|
Post by Dianna on May 18, 2013 14:34:52 GMT -5
yes, I understand Linda has had some serious health issues. This week I saw Aretha Franklin perform on TV, who just turned 71 yrs old, she has also had serious health issues with cancer, which she has had to cancel shows... clearly I don't know how she does it. She defines herself as a singer, yes, yet she wants no part of a documentary in which she help shift the music industry.. the eagles.. just odd. but I respect her decisions.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on May 18, 2013 15:40:35 GMT -5
She defines herself as a singer, yes, yet she wants no part of a documentary in which she help shift the music industry.. the eagles.. just odd. but I respect her decisions. Another theory here, if I may: perhaps she doesn't see her contribution in the formation of the Eagles as being that big of a deal? True, some were members of her backing band at the time or perhaps other members were acquaintances of Linda's, and it could be she sees her part in the formation of the Eagles as overstated. Yet, she was the catalyst and without her, the Eagles might never have happened - at least not in the group line up everyone knows or the music that was a big part of the 70s soundtrack.
|
|
|
Post by Dianna on May 18, 2013 15:48:53 GMT -5
Yes, she was.. and I guess my point is along with many others is she seems to be very insecure about her talents and contributions.. maybe that is part of her appeal.. I mentioned Aretha as a comparison to Linda.. and I had to laugh when she said, Halle Berry would be the perfect person to play her in a movie. lol.. that's some crazy self confidence.
|
|
|
Post by JasonKlose on May 18, 2013 17:21:47 GMT -5
Quote by Richard W: My theory, for what it's worth (again, probably not much [LOL]), is that, while what she might have said would likely have been important, the talk on all the blogs and Internet forums, except for this one, might not have been about that, but instead on her physical appearance: the usual stuff about her not having "aged well" and "letting herself go." I'm not saying, of course, that such talk is right; but I do believe that's where the talk would have been. I think out of an abundance of caution over those issues, she declined. But seeing as how Glenn and Don had no problems with her decision, and how they are still advocates for her talent and grateful for her having been there for them back in '71, I don't think I can complain too much. I totally agree with your theory, Erik. We know Linda is a very private person anyway, but I'm sure she doesn't want to go through all the media scrutiny again. Of course we don't really know for sure what would've happened had she interviewed for the documentary. But as you said, maybe Linda thought it wise to decline out of caution, just in case. And I also think that Linda simply just doesn't like the celebrity status either. She's retired now and wants to live a normal life, something she could never do before, even though she tried very hard to. Considering all the craziness that went on in the music business back in those days, I'd say Linda did live a fairly normal life compared to most. I also get the feeling that could be another reason why Linda is not in the RRHOF. She didn't do drugs, although she did try them. She didn't drink, she didn't live a wild and crazy life. It seems like that's what they want rock 'n' rollers to do. Is Linda too goody-two-shoes for them or what? I also applaud Don and Glenn for their wonderful compliments of Linda. They really do appreciate and respect her a lot. I totally agree with them 100%. Like Don said, it's a travesty that Linda is not in the hall, and he's also right about it being political and sanctimonious. As much as I love music, I will not set foot in that place until Linda is inducted. I hope that day comes soon. Don and Glenn seem like nice guys. Glenn is especially cool. He seems like he'd be an interesting person to interview. They always seem to be very pleasant and cooperative with the media. Maybe they aren't as bad as Don Felder painted them in his autobiography.
|
|
|
Post by erik on May 18, 2013 19:05:00 GMT -5
Obviously, celebrity is the last thing that concerns Linda, but it's a complex thing with Linda. After all, we're not talking about Lindsay Lohan or the godforsaken Kardashians, who are famous for merely being famous (or is it infamous?). We're talking about someone who became a reluctant celebrity/superstar/sex symbol, but at the same time used her celebrity for a whole host of great causes she believed in. She knew that the misuse of celebrity could be a dangerous thing, and that's why she found ways of using it wisely. And in truth, most celebrities do use it wisely; you just don't hear about it in the media.
With respect to how Linda might see herself in relation to the Eagles--I think for her, it was just a case of her needing a backing band to do a tour of the East Coast in the spring of 1971. When Don, Glenn, Randy, and Bernie told her that they wanted to become their own band, she was all for it and offered moral support. I doubt she would have ever hyped up her own "importance" to the formation of the band (modesty being part of her nature), but they certainly saw her as being pivotal, and still do. Linda certainly sees her role in the formation of the Eagles in very modest, matter-of-fact terms, and she has always had nothing but great things to say about them, even with all the turmoil the band had.
|
|
|
Post by philly on May 19, 2013 2:17:01 GMT -5
Loved the video Erik, always nice to hear Linda get some acknowledgement, (and the RRHOFools get their dues). My 2 cents would be that Linda, for her own reasons, doesn't like to revisit when she "became a pop star, whatever, all that craziness that went on in the 70s and the 60s and the 80s, it was just nutty" , as she said about that era. I'm sure she'll write about those times in her book, but maybe she's otherwise un-nostalgic about those days
|
|
|
Post by MokyWI on May 19, 2013 8:42:06 GMT -5
It's easy for use to project our romantic/nostalgic ideas of what those three decades were like for the artists we love. Those artists LIVED that life unlike us. The reality was not exactly the fantasy some of us might think it was. Ronstadt worked her butt off from 67-90 on her career, and to dodge all those "sink holes" and stay on top of it all I would imagine was anything but a fantasy for her much of the time.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on May 19, 2013 14:06:42 GMT -5
Loved the video Erik, always nice to hear Linda get some acknowledgement, (and the RRHOFools get their dues). My 2 cents would be that Linda, for her own reasons, doesn't like to revisit when she "became a pop star, whatever, all that craziness that went on in the 70s and the 60s and the 80s, it was just nutty" , as she said about that era. I'm sure she'll write about those times in her book, but maybe she's otherwise un-nostalgic about those days Linda probably is a forward looking person but for all of the craziness or nuttiness, would Linda have traded it all, not to have been part of it in the first place? I think everyone looks back and has mixed feelings about the past, whatever their station was in life, and your past is what it was. I think most people look back fondly on their past but I seriously doubt Linda would've traded one day of that "craziness" for one day of an ordinary life or a different life.
|
|
|
Post by erik on May 19, 2013 19:17:18 GMT -5
Well, for one thing, all that craziness, if she herself had immersed herself in it completely, would probably have killed her in some way a long time ago, as it did more than a few of her contemporaries; but she's still around. She knew that it was a part of the game, and how she played it was to simply not let it get to her head.
And as I've mentioned, going by her remarks about the Eagles at Grace Cathedral back in February, she seems more philosophical about that era now. The memoir, I suppose, will set the record straight.
|
|
|
Post by musicaamator on May 20, 2013 7:09:27 GMT -5
It's easy for use to project our romantic/nostalgic ideas of what those three decades were like for the artists we love. Those artists LIVED that life unlike us. The reality was not exactly the fantasy some of us might think it was. Ronstadt worked her butt off from 67-90 on her career, and to dodge all those "sink holes" and stay on top of it all I would imagine was anything but a fantasy for her much of the time. Great point! We, as fans, have some type of preconceived knowledge of a musician (Linda in this case) when in actuality they're nothing like their "stage" persona or we over glamorize the life they actually led. As one other musician puts it, people may have an illusion of someone famous, but they don't want to live up to that illusion. Maybe that's why when you're about to meet someone you're really jazzed to meet, they might not live up to your expectations, leaving you disappointed. I personally have not met anyone but I am guilty of putting people I would love to meet on a pedestal, including Linda. But that still would not deter me from meeting her if given a chance, but I think I would just be more...um...respectful (not really the word I am looking for).
|
|
|
Post by musicaamator on May 20, 2013 8:28:47 GMT -5
Well, for one thing, all that craziness, if she herself had immersed herself in it completely, would probably have killed her in some way a long time ago, as it did more than a few of her contemporaries; but she's still around. She knew that it was a part of the game, and how she played it was to simply not let it get to her head. There are some who could not handle it as well, and they're are those that can and glad Linda was able to protect herself from that. It reminds me of the words to a song by a band called Rush, that deals with fame. It's called Limelight and the words are such: Living on a lighted stage Approaches the unreal For those who think and feel In touch with some reality Beyond the gilded cage.
Cast in this unlikely role, Ill-equipped to act, With insufficient tact, One must put up barriers To keep oneself intact.
Living in the Limelight, The universal dream For those who wish to seem. Those who wish to be Must put aside the alienation, Get on with the fascination, The real relation, The underlying theme.
Living in a fisheye lens, Caught in the camera eye. I have no heart to lie, I can't pretend a stranger Is a long-awaited friend.
All the world's indeed a stage, And we are merely players, Performers and portrayers, Each another's audience Outside the gilded cage.One in that stature or exposure would need to protect themselves from that or one would go insane. Linda did so and is thus a survivor from that craziness.
|
|
|
Post by MokyWI on May 20, 2013 9:05:17 GMT -5
musicaamator that is why I ran when I had the chance to meet her. A friend of mine had asked Andrew Gold, who my friend knew, if Andrew could get us backstage after a show on The Feels Like Home Tour in 95. Gold got us tickets to all the California shows, even the second night that was cancelled at Universal Amp. in LA. The first show in the state was up near San Francisco. My friend and I were the first in the seats, and it was her cousins who sat right in front of us. These relatives had arrived at the venue extra early as well. Mark and I and her cousins were in the venue pretty much alone for a good 10-15 minutes. The four of us started laughing when the only two groups of people in the venue were front/back of the other. We already had backstage passes, but her cousins had offered to get us back. When we went back stage I never dreamed Ronstadt would be in the reception area. We walk into this room and there she was in berkinstocks and after show cloths. She was in converstation with a group of people. My friend knew her manager at that time, Ira Koslow if I remember correctly. My friend Mark had the pleasure of meeting Ronstadt before and knew Koslow as well so Mark took me over to meet Koslow. While we were conversing with Koslow my friend asked if it would be alright to introduce me to Ronstadt when she was done talking with the others. Koslow said he didn't think it would be a problem and he would ask her once she was done talking with others. At that moment when he asked Koslow I WALKED OUT of the room, I didn't want to meet her once I had the chance. I thought to myself, "what if she is not nice, what if she is not what I have dreamed her to be all these years." I was not ready to have my illusions crushed. I could kick myself now for being so stupid and childish. I also was scared I would be a babbling idot or to shocked that I was talking with her that I wouldn't be able to speak. Up to that point I never considered her being anything other than what I had imagined her to be and it suddenly dawned on me that I was going stricktly on what was in print and my perceptions of her through print and records and concerts I had attended up to that point.
|
|
|
Post by eddiejinnj on May 20, 2013 10:00:50 GMT -5
weird you put limelight on here (it is topic appropriate). I just mean that for me it was Ronstadt and Rush. My 2 fav artists for a long time. I do not follow them like Linda but they are a great group. eddiejinnj
|
|
|
Post by musicaamator on May 20, 2013 10:10:15 GMT -5
musicaamator that is why I ran when I had the chance to meet her. A friend of mine had asked Andrew Gold, who my friend knew, if Andrew could get us backstage after a show on The Feels Like Home Tour in 95. Gold got us tickets to all the California shows, even the second night that was cancelled at Universal Amp. in LA. The first show in the state was up near San Francisco. My friend and I were the first in the seats, and it was her cousins who sat right in front of us. These relatives had arrived at the venue extra early as well. Mark and I and her cousins were in the venue pretty much alone for a good 10-15 minutes. The four of us started laughing when the only two groups of people in the venue were front/back of the other. We already had backstage passes, but her cousins had offered to get us back. When we went back stage I never dreamed Ronstadt would be in the reception area. We walk into this room and there she was in berkinstocks and after show cloths. She was in converstation with a group of people. My friend knew her manager at that time, Ira Koslow if I remember correctly. My friend Mark had the pleasure of meeting Ronstadt before and knew Koslow as well so Mark took me over to meet Koslow. While we were conversing with Koslow my friend asked if it would be alright to introduce me to Ronstadt when she was done talking with the others. Koslow said he didn't think it would be a problem and he would ask her once she was done talking with others. At that moment when he asked Koslow I WALKED OUT of the room, I didn't want to meet her once I had the chance. I thought to myself, "what if she is not nice, what if she is not what I have dreamed her to be all these years." I was not ready to have my illusions crushed. I could kick myself now for being so stupid and childish. I also was scared I would be a babbling idot or to shocked that I was talking with her that I wouldn't be able to speak. Up to that point I never considered her being anything other than what I had imagined her to be and it suddenly dawned on me that I was going stricktly on what was in print and my perceptions of her through print and records and concerts I had attended up to that point. Great story! But if I were in that situation too, you know, I would probably leave too. IDK why, I can't explain, but I guess because of these reasons: 1. Linda would see me and wonder how he got in? Believe me, if I saw me walk into a room, I'd ask that question! 2. Would she be courteous? Would I catch her at a bad time? I'd be stressed before a gig. 3. Even though I made a thread wondering what I would say to Linda if given a chance, I may talk the talk, but could I walk the walk so to speak? I'd be nervous as the Tobes of Hades in meeting/talking to her. So yea, I completely understand why you did what you did. Kind of protect the image you think/have of Linda (or anyone--like Sir Paul for me) and not having it shattered. But I guess too, it is worth the risk! Long time ago, a friend of mine who is a guitar player had the chance meeting of meeting one of his guitar god idols. Well, needless to say, the guitarist (who will remain nameless) was smug/indifferent and arrogant which totally ruined my friend's notion of that musician. So yes, there is a risk this might happen, but there is the other chance that meeting someone you admire will be the nicest encounter ever and only reinforce why that person is held in good esteem. Hey, anything can happen....
|
|
|
Post by musicaamator on May 20, 2013 10:12:59 GMT -5
weird you put limelight on here (it is topic appropriate). I just mean that for me it was Ronstadt and Rush. My 2 fav artists for a long time. I do not follow them like Linda but they are a great group. eddiejinnj My gosh--a fellow Rush fan! I have been a fan of theirs for 30 years now and glad they're still making new relevant music. That band there got me through high school, I tell ya! I see them every chance I get--sort of how I wish I could do if Linda was still touring...
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on May 20, 2013 14:26:24 GMT -5
Well, for one thing, all that craziness, if she herself had immersed herself in it completely, would probably have killed her in some way a long time ago, as it did more than a few of her contemporaries; but she's still around. She knew that it was a part of the game, and how she played it was to simply not let it get to her head. And as I've mentioned, going by her remarks about the Eagles at Grace Cathedral back in February, she seems more philosophical about that era now. The memoir, I suppose, will set the record straight. I'm assuming the craziness she referred to was what was going on around the music scene as a whole, and not so much her personally. But, she could've meant the craziness of albums selling in the millions and sold out concerts. I know from reading accounts of others who were musical superstars, many of them had an "Oh, wow!" thing going on, that they couldn't believe what was happening to them and how the fans were reacting to them. Some were frightened by their experiences. Some were insecure when the superstardom happened and were even more insecure when it happened. They also described what happened to them as crazy, nutty. Ironically, I think the artists who had that attitude kept their sanity whereas others who embraced the craziness, perhaps got too caught up in the belief they could do no wrong and nothing bad could happen to them. Might have helped some if they had stayed a little more grounded. I think Linda is more comfortable with her past, if going by the Grace Cathedral interview. I am curious to read what she has to say about her music now, whether she still regards it negatively or has a more favorable opinion. I want to believe she realizes that just because her music wasn't up to a Sinatra standard, that made it bad. And that actually, judging one's music by another artist's of music isn't a good measuring stick to be using all of the time. You're bound to think you'll come up short in comparison and that your music isn't as good, even if you sell in the millions.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Jul 1, 2013 22:10:21 GMT -5
Quote by sliderocker:
I would hope this is true, especially with regards to her comments about talent shows--that you shouldn't be made to feel like a loser if you don't win. The same is true about measuring yourself against someone like Sinatra, or Elvis, or the Beatles. Besides, with the generations of female artists she's influenced, and having a second cousin now who is ready to take The Big Plunge with some helpful advice from her, I think Linda, with the lack of recognition from the RRHOF the only real exception, has already won far more than most.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Aug 25, 2016 21:59:56 GMT -5
To my knowledge, neither Glenn Frey nor Don Henley ever had anything bad to say about being on tour with Linda during that summer of 1971. I don't know who could have planted the notion that either they or the other guys (to wit, Bernie Leadon and Randy Meisner) had to "tough it out" unless it was a very misogynistic writer who wanted to smear Linda's good name.
|
|
|
Post by eddiejinnj on Aug 26, 2016 7:06:49 GMT -5
Not quite getting this thread. It was posted named by nobody's nobody and the only reply is from erik. just seems kind of pulled from the sky. Who said they "toughed it out" and did Meisner play with Linda too that summer? Did nobody's nobody just post a title or did he/she say something that we are no longer seeing? eddiejinnj
|
|
|
Post by moe on Aug 26, 2016 8:21:59 GMT -5
Yeah need a little context here! Looks like the initial post disappeared. Most likely a alt-con job.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Aug 26, 2016 8:55:34 GMT -5
The original poster, nobody's nobody, removed the post himself. I know for a fact that it wasn't me.
I remember his post as being about something he read somewhere about how Glenn and Don supposedly resented being on tour with Linda in 1971. Whatever he read, I don't think the evidence out there supports any supposed tension Glenn and Don might have had with her, and that my opinion of it is that whoever wrote this in the media must have been some kind of a misogynist.
|
|
|
Post by Richard W on Aug 27, 2016 7:35:49 GMT -5
Never heard anything about Glenn and Don specifically (and I'd be surprised if there were), but Linda has said that she often times had difficulty putting together a touring band because many male players resented or felt demeaned by backing up a female "front man".
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on Aug 27, 2016 8:05:01 GMT -5
The only negative thing I heard about was that Linda wasn't crazy about Randy's guitar style. They weren't together for very long so it doesn't seem there would be too much to complain about.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Aug 27, 2016 11:10:00 GMT -5
Never heard anything about Glenn and Don specifically (and I'd be surprised if there were), but Linda has said that she often times had difficulty putting together a touring band because many male players resented or felt demeaned by backing up a female "front man". Linda mentioned in her book that she had a band that had a member or members who tried to convey the impression they were in charge, giving the wrong impression Linda was just a member of their band. Could that have been Don and Glenn? As in another section of her book, she talked about seeing how her backup band that included Don, Glenn, Randy and Bernie were going to become their own band, and she made a deal with them that they would back her for the tour and then she'd release them to be their own band. People sometimes get up the idea that the world of the musicians is all brotherhood and sisterhood, that it's all peace and harmony instead of being a business like any other business where personalities can sometimes clash and just don't get along. And as for Linda, she herself admitted she had to learn how to take charge, that the backing members of her band were her employees and not the other way around. And I think the kind of person Linda was and is wouldn't allow her to stand in the way of Don, Glenn, Bernie and Randy going off to be their own group. But, I also believe she also couldn't allow them to quit or leave while she herself was committed to doing a tour. Such a move would've cost Linda money in two ways: money promised from the concert tour and money she would had to have paid the concert promoter for having to back out because she no longer had a band. And maybe there were tensions we didn't know about. Tensions that were worked out and never mentioned or publicly aired as "dirty laundry." And perhaps there were things that still bothered Linda about those days and she wanted to vent about them in a way in her book, but she was too much of a lady to name names. The names being omitted to protect the guilty.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Aug 27, 2016 11:21:24 GMT -5
Quote by ronstadtfanaz:
I think Linda did feel that Randy's bass-playing style was a bit too busy, although she may have expressed it in somewhat sinister terms back then with a couple of evil-eye glances. In the end, though, I don't seem to recall Randy having anything terrible to say about her. The media tends to make a lot of stuff up that isn't exactly true, as we're all too painfully aware of (IMHO).
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Aug 27, 2016 11:33:35 GMT -5
The only negative thing I heard about was that Linda wasn't crazy about Randy's guitar style. They weren't together for very long so it doesn't seem there would be too much to complain about. Did Randy play guitar or bass for Linda? I thought I had read somewhere that Randy had been an off and on member of her various bands from 1969 onward, and that he was always the bass player. Maybe she had trouble communicating to Randy about what she wanted and expected from him as a musician? Of course, it could also have been he was one of those male musicians who resented playing behind a female performer.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Aug 27, 2016 11:45:44 GMT -5
I think Linda did feel that Randy's bass-playing style was a bit too busy, although she may have expressed it in somewhat sinister terms back then with a couple of evil-eye glances. In the end, though, I don't seem to recall Randy having anything terrible to say about her. The media tends to make a lot of stuff up that isn't exactly true, as we're all too painfully aware of (IMHO). It may have been Randy's bass playing was a bit too busy for Linda, but as the period we are talking about is the very early 1970s, that was a time when Linda said she had trouble communicating what she wanted from the musicians in her band and she wasn't a take charge person when it came to her bands. Maybe that led to some of the musicians improvising their parts?
|
|
nobody's nobody
A Number and a Name
If people never did silly things, nothing intelligent would ever get done. Ludwig Wittgenstein
Posts: 44
|
Post by nobody's nobody on Aug 27, 2016 19:41:57 GMT -5
Sorry for deleting my original post, but I feared people weren't understanding it? Having said that, it looks like it's got a life of it's own!
So here's a direct cut and paste of what you guys are talking about from the God of sources, Wikipedia!
1971–1973: Formation and early releases
The Eagles began in early 1971, when Linda Ronstadt and then-manager John Boylan recruited local musicians Glenn Frey and Don Henley for her band.[7] Henley had moved to Los Angeles from Texas with his band Shiloh to record an album produced by Kenny Rogers,[8] and Frey had come from Michigan and formed Longbranch Pennywhistle; they had met in 1970 at The Troubadour in Los Angeles and became acquainted through their mutual record label, Amos Records.[9][10] Randy Meisner, who had been working with Ricky Nelson's backing band, the Stone Canyon Band, and Bernie Leadon, a veteran of the Flying Burrito Brothers, also later joined Ronstadt's group of performers for her summer tour promoting the Silk Purse album.[7][11]
While on the tour, Frey and Henley decided to form a band together and informed Ronstadt of their intention. Frey later credited Ronstadt with suggesting Leadon for the band, and arranging for Leadon to play for her so Frey and Henley could approach him about forming a band together. They also pitched the idea to Meisner and brought him on board.[12] These four played live together behind Ronstadt only once for a July concert at Disneyland,[7] but all four appeared on her eponymous album.[13] It was later proposed that J. D. Souther should join the band, but Meisner objected.[14] The four were signed in September 1971 to Asylum Records, the new label started by David Geffen, who was introduced to Frey by Jackson Browne.[15] Geffen bought out Frey's and Henley's contracts with Amos Records, and sent the four to Aspen, Colorado to develop as a band.[16] Having not settled on a band name yet, they performed their first show in October 1971 under the name of Teen King and the Emergencies at a club called The Gallery in Aspen.[17][18] Don Felder credited Leadon with originating the name of Eagles for the band during a peyote and tequila-influenced group outing in the Mojave Desert, when he recalled reading about the Hopis' reverence for the eagle.[19] Accounts however vary, and J.D. Souther suggested that the idea came when Frey shouted out, "Eagles!" when they saw eagles flying above.[20] Steve Martin, a friend of the band from their early days at The Troubadour, recounts in his autobiography that he suggested that they should be referred to as "the Eagles", but Frey insists that the group's name is simply "Eagles".[21] Geffen and partner Elliot Roberts initially managed the band; they were later replaced by Irving Azoff while the Eagles were recording their third
|
|
nobody's nobody
A Number and a Name
If people never did silly things, nothing intelligent would ever get done. Ludwig Wittgenstein
Posts: 44
|
Post by nobody's nobody on Aug 27, 2016 19:50:24 GMT -5
The four were signed in September 1971 to Asylum Records, the new label started by David Geffen, who was introduced to Frey by Jackson Browne.[15] Geffen bought out Frey's and Henley's contracts with Amos Records, and sent the four to Aspen, Colorado to develop as a band.[16] Having not settled on a band name yet, they performed their first show in October 1971 under the name of Teen King and the Emergencies at a club called The Gallery in Aspen.
Wow they make it sound so depressing like they were sent to Aspen (like it was a penal colony or something) to develop as a band and their original name was the "Teen King and the Emergencies"! What's up with that?
|
|
|
Post by erik on Aug 27, 2016 21:08:57 GMT -5
Quote by nobody's nobody:
I think this was David Geffen's idea, to get them more tightened in an environment away from L.A.'s excesses, and they did perform as Teen King and the Emergencies--a moniker that, I believe, was Frey's. But Aspen wasn't quite as much a penal colony as London would be when Geffen sent the band over there on his dime to work with producer Glyn Johns on their first album.
|
|