Whitecross it's Whitecross 2.0 now

I doubt this new name would fly legally if it went to court.

Interesting how this makes it sound like Scott and Rex have been together for 34 years.

They should select another name.

Black Rider wrote:Interesting how this makes it sound like Scott and Rex have been together for 34 years.

Ha!  I caught that, too.  Agreed.  I'm also not diggin' the 2.0 tag.

Can't say I am surprised, but at the same time i thought they were long done years ago. I wonder how the new singer will sound?

Weren't they supposed to follow up 1987 with a new release? Even that release is old now.

Warzawa wrote:Can't say I am surprised, but at the same time i thought they were long done years ago. I wonder how the new singer will sound?

 
My guess is they will sound exactly like the video below.
Peter Stenlund was the singer/guitarist for Laudamus.  Not quite as good vocally as Scott IMO...but certainly not horrible.

Maybe Rex & Co. should just focus on King James.

First we had Whitecross without Rex, now we have Whitecross without Scott.  My thoughts of post-Rex Whitecross were that it wasn't bad (especially Unveiled) but they should have changed their name and started fresh as something else.  I'll bet I'll feel the same way about this.

Great band in the day.

I also wonder how it will work as far as concerts go with Peter not being from the U.S.?

eatbugs wrote:Maybe Rex & Co. should just focus on King James.

First we had Whitecross without Rex, now we have Whitecross without Scott.  My thoughts of post-Rex Whitecross were that it wasn't bad (especially Unveiled) but they should have changed their name and started fresh as something else.  I'll bet I'll feel the same way about this.

They did focused on King James a few years ago. it didn't work that well, I guess.

It's funny how I just read criticism about this thread so far.

They are trying to bring new life to one of our favorite bands and they are even recording a brand new album which is a common request from fans of long time aparted bands...

Still, no one seems to even care.
This is sad and that's why Christian Metal is dying.

What about the singer critics? How can we judge from an amateur recorded video with an awful sound quality and a bad mix?
By the way, have you seen how Scott's voice sounded in the last Whitecross concert's he's sang on it?
If you hadn't had the opportunity, check it out on Youtube. His voice has sadly grown old.

Thiago-Brazil wrote:It's funny how I just read criticism about this thread so far.

I'm with you, bro. And also a question... why you guys think they should change their name? Just remember they're not the only band which have had line-up changes. Think about Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Stratovarius and so on. They all have had very critical changes, yet still kept their names.

As a fan of both Scott and Peter, I'm really looking forward to this. Peter is a really great vocalist and I also hope that he would join Rex in the guitar department, as he is also a good guitarist.

Markus1987 wrote:

Thiago-Brazil wrote:It's funny how I just read criticism about this thread so far.

I'm with you, bro. And also a question... why you guys think they should change their name? Just remember they're not the only band which have had line-up changes. Think about Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Stratovarius and so on. They all have had very critical changes, yet still kept their names.

As a fan of both Scott and Peter, I'm really looking forward to this. Peter is a really great vocalist and I also hope that he would join Rex in the guitar department, as he is also a good guitarist.

I couldn't agree more. I was reading through this and I'm somewhat stunned. I love Whitecross. Yeah, Scott was a big part of that. But he's made clear that he's going a different direction in his life, and God bless him. He loves the Lord and is following His leading. But Rex feels called to play, and Whitecross is his band now. Why can't we be happy that we're going to get more Whitecross music soon?! I, for one, am thrilled. I hope they stick to the melodic hard rock that Rex is most known for. Another record in that style, with Pete singing, I think will sound great.

It's just opinions. I'm curious what they'll sound like.

I hope this does materialize. In the past we have been promised new music from Whitecross only to get this instead. 



The Guardian/Whitecross release had promise but was awful short. 

I'll definitely check it out but I won't hold my breath that it will be any time soon.

Markus1987 wrote:

Thiago-Brazil wrote:It's funny how I just read criticism about this thread so far.

I'm with you, bro. And also a question... why you guys think they should change their name? Just remember they're not the only band which have had line-up changes. Think about Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Stratovarius and so on. They all have had very critical changes, yet still kept their names.

Major sound changes require resets, with or without lineup changes.  Holy Soldier - Promise Man is the most obvious example.  Deliverance after What A Joke, Bride after Scarecrow Messiah, and others also apply.

I hope my previous post wasn't too negative.  I love Whitecross, I love Rex, I love Scott, I've never heard the new guy.  I will very probably get Whitecross 2.0 if/when it comes out.  I just meant to say that King James and Whitecross have 3/4 overlap and I'd like to hear new material in the vein of Maximus (not just an album of half re-records), I would have liked to see a focus on that.

I didn't think I was being negative myself (at least that wasn't my intent).  I have two of Peter's Laudamus albums and I really dig them.  I just like Scott as a singer (at least from the glory days) a bit better.
Hoping they actually will be recording and release new music as it will be unlikely they will get to perform close enough to where I live for me to actually see them live.

Thiago-Brazil wrote:

eatbugs wrote:Maybe Rex & Co. should just focus on King James.

First we had Whitecross without Rex, now we have Whitecross without Scott.  My thoughts of post-Rex Whitecross were that it wasn't bad (especially Unveiled) but they should have changed their name and started fresh as something else.  I'll bet I'll feel the same way about this.

They did focused on King James a few years ago. it didn't work that well, I guess.

Maybe that had to do with the fact that they merely re-recorded an already great album and only added a couple of new tracks.  Had they remastered the first album and then did a full length, I think they would have gained more traction.

As far as Whitecross 2.0, I would give them a spin.  I love Rex's playing and Pete was good with Laudamus.  If they do some originals and don't re-record Whitecross classics, then I'd definitely buy an album from these guys.

My initial response wasn't a jab at Whitecross with Peter singing; I'm simply not fond of the 2.0 tag as far as the band name.  Just my opinion... many others may love it.  I wasn't fond of the name "Classic Petra", either, yet I still purchased "Back to the Rock" and enjoyed every bit of that album.

I think the reason why bands like Classic Patra/CPR and Whitecross 2.0 change their name is a marketing thing and to separate a revamped band form the original band. I can see why bands do this.

Whitecross went down hill after Unveiled. The last Equilibrium was a horrible album and Flytrap was some what better. Whitecross 2.0 I'm thinking is a revamped version of the 1987-1993 era of Whitecross before Rex left. I'm curious in hearing the new Whitecross material with the new lead singer as long as it is similar to the classic Rex Carroll era of Whitecross.

The Guardian/Whitecross Revival EP is good. I have the vinyl and CD. I just wish it was a full album instead of 2 or 3 songs form each band. I hope they release a similar album in the future with a couple or a few original classic rock songs with Whitecross and Guardian covers of the 1987 to 1993 period.

I also quite enjoy the 2 Classic Petra albums Back to the Rock 1 and 2. I hope they continue this with Greg Volz on lead vocals with maybe John Schlitt  doing a song or 2 or a duet with Greg.

eatbugs wrote:

Markus1987 wrote:

Thiago-Brazil wrote:It's funny how I just read criticism about this thread so far.

I'm with you, bro. And also a question... why you guys think they should change their name? Just remember they're not the only band which have had line-up changes. Think about Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Stratovarius and so on. They all have had very critical changes, yet still kept their names.

Major sound changes require resets, with or without lineup changes.  Holy Soldier - Promise Man is the most obvious example.  Deliverance after What A Joke, Bride after Scarecrow Messiah, and others also apply.

I hope my previous post wasn't too negative.  I love Whitecross, I love Rex, I love Scott, I've never heard the new guy.  I will very probably get Whitecross 2.0 if/when it comes out.  I just meant to say that King James and Whitecross have 3/4 overlap and I'd like to hear new material in the vein of Maximus (not just an album of half re-records), I would have liked to see a focus on that.

I see your point and kind of agree with it, but I doubt they would get more attention from media with a new name.

I mean, I'm pretty sure that hundreds of people out there are interested in a new Whitecross album, as well as a few dozens websites would write an article about that. Under a new name, I am pretty sure half of this public wouldn't even know about this "new band". And another part of it, would be suspicious of how this "new band" would sound like. 

That's why they usually keep their current name. I would buy a new Whitecross album, without having to hear any samples or read any reviews.

/< wrote:My initial response wasn't a jab at Whitecross with Peter singing; I'm simply not fond of the 2.0 tag as far as the band name.  Just my opinion... many others may love it.  I wasn't fond of the name "Classic Petra", either, yet I still purchased "Back to the Rock" and enjoyed every bit of that album.

I would say that some label has the right of the band's name.

See that Petra cannot release an album under the name of Classic Petra, unless the label that used it originally ten years ago allow then. Even Bob Hartman could use this name if he wishes so. That's why we have "CPR" now... 

That is how the music market works.