Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 13:49:22 GMT
What I mean is, these disagreements make NO difference to my enjoyment of their music. I can think of several very unsavoury characters whose music I still listen to, but, unlike many, I've long been able to separate the music from the men (Terry's tweeting has nothing on the exploits of Gary Glitter and Chuck Berry!).
|
|
|
Post by gee on May 15, 2020 13:56:14 GMT
both The Stones and The Kinks grew apart - The Kinks broke up - while The Stones went on hold for some time due to internal issues...and we better not mention CSNY
Terry rants re Allan back on 16 February if anyone wants to look - calling him 'that idiot Clarke !'
he also moans re the drummer and guitarist who own the name The Hollies touring...
while Terry uses the name 'OF The Hollies' (which he has not been since June 1981) and sings Hollies songs in his shows....
I still suspect that - unlikely I know - if Graham Nash, with Allan's voice recovered alot, and with Tony and Bobby onboard set up a big Hollies surviving members reunion concert to be recorded and filmed for Blu Ray / DVD release...and invited Terry to be a part of it
....Mr Sylvester would quickly delete all nasty tweets, grab his guitar and be there like a shot...!!
|
|
|
Post by cameron on May 15, 2020 15:04:20 GMT
I don't understand why the RRHOF fiasco is STILL being debated ten years on. Terry needs to do something more meaningful with his life. When he's interviewed, he actually comes across pretty well and he's a good laugh. Why can't he channel that energy into building up his legacy?
In terms of upsetting the fans, past band members taking a snipe at each other is absolutely nothing compared to "vetting" Hollies fans on the official forum if they've been known to speak out against the current line up at some point on social media somewhere. That completely killed any enthusiasm I had for supporting the current line up, as I feel like they obviously feel threatened if that kind of politics is allowed to go on.
Also not keeping on top of their back catalogue, that's upsetting to fans as well. As a fan who only discovered them in the late 2000s, I still don't actually have a complete set of their studio albums on CD, they're just too hard/expensive to come by and their Spotify catalogue is an absolute mess, with quite a few albums mussing that are actually on there under the 'complete' series of boxsets.
Why can't the likes of Terry Sylvester spend his time pulling together a decent reissue project to help build both HIS legacy and that of the Hollies, instead of sat on his backside all day causing trouble on Twitter?
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on May 15, 2020 15:28:41 GMT
Now he's having a go at David Crosby, two days after his son dies. Not classy, Tel.
|
|
|
Post by baz on May 15, 2020 15:28:49 GMT
In terms of upsetting the fans, past band members taking a snipe at each other is absolutely nothing compared to "vetting" Hollies fans on the official forum if they've been known to speak out against the current line up at some point on social media somewhere. That completely killed any enthusiasm I had for supporting the current line up, as I feel like they obviously feel threatened if that kind of politics is allowed to go on. Oh yes! Was a very bad feeling in 2006 when I and some others here found ourselves ejected/locked out of the official forum for stating honest thoughts about their latest album. What was galling (from what I remember seeing) was the criticisms were done in a very polite mannered way, but no no no! We weren't allowed to say one bad word against what was and remains a very rotten album so it felt very sycophantic and clearly operating to some agenda which some of us fell foul of. Didn't leave a favourable impression at all and yes, my support and interest in the band as an ongoing concern ceased there and then.
|
|
|
Post by thejanitor on May 15, 2020 20:56:00 GMT
Do we really need two Terry threads now? 😐
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on May 15, 2020 21:17:03 GMT
Seems to be turning into more of a general Grumpy Old Hollies Fan thread that being said.
GROUP HUG!
|
|
|
Post by dirtyfaz on May 16, 2020 1:40:27 GMT
Sadly my point was missed by some. All I was suggesting is that none of us were there so we don't really know the ins and outs of why Terry left or any of the others for that matter.
No we don't need 2 Terry threads about his Twitter comments. Not worth the effort on either front.
|
|
|
Post by anthony on May 16, 2020 1:59:00 GMT
Sadly my point was missed by some. All I was suggesting is that none of us were there so we don't really know the ins and outs of why Terry left or any of the others for that matter. No we don't need 2 Terry threads about his Twitter comments. Not worth the effort on either front. I sure didn't miss your thoughts, you are 100% correct, we were not there and don't know what life was like. Music groups would be like the work place, so much going on, conflict etc. Just a pity that we hear the rants, sadly he doesn't do himself any favours As we know the Hollies have always kept everything in house. No talked about scandals like other groups had.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyfaz on May 16, 2020 2:04:59 GMT
The shame about the Terry saga of supposed bitterness is that not one of us was there actually at the time(so none of us can comment with certainty) and do not know the events that transpired. He may have a real valid reasons for his grievence. I don't have or participate on twitter so I don't see what he has to say. I will bet it is not all bad but humans don't care about the good only the bad. They make assumptions and read into things and put their own spin on it. Those of us commenting have actually seen the tweets, which I think is more valid than what you "bet," sorry. Why would we -- fans of Terry's -- want to believe the bad and not the good? That makes no sense. The most positive spin I can put on his Twitter feed is that a) he never mentions Tony (interestingly), b) he never disses Allan's singing, past or present, c) he still loves Bernie. Hope that makes you feel better, but really don't appreciate your lack of trust regarding what we've seen with our own eyes, and you haven't. If he feels he has a valid beef against Bobby, snipey comments about his baldness and the bags under his eyes doesn't help his case. And it's been 10 years since the R&RHoF. Validity to his claims or not, he's doing more damage to his legacy now than anybody else might have done that evening. Sadly I think you missed the point. All I suggested was that his tweets have good points that no one mentions but my comments were really about his leaving the band and the circumstances. None of us were there. Terry's bad mouthing does no one any favours and I don't condone that. Dunno what you mean by "Hope that makes you feel better". I wasn't feeling bad.
|
|
|
Post by gee on May 16, 2020 11:13:03 GMT
we can only guess re Terry's exit from the band
but we DO know several points and can get an idea overall - while there was a 'last straw' it was not any one thing but a combination of factors
1. we do know Terry was unhappy about them outvoting Bernie and himself to oust manager Robin Britten - who of course also was Terry's own manager
2. Terry was getting very frustrated within the band re his views re musical direction being overlooked - 'Buddy Holly' being Clarke's idea and it flopped ! - but it seems if the; 'we don't need the opinion of hired help' jibe was true that Terry even after twelve years service was still being seen as 'the new boy' or 'baby' of the group (something George Harrison and Carl Wilson could identify with re their bands too)
- Terry has said that 'Too Young To Be Married' was a roundabout nod in his direction...!! (perhaps - note the line; 'I'll get a job where I get good pay....')
I saw Allan Clarke make an unkind dig at Terry being 'only a baby' onstage once in the early 80's - Terry looked very unhappy and Tony quickly cut in with some PR chat to cover it....
Terry's overall standing in the band had gone from 'new boy' in 1969 up to a major group figurehead by 1971-73 as part of the Clarke-Sylvester songwriting duo....then getting several lead vocals on both his own and others songs on albums, even singing LCW in USA shows due to Allan's absence, helping alot re PR work during the 'Rickfors era'....and as a part of the Clarke-Hicks-Sylvester second in house Hollies composing team....only by 1980 to have declined all the way back to high harmony vocals, rhythm guitar...!
The fact Allan took the new to bigger pop success young Terry 'under his wing' as a novice songwriter circa 1969-70 is probably relevant here as Allan, Tony and Bobby probably saw him as 'the new boy' whom they helped as he in return helped them seemlessly cover Nash's exit from the band then....and likely any such attitudes from the three 'senior' Hollies persisted long after...far too long
3. Terry was very likely increasingly frustrated that his own songs and any lead vocal work was set to one side in favor of the group orientated approach from 1975 onwards - his two by then rare lead vocals on 5317704 album in 1979 was probably purely to save studio time
4. Like as with Clarke-Hicks-Nash in 1968 so too by 1978 Clarke-Hicks-Sylvester appear to have run their course as a composing team further loosening their ties and reducing Terry's creative standing in the band
5. The 'Last Straw' - Allan's wanting to stop touring by 1981 was the 'last straw' for Terry - it seems causing his argument after a stressful day with producer Bruce Welch re a song Terry loathed where he was already upset, frustrated, and in growing rage talked out of turn once too often....then after a verbal warning on failing to cease and desist was duly shown the 'red card' by Tony
ironic that they went on to tour pretty incessantly thereafter even calling the 80's 'the touring years' - so was Clarke's apparent desire to cut back touring actually real ? - or part of the 'trap door' Bobby refers to in his book ?
Terry always insists they were five equals (we know from Bernie's part of the story from 1966 onwards that wasn't quite the case as Bernie openly said Mike Cohen told him he 'was on the payroll...') as per Robin Britten's five way split deal....however any mention of being a Hollies Limited employee or just the 'hired help' makes Terry explode with rage possibly touching a raw nerve especially IF that was the unkind jibe thrown at him in 1981 (?) Terry and Bernie indeed got an equal share per Robin Britten's deal - were the three 'senior' Hollies unhappy about that and looking to trim the wage bill ?? (think Moody Blues getting rid of Patrick Moraz etc) - a horrible thought but we DO know such 'engineering' goes on....ask Don Rathbone or Eric Haydock
we do know that they could be ruthless - as Clarke himself discovered in late 1971 and Mike Rickfors learned in 1973 - so it is a possibility the 'trap door' was set...then sprung on Terry in 1981 if his moaning re Allan, in general and getting above himself had really got to a point where Tony and Bobby looking around decided getting 'sidemen' in was a far cheaper less hassle ridden thing to do....
My guess is ALL of these factors combined to see Terry depart
|
|
|
Post by baz on May 16, 2020 12:02:52 GMT
Terry and Bernie got an equal share per Robin Britten's deal - were the three 'senior' Hollies unhappy about that and looking to trim the wage bill ?? (think Moody Blues getting rid of Patrick Moraz etc) - a horrible thought but we DO know such 'engineering' goes on....ask Don Rathbone or Eric Haydock we do know that they could be ruthless An excellent dissection of the many factors that contributed to Terry's departure. The Robin Britten deal I suspect is a crucial one and the more I think about it, Robin cut an unusual deal. Terry boasts to this day he still gets a good income from The Hollies and always attributes that to Robin. If there's one person one can safely say Terry will never criticise, it's Robin and he made certain to give him his due at the HOF fiasco. I think Terry remains unhappy he was the only one who acknowledged Robin on that fateful night. Lets be realistic here... the Hollies' 70's catalogue isn't exactly a goldmine where sales and royalties are concerned as those albums are not big sellers and never will be. Terry and Bernie were salaried members of the band so the power belonged to Tony, Bobby and to a lesser extent after 1973, Allan. The two biggest 70's hits? "Long Cool" and "Air" will forever generate songwriting income for the writers and Terry had no involvement with those. So, that must mean he gets a cut of the sales income from the recordings. That's an unusual situation given Terry was a "hired help" and that agreement remains in place to this day. Robin certainly struck an unusual deal as "hired helps" and musicians who don't write usually end up with next to nothing so with such a 5 way split in place, larger cuts would be available if less were taking a cut of the pie so I do suspect Tony, Bobby and Allan were very mindful of this and that Terry and Bernie's departure enabled them to make more money between them. So I suspect it was a business decision as by purging Bernie and Terry, they could move on and it would look better on them if Terry and Bernie quit of their own accord as opposed to firing them which is what transpired. Ruthless, but common in the world of "business".
|
|
|
Post by cameron on May 16, 2020 13:21:40 GMT
we do know that they could be ruthless - as Clarke himself discovered in late 1971 and Mike Rickfors learned in 1973 - so it is a possibility the 'trap door' was set...then sprung on Terry in 1981 if his moaning re Allan, in general and getting above himself had really got to a point where Tony and Bobby looking around decided getting 'sidemen' in was a far cheaper less hassle ridden thing to do.... This all points to Tony. He was perhaps the most ruthless/shrewd man in pop music after Dave Clark, and very much viewed the Hollies as his vehicle to making money, creating a nice life for himself and living comfortably. Before he even joined the band, he demanded (I think) £18 per week when the rest of them were on something atrocious like £4 per week, leaving the band funds decimated until their touring picked up thanks to their deal with EMI. Tony was also the driving force in getting on top of that Clarke/Hicks/Nash songwriting roll from mid-1966 onwards because they knew they'd make more money and it would help them get out of their collective £250,000 debt, which was wiped with 'On A Carousel' alone. Graham even introduces the song in their 1968 concert as "this song made us SO much money, it's untrue". He would be the driving force in the creation of 'Hollies Sing Dylan'. It gave them absolutely zero credibility and seriously harmed their image at the time with the music press, but as Micky Most mused, it was very much in "their segment of the dartboard". The result? The second highest charting studio album of their whole career, and the one Hollies studio album that genuinely remained in print on both sides of the Atlantic for about a decade. Tony always speaks despairingly of their foray into psychedelia because that was not commercially successful, though perhaps remains the most artistic and most lauded phase of their entire career by music critics. So it's very much a double edged sword keeping the balance between being artistic and actually making money. Tony was also the one with an ear for a hit, even as unpredictable as 'He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother', he knew it was a hit. His opinion was so highly valued that even Paul McCartney sought him out to hear 'Abbey Road' when it was finished for an honest opinion on it. THAT'S how respected his ear for a hit was. You can hear Tony somewhat "bossing" the guys around on that documentary for the Buddy Holly reunion single as he's telling them how it's going to be arranged. And herein lies the problem... He was on a roll for all of the 1960s and the early 1970s. His proven formula for success fell short during the Rickfors era, though this was not his fault at all, I just don't think the general public wanted the Hollies without Allan Clarke. As we know, the music from this era is absolutely top notch, some of their absolute best in fact. Tony ascends to the top of 'Hollies Ltd' when Allan left, though in truth he was leading them as early as 1968 before Graham left and he knew they needed to get back to creating pop records. With Allan shaken by his best-friend's departure, Tony pulled the group through it. I think the others end up leaning on Tony to lead the group too much. Bobby, even in his own book, appears to have little input where the general direction and song selection is concerned. Tony gets so used to telling everyone how it is and how it's going to be, that they end up on that foray into ballads in the 1970s (which Allan Clarke detested) and when he relents and lets Allan have the 'Buddy Holly' LP, it's a huge flop (though not as much of a flop as 'Russian Roulette', 'A Crazy Steal' and '5317704'), and there's a degree of "I told you so", and Allan falls into line and Tony has another crack at trying to lead them into success in the 1980s. Tony seems to steer the Hollies like he's investing in shares: orchestrating every choice carefully and thinking "well that sound is popular now, let's do that for our next record" and the result is that the era from the late 1970s onwards isn't at all ageless like their earlier stuff, nearly all of it sounds dated today, with very little of it standing up artistically now. They're so concerned by constantly reviewing what has been successful for them and constantly weighing up what the next "big sound" will be, that their three main assets get sidelined from the late 1970s onwards: Tony's guitar playing, Bobby's drumming and that magic three-way vocal sound. How much of their 80s, 90s and 00s output gives Bobby some awful synthetic drum sound or even replaces him with a drum machine?! How much of that output pushes Tony right to the back, with many songs not featuring his lead guitar at all? How many of those songs predictably restrict the harmonies to just the chorus? It's like they got stuck in a rut and just never got out of it when it comes to new material. The best of their current stuff that I like such as 'So Damn Beautiful', 'Then Now and Always' and a few others all have prominent harmonies, natural-ish sounding drums from Bobby with space for his animated fills and bits of Tony's so unique lead guitar dotted here and there. It feels like everything else they've recorded is filler that's not been arranged to its maximum Hollies potential. It goes back to this "get it in the can and let's get to the pub before last orders" attitude, except Tony is the one who's not the going to the pub type. Look how stunning 'Romany' turned out to be when they actually spent time carefully crafting it in the studio, afraid of what the reaction was going to be from the public now that Allan was gone. From the mid-1970s onwards, it all seems to be down to saving money and doing things as cheap as possible, which might be good for their bank balance short term, but they're missing out on a lot of their potential long term and still don't seem to have reserved their place in rock music as being in the top ten commercial artists of the 1960s... We constantly get told this "well the Hollies still sell out auditoriums all over the world" line, which is true, but the Rolling Stones are filling huge stadiums and still releasing music that's very much identifiably theirs. The same can be said of the Monkees before Peter Tork died. Their reunion album 'Good Times' was so good that I file it with the rest of their albums rather than on my shelf for "new releases" because it's so much their style with just a slight contemporary edge to it. At no point do I ever feel like I'm listening to anything less than the Monkees, despite Davy Jones not being on most of the tracks. They even slipped one of the new songs onto a compilation of "Summer of Love" tracks by the Monkees, and it blends in seamlessly and it's really satisfying that they can still give us "more of the same" while still being creative and looking forwards. Why can't the Hollies get that vibe back? Give us a new album of 12 or so catchy pop songs with prominent harmonies (find a new true alto high harmony singer), lots of solos from Tony (especially with some of his signature guitar sounds like the jangly sound of his 1960s Vox Phantom V, his mellow toned Gretsch from the early 1970s) and keep Bobby's drums tight and to the fore like they were in the 1960s and early 1970s. Perhaps even go back and finish off some old demos like the Monkees did and finish it with a cover that doesn't feature a photo of the band, like many of their covers didn't in the 1970s. With all this, Peter Howarth singing the songs instead of Allan Clarke is not going to be a problem if Tony and Bobby's stamp is all over it and that identifiable 3-way wide harmony.
|
|
|
Post by gee on May 16, 2020 18:04:32 GMT
I think the issue of Tony's guitar being sidelined was actually there from 1966 - tracks on 'For Certain Because...' like 'High Classed', 'What Went Wrong' and both 'Evolution' and 'Butterfly' saw Hicks guitar on occasions cut back in places in favor of additional accompaniment taking the solo, be it brass, orchestration, steel drums etc just as the featured guitar became a very noted instrument in music in 1967 indeed 'He Ain't Heavy' had NO guitar in 1969 just as heavy rock became popular....
Tony had the talent of a Clapton, Beck, Page etc....but no desire to be a rock axeman rather a pop band musician and that aspect probably saw them never become as highly regarded as the guitar led bands of the early seventies etc
the obsession with slow ballads, later tinny keyboardy pop show how the three 'senior Hollies' probably had too much of Ron Richards 'set in his ways' in them - once they had loathed a ballad 'That's My Desire' Ron suggested....later it probably was Tony dogmatically doing ballad after ballad ignoring what either Clarke or Sylvester thought re musical direction
even when allowing Clarke his idea re 'Buddy Holly' it was drenched in keyboards, synth' and the single was...a slow ballad !
I believe we nearly got the dreaded drum machine again on 'Then Now Always' album too - Bobby's real drums were recorded specifically and I think this was after it was pointed out to Bobby how much fans wanted his actual drumming over drum programming...
like 'em or loathe 'em those two Howarth era studio albums DO actually feature quite a bit of Tony Hicks guitarwork also by Steve Lauri too, even the guitar/sitar returns on 'One Touch'
I feel they need a 'soaring' high harmony vocalist as Alan Coates was and years ago Nash/Sylvester also Allan Clarke who could handle high harmonies with a distinctive voice that whilst standing out nevertheless blends with the other two vocalists into a complete harmony sound
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on May 16, 2020 20:31:45 GMT
"I don't have or participate on twitter so I don't see what he has to say. I will bet it is not all bad but humans don't care about the good only the bad."
I didn't miss the point. Unless this wasn't a point.
|
|
|
Post by JamesT on May 16, 2020 20:55:36 GMT
I believe we nearly got the dreaded drum machine again on 'Then Now Always' album too - Bobby's real drums were recorded specifically and I think this was after it was pointed out to Bobby how much fans wanted his actual drumming over drum programming... Wasn't it amazing that most of the sonic issues raised by fans after the release of Staying Power were remedied with the release of Then Now Always? Coincidence?
|
|
|
Post by dirtyfaz on May 16, 2020 23:43:40 GMT
"I don't have or participate on twitter so I don't see what he has to say. I will bet it is not all bad but humans don't care about the good only the bad." I didn't miss the point. Unless this wasn't a point. It seems you did. It was nothing to do with twitter it was about none of us being there so we don't know.
|
|
|
Post by Malc on May 17, 2020 5:57:50 GMT
Seems TS has finally gotten around to reading Bobby's book, which is where the current round of negativity comes from...
|
|