I know that doesn't have any bearing on how new 'ryche will do, but it does indicate to me that life without the original singer is doable. Given how successful that venture was I'm not sure why this one is getting written off without hearing a note.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Why would anyone assume that Tate would win the name? I assume the person with the rights to the name will win it. Of course, nobody knows who that is at this point. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the amount of songs someone writes has ZERO bearing on the control of a band's name. The court will not care at all about that. If this is a partnership with a 4 way ownership then Geoff is SOL. Of course, bands and musicians never organize their business relationships properly or cleanly so this will be a major cluster foxtrot.

thank you. While the songwriting that Tate has added may determine future success of lackthereof, ownership is completely another thing. I am glad he is gone. I think he was ruining the band and was using the name because it was a bigger draw than his.

They'll do nothing of note without him...IMO. I'll gladly be proven wrong, but I don't see it happening.

I agree with Shawn, I have enjoyed most of their albums with the exception of the newest one, even that one, I admire the fact that Geoff Tate followed his own muse. I doubt the band will do anything worth a damn without Geoff Tate except maybe become a nostalgia act, I would loved to be proved wrong because I feel the others guys are talented but look at the chickensh@t way they handled getting rid of Tate. Forming a new band called 'Rising West' and then whining about being locked out of their FB page

As a concession, I am on YouTube now listening to LaTorre's karaoke versions of Queensryche songs. My synopsis:

- the dude can sing
- he's pretty much nailing the notes
- he sounds like a tribute band singer...good but obviously being someone else
- to me, he's like Arnel for Journey...obviously talented, but something about his delivery is not sitting right with me...Tate had originality and intensity...LaTorre has neither.

manny wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Why would anyone assume that Tate would win the name? I assume the person with the rights to the name will win it. Of course, nobody knows who that is at this point. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the amount of songs someone writes has ZERO bearing on the control of a band's name. The court will not care at all about that. If this is a partnership with a 4 way ownership then Geoff is SOL. Of course, bands and musicians never organize their business relationships properly or cleanly so this will be a major cluster foxtrot.

thank you. While the songwriting that Tate has added may determine future success of lackthereof, ownership is completely another thing. I am glad he is gone. I think he was ruining the band and was using the name because it was a bigger draw than his.

They'll do nothing of note without him...IMO. I'll gladly be proven wrong, but I don't see it happening.

I agree with Shawn, I have enjoyed most of their albums with the exception of the newest one, even that one, I admire the fact that Geoff Tate followed his own muse. I doubt the band will do anything worth a damn without Geoff Tate except maybe become a nostalgia act, I would loved to be proved wrong because I feel the others guys are talented but look at the chickensh@t way they handled getting rid of Tate. Forming a new band called 'Rising West' and then whining about being locked out of their FB page

Ill disagree. I think while Tate follows his own muse, he has has taken the band down a path that very few want to hear. I think the new singer will bring a revitalization to the band.

exact33 wrote:

manny wrote:

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Why would anyone assume that Tate would win the name? I assume the person with the rights to the name will win it. Of course, nobody knows who that is at this point. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the amount of songs someone writes has ZERO bearing on the control of a band's name. The court will not care at all about that. If this is a partnership with a 4 way ownership then Geoff is SOL. Of course, bands and musicians never organize their business relationships properly or cleanly so this will be a major cluster foxtrot.

thank you. While the songwriting that Tate has added may determine future success of lackthereof, ownership is completely another thing. I am glad he is gone. I think he was ruining the band and was using the name because it was a bigger draw than his.

They'll do nothing of note without him...IMO. I'll gladly be proven wrong, but I don't see it happening.

I agree with Shawn, I have enjoyed most of their albums with the exception of the newest one, even that one, I admire the fact that Geoff Tate followed his own muse. I doubt the band will do anything worth a damn without Geoff Tate except maybe become a nostalgia act, I would loved to be proved wrong because I feel the others guys are talented but look at the chickensh@t way they handled getting rid of Tate. Forming a new band called 'Rising West' and then whining about being locked out of their FB page

Ill disagree. I think while Tate follows his own muse, he has has taken the band down a path that very few want to hear. I think the new singer will bring a revitalization to the band.

Unless he brings a time machine and/or some songwriting with him, it won't matter...IMO.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Why would anyone assume that Tate would win the name? I assume the person with the rights to the name will win it. Of course, nobody knows who that is at this point. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the amount of songs someone writes has ZERO bearing on the control of a band's name. The court will not care at all about that. If this is a partnership with a 4 way ownership then Geoff is SOL. Of course, bands and musicians never organize their business relationships properly or cleanly so this will be a major cluster foxtrot.

thank you. While the songwriting that Tate has added may determine future success of lackthereof, ownership is completely another thing. I am glad he is gone. I think he was ruining the band and was using the name because it was a bigger draw than his.

They'll do nothing of note without him...IMO. I'll gladly be proven wrong, but I don't see it happening.

Yeah, but they hadn't really done anything with him over better part of the last decade and a half. So, it's a wash...

OK, I listened to LaTorre & Rising West live doing " Walk In The Shadows"...

Wow...that was really not good. He was flat on a large part of it, the backing vocals are out of key...the only good thing about it was the band playing the music. I kinda felt sorry for him...maybe he could not hear on stage or something.

I know it's YouTube, fanshot, etc.

But by contrast, I listened to Tate solo from June 7 doing "Jet City Woman"...fan shot, YouTube, etc...he nailed it...still the man.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

exact33 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Why would anyone assume that Tate would win the name? I assume the person with the rights to the name will win it. Of course, nobody knows who that is at this point. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the amount of songs someone writes has ZERO bearing on the control of a band's name. The court will not care at all about that. If this is a partnership with a 4 way ownership then Geoff is SOL. Of course, bands and musicians never organize their business relationships properly or cleanly so this will be a major cluster foxtrot.

thank you. While the songwriting that Tate has added may determine future success of lackthereof, ownership is completely another thing. I am glad he is gone. I think he was ruining the band and was using the name because it was a bigger draw than his.

They'll do nothing of note without him...IMO. I'll gladly be proven wrong, but I don't see it happening.

Do you think they've done anything of note since DeGarmo left? I'm not sure if they have. They'll still do festivals and stuff. I don't know, it'll be interesting to see what happens.

It's very seldom that a band can lose a long-time singer and not have it be incredibly detrimental to the band (Sabbath did great with Dio but they also overhauled their sound musically at the same time). When the vocalist is someone as unique as Tate it becomes almost impossible (Queen anyone?). With both Tate and DeGarmo gone it really makes me wonder what is left.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

OK, I listened to LaTorre & Rising West live doing " Walk In The Shadows"...

Wow...that was really not good. He was flat on a large part of it, the backing vocals are out of key...the only good thing about it was the band playing the music. I kinda felt sorry for him...maybe he could not hear on stage or something.

I know it's YouTube, fanshot, etc.

But by contrast, I listened to Tate solo from June 7 doing "Jet City Woman"...fan shot, YouTube, etc...he nailed it...still the man.

I don't think he sounds bad in that clip, but he clearly should stop emulating Geoff if they're going to continue on as Queensryche. He's not going to be able to nail every song, you know. He should do his own thing, because his own voice is fantastic. As for the backing vocals, I think--or hope--that's the crowd singing and the camera picking up the people around it.

Back to Todd, though:



He's a pretty dynamic singer. I'd love to see him bring some different styles to old Ryche tunes and new, if they carry one as Queensryche, you know.