In years gone by tribute bands were always looked upon with a slightly scornful manner, as though their art was in some way a cheap fraud, a poor copy of the real thing. But as time has gone by my views have somewhat mellowed, and indeed the phenomena has become much more widespread and has garnered much more respect as it has grown. Indeed why should this not be the case. Take classical compositions as a comparison; at no point were these works produced with the idea that only one set of performers should ever stage the show/works - indeed the idea seems ridiculous. So why should this idea apply to 'bands' either. The music and theatre of a good rock show is over and above that of the individuals performing it and while it is indeed good to see the works as performed by their original composers it is not really a must when equally talented (in terms of copy performance) artists can do the same.
This argument applies especially well to bands like the Floyd, who were performance rather than personality driven. Hendrix would have been for example a much harder ask, not least because his style was so unique as to almost deny emulation, but also because his personality and charisma was bound into his actual music in such an intimate way.
So yes, damn it! Given all this "Mom, I'm off to see a tribute band!"
Still, we'll see.
