Why I no longer am happy with my favorite band

[Vector]

I will say this though; Glenn's cutting back on his vocals to allow Henley to shine shows a generosity of spirit on Glenn's part & an acknowledgement of talent that some seem incapable of recognising. He did not turn the band into a vehicle for himself; in fact he did the reverse.

There is something to be said for this in my view. I honestly believe Frey started out with the best of intentions, and wanted everything split equally, and not just the money. He assembled 3 other guys and eventually a 4th as equals, whom in theory would be expected to write songs and sing.
Yet somewhere along the way the idea that lets do "what is in the best interest of the Eagles" morphed into most everyone else's role being diminished(except Henley of course).
Who is to say that other songs would not have sounded good with Frey singing them? It is hard to imagine since we love and are use to so many classic songs with Henley on lead vocals.
Clearly Frey did not have the pipes/range to sing Take It To The Limit like Meisner did, but he certainly has a fine overall voice.
If Henley were to have died, quit, etc., would that have meant the end of the Eagles? I don't think so, nor would that apply to any other individual band member.

`

[Glennhoney]

There is something to be said for this in my view. I honestly believe Frey started out with the best of intentions, and wanted everything split equally, and not just the money. He assembled 3 other guys and eventually a 4th as equals, whom in theory would be expected to write songs and sing.
Yet somewhere along the way the idea that lets do "what is in the best interest of the Eagles" morphed into most everyone else's role being diminished(except Henley of course).
Who is to say that other songs would not have sounded good with Frey singing them? It is hard to imagine since we love and are use to so many classic songs with Henley on lead vocals.
Clearly Frey did not have the pipes/range to sing Take It To The Limit like Meisner did, but he certainly has a fine overall voice.
If Henley were to have died, quit, etc., would that have meant the end of the Eagles? I don't think so, nor would that apply to any other individual band member.

`

"If Henley would have died"????????...GOOD LORD..ENOUGH with the "what ifs" already!!

[Vector]

I am almost caught up with replies to every response, but will just make a quick comment on this new one.

"If Henley would have died"????????...GOOD LORD..ENOUGH with the "what ifs" already!!

Death is a part of life.
Considering many a drug user has died early, and considering how much the Eagles were doing back in the day, they are all lucky none of them overdosed, wrecked their car, etc.
I'm not sure what your objection is to including such a possibility, but if the mere mention of peoples mortality, even that of a R&R god bothers you, lets just say he was no longer able to perform.

[Shadowland07]

"If Henley would have died"????????...GOOD LORD..ENOUGH with the "what ifs" already!!

I know right lol. Just stick to the facts if you're going to make any arguments Vector. What if what if what if. What if Felder had actually stopped being a nuisance and just played instead of whining? What if Glenn didn't listen to Geffen's advice and tried going solo from the beginning? What if they had never broken up and continued into the 80s? Oh my!!! My head hurts just thinking about it aaaaahhhhh

[Vector]

I have a avoided posting here because frankly the political part of the op turned me off.

When I was a kid, my parents were strict about not putting money in peoples pockets they didn't like by buying their products. Funny enough my Godfather had the same practice. For example he refused to buy anything Japanese because of the Pearl Harbor sneak attack. Movies with Jane Fonda would be another example.
While this practice was not typically enough to have a major effect without many more people boycotting, I was taught it was the principle that was important.
Still not a penny of their hard earned money was going to enrich those who stood for something they did not believe in.

As I've matured I also see the merit in this practice. As this relates to politics, it has caused me to not go and watch a movie that I would otherwise have paid to see if certain outspoken actors are in it. If I really want to see it, I will just wait until it is released on TV.
So you can imagine my dismay over finding out that one of my favorite bands were actively supporting politicians who I considered to be on the extreme fringe. All the while I was buying their albums and went to their concerts back in the day. There is nothing I can do to take back the money I spent back then, but I can certainly make sure not to spend any further money on them now.
This may seem like a foreign concept to some of you, and others might think it is
To me, it is putting my money where my mouth is, and not putting it elsewhere so to speak.

Also the dissecting of everyone's responses is way too lawyer-ish for my tastes

This is funny because as some of you might imagine, I have received a few PM's. The authors will remain nameless of course, but they have been to support me, for saying what they would like to, but do not want to catch flack for. One mentioned liking my "dissecting style being very cool" and "and the lawyer-ish method is very enjoyable". I did not put two and two together until reading your post, which must have touched a nerve with them, so they sent the PM as a means of countering your post.

Anyway, I am not a lawyer, just someone who tries to avoid misunderstandings. If I address individual points within a post, I do not miss anything.

BTW - I am so paranoid about letting PM's build up, I tried to store them like you can on other platforms without exceeding my limit, and respond later. But I somehow managed to erase all but one, so my apologies for not responding back.

They are a great band. Why isn't that enough to be able to enjoy their art? I don't understand.

That is certainly a fair question. Aside from what I've already said, I certainly get how fans could be willing to put everything negative aside and still be fans.
I still listen to my CD's, and since I went on this knowledge quest, I've listened to them more than usual to see how they sound different with the addition or loss of certain individual members. This has led to both good and bad revelations. More on this later when I have more time.


`

[Glennhoney]

I know right lol. Just stick to the facts if you're going to make any arguments Vector. What if what if what if. What if Felder had actually stopped being a nuisance and just played instead of whining? What if Glenn didn't listen to Geffen's advice and tried going solo from the beginning? What if they had never broken up and continued into the 80s? Oh my!!! My head hurts just thinking about it aaaaahhhhh

EXACTLY...IT IS WHAT IT IS...!!!!!!!..GET OVER IT!!!

[Vector]

I am curious about what the final outcome of your research materials will be. I would hate for any quote of mine, and certainly my name, to show up in a blog or magazine article somewhere.

Have no worries about that. I've spent far more time on this than I ever planned.
I do not have a blog about things I have a passion for, much less a behind the scenes look into the shenanigans of a R&R band.

As to a final outcome, I have already formed some views, but they are not set in stone. I still have one book to read, maybe two at most.
Another poster mentioned a book I was not aware of. I looked it up and it is called The Story of The Eagles: The Long Run, written by Shapiro. They didn't say if it was any good or not. Anyone else read it, and if so is it worth the time?


`

[Vector]

This is a very interesting thread. I live in the UK and haven't yet seen 'The History of the Eagles. However, like every film/TV programme about the career of any band, I anticipate that there will be things which I don't want to hear, or which may annoy me.

I've been a fan of the Eagles music for many years. Until 1976 when the Hotel California album became BIG in the UK, I didn't know their names or what they looked like!!!

I can see where being across the pond might make you even less knowable about who they were as individuals. That is especially true back in those days before the internet. I really didn't know all there names until recently. Even during their "reunion", I was wondering who they all were, not realizing the guy in the back playing to bongos for example was not part of the Eagles.

Although they're my favourite band, I don't expect them to be perfect - after all, they're still only human like the rest of us.
Greed, infighting, and egoism exists in every walk of life. That's where the human race has got to. Sad, but true.

That is a very pragmatic way of looking at it, and for the most part it was how I felt. Yet when some things didn't add up, and others seemed hypocritical, it helped to start me on my quest.

I listen to lots of bands/solo performers who I don't know anything about.
I can see that it might be upsetting to find out the more unsavoury things about your favourite band, and might make you think about the individuals in the band in a different way. It's sad that this can stop you wanting to listen to the music.

As strange as it might sound to some of the members who are involved in this thread that think I hate Frey, I was rooting for him not to be as bad as he came across. While he did himself no favors in the Doc, I liked the guy from what little I knew of him prior to watching it. I mean it is not like he was a child molester like that guy over in the UK named Glitter(sp?).

My other issue with the Eagles breaking up was being deprived of the music. When it is something like a band member dies, or in the case of Def Leopard's drummer losing a limb, you accept that nothing can be done. Heck Def Leopard were decent enough to wait for the drummer to re-learn how to play and stuck with him, so they certainly receive a gold star for loyalty in my book. However when bands break up over petty crap, that is not a legitimate excuse in my mind.


Most of the long-time successful bands have a history of members falling out with each other, alcoholism, drugs, arguments with record companies & managers etc

I too have issues about the Eagles ticket prices, the inconsistent rules on photography, their hatred of YouTube and other social networking(although this seems to be some band members only, not all), and Don's eagerness to sue everybody! I also have some problems with the attitude towards their fans - we don't always get the respect we deserve. As a band they do seem to be a bit paranoid about some things.

I know, but I cannot stomach hypocrasy. The issues with the label/producer after they started with nothing, and became successful looked very bad on them in the Doc. Then when you read how they treated other long time people like members of their entourage and road crew, it puts them in a decidely negative light.

In the UK also nowadays we have famous people 'representing' political parties and backing their campaigns. I don't like this very much either. It's like when they get celebs to advertise cars or make up etc - we're supposed to think if we buy the products we'll look like they do, or our life will become like that of the celeb - who wants that? not me; they can keep it.
I DON'T want to be given a 'political address' when I go to a concert. I want to hear the music. To be honest, I've seen the Eagles quite a few times and Don Henley also, and I haven't heard them express any political views at a show.
Our political parties are a bit different over here as we have a Right Wing party(Conservative) a Left Wing party(Labour) and a Liberal party(which is sort of in the middle). I think the Eagles views which I have heard expressed would fall into the area of the Liberal party. So to me they can't be called extremists.

I have studied about the Irish political system, and an Irish Republican is much different than an American one.
Having looked into the "Troubles" in the north of Ireland, I began to get a feel for British politics. Heck I even started watching the weekly segment on C-SPAN broadcasting the Prime Minsters questions. I found it fascinating in how different it is from most countries.

So even though I have the aforementioned issues, I'll still buy the albums & go to the show when I can.


I just cannot bring myself to spend my money on anything new of theirs. Frankly, and I know I will probably catch some slack for saying this, but something is missing from their current performances from what I can tell listening to their concerts recorded on YouTube before it gets taken down.

For example, Smith is no Felder. To me, you could tell that Felder and Walsh fed off of each other with similar talent. Walsh would try to keep up with Felder, and Felder would try to keep up with Walsh. It made for some spectacular sounding R&R. In a YT preformance I watched a few weeks ago, Hotel California sounded bland. Smith was competent, but playing HC in the Eagles is not something you want to hear played without the energy. You could tell Walsh was playing to let Smith try to keep up with him. So aside from my other issues with not wanting to put more money in their pockets, I certainly do not want to lighten my wallet by hundreds of dollars to hear HC and other guitar heavy tunes played that way.

`

[Vector]

I watched the documentary multiple times. Soda is right.

I never said she is wrong, I just remember it slightly differently. So I wanted a few others who might have specifically remembered to voice their recollection. Out of the 4, L-eadon seemed to have the least reason to feel that way, so it is perplexing he would be speaking only for himself with the comment in question.
Funny enough, I cannot go back and see for myself because my DVR fried out and Comcast replaced it with a new one. Naturally Showtime does not have the Doc playing now, so I have no access to it.

And no, I am not buying the DVD.



Actually Felder referenced other Eagles books to fill in the gaps in his memory. He admits it in his book. Guess you missed that part,

I guess so, because I read it and am still missing it as I still have his booked checked out. With a cursory look it reveals no such revelation.


but I'm glad you were so impressed with how he humanized himself in his own autobiography. What a hero.

I don't mean this to sound condescending, so don't take it that way. When I said humanize, you must have assumed it was a totally positive connotation. Instead to me it means a willingness to expose both ones virtues and sins. He exposes himself as both righteous and flawed with what I perceive to be an honest assessment. Sure it is his side of the story, but it is not as if his book was a "whoa is me", then it would not have had much validity.


I especially enjoyed the part where he whines about how his wife wasn't paying enough attention to him because of her jewelry business so he divorced her

If that is how you would sum up what you read, then I see your point. To me, he seemed to have admitted his faults, acknowledged how his wife struggled to be a full time parent without much help from him. They apparently went to counseling for years after his infidelity. The jewelry business he encouraged her to do eventually became her all consuming passion, just as his music and life with the Eagles did with him. As time went by, they fell out of love and became distant with each other.

... this from a man who spent years away from his wife and has sex with hundreds of groupies and she stood by him, but he can't handle that she has a jewelry business and missed a 'date' with him?

The missed date seemed to be a metaphor of where their relationship was, and the final straw that helped him to coalesce the big picture(at least to him).
I think what surprised me the most was that she did not seem to be on the same page with him in wanting a divorce. He certainly could have stuck it out longer, considering how she stuck it out with him. He said more counseling was not going to make a difference, so at some point he had lost the desire to try and recapture what he perceived as a lost cause.
Still he lavished praise upon her throughout the book, even after the divorce. He never sugar coated his mistakes/flaws, and emphasized how she went above and beyond by raising their kids alone most of the time, and supported him through his ups and downs. He even said she deserved and received half of his lawsuits proceeds because she "more than deserved it". He went on to say "she suffered minute by minute and day by day at his side, and that she was as much a part of the Eagles as he was".

So it surprises me a little that a female perspective would not give him credit for that.



I think Felder settled because he knew he couldn't win.

You base this on what exactly?

If his case had merit, why not take it all the way? Unlike the Eagles ~ who wanted to get the case over with so they could put out a new album ~ Felder had nothing to lose by refusing the settlement and taking the lawsuit to trial... unless he knew in his heart he couldn't win.

We definitely came away with different views here. I could buy into your premise if the settlement was substantially smaller, but as greedy as the triad of Frey/Henley/Azoff were, there is no way they would had settled for such a large amount. Nuisance lawsuits are settled for legal costs and maybe a bone thrown in. No one, much less greedy people, settles for tens of millions of dollars if they are in the right.

As to Felder having nothing to lose going to trial, you sound like an inexperienced novice. Lawyers will always hedge their bets and tell their clients they could lose as nothing is 100%. Get the wrong jury or judge, and anything can happen.
Heck I was sued once for something I was not even responsible for, yet because I was the one with money/resources, I was targeted. Sure enough my 100% innocence meant nothing when a key defense witness disappeared. My lawyer uncovered how the plaintiff intimidated the witness, and we even got him on tape admitting as much. Yet the judge was left with the litany of false claims to obfuscate what really happened, and had to rule on what was presented, not what actually happened.

Regardless, for those of us who have been through lawsuits, you can be 100% right, but grow weary of the endless years of back and forth legal shenanigans.
That is especially true in cases where one side has a financial advantage and can afford to play the game.

`

[Vector]

Yeah, Felder doesn't inspire much passion. People like his guitar playing and some think his voice is OK, but otherwise, eh.

Now this is only opinion, and most of it based on my limited time on this forum.
I suspect the Felder fans feel as if they are under siege to a certain extent. I have not seen venom directed toward any of the band members like it seems to be directed at Felder.
Now one might suspect it is because some novice fans watching the Doc feel as if Felder & Frey blew up the band. Between those two, most probably didn't even know Felder's name, much less what he brought to the band.
But it must run deeper than that, because the Doc has not been out that long. Maybe it has to do with Felder writing the book and airing the bands dirty laundry?

There's more vocal Tim fans than Henley fans here. It's kind of funny, because you wouldn't think that would be the case, but it is. If anybody started attacking Tim, there would be hell to pay. Truth be told, if you dissed Tim the way you've been dissing Don Henley and Glenn ~ ie calling them 'jerks' ~ you wouldn't find yourself at the center of a pile of roses.

Well I don't like to put it this way, but unlike some of the others, it is hard to find fault with Schmit. To me, he along with Meisner seem to be the two sympathetic members. Things seems to have happened having little to do with them, and in some cases, in spite of them.

Dissing? While I unfortunately know what you mean by that, please do not lower yourself to repeating ignorant slang that came from the ghetto.

To the point, is mentioning someones flaws or actions being disrespectful? Despite you being a fan, doesn't it bother you that Frey both helped to assemble a great band that we loved, but also helped to destroy it?
Then even when Henley and the others wanted to get back together and were in the studio waiting for his promised arrival, he was a no show. I'd think as a Henley fan, you might be mumbling under your breath just like Henley was.
Also the Doc seemed to gloss over the conflict between Frey and Henley as being one of the primary reasons the band broke up. Then again, as a Henley fan, you might be grateful since that would have likely exposed some of his less attractive tendencies.

I like it.

Ok, I'll give it a shot as soon as I finish the To The Limit book.

Why would they have both Randy and Tim?!

I'll answer your question with a question. Why not?!

One of the things you have to give the Eagles is they were not some boy band put together because of looks, dancing, and maybe an ability to sing. All of them are great singers and musicians. So if one played bass guitar, the other could be playing an acoustic and visa versa. I'd also love to hear both Meisner and Schmit singing together since both of their voices are incredible. Just imagine the harmonies of those two combined with the others.

This 'alt Eagles' without Glenn just gets more and more ridiculous. Reality check about 'plenty of hits' ~ um. no. Do some 'research' on the post-Eagles careers of these guys and see what you come up with.

I have never claimed the Eagles would be better without him talent wise. Instead I have proffered that they could have continued on without him.
This is especially true if you consider a few things, like him refusing to rejoin the group. Don't forget, that had already happened once, with everyone sitting around and him being a no show. As Felder put it, "Almost the Eagles".

As to their solo careers, be careful what you ask people to research, as you may not like what you find out.
Sure Henley and Frey did well. However one thing I've never seen mentioned anywhere, is why Walsh is not included in that discussion.

Remember when Frey arrogantly pronounced he wanted more money for he and Henley for keeping the Eagles alive in the publics consciousness?
Well Walsh certainly did well, even better than Frey if you count collective album charting success.
Here is what my research came up with;

Out of 7 albums Frey did solo wise, only 3 charted.

Out of the 8 albums Walsh did, 6 charted.
That of course does not include his other solo albums of which there were 4 more, all of which charted.

So when Walsh and the radio stations were playing all these songs that kept the Eagles alive as Frey claimed(for himself and Henley), Walsh was strangely left out of the conversation.
I wonder why?


`