|
|
Post by moorlock2003 on Mar 9, 2021 1:37:27 GMT
Record World Magazine, Nov. 18, 1972, "The Coast" column by John Gibson:
"The Hollies are beginning to pick up steam after a shaky start. Audiences not minding the personnel changes as much as first thought".
|
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Mar 10, 2021 13:18:17 GMT
Record World Magazine, Nov. 18, 1972, "The Coast" column by John Gibson: "The Hollies are beginning to pick up steam after a shaky start. Audiences not minding the personnel changes as much as first thought". To be honest don’t think the Americans minded the change, probably didn’t notice, it was more the issue in the Hollies home land. |
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on Mar 10, 2021 15:22:21 GMT
Record World Magazine, Nov. 18, 1972, "The Coast" column by John Gibson: "The Hollies are beginning to pick up steam after a shaky start. Audiences not minding the personnel changes as much as first thought". To be honest don’t think the Americans minded the change, probably didn’t notice, it was more the issue in the Hollies home land. Yeah, most Americans couldn't pick a Hollie out of a lineup, except for Graham, and that's only AFTER he left the band. |
|
|
|
Post by gee on Mar 12, 2021 21:43:11 GMT
Terry Sylvester:
'The Americans wanted Allan...but we just didn't sound like that anymore'
Bobby Elliott: (pages 216-217 - 'It Ain't Heavy It's My Story')
'Mikael was a fine artist but some of our performances had been to be honest pretty mediocre in the grand scheme of all things Hollies. We were missing the cut and thrust of our trademark energy-driven hit-'em-between- the-eyes live show delivery...'
|
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on Mar 13, 2021 13:51:36 GMT
Terry Sylvester: 'The Americans wanted Allan...but we just didn't sound like that anymore' Bobby Elliott: (pages 216-217 - 'It Ain't Heavy It's My Story') 'Mikael was a fine artist but some of our performances had been to be honest pretty mediocre in the grand scheme of all things Hollies. We were missing the cut and thrust of our trademark energy-driven hit-'em-between- the-eyes live show delivery...' But how many Americans (outside the hardcore fans) knew why? |
|
|
|
Post by stuball on Mar 13, 2021 16:25:37 GMT
Mikael was fine for making adventurous new music such as the Romany and Out On The Road LPs. However the big problem when it came to touring, was that old setlist chock full of old solid gold hits which, quite rightly, the fans demanded they play. But without Clarke, and despite Sylvester and Hicks best efforts, they just didn't have that Hollies 'hit sound' anymore.
I think they themselves realized this, and began the US tour by adding some laid back folk to the mix. But to my mind, that was a step in the wrong direction. People hadn't come to hear Gordon Lightfoot interpretations. They wanted the high energy pop that The Hollies had made their own. And to a large degree vocally, that meant the Clarke/Sylvester/Hicks sound.
Kudos for the group for dumping the snoozers after the first few gigs, and rocking things up a bit, especially in the wake of support act The Raspberries drawing the majority of the applause. An example of this is the fabulous live version of 'Long Dark Road' which despite Clarke's absence, really rocks. A few more numbers in this style would have helped, but whether it would have got the group over the massive hurdle of Clarke's vocal absence, I have my doubts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony Wilkinson on Mar 13, 2021 18:05:10 GMT
The casual concert goers wanted the hits, but for me I yearned for album tracks and something different, it was usually more weighted towards the hits though.. but never mind, it was what it was...
|
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on Mar 13, 2021 18:35:17 GMT
But how many Americans (outside the hardcore fans) knew why? Even if they weren't aware of Allan's name, The Hollies had appeared on TV and record covers enough times for concert goers to know that something was amiss with a blonde lead singer who barely spoke English... Maybe in the UK. Most North Americans bought the singles, not the albums and hadn't a clue. They were on TV post-Nash a couple of times, but aside from one Midnight Special and a Canadian TV appearance, I'm not aware of very many. I never saw them on TV at the time. And, considering our expansive geography, concerts aren't as accessible as they are in the UK. |
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Mar 14, 2021 0:43:09 GMT
'Hollywood Palace', 'The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour', 'The Mike Douglas Show', 'This Is Tom Jones', 'Get It Together', (and, earlier, on 'Shindig!', 'Hullabaloo' and 'The Red Skelton Show')... The Hollies had done lots of national US TV over the years. Granted, they probably wouldn't have been recognised by many in the street, but I still find it hard to believe that most ticket buyers didn't know what the lead singer looked like, particularly as US singles tended to have picture sleeves... That’s very true, but I remember seeing the Hollies live in Oz 1983, I was surprised no Terry or Burnie, days before the net, so it’s here are the Hollies, hey it’s a different line up. Plus the Hollies were not a group we knew all their members, not like the Stones, maybe in the 60’s the English fans knew. Plus with the Hollies tours of America in the 70’s how were they really received, you hear Moorlock saying they were massive, but I’m not sure, |
|
|
|
Post by sandy on Mar 14, 2021 12:46:10 GMT
I'm STILL reading and listening to interviewing where Terry is cited as lead singer of Long Cool Woman ,in America???!! I'm aware he sang it on the tour,but just today , someone online asked who he was, and was told " he sang the record 'Long Cool Woman'.."..!!!! And the guys who saw the tour with Rikfors...could they honestly not hear the difference in the vocals?😬
|
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on Mar 14, 2021 13:27:21 GMT
'Hollywood Palace', 'The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour', 'The Mike Douglas Show', 'This Is Tom Jones', 'Get It Together', (and, earlier, on 'Shindig!', 'Hullabaloo' and 'The Red Skelton Show')... The Hollies had done lots of national US TV over the years. Granted, they probably wouldn't have been recognised by many in the street, but I still find it hard to believe that most ticket buyers didn't know what the lead singer looked like, particularly as US singles tended to have picture sleeves... The Hollies didn't have much in the way of picture sleeves in the US. Canada, less so. (Ironically, one of those sleeves being for the Baby, which didn't chart) You overestimate the popularity of the Hollies in America. They had a few hits. That's it. They weren't really in the music magazines. They would have been just as recognizable as the Association or the Turtles. A few hardcores, but that's it. I was born in 1961 and, like I said before, never saw Allan Clarke's face until 2003. And I was a music fanatic (especially British invasion stuff) and the little sister of one who bought Graham's solo albums. The Hollies were just another faceless pop group. www.45cat.com/artist/the-hollies |
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on Mar 14, 2021 13:49:56 GMT
'Hollywood Palace', 'The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour', 'The Mike Douglas Show', 'This Is Tom Jones', 'Get It Together', (and, earlier, on 'Shindig!', 'Hullabaloo' and 'The Red Skelton Show')... The Hollies had done lots of national US TV over the years. Granted, they probably wouldn't have been recognised by many in the street, but I still find it hard to believe that most ticket buyers didn't know what the lead singer looked like, particularly as US singles tended to have picture sleeves... And none of those TV appearances except for Tom Jones was post-Nash. |
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on Mar 14, 2021 16:53:24 GMT
The Hollies didn't have much in the way of picture sleeves in the US. Canada, less so. (Ironically, one of those sleeves being for the Baby, which didn't chart) You overestimate the popularity of the Hollies in America. They had a few hits. That's it. They weren't really in the music magazines. They would have been just as recognizable as the Association or the Turtles. A few hardcores, but that's it. I was born in 1961 and, like I said before, never saw Allan Clarke's face until 2003. And I was a music fanatic (especially British invasion stuff) and the little sister of one who bought Graham's solo albums. The Hollies were just another faceless pop group. www.45cat.com/artist/the-holliesI'm not over-estimating how popular they were, I just believe that by the early 70s most ticket buyers to a Hollies concert would know what the lead singer looked like. You can't speak to North America, Peter. |
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on Mar 14, 2021 16:55:56 GMT
And none of those TV appearances except for Tom Jones was post-Nash. Actually 'Get It Together' was 1970 (they performed He Ain't Heavy...). Never heard of the show but we didn't have an ABC affiliate station where I live. |
|
|
|
Post by stuball on Mar 15, 2021 14:51:40 GMT
'Hollywood Palace', 'The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour', 'The Mike Douglas Show', 'This Is Tom Jones', 'Get It Together', (and, earlier, on 'Shindig!', 'Hullabaloo' and 'The Red Skelton Show')... The Hollies had done lots of national US TV over the years. Granted, they probably wouldn't have been recognised by many in the street, but I still find it hard to believe that most ticket buyers didn't know what the lead singer looked like, particularly as US singles tended to have picture sleeves... The Hollies didn't have much in the way of picture sleeves in the US. Canada, less so. (Ironically, one of those sleeves being for the Baby, which didn't chart) You overestimate the popularity of the Hollies in America. They had a few hits. That's it. They weren't really in the music magazines. They would have been just as recognizable as the Association or the Turtles. A few hardcores, but that's it. I was born in 1961 and, like I said before, never saw Allan Clarke's face until 2003. And I was a music fanatic (especially British invasion stuff) and the little sister of one who bought Graham's solo albums. The Hollies were just another faceless pop group. www.45cat.com/artist/the-holliesIt was a very rare treat in Canada in the '60's and early '70's to read any article about The Hollies in pop magazines, and then those were largely US publications. And only very hardcore pop fans could name a 'Hollie', and then it would invariably be Graham. But 'Graham Nash' only became a household name in North American pop, AFTER he abandoned The Hollies. I was an avid Hollies fan in those days and I don't recall ever seeing a 45 encased in a picture sleeve. I could eventually put names to faces in the group of course, but that was only because of LP covers. And a Hollies appearance on TV? It was somewhat less likely to be witnessed than a sighting of Bigfoot. |
|
|
|
Post by Mevrouw Bee on Mar 15, 2021 17:52:58 GMT
The Hollies didn't have much in the way of picture sleeves in the US. Canada, less so. (Ironically, one of those sleeves being for the Baby, which didn't chart) You overestimate the popularity of the Hollies in America. They had a few hits. That's it. They weren't really in the music magazines. They would have been just as recognizable as the Association or the Turtles. A few hardcores, but that's it. I was born in 1961 and, like I said before, never saw Allan Clarke's face until 2003. And I was a music fanatic (especially British invasion stuff) and the little sister of one who bought Graham's solo albums. The Hollies were just another faceless pop group. www.45cat.com/artist/the-holliesIt was a very rare treat in Canada in the '60's and early '70's to read any article about The Hollies in pop magazines, and then those were largely US publications. And only very hardcore pop fans could name a 'Hollie', and then it would invariably be Graham. But 'Graham Nash' only became a household name in North American pop, AFTER he abandoned The Hollies. I was an avid Hollies fan in those days and I don't recall ever seeing a 45 encased in a picture sleeve. I could eventually put names to faces in the group of course, but that was only because of LP covers. And a Hollies appearance on TV? It was somewhat less likely to be witnessed than a sighting of Bigfoot. Picture sleeves in Canada were generally US import ones, if we got any at all. We couldn't afford to print our own. But LP covers after Graham left? We had He Ain't Heavy He's My Brother (instead of Hollies Sing Hollies), Moving Finger, Distant Light and Romany -- and let's not forget that Greatest Hits collection that had a collage on the front cover...in other words, their faces were only on the back cover, and it wasn't a thing by the 70s to label back cover/gatefold images generally unless it was a new band. Even that Canadian-only compilation I bought when I was 16? Loved the music but I wouldn't have recognized the band if they were standing in front of me. I was that teen music geek that read Hit Parader, had a subscription to Circus and Creem...didn't read Rolling Stone much because US-centric politics...but never saw anything about the Hollies. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtyfaz on Mar 16, 2021 3:01:45 GMT
Peterc, a bit more Moorlock bashing here. His only comment on this topic was to start it and there was to me nothing sinister in that comment. He was just quoting Record World Magazine. Just like you he is entitled to have an opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by moorlock2003 on Mar 17, 2021 15:09:31 GMT
The Hollies were, simply put, electrifying with Rickfors. "In Concert" proves that.
|
|
|
|
Post by moorlock2003 on Mar 17, 2021 16:30:54 GMT
The return of Allan was a mixed blessing. On one hand, it was cozy. On the other hand, it was lazy. They didn't capitalize on Allan's return properly. Had they concentrated on the US market like The Kinks did in the 70s, their popularity would have gone in an upward direction. But no, they stayed in the UK for nostalgic chicken-in-a-basket gigs doing "Just one Look", frustrating fans when they had just put out a brilliant reunion LP.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtyfaz on Mar 17, 2021 22:20:51 GMT
I have seen all versions of The Hollies live except the Nash one and of all the ones I saw, I have to say the Rickfors period band was the most powerful music version of the band.
|
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Mar 17, 2021 22:50:03 GMT
I have seen all versions of The Hollies live except the Nash one and of all the ones I saw, I have to say the Rickfors period band was the most powerful music version of the band. Never got to see the Rickfors version of the band, but from the Albums and what I have seen on YouTube the music sure had a bigger sound to it. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtyfaz on Mar 17, 2021 23:15:50 GMT
Rickfors added an extra guitarist as well as keyboards to the band. This certainly increased their power as a band.
|
|
|
|
Post by baz on Mar 18, 2021 0:20:31 GMT
The return of Allan was a mixed blessing. On one hand, it was cozy. On the other hand, it was lazy. They didn't capitalize on Allan's return properly. Had they concentrated on the US market like The Kinks did in the 70s, their popularity would have gone in an upward direction. But no, they stayed in the UK for nostalgic chicken-in-a-basket gigs doing "Just one Look", frustrating fans when they had just put out a brilliant reunion LP. Agreed - Hollies 74 was an excellent album and to my ears should have gone down well in America. When one looks at The Hollies' career musically and commercially, "Breathe" ended up being their pinnacle and they had a strong album behind it from which they should have progressed further. Instead, they regressed as it seems to me the success of "Breathe" sent them in the wrong direction, gradually believing that ballads was their strongest chance of staying successful which sadly as was to be proved was not the case. There was never gonna be any escape from their older hits but they bungled this last chance to focus just as much on their current music, probably believing now Allan was back that audiences would want to hear him singing the old hits again instead of newer material. That album should have been the launchpad for greater things. A pity it wasn't to be the case. |
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Mar 18, 2021 3:30:14 GMT
Agree with you baz, Hollies74 was a brilliant album, funny over the years the Hollies have never seemed to grab that moment , don’t know why, maybe playing it safe was easy, give the people what they want., also the band did believe the Ballard was the way to go, real pity as they did some great rock and roll, thought Daddy Don’t Mind was a great up beat number. In my opinion things like Son of a rattan gambler was just an album track, nothing to write home about. Don’t know if I’m the only one but after Russian Roulette all the later 70’s albums were just so slow and boring.
|
|
|
|
Post by baz on Mar 18, 2021 10:24:20 GMT
Don’t know if I’m the only one but after Russian Roulette all the later 70’s albums were just so slow and boring. I doubt you're alone judging from what many have posted and expressed here - myself included! Prioritising the ballads and barely bothering to rock killed their momentum and turned them into something extremely bland. Painful to hear what happened when one knows they were capable of far better. |
|
