It's a very good point and something I've looked at in some depth in my "Gone solo in the game" slot in my journal. Why do some band members feel the need to go solo, either completely leaving the band --- Fish from Marillion --- or just doing a side project while remaning a part of the band --- Phil Lynott, Mick Jagger, Freddie Mercury etc? Sometimes it seems it's down to the fact that within the band structure they're constrained to play a certain type of music, either because all the other members like it and don't want to step outside the dreaded comfort zone, or because the band's fans expect a certain uniformity or even predictability from them.
It's certainly evident in the case of Freddie. You can see "Hot space" was an attempt for Queen to branch into disco music, a bit of electronica, and the end result was that the fans didn't really like the album. But Freddie does the same thing on his own solo albums and they like, or accept it. It's almost as if an artiste is allowed to try new things if they're solo --- all bets are off --- while within the band structure they have to conform to certain guidelines and not step too far outside those. Also, within the band they have the worry of impacting upon the other members (and sales) if they try "something new" whereas if they're doing it solo there's really only themselves to consider.
Solo better than group though? Nothing really springs to mind at this particular moment, though I will think more on it.
Good thread, Ped!
