What do his intentions have to do with my original post? It was evident that I didn't consider it to be a version of Judas Priest in any case.
This is what you said:
I believe it would be fairer to the fans if KK had the opportunity to create his own version of Judas Priest.
1) KK’s Priest is legally not Judas Priest,
but it is KK’s attempt at creating his own version of Judas Priest. Yes, I know that it’s not legitimate — if you show up to a KK’s Priest concert you know it’s KK’s Priest and not the real deal Judas Priest — but if you want fairness to the fans then this is what you get. Even if KK just straight up took the name Judas Priest for these albums the music wouldn’t change, and frankly having a different name for this work makes sense so people know who is who. When Geoff Tate tried to steal the Queensrÿche name, he got blasted straight out of the court room. Having two touring entities going by the name “Judas Priest” is a complete fantasy in the first place, especially because:
2)
He left the fucking band. I mean, am I missing something here? If you leave the band you’re not entitled to it any longer. The band can now make its own decisions. It’s like if back in ‘97 someone said Rob should get to do his own version of Judas Priest — no, he left the band. He can create Rob’s Priest to compete with them, but Judas Priest is still the original band and whoever is a part of that. That band chose Richie and Andy, so they are members of Judas Priest. KK left Judas Priest, so he is no longer a member of Judas Priest.
3) And finally, Rob and Ian have been with Priest since the beginning (barring the ‘90s kerfuffel), Scott has been with them since the ‘90s and played on
Painkiller, Richie was KK’s replacement, Andy is a touring guitarist, and Glenn is still part of the band, just no longer on stage. This is a legitimate lineup. A lot of bands could wish for something this strong. They’ve been around for fifty years and still have four classic members in their ranks; plus a new guy who has become one of the most lauded modern metal guitarists; and their producer, who is widely regarded as
the metal producer, helping out on stage. KK’s Priest — his version of Judas Priest, name or not — is a bunch of hired guns, including Ripper, the ‘greatest’ hired gun in the history of metal. Please tell me which lineup is more legitimate here.
It seems that my message may have been misconstrued, as you deliberately overlooked the essence of the post and attempted to present KK's Priest as a genuine incarnation of Judas Priest, a concept that doesn't hold water. Just as Heaven and Hell was distinct from Black Sabbath, KK's Priest is separate from Judas Priest. Moreover, the argument you're putting forth concerning its members doesn't hold up either. It boasts only one long-standing member from Judas Priest, alongside a singer who was part of the band for a relatively brief period. Rather than attempting to portray KK's Priest as on par with one of the most renowned heavy metal bands in history, namely Judas Priest, you could make a compelling argument by questioning the legitimacy of the current official (Sneap-Faulkner-Hill-Travis-Halford) live lineup. It's worth noting that this lineup did not contribute to the creation of any of the classic musical material found in Judas Priest's catalog.