Paul Levitz and Keith Giffen's run on Legion of Super-Heroes...Legion of Superheroes #281-313, Legion of Superheroes #1-5
Roger Stern and John Romita Jr.’s Amazing Spider-Man... Amazing Spider-Man 229-252
John Ostrander and Tom Mandrake’s The Spectre...The Spectre #0-62
Nocenti's GA is horrible. I swear, I don't even know whats going on half the time I'm reading it.
*Nemesis of QCCBob*
It's a dense and challenging read. It has it's flaws, but the fact that it's not straight forward doesn't make it horrible.
But yeah, I, Vampire has been the only one without a change in the TWO creators, but very few books have sustained runs where the artist draws every issue. They're pretty rare in comics history. "Long sustained runs" are usually driven by the writer. Lets face it, a writer change impacts a book more dramatically than an artist change. Looking at the New 52, there are a good amount of books with a consistent team of artists that work with a writer to create a good unifed run. Animal Man, Swamp Thing, Wonder Woman, Batman, Green Lantern, Justice League, Batman and Robin and Batwoman, amongst others, have provided a consistent narrative with a stable creative team. The low selling or secondary books are always going to experience a lot of creator shake up, because DC's (and Marvel's) top priority is to SELL. If a book isn't maximizing its potential, then hell yes they should change the creative team.
Bottom line, and I'm just ranting in general now: it's easy to look at the history of comics and rattle off a couple dozen long runs. But in the grand scheme of things, those runs are few and far between. The majority of comics often change hands creatively, and for good reason. They're usually not very good. It's easy to look back on classic runs with rose colored glasses, but at the same time I find those who do that often miss out on the history that gets made right before them. There are some pretty great runs happening in our midst.
Can someone ask Grant Morrison to give me a haircut?