|
Post by JamesT on Apr 12, 2015 9:26:35 GMT
Saw the Hollies at Carlisle last night and it was announced that Bobby is writing about his life and The Hollies - here's hoping it comes to fruition!
They, or rather Peter Howarth (acoustically), did a new Howarth/Elliott song 'Priceless' which was superb.
|
|
|
Post by Stranger on Apr 14, 2015 14:21:21 GMT
It's Terry's book I want!
|
|
|
Post by dirtyfaz on Apr 14, 2015 21:13:43 GMT
All I can say about both books is "Seeing is believing". In other words I reckon I will be dead before one or either are published.
|
|
|
Post by JamesT on Apr 14, 2015 21:31:58 GMT
Yes, I wonder if they will appear. Re: Bobby's - it almost seemed like promotion for a near finished item, but we'll see. I seem to recall a Bobby book was first mooted about 20 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Gralto on Apr 15, 2015 13:53:18 GMT
Well it's certainly in process. Word on the street is that he's written 25,000 words and he's only up to 1965. When this tome was commenced however is less certain. Whatever the case it's sure to be filled with heaps of info and anecdotes given he has retained his diaries from the time.
|
|
|
Post by JamesT on Apr 15, 2015 19:25:10 GMT
Well it's certainly in process. Word on the street is that he's written 25,000 words and he's only up to 1965. When this tome was commenced however is less certain. Whatever the case it's sure to be filled with heaps of info and anecdotes given he has retained his diaries from the time.
He was able to recall from his diary the date and location of the Carlisle gig in 1964 and that the audience were wild. This might be a multi-volume set!
|
|
|
Post by dirtyfaz on Apr 16, 2015 3:57:48 GMT
Still reckon I will be dead first or if not me then them.
|
|
|
Post by Stranger on Apr 17, 2015 10:00:47 GMT
I think Simon's PDF book is the most interesting prospect at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Apr 20, 2015 22:13:45 GMT
I can't wait for it, but I think we're a few more years off seeing it yet. He did a very brief radio interview on the BBC a few weeks ago and said that he was up to 1965. He had one of his diaries with him and read a few tour dates out but no anecdotes as such. He said it's been his life-long mission to sort his memoirs out. I do hope it comes to fruition soon!
|
|
|
Post by stuball on Apr 24, 2015 16:08:58 GMT
When you think about it, the Hollies story would make a great book. All the ingredients are there: success and failure, harmony and controversy, love and hate, all the ups and downs of their long history. The problem is, are The Hollies, forty years past their commercial prime, still able to draw enough interest to make the publishing of a book worthwhile?
Then, there is so much controversy among past members of the group, that without doubt, everyone's take on the Hollies history would be shockingly at odds with each other. I'd love to hear each member's version of certain events in their past. It certainly would be entertaining reading.
The real question though, is who will ever write a book. Terry or Bobby? In Sylvester's case, a handful of angry tweets directed at Nash and Clarke, is hardly a foundation for a Hollies history. As for Bobby, all very well having kept a record of the group's bookings and dates, but again, that's a long way from writing a book.
I'd love to read a comprehensive book on The Hollies but I'm not holding my breath. And if it doesn't happen soon, it won't happen at at. Time is running out.
|
|
|
Post by christocello on Apr 24, 2015 18:04:28 GMT
A book by Terry could only cover twelve years, Bobby's recollections would encompass more than fifty years. But I'm not sure if there is much public interest for the last, say 15 years - and also the 15 years before. Apart from the R'nR HOF induction and maybe the last and surprising No. 1 in GB (1988)- nothing of a mere musical importance can be reported, I fear. This would make a difference to Grahams memoirs. (and Grahams stories of drugs, politics or love affairs probably didn' t happen to the other Hollies in that abundance....even if I'd like to hear stories from the jailed Hollies in Caracas, from Alan's experimentation with the subconscious, Alan's supposed romance with Marianne ("Carrie Anne"), Hollies (unwillingly?) supporting the U.S Navy in playing on an Aircraft carrier about 1968... and so on. So all in all I would be in favour of a more or less objective book written by someone outside the group. An author with some kind of reputation and with knowledge who talks with the members of the group and probably points out the different views.
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Apr 24, 2015 21:29:35 GMT
I think an independent book would be great also. It would ensure an even and balanced coverage. Graham's memories of the Hollies were very geared to the early days and then their subsequent trips to America. Also, naturally, the individual Hollies have their own opinions of the various parts of their career such as Tony describing the "flower power bit" as "uninteresting" and Bobby describing their run with Rickfors as "Bland". Alas, I would really look forward to his book, perhaps he has a reason for referring to the Rickfors years as bland that we perhaps don't know about.
There's much of the Hollies career that is undocumented or forgotten about. Most of it ought to be and deserves to be elaborated on. Sadly most interviewers ask the same old questions and fail to drag out anything new from the Hollies' past and present members.
Personally, I'd like to hear about their sessions in detail for "For Certain Because..." through to the final sessions with Graham. These seemed pretty experimental and almost erratic. The selection for his replacement is also a rarely talked about point - I've heard various rumours for who was on the list. The same can be said of when Allan left in 1972. It'd be nice to hear about their touring schedule too. They toured with some very popular bands in the 1960's and some impressive world tours in the 70's. But sadly Christocello's point is spot on - there's little to be said of the Hollies career post-1982/3 or thereabouts. Perhaps their recent albums merit some discussion, but the casual music fan would be interested in their prime years from around the late 1950's through to the late 1970's.
|
|
|
Post by stuball on Apr 26, 2015 13:21:41 GMT
I think an independent book would be great also. It would ensure an even and balanced coverage. I'm not so sure about that Cameron. If past precedent is anything to go on, I fear the book could be very Nash-centric. We've seen this pattern ad naseum over the last couple of decades, from every interview to the Look Through Any Window DVD. The focus is always on the '63-'68 period. The equally interesting '69-'81 era is usually wrapped up as an afterthought: '3 big hits, Clarke quit then returned, nothing else of interest...' It leaves many true Hollies fans hanging, and to be blunt, angry. Another point should be raised too. If Hollies Ltd have any say in the matter (and I'm sure they will!), I can't see them not wanting a chapter promoting the current incarnation of the group. And if that turns out to be the case, I can imagine a book that has say, ten chapters on the early years with Graham, a single chapter covering 1969 thru '99, and a final one on their latest and greatest edition of The Hollies. I've just painted my worst nightmare of a future Hollies book. I do hope I'm wrong on this, because I badly want to see a proper book on my favourite group. Having said that, the old saying comes to mind: be careful what you wish for!
|
|
|
Post by roots66 on Apr 26, 2015 15:58:45 GMT
I think an independent book would be great also. It would ensure an even and balanced coverage. I'm not so sure about that Cameron. If past precedent is anything to go on, I fear the book could be very Nash-centric. We've seen this pattern ad naseum over the last couple of decades, from every interview to the Look Through Any Window DVD. The focus is always on the '63-'68 period. The equally interesting '69-'81 era is usually wrapped up as an afterthought: '3 big hits, Clarke quit then returned, nothing else of interest...' It leaves many true Hollies fans hanging, and to be blunt, angry. Another point should be raised too. If Hollies Ltd have any say in the matter (and I'm sure they will!), I can't see them not wanting a chapter promoting the current incarnation of the group. And if that turns out to be the case, I can imagine a book that has say, ten chapters on the early years with Graham, a single chapter covering 1969 thru '99, and a final one on their latest and greatest edition of The Hollies. I've just painted my worst nightmare of a future Hollies book. I do hope I'm wrong on this, because I badly want to see a proper book on my favourite group. Having said that, the old saying comes to mind: be careful what you wish for! roots 66 sez: Within the last 10 to 15 years or so, it seems like there's been an explosion in rock books and documentaries focusing on the lesser-known aspects of rock history--even in those books and films geared toward a somewhat broader audience than the music obsessives. The fact that a Hollies tome is under consideration at all makes me optimistic that in the right hands--and given the fact that the Nash years have been covered "ad nauseum" already as you say--a properly balanced narrative can be produced.
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Apr 26, 2015 20:25:39 GMT
I don't mind the emphasis being on the 1963-1974 years. This is, after all, their "heyday". The Nash years (particularly 1966-1968) are my favourite years of the Hollies' career. It was the time that they were topping the charts three or four times per year and were becoming a global sensation. I believe they'd have easily achieved this if they carried on as they were and Graham didn't get itchy feet. But at the same time, I'm glad he did as it gave us their fantastic "flower power bit" (to quote Bobby) and then led the next Hollies lineup to mature and grow artistically but in a more adult direction than that which Graham went with CSNY.
What I meant by even and balanced coverage really was a balanced account of things. We all know that the individual Hollies' members have their own accounts of the way that some things happened that contradict the others. Also, some members (particularly Tony) don't really like dwelling on the past and it takes a good interviewer to get the most out of them. I think he's probably quite rightly just fed up of answering the same old questions for 50 years!
I do hope that Bobby covers some of the more controversial aspects of the Hollies' career such as Allan leaving them (twice) and also the big group split in 1981. The Hollies had a lot of changes in management which were never talked about either. These aspects never get talked about because they may seem 'awkward' or not relevant but it would be nice to know what happened.
Finally, I hope - just for the hardcore fans - he names the first chapter "Bobby's Prologue"!
|
|
|
Post by Gralto on May 2, 2015 13:41:35 GMT
I certainly hope Bobby covers the Rickfors era with a great deal of new information because it was a significant period of transition for them. It was the first time they started to have consistent chart failures, they didn't tour any of their major popular territories during this time (UK, Germany, Scandinavia) and with Clarke potentially never to return, the others MUST have at some point started thinking about their futures doing something else. If Clarke had said "forget it, I'm not coming back" the band would have been possibly up the creek because Rickfors almost certainly would have left regardless of who made the call. He wasn't at all happy, didn't fit in culturally and had a real issue with the band's preoccupation with money. He was still young and idealistic, The Hollies were tough, well travelled and in it for the long haul. And...he wasn't the frontman The Hollies needed. They may have gone off and tried other lead singers but would have found the problems they've had with some fans accepting the lead singer changes 25 years earlier than when they did once Clarke retired. Hopefully an honest tome from the guy who was there for all of it will include some of these trepidatious thoughts as The Hollies future remained hanging by a thread. It's easy to forget but if Clarke didn't come back in late 73 then Curly Billy (minor hit but gets them back on TOTP) doesn't happen and most likely Air That I Breathe doesn't happen either. That leaves the Hollies with He Ain't Heavy as their last big hit and with 1974 approaching, that's getting towards 5 years since The Hollies had a monster. So I guess if Clarke says no, Out On The Road comes out worldwide and they try their best to flog it in their usual strongholds. If it fails, Rickfors would probably still leave and the band would be well into 1974, maybe 1975 with no lead singer and no decent sized UK hit since Gasoline Alley Bred. Hicks and Elliott would have then had some big decisions to make. Basically without Clarke, the band couldn't successfully trade off its past in the same way in the subsequent decades that it was able to.
And thanks for the kind words Stranger. Still working on it with a plan to have it all written by the end of May then get the layout and pictures done by a mate and it's done. If you like detail, it will hopefully have something of interest, but if you are a casual fan, it might be a bit full on!
|
|
|
Post by Stranger on May 3, 2015 12:08:28 GMT
I certainly hope Bobby covers the Rickfors era with a great deal of new information because it was a significant period of transition for them. It was the first time they started to have consistent chart failures, they didn't tour any of their major popular territories during this time (UK, Germany, Scandinavia) In some respects everything seemed to go wrong for them or be ill-judged around this time. They foolishly let Allan leave (though who knows it may have been a great relief to everyone). LCW hits in America and they get their first (and last) major crack at the States without the singer of the hit single. Not only that, they are breaking in a new sound and touring for the first time with Rickfors so they suddenly aren't the "perfect" live band they always were. Their tight harmony style has changed. And to top that they don't tour in the countries where they are most popular... That's exactly the level of detailed nerdery I've been waiting ten years for!
|
|
|
Post by cameron on May 3, 2015 18:01:42 GMT
With all due respect to the band, it wouldn't have been the worst thing if they called it a day when Rickfors left. I've always maintained that the reason that the Hollies are largely forgotten today by the casual listener is because it's aways been accepted that the Hollies will always be around - or part of the furniture to quote a good magazine article IMO, in terms of albums, they never quite did anything later on to better Romany. It was so meticulously crafted and really well thought out. There isn't a filler track on it. I get that feeling about most Hollies albums prior to it too. The late 70's ones, however, always seem when you listen to them and read articles about them that they were a quick "all in one take" affair. Now you mention it Simon, the whole 'preoccupation with money' thing makes sense now. Listening carefully to Romany, you can hear how layered and and immaculately produced it is. I'd put that album up against any other AOR album of the period. The Hollies spent a lot of time perfecting it and it was apparently delayed for release in England THREE times while it was perfected. I think the Hollies would have really well endured the rest of the 70's had they applied that ethic with subsequent albums. Although Another Night is quite close. I read an interview with Tony that they tried really hard with that album to revitalise their career in America - then Epic elected not to release it! So on the one hand, I'm cynically saying they could have tried harder, but on the other, who were they trying harder for when audiences wouldn't accept them for anything but a pop singles band. To bring it back to the point of this thread; I hope Bobby elaborates on the Rickfors era. He stated it was a bland era for the band, but to me it's one of their most exciting periods. But Bobby knows what went on behind closed doors; all Hollies (including Rickfors) have said it was a challenging time due to Mikaels English language skills (or seemingly lack of them) meaning that their usual one take work ethic went out the window as the vocal track was re-tracked dozens of times until they were satisfied with Mikael's pronunciation. Keep going with your project Simon, can't wait to read it. Anything new and in depth is like gold dust. The last new Hollies story item that I really enjoyed was Tony and Bobby's interview in 'Shindig!' magazine way back in 2010 where they elaborated on the "flower power bit". It's about time they got the recognition they deserve and their story shared!
|
|
|
Post by Stranger on May 4, 2015 12:47:38 GMT
IMO, in terms of albums, they never quite did anything later on to better Romany. It was so meticulously crafted and really well thought out. There isn't a filler track on it. I get that feeling about most Hollies albums prior to it too. The late 70's ones, however, always seem when you listen to them and read articles about them that they were a quick "all in one take" affair. Very good point Cameron, in general I always find the '60s albums and Confessions to be sonically underwhelming especially compared to some contemporary albums. I always thought that they were quick jobs and that the time and money simply wasn't spent recording the albums. Distant Light sounds like a mess to me but it's a great album. Romany does have a much deeper and more careful production. I also think Hollies '74 sounds reasonably full. It's possible to imagine the Hollies putting the double the care and money into their albums and still not selling any though. I can understand them not doing... I'm not sure about Out On The Road. I never put on the vinyl to actually listen to it, how does it sound? It certainly has great songs. The ultimate Hollies album in some ways.
|
|
|
Post by cameron on May 4, 2015 15:18:13 GMT
The Hollies had no control over the sonic qualities of their records. They had some say in the mixing of the track if they stuck around after the session and that was about as far as it went in terms of the audio itself. Of course, they mainly dealt with the arrangements.
Ron Richards was the man in charge when t came to the final mix. He was known for creating great mono mixes but often let the younger technicians create the stereo mixes. He'd give them a brief on how to do it (ie, if EMI wanted one of those silly extreme vocal/backing separation mixes) but largely left them to it. As is well documented by the Hollies, he was a strict "let's get the job done and make it to the pub before closing" kind of guy. So in fairness to the Hollies, they never had the creative environment that a band like, say, the Beatles had with a producer who worked purely in their best interests.
I've always been disappointed with the mix on Evolution. It's so muddy that many parts are lost in it. I do hope it gets remixed/remastered properly one day.
I think it's also worth noting that for Romany, it was the start of the Hollies' working relationship with Alan Parsons as engineer. Ron Richards had very little to do with that LP, largely leaving the lads to it.
|
|
|
Post by stuball on May 13, 2015 13:07:31 GMT
I think the Hollies would have really well endured the rest of the 70's had they applied that ethic with subsequent albums. Although Another Night is quite close. I read an interview with Tony that they tried really hard with that album to revitalise their career in America - then Epic elected not to release it! Not sure where this idea came from but the Another Night LP was released in America in the spring of '75 and, by Hollies' standards, with a lot of promotional push by Epic. Ads appeared in all the trade and pop mags at the time and the album was universally praised by critics. Epic brought the group stateside in May '75 for 4 concert nights in New York and another four in LA. While in the USA, The Hollies did a lot of television work and they were present on late night TV that spring, performing 'Sandy' and 'Another Night'. The lyrics to 'Another Night' were published in Hit Parader magazine, a sure sign that the single was about to break in a big way. And then......nothing. Another Night the album stalled at #123, despite all the the promotion and glowing reviews. The relative failure of the LP was the beginning of the end for The Hollies in America. In Epic's eyes, it had proven once and for all that the general music-buying public would never accept The Hollies as anything but purveyors of the odd catchy single, and that a Hollies album would only sell if there was a top ten single nailed to it. After Another Night, Epic decided to cut their losses and ride out the Hollies contract until its expiry in '79. What followed Another Night were an irregular trickle of Hollies releases, dumped on the market with zero promotion, solely to satisfy contract demands. In spring '77, a bastardized version of bits of Write On and Russian Roulette plus 'Sandy' appeared, and then about 8 months later, A Crazy Steal. And that was that for The Hollies in America.
|
|
|
Post by Stranger on May 18, 2015 10:11:09 GMT
The Hollies had no control over the sonic qualities of their records. They had some say in the mixing of the track if they stuck around after the session and that was about as far as it went in terms of the audio itself. Of course, they mainly dealt with the arrangements. If The Hollies Ltd. owned the recordings were they paying EMI for the recording time etc.? Or did EMI pay and give them back the recordings? Surely, they were paying they could have chosen to pay for more time and put more effort in etc.
|
|
|
Post by cameron on May 19, 2015 7:43:31 GMT
I couldn't say for sure, I just know hat they do own their own recordings. EMI didn't make much money out of it hence the total lack of promotion for Evolution and Butterfly. I'm guessing that the Hollies themselves paid for it as part of Hollies LTD as in 1968 they were recording at studios other than Abbey Road that weren't run by EMI.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyfaz on May 19, 2015 12:29:06 GMT
My understanding is that EMI owned everything up to and including For Certain Because and the Hollies LTD own everything after. Hollies Ltd leased to EMI and then later albums to Polydor and then it seems everything is now leased back to EMI. Makes doing compilations etc much easier if all the recordings are through the one company.
|
|
|
Post by davidm on May 20, 2015 19:53:24 GMT
Frank Allen of The Searchers produced a good history of that band in 2009 that runs to over 400 pages and gives fairly even coverage to all the decades and gives the inside story of the line-up changes. I would hope that Bobby's book will appear and will at least match that standard.
|
|