Eric Haydock

[Deleted]

The other day i decided to play the Hollies first five albums, from 'Stay with the Hollies' to 'For Certain Because' back to back, since i had not listened to them for some considerable time. 

After listening to them again a couple of points sprang to mind.

Firstly, how the band progressed in leaps and bounds through those first five albums.

Secondly, what a very good bass player Eric Haydock was, i believe he and Bobby were as much an integral part of their sound as were the Clarke, Hicks and Nash vocals.

For me, 'For Certain Because' was the start of that great run of albums, Evolution, Butterfly, the band and their songwriting was second only to Lennon & Mccartney.

Unfortunately for the band The Beatles eclipsed everybody else around that time, they even had EP's and LP's showing in the singles charts.  
 

[gee]

that isn't the full story tho' - while The Beatles were massive they did NOT eclipse everybody else at all but over time some music writers would have you believe that was a fact....actually back then there were quite a lot of people NOT impressed by The Beatles at all

hence John Lennon's comment in 1965 on 'Blackpool Night Out';

'here's our latest record...or electronic noise depending on whose side your on !'


if you look at the youtubes of the NME Poll Winners concerts of 1964 and 1965 you will see that now supposedly 'lesser' acts like Billy J. Kramer with The Dakotas, Brian Poole and The Tremeloes etc were also really MASSIVE back then too, as was Gerry and The Pacemakers  with screaming girl fans !

The Rolling Stones whipped up a hysteria too but from a rather different audience than The Beatles - and bands such as The Who, Pretty Things, Yardbirds etc appealed to a different idiom entirely than the then very 'safe' pop music of The Beatles

The Animals sliced through the ebbing Beatlemania in 1964 with 'House of The Rising Sun' - which hit big in the USA too

The Kinks stormed into the UK charts in 1964 with a very aggressive stark musical style far 'grittier' than The Beatles...then in 1965 began a whimsical almost 'Noel Coward' observational witty style of songs from 'A Well Respected Man' onwards...


Ex-Shadows bassist Jet Harris won the top musical personality poll of 1964, and the much loved Joe Brown won an award presented to him by visiting Roy Orbison


The Sunday Night at The London Palladium DVD shows that acts like Cliff and The Shadows were still massive in 1965 even after 'Beatlemania' while Freddie and The Dreamers were much loved
- and even Ireland's The Bachelors brought the Palladium house down when topping the bill !

by 1966 Soul and Tamla Motown music was a really big thing in the UK and the American bands were 'fighting back' in the UK charts - The Monkees and 'Monkeemania' swept the UK

by late '66 into 1967  Cream, Jimi Hendrix Experience, Procol Harum, The Move, Pink Floyd, Traffic etc had all arrived in style

there was a vast record buying audience NOT into The Beatles or other electric guitar led groups either

The folk tinged Seekers from Australia were massive from 1964 onwards....

Male vocalists such as Roy Orbison, Gene Pitney, Tom Jones etc were unaffected by The Beatles as the group's music didn't impinge on their style or status at all

even the very 'square' Englebert held 'Penny Lane' back at no.2 in 1967.....while Ireland's Val Doonican knocked 'Sgt Pepper' off top spot in the UK album chart after a long stay...

The Hollies were much loved and instrumentally really had the edge on The Beatles, Bobby Elliott won the top drummer poll in 1965 (possibly why early on John Lennon seemed to perceive them as some kind of potential  threat to The Beatles popularity and unkindly belittled them...)

- re being innovative note The Hollies were singing about openly spending the night with a loved one in 'Baby That's All' in 1964 while The Beatles were singing 'she's in love with me and I Feel Fine' and doing songs with sound effects about death itself ("Too Many People') in 1965 while The Beatles largely were still singing love songs like 'Yesterday'' and 'It's Only Love' etc  albeit with a more cynical edge emerging later in that year 

vocally it was The Hollies who were tagged 'Britain's answer to The Beach Boys' and really it was the songwriting of Lennon-McCartney for The Beatles and others too that made the Fab Four stand out as something special

- their string of unbeatable original  hits put them on top but they as a band were not the strongest really as instrumentalists BUT were a really tight versatile unit and they were very imaginative never standing still or resting on their laurels as some bands rather did

Hank Marvin regularly took top guitarist poll back then while Blues, folk and jazz lovers were more impressed with the likes of say John Mayall, Graham Bond, Bob Dylan, and even Chris Barber, Acker Bilk and Kenny Ball...!

so The Beatles were not the 'be all and end all' at the time as too many writers have tended to paint them as in later years even tho' clearly they defined the swinging sixties

[Deleted]

Well thats me well and truly told then.

[gee]

no need to say that as I'm not 'well and truly telling you' anything rather I was making a point of trying to present the reality of those sixties days

it's just this idea The Beatles 'eclipsed' everyone else - and normally they get credited for doing every type of innovation before anyone else too - back in the sixties is not accurate and has largely been pushed by music writers over the years who like to create this impression probably to flog books or magazines they have written

[Deleted]

Unfortunately you chose to respond to one line of my post rather than the whole, as you are entitled to do.

You seem to imply that your point/s are valid and mine are not which is nonsense.

[christocello]

So badpenny

do you think, Gee missed the main topic "Eric Haydock"? Well, I'm always impressed of the deep and wide knowledge that every post of gee does display, so I would not take it personally, if he puts the bigger emphasis on your last remarks about the Beatles. Moreover, in my view Gee tries to unterstand history from its own time, not through the lenses of nowadays press or nowadays writers.

Returning to Eric - yes, he was a very good bass player, also due to the special bass he was playing: For he used to play a Fender 6-string bass with obviously thinner strings than those on 4-stringed basses, so he could play faster and with more ease. So his bass playing had something of a guitar playing. As a person, he has been described as a miracle - because he seldom said anything, it was hard for the press to get any information about him, and I suppose, his fellow mates in the band also didn't get much words from Eric. This probably led to the alienation in 1965/66, when, after his wedding he didn't seem to be so interested in the whole showbiz as the others were. Perhaps he didn't speak about his personal thought and feelings so that he seemed uninterested and unreliable for the band?

I am sure that Gee can easily contribute more detailed facts about mysterious Eric...

I hope I hit the topic ;-)

[eric]

When I discovered The Hollies in 1965 I loved the fact that they were very strong instrumentally. They were not embarrassed in this area by other bands of the day and to my way of thinking this helped define them as a top tier band. Eric Haydock made a significant contribution to their sound and therefore their success.

This brings me to the sleeve notes on The Hollies 1966 LP “Would You Believe? ” that state that “Eric is something of an enigma”. I have always thought that it was quite rude to dismiss Eric in this manner. Even if there were differences between Eric, the band and management at that time, the sleeve notes should have been more generous to Eric. After all, the band and management were happy to release the LP with Eric’s bass on all 12 tracks, including the magnificent “I Can’t Let Go”.

It will be interesting to see if Bobby comments on the band’s bass players in his book!

With regard to the status of The Beatles, I believe that their body of work qualifies them as the greatest band of all time. Having said that, there were many other artists who composed great songs, made wonderful recordings and had huge followings in the era of the Fab Four. For starters, the Hollies self-composed albums “For Certain Because”, “Evolution” and “Butterfly” and the self-composed singles “On a Carousel”, “Carrie Anne” and “King Midas In Reverse” are great records.

Songs by other British artists such as The Who, Eric Burdon & The (New) Animals, The Small Faces, Cream, Traffic, Donovan, Spencer Davis Group, The Stones and The Kinks were innovative, exciting and of the highest order.

From a USA perspective, Jimi Hendrix (with Mitch and Noel), Aretha Franklin, The Beach Boys, Simon and Garfunkel, The Motown groups, the Stax artists and The Young Rascals, amongst others, made many unforgettable recordings.

Even “Down Under” the Bee Gees (later to go onto massive international success), the Easybeats and other Aussie acts made great records that are still played on air/streamed today.

As an aside, I have recently completed a number of playlists of 1964 music picking up random B sides, EP and LP tracks and A sides that were hits in the UK but not in Australia (there are not that many in this category). These playlists include The Hollies and the likes of The Dave Clark Five, The Stones, The Kinks, Manfred Mann, The Pretty Things, The Who, The Searchers, Billy J Kramer, Dusty Springfield, The Animals, The Zombies, The Yardbirds and Australia’s Billy Thorpe & The Aztecs. (For my British friends, Billy Thorpe was born in Manchester and, like the Bee Gees, migrated to Australia at a young age. He had a No.1 hit Down Under in 1964 with arguably the definitive version of “Poison Ivy”, knocking The Beatles off the top spot in the process.)

I was reminded during this exercise of how vibrant The Hollies sound is, the high levels of energy displayed by the artists of that era and, importantly, how influential these artists were.

I am pleased to say that The Hollies shine through on the playlists with Eric Haydock and Bobby Elliott underpinning the band’s early beat sound and (a very young) Tony Hicks playing attacking guitar over the pulsating rhythm!

[cameron]

Sticking with what Gee said, it's always annoyed me how the Beatles get the credit for everything. The more I learn about the Hollies, the more I realise that the Hollies were far more ahead of the game in the studio. I think that was down to them being a much tighter band than the Beatles and the fact that they turned up to Abbey Road fully rehearsed. The Beatles, from around 1964 onwards, used the studio as a place to finish and arrange their songs, probably down to their gruelling schedule which didn't allow any practice runs.

The Hollies once mentioned hiring a Church Hall to sort out their music before they went into the studio. And this was actually in reference to "Romany". Presumably this cut down costs as due to their unusual licensing agreement, the Hollies' management company had to foot the bill for their sessions at Abbey Road.

Speaking of innovations, it's often said that "Revolver" in 1966 marked the first use of closely mic'd drums in the studio, as it was strictly against EMI policy. However, it's getting more and more well known now that Bobby Elliott first pushed for this when recording "Here I Go Again" in 1964.

People turn to "Sgt. Pepper" for using unusual instrumentation in 1967. Back in 1966, the Hollies were using tubular bells, timpani, whistles, triangles, glockenspiels and assortment of percussion to bring more colour to the "For Certain Because..." album back in 1966.

It's also said that "Rubber Soul" in December 1965 was the first pop album to feature songs straying away from the themes of love or story telling, namely "In My Life", "Nowhere Man" and "The Word". Again, the Hollies actually recorded the very political "Too Many People" about the overpopulation of the World a good few months earlier. The mono mix of this also features crashing sound effects at the end, again, beating the Beatles to this claim to fame by a whole year, as they get credited for the first use of tape effects/loops on "Rain" in mid-1966.

"All You Need Is Love" is credited as being the first 'hippy' anthem about spreading free love. It was recorded in June 1967. The Hollies' "All The World Is Love" is similarly themed and similarly psychedelic, recorded in January 1967, almost a whole six months earlier!

I think Gee makes a very valid point about John Lennon feeling threatened by the Hollies. Especially by late 1965 when he started to lay into them a bit in the press, the Beatles' live performances were slipping as they couldn't hear themselves, and the Hollies were consistently rising to the top of the NME polls for their live performances. Though John later made "Hey Willy" his record of the week when he guest-edited NME in 1971, so perhaps that was his small apology.

As for Eric, it's believed that he was the first guy in a pop group to play a six string bass. Bobby once mused that it was more expensive than all of the rest of their instruments combined! He was a very agile player, which perhaps contributed to the Hollies feeling that early on they didn't need a rhythm guitar. I'm glad they changed their minds later on, as I've never particularly been a fan of their early thin sounding recordings, especially on some of the early album tracks where Eric and Tony didn't seem to have fleshed out more filling guitar parts. He's a very very underrated player on the early 1960s scene. He and Paul McCartney were really at the forefront of bass playing in the early 1960s, soon joined by John Entwhistle, but I feel that it wouldn't be until later on with the likes of Cream and Jimi Hendrix Experience that a bass player would be realised as not just a "supporting" member of the band.

[moorlock2003]

Hollies underrated, Beatles overrated. Enough said.

[gee]

spot on Moorlock and Cameron and thank you Eric and Christocello

yes The Beatles were and are overrated BUT that doesn't diminish how vitally important they were of course and I'm a BIG Beatles fan from the time !

I am not trying to imply my views are valid and Penny's not but the fact is there HAS been so much revisionism and 're-writing' of things by music writers it's important that guys such as Peter Checksfield, Chris Farrell, Simon of course, Cameron and the rest all contribute their FACT based views - Peter has just done an exhaustive book 'Chanelling The Beat'

I have read and listened to umpteen music people over praising The Beatles crediting them with doing almost everything FIRST - which is simply not true

bands such as The Shadows, Manfred Mann, Graham Bond Organisation and of course The Hollies each did things such as: be FIRST to have a three guitars/vocalists 'front line' and drummer four piece recording line up, utilise strings, feature a flute, mellotron, unusual instruments and taped sound effects before The Beatles - yet I have seen / heard The Fab Four credited as doing all of those things before anyone else !

Manfred Mann and The Moody Blues had a flute player in the band - Mike Vickers and Ray Thomas - where as The Beatles had a guest play flute on 'You've Got To Hide Your Love Away'

so I'm not belittling Penny or anyone's views here just trying to set the record straight re what actually was the facts back then, as opposed to alot of revisionism later, probably as part of selling books or magazines etc - there must have been a good number of rain forests used on The Beatles books !

NOT everybody was 'Beatles mad' back then, they didn't 'eclipse' everyone else, while others WERE also massively popular, others did things that influenced The Beatles too as well (George got 'If I Needed Someone' chords idea from The Byrds 'Bells of Rhymney', John adapted the intro of 'Watch Your Step' for 'I Feel Fine' intro etc)

- but that does not of course for one moment reduce The Beatles standing or importance in music or cultural history

Actually re bass players it was Jet Harris of The Shadows who really played the bass as lead instrument - he's actually featured as soloist on The Shads first instrumental single 'Jet Black' in 1959 !

while on 'F.B.I', 'Nivram' etc Jet again either features a full up bass or takes a bass solo in 1960-61

Duane Eddy of course played his 'Twangy' guitar instrumentals on the lower strings of his guitar and later used a special bass guitar too, but Duane was a lead guitarist first  with a bass player included in his 'Rebels', where as Jet Harris was the bass guitarist for The Shadows

listen to Jet's solo hit 'The Man With The Golden Arm' - Pete Townshend said John Entwistle was a 'disciple of the Jet Harris school of bass players' as was Keith Moon to original Shads drummer Tony Meehan's style

here's Jet Harris on a 1963 TV show, Jet begins playing around 20 seconds into the posting;





now re this thread title;

Eric Haydock was really a third founder member of The Hollies along with Clarke and Nash - Eric was a rather quiet guy not that bothered re any public image, they let Nash do all that for them - but his bass playing was terrific, he had a fast style and a strong bond with Bobby once Mr.E arrived to power up the drumming - 'Stay' really shows the improvement in The Hollies engine room

Eric was a rock & roll / soul loving bass player and while we think of him as just a 'beat boom' era bassist he could be more experimental as his bass playing on 'In The Hollies Style' and 'Hollies' 1965 shows especially on those tracks with fast tempo and key changes like 'When I Come Home To You' and 'I've Been Wrong' etc

Eric's six string bass was very hard to tune which probably 'irked' him a bit over time as their workload grew and grew, but it gave them a very solid and interesting bass foundation sound


Eric's bass is strongly to the fore on 'Oriental Sadness' on his final Hollies album 'Would You Believe'- note Eric is the only one looking in another direction on the cover pencil sketch of the band's faces, very apt !

'I Can't Let Go' was probably Eric's finest 'Hollie' moment - while a number of very talented bass players have featured in the group since no one really plays it like Eric did, the intro is stunning (and John Lennon seriously said The Hollies lacked 'balls' ?)  and he & Tony's guitar powered out the number magnificently - even Paul McCartney was impressed at the time, tho' he wondered if the very  high note - Nash -  was a trumpet (!) 

Eric over time seemed to find the touring becoming a strain and when he got married obviously found himself rather torn (bass player Clint Warwick in the original Moody Blues likewise) - Eric's wife was gorgeous too !

plus I think as Clarke-Hicks-Nash developed as 'Ransford' the composing team Eric maybe began to feel somewhat sidelined within the band he'd co-founded with Allan and Graham who of course had been school pals while Tony and Bobby were also close as both ex-Dolphins and later brothers-in-law it probably left Eric rather out of things re group 'bonding' as such

I think Eric's major issue tho' was his issues re their management, where the money was going etc.......and he possibly was later proved to have had some justifiable concerns as subsequent events proved (?)

Eric thus became more 'distant' to his colleagues, he began missing shows, then a radio session plus a notable TV show at The London Palladium

Eric claimed he was ill, and that he'd dutifully submitted a 'sicknote' to cover his absences - telling us perhaps just how 'factory' orientated the band were in operations then, with each 'worker' given his designated responsibility etc - which probably explains George Harrison's misguided 'souless sessionmen' quip that George NEVER intended to go public I am sure !

but then there were alleged sightings of Eric out at restaurants when supposedly off sick - tho' how true that was we can only guess as it could be a put up job to help them unload Eric ()

we know they 'engineered' Don Rathbone's exit - shades of Pete Best in The Beatles and Tony Jackson in The Searchers later - Ron Griffiths in Badfinger too - this kind of 'band politics' is upsetting for fans of a group to read but hey sadly that's life....

Clearly for various reasons, mostly it seems non-musical ones The Hollies and Eric were going their separate ways by spring 1966...tho' even after Bernie played bass on 'Bus Stop' Eric accepted an invite to plug it with them on 'Top of The Pops' in June 1966, and of course many years later reunited with them for 'Holliedaze' on TOTP in 1981 tho' after that he was back on the train up north...

Eric formed Haydock's Rockhouse after he left releasing two singles on Columbia 'Cupid' and 'Lovin You' but neither charted and he left the music business for a time, he later ran a guitar shop up in Stockport I think, maybe Manchester - Eric then was happy to grant interviews with Hollies girls from 'Carousel' fanzine and spoke fondly of his days as Hollies bass player

they had some legal issues with Eric later, which hopefully are resolved and history now - Eric led his own outfit but later joined 'The Class of '64' group

they said a few unkind things about Eric in both 1966 and later in 1981

'the bass player does the least work in the group' - Nash 1966

'Eric just couldn't play bass in the modern style' - Hicks 1981
(tho' maybe that proved a back handed compliment !)

Present day Hollies bassist/vocalist Ray Stiles however has paid his own fellow bassist tribute to Eric's work with The Hollies over 1963-66 and on the band's first four albums noting what an innovative bass player Eric Haydock was

Fittingly and rightly Eric Haydock was present to be inducted into the USA Rock and Roll Hall of Fame along with Allan Clarke, Graham Nash, later members Bernie Calvert and Terry Sylvester...and if not present Tony Hicks and Bobby Elliott in 2010

[moorlock2003]

I think it would have been a totally different story had George Martin produced The Hollies instead of Ron Richards. Also, they needed to replace Richards once he left the team. The band drifted off into no-hits land once there wasn't anybody to sail the ship, so to speak. An expert producer was needed to keep the momentum going. "Another Night" had a few bright spots but covering Springsteen was a bad idea (that should have been left to Clarke solo) and it wasn't necessary for them to be adopting a Steely Dan kind of sound.  I'm a fan of neither.  I liked them much more pre-synthesizer. 

[cameron]

Sept 5, 2018 17:15:08 GMT moorlock2003 said:

I think it would have been a totally different story had George Martin produced The Hollies instead of Ron Richards. Also, they needed to replace Richards once he left the team. The band drifted off into no-hits land once there wasn't anybody to sail the ship, so to speak. An expert producer was needed to keep the momentum going. "Another Night" had a few bright spots but covering Springsteen was a bad idea (that should have been left to Clarke solo) and it wasn't necessary for them to be adopting a Steely Dan kind of sound.  I'm a fan of neither.  I liked them much more pre-synthesizer. 

This is one of the most valid comments I've seen on this forum!

The Hollies themselves speak very highly of Ron Richards. Quite rightly too, Ron was solely responsible for signing them to EMI in 1963, and he saw something in them from that early stage when, let's be honest, their sound still needed a bit of work. 

But by the mid-1960s, Ron was losing interest in the group as they pushed further to experiment. He wanted things done quickly and efficiently. Artistic exploration went against his work ethic. Plus he no doubt stunted their growth by calling sessions short to get around to the "Abbey Tavern" before last orders! He allegedly left the stereo mix of "Butterfly" to a second engineer, who was allegedly assisted by Graham Nash. Ron dutifully finished the mono mix, and the difference in the attention to detail between the two mixes is enormous! 

Ron was a radio hit machine man. He didn't care much for LPs, as he knew the money was in singles. He was right, of course, and he was one step ahead of George Martin early on by including the hit single on the LP throughout 1966. But as the album format came to the fore in the late 1960s, he seemed increasingly disinterested. Perhaps the timing of the Hollies' lineup change was quite poignant in retaining his interest as the Hollies quickly rattled off three LPs once Terry Sylvester joined the fold, eager to have a few chart topping singles to prove that they could survive without Nash. In fact, it was Ron who found them "Sorry Suzanne", which dutifully gave them a UK No.3. 

He famously lost interest in "Distant Light" and was a big driving force in Allan's decision to leave due to clashing with Allan's Americanised vision of their music. He thought "Long Cool Woman" was far too weak as even album filler, and questioned their use of echo and the lack of harmonies. He would later be proved wrong, of course. I *wish* they'd have listened to Allan and recorded a lot of what was on his solo LPs. "Headroom" especially would have been an absolutely killer LP had the Hollies played on it and put their name to it. I was also sad to hear how Ron Richards abandoned the Hollies in their hour of need when they recorded "Romany". Problems with Mikael's pronunciation considerably slowed down progress in the studio, and Ron lost interest in the LP and left them to it. Of all the Hollies' albums, "Romany" has one of the very best production values. I thought the length of time they spent crafting that album came across loud and clear with the complex arrangements and beautiful production. 

But just how Ron would force his opinions on matters onto the group regarding what was a hit and what wasn't, Tony Hicks would later similarly control the direction of the group, always with a firm ear on commercial sounds. The fact is, both of them were proved right and wrong in equal measure. No doubt Paul McCartney seeking out Tony's opinion on "Abbey Road" boosted his ego, as Tony was known around this time to be brutally honest in his opinions. They didn't allow for changing audiences and trends, something that Allan Clarke seemed a lot more in tune with. Allan talks of his frustrations over direction later on, or rather, lack of direction. They diminished into trying absolutely anything and everything to try and score a hit - other than write something quite exciting themselves. I've always said if they'd have followed Allan's lead around "Headroom", they'd have pushed themselves on into the 1970s and again followed his path and recorded "Legendary Heroes", they'd have pushed themselves into the 1980s. Allan didn't have a strong enough image to score big successes on his own sadly, but the Hollies' name would have carried that burden nicely.

Remember how Graham pushed them down the psychedelic path in 1967, assisted by Allan? Both Tony and Bobby have spoken of their disliking of this era, and their resistance to the material at the time. It absolutely cannot be argued that this 'flower power bit' moved the Hollies on and gave them longevity, albeit supporting a very transient fad. Had they stuck with their 1966 and early 1967 material as particularly Tony wanted, no doubt they'd have been tossed on the commercial heap along with the Searchers, Herman's Hermits, Dave Clarke Five etc... who didn't progress musically at that particular time. But later on, Tony was absolutely instrumental in pushing them into a more AOR sound in 1970, again, giving them slightly more longevity. The surprise hit of "Air That I Breathe" perhaps gave them false confidence that ballads were what the fans wanted. They needed another direction change around 1973/4 that would have sustained them into the late 1970s. Though having said that, the largely Allan Clarke lead "Distant Light" was very ahead of it's time, as sales would eventually catch up 12-18 months later. This rockier sound was about to flood over the airwaves from America, and the Hollies should have perhaps paced themselves  and gone with it, rather than giving Allan his infamous ultimatum. At least Tony now admits that he made an enormous judgemental error there. But they weren't to know that their LP would light up the charts in a year's time. Their entire career up to that point was spent trying to get out two LPs per year, and they quickly disappeared down in the charts within a couple of months after initial release, so they couldn't have possibly foresaw the delayed interest in "Distant Light". 

We could say "what if..." all day long. Whichever way you slice it, the Hollies have turned out one of the most varied and consistent back catalogues of any artist who's endured a long career. Their 1970s output alone is of the standards that most bands would die for. Perhaps the Hollies standard was too high among their fans, because they recorded some stuff that should have been absolutely huge. Again, cementing their place in the lineup of the most criminally underrated mainstream bands of all time. 

[gee]

All valid points - it seems as if every time there was an oppertunity to push the envelope somehow things conspired to dissuade them

We're Through made no.7 in 1964 - a decent hit by anyone's standards BUT not quite enough to convince Ron....so it was back to safer covers

'Ransford' pen name was a very silly idea too - the lame excuse their names were too long to go on the record label was utter nonsense as 'Marvin-Welch-Harris-Meehan' fitted on a Shadows single ! but again it got them tagged by many as a non composing band reliant on outside writers for hits

Ron's excuse about the 'echo machine going off at 10pm' - surely they noticed The Beatles one didn't !! - was pure tosh of course and they fell for it too...probably as Allan liked a last orders pint like Ron in the Abbey Tavern !

Ron forced 'That's My Desire' upon them - they still disliked it enough to veto it from 'Greatest Hits' 2CD set in 2001....

I think Ron was so 'set in his ways' he made them 'set in their ways' alot too

the 'If I Needed Someone' cover rather blew up in their faces after George Harrison's ungrateful and unwise (re his own songwriting cause and royalties) comments - that along with John Lennon's nasty jibes served to I suspect turn many more easily led Beatles fans and some music writers against The Hollies - and Nash had been 100% AGAINST them covering it knowing it would put them in the shadow of The Fab Four - probably why he was SO against the 'Dylan' set idea a few years later...

next up 'King Midas' and 'Butterfly' flopped chart wise in 1967...further re-enforcing 'commercial conservatism' within the band and Nash's guidance was de-throned

once Nash had  left Clarke  - who had sided more with Ron re a few songs notably 'Marrakesh Express' - suddenly then found himself out voted 2 to 1 by Hicks-Elliott while Terry barely had a group direction voice...hence Tony suggesting 'Sing Dylan' etc

whatever we may feel re 'Distant Light' then 'Romany' neither charted at home - and 'Romany' barely in the USA largely due to LCW charting there, plus 'Magic Woman Touch' flopped at home - thus further dis-couraging them to push the envelope thereafter...

Tony made an admitted bad error refusing Clarke's offer to do that USA tour in 1972-73 when as Terry said; 'The Americans wanted Allan...'

Hicks might have made allowing Allan back a proviso that Clarkey in turn from then on took co-lead vocals with Mike Rickfors - then Allan just might have accepted that compromise - Mike could have remained, adding Allan like CSN added Y and The Eagles added Joe Walsh and they could have become more CSNY / Eagles styled acoustic/electric rock and folk style based....certainly Allan and Mike's creativity would have boosted them alot with Terry also taking lead vocals more - Allan's voice might have lasted too  

After Clarke's solo career despite fine tracks was largely unsuccessful they re-grouped with Mike going home but with Clarke having to accept things had changed alot re who ruled the band he'd co-founded...

Ron suggested 'Son of A Rotten Gambler' which crucially flopped UK / USA after 'Air' effectively ending their chart days at home and in truth they were after another 'He Ain't Heavy' / 'Air That I Breathe' ballad hit thereafter and as stated Hicks and Elliott probably had final say most of the time with Clarke's ideas less followed - tho' he got it wrong big time re 'Buddy Holly' later 

From 1974 onwards they really needed a Gus Dudgeon / Roy Thomas Baker type producer - briefly Alan Parsons took over...for another slow ballad 'Boulder' but really they needed a longer term more contemporary aware outside producer to keep them relevant and more playing to their guitar / drums rockier strengths

minus Nash no one was driving the band forward - Terry might have but was always 'the new boy' to the three senior Hollies I suspect and they were rather a 'committee'  I think who tried to 'play safe' far too much re another slow ballad - even in the 80's 'Laughter Turns To Tears' was dumped for the slow ballad 'Too Many Hearts Get Broken'....which surprise surprise flopped !

while earlier a great track like 'Crossfire' - was tucked away as a mere 'B' side ...to a slow ballad of course and not even used on 'A Crazy Steal'
- and WHO was doing their photo image thing then...??

so Ron Richards for all his great work for them really held them back a fair bit...then they did it themselves

you can see why first Graham Nash...then later Terry Sylvester each 'walked' from the band

[cameron]

It's ironic, just earlier this evening someone sent me a rather scathing article from 1978 when Allan Clarke left the Hollies for the second time. He had this to say:

"As for the last album that Allan recorded with the Hollies, A Crazy Steal, Allan looks on it as an "abortion" and he'd rather not talk about it. "The album took a long time to record, even the cover took three months to get together. There was no guidance and I wasn't really a guide. I had no direction. I had nobody up there telling me what to do so there was no way I could guide them. There has to be somebody behind every group and we didn't have anybody. There's no way the Hollies could ever take to one person as the boss. All the way through our career we've all been individuals and we would all take a vote on everything. No one was the leader. In the end I gave up my position on the board of directors and my vote within the corporation. The only song I wanted on the Crazy Steal album was "Writing On The Wall" and I had to FORCE them to record it." Allan's face hazes over and he says "I should have left with Graham, I should have listened to him all along.""

So there you have it, exactly what we've just said, though straight from the horse's mouth!

[gee]

True - but then Allan RETURNED to the band for the second time in 1979...!

leaving along with Graham - and Nash once said he'd urged Allan to go with him in 1968 - was not really likely for Allan as unlike Graham becoming a 'free agent' after his first marriage to Rosemary collapsed Clarkey was happily married with at least one son Tim then so he had to consider his family and security of a guaranteed income fronting a top group at that time

- Nash secretly  knew CSN was set up and awaiting him across the pond WITH a record deal with Ahmet Ertegen of Atlantic records in place where as when Clarkey quit The Hollies in 1971 he had no record deal or producer or backing group !

Had he quit in 1968 along with Nash that probably would have ended The Hollies while on a personal career level Allan also would then have NEVER sung 'He Ain't Heavy', 'Long Cool Woman' or 'The Air That I Breathe'with The Hollies which are probably his three most famous 'signature' song performances....!

Allan had he gone to the USA with Nash would not likely have settled into either the lifestyle then or into any CCSN set up - a really 'miffed' Allan almost belted the supercilious Crosby backstage at Nash's final Hollies gig at the 'Save Rave' charity show at the London Palladium on 8 December 1968 so how long before Clarke and Crosby fell out would be the question...?

Being in The Hollies in the seventies onwards also allowed Allan to continue his solo career maybe ironic as a 'sideshow' BUT in both 1972-73 and 1978-9 his solo career never took off in a major way and it has to be said he was at best a little 'half hearted' about it seeming to think the studio albums alone could do it for him - he never toured or did any real sustained TV promotion as a soloist etc

Allan's genuine 'gripe' - tho' his own doing really - was that after walking out on HIS band in late 1971 and handing over major control totally to Tony and Bobby, his offer to do that early seventies USA tour was rejected by Hicks, a bad error as had Tony allowed Allan back (possibly alongside Mike Rickfors being the condition, but in turn allowing Allan to do his solo albums as well) then the USA tour might have really broken The Hollies properly as a seventies band in America to all their gain...Clarke, Rickfors, The Hollies, Epic Records etc...it was a golden opportunity missed

as Terry Sylvester pointed out;
The Americans wanted Allan but we just didn't sound like that anymore...' 

While later on IF Allan was so unhappy re 'A Crazy Steal' - and he co-wrote 75% of the songs on it per credits - surely he should have pushed harder for a few more uptempo songs like say their 'Crossfire' gem to be included ? - surely that song from 1978 was far more valid to the new album  than the then TWO YEARS OLD song 'Boulder' which failed to chart in the UK or USA back in early 1976 ?

would they have put say 'I'm Alive' from 1965 on 'Butterfly' in 1967 ? - we know that they were very upset when the two years old album track 'That's My Desire' (a ballad no less !) topped the chart in South Africa in 1967 then holding current single 'Carrie Anne' back in second spot....how times changed later !

A Crazy Steal was bogged down by too many slow mournful ballads leaving 'Burn Out' and 'Caracas' standing out like oasis in a desert of rather sad sounding melodramatic ballads with each song and performance fine in itself but all bunched together making a very heavy going album overall.... along with that terrible cover idea and dreadful group photo !!!

Allan might not have been the figure within the group he once was by then but he surely ought to have had some 'clout' and convinced Hicks and Elliott they needed to offset a few ballads with a couple more livelier songs - 'Crossfire' opening side two and moving 'Amnesty' in place of 'Boulder' at the very least surely ?