I also have the second night (July 25 at the same place) but the performance is so similar to the first one (same tracks, same order, same comments) that I don't feel the need to post it. Except of course if there's a flood of requests begging for it...
10 comments:
The three McGuinn-Hillman-Crosby reunited Byrds concerts in San Juan Capistrano, Ventura and San Diego were also very similar, yet I have them all. Despite what McGuinn says, this is a reunited Byrds concert, in that it includes the two original Byrds who were the only Byrds left at that time (Parsons and Kelly were hired hands). Go ahead and upload it, if it's not too much trouble. These may be the last we ever get of the original members.
I would humbly dispute Steve's comments , and concur with McGuinn. It is not a reunited Byrds show ( they are being adamant in their denial of such.), but a celebration of an album. Both Hillman and McGuinn have been very out spoken on this point. I thought the "lawyer shows " were a bit bogus as well, in spite of what Michael Clarke was doing at the time.
Although Parsons was a hired gun to be sure, he was the driving force behind the album, and had the album come out as envisioned, would have been the lead vocalist on the majority of the songs. To me, there's just something not right in doing this without his participation, which of course is impossible. No knock on Marty Stuart and his fabulous band, by any means.Just my humble thoughts
Well they do an entire Byrds album, plus many earlier Byrds songs, even 9 of them from the Crosby era. How can this not be considered a reunion of some sort. 2018 is also the 50th anniversary of Notorious Byrd Brothers, but no tribute. And even the Crosby-era Byrds songs are well chosen, meaning no song written or co-written by Crosby. I'm sure they carefully did choose the songs on purpose. Why do "Rock and roll star" but not Eight Miles High? The idea was to leave Crosby out. And it's him who owns the trademark name. Another reason for insisting on saying it's not a Byrds reunion.
I guess as the years have gone by, my perspective has changed. I don't want to see any partial "reunions " called "The Byrds ". If it's not the Five Byrds together, it's not the Byrds. If any of the 3 want to get together and play,in whatever form they choose, that's fine, but don't call it the Byrds. It's disrespectful to Gene & Mike, and I personally don't want to see any "fill ins ", as M,H,&C did on those 1989 shows. I'm sure others may differ in their opinions.
David, does that mean that in your opinion, the Byrds ceased to exist after the first two (three?) LPs?
How many famous bands keep all their original members? Well, the Beatles, yeah, but not the Rolling Stones. And Fleetwood Mac continues to evolve, both in membership and style of music. And the Beach Boys? Or the Eagles--only one of the original members is left (Don Henley), yet they sound similar and still call themselves the Eagles. Bands do change, and the names often stay the same. These recordings sound like the Sweetheart Byrds, except for Gram Parsons. They also sound like the earlier Byrds, more so than the Clarence White Byrds ever did. Yet many people prefer the latter Byrds to the originals. So what's in a name? Most of Sweetheart didn't sound like the original Byrds either, but groups evolve and their sound evolves. Whether or not this is a real Byrds reunion or not is a matter of splitting hairs in some ways. It sounds like them, as did the 'lawyer reunions' (I like that term) and they do a fine job with the record and all the other songs, and that in the end is that matters.
Woww!!
Have you got a PayPal account? Down through the years, you have made available to me countless performances like these recent Sweetheart Anniversary shows. The value to me of these rarities. These concerts, outtakes, FM broadcasts... as a whole cannot be measured in dollar$! The soundtrack TO MY LIFE!! How can I repay this enormous debt I owe you?
Libertarian, no need to repay.
Music is love, as Crosby once sang.
Post a Comment