Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
gatorhugger

The firing of Stan Lynch

Recommended Posts

https://www.moderndrummer.com/article/february-1984-stan-lynch-heartbreaking-rhythm/


Very cool and insightful interview with Stan Lynch from the Southern Accents era. You really get a sense of him as a person. He discusses his relationship with the band (and vice versa), his drumming rig, singing and playing, pre-show & tour warm ups, and how he's quit the band during the recording of every album.

At times, he comes across like big immature teenager, and at other times quite thoughtful and respectful. Always honest. If he didn't like the music, it's style, direction, or disagreed on anything, he was out. He'd leave. You can see the undercurrent of strain it created in the group. Probably exasperated Tom.

It's clear he had/has a big personality, was a fun loving guy who was taking a big bite out of life. Looking back, it some times would appear it was 4 against 1....and vice versa.

Stan is a good singer. I think he rocks when he gets a turn to cut loose and sing in concert. Howie was a great singer. And let's not get started on Mike. I often wonder if Tom was under-utilizing the Heartbreakers over the years?

Semi-related - The fact that he basically told Mike he couldn't put out an album because it would mess up the "Heartbreakers Brand". That's kinda lame to me. He comes across as threatened. I don't think people would think or see it as a Heartbreakes project, or even close to it. We actually like to keep these things separate in our minds and enjoy both for what they are. For example, Carl Broemel, guitarist for My Morning Jacket. He puts out solo albums which are awesome, and then there's his main band, the "main gig." I go see & enjoy both for what they are.

Was Tom that worried or intimidated about it? IMHO, Mike served Tom faithfully since day one. I wish Tom couldn't let his friend shine, and give him some glory, as it were. Be excited and supportive of him, give him his blessing, etc.

Ya know?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, RedfordCowboy said:

 

Semi-related - The fact that he basically told Mike he couldn't put out an album because it would mess up the "Heartbreakers Brand". That's kinda lame to me. He comes across as threatened. I don't think people would think or see it as a Heartbreakes project, or even close to it. We actually like to keep these things separate in our minds and enjoy both for what they are. For example, Carl Broemel, guitarist for My Morning Jacket. He puts out solo albums which are awesome, and then there's his main band, the "main gig." I go see & enjoy both for what they are.

Was Tom that worried or intimidated about it? IMHO, Mike served Tom faithfully since day one. I wish Tom couldn't let his friend shine, and give him some glory, as it were. Be excited and supportive of him, give him his blessing, etc.

Ya know?

 

I know and I totally agree!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2018 at 12:02 PM, RedfordCowboy said:

https://www.moderndrummer.com/article/february-1984-stan-lynch-heartbreaking-rhythm/


Very cool and insightful interview with Stan Lynch from the Southern Accents era. You really get a sense of him as a person. He discusses his relationship with the band (and vice versa), his drumming rig, singing and playing, pre-show & tour warm ups, and how he's quit the band during the recording of every album.

At times, he comes across like big immature teenager, and at other times quite thoughtful and respectful. Always honest. If he didn't like the music, it's style, direction, or disagreed on anything, he was out. He'd leave. You can see the undercurrent of strain it created in the group. Probably exasperated Tom.

It's clear he had/has a big personality, was a fun loving guy who was taking a big bite out of life. Looking back, it some times would appear it was 4 against 1....and vice versa.

Stan is a good singer. I think he rocks when he gets a turn to cut loose and sing in concert. Howie was a great singer. And let's not get started on Mike. I often wonder if Tom was under-utilizing the Heartbreakers over the years?

Semi-related - The fact that he basically told Mike he couldn't put out an album because it would mess up the "Heartbreakers Brand". That's kinda lame to me. He comes across as threatened. I don't think people would think or see it as a Heartbreakes project, or even close to it. We actually like to keep these things separate in our minds and enjoy both for what they are. For example, Carl Broemel, guitarist for My Morning Jacket. He puts out solo albums which are awesome, and then there's his main band, the "main gig." I go see & enjoy both for what they are.

Was Tom that worried or intimidated about it? IMHO, Mike served Tom faithfully since day one. I wish Tom couldn't let his friend shine, and give him some glory, as it were. Be excited and supportive of him, give him his blessing, etc.

Ya know?

 

That was a fantastic interview! Thanks for posting the link. It really gives you some insight into the tensions that simmered for years and eventually led to him becoming detached from the band in the late '80s/early '90s and leaving for good in 1994. Obviously, the topic of his firing has been discussed hundreds of times with fans taking sides on who was right, who wronged who, etc. For all the talk of Stan's performance in the studio or dedication to his craft, this proves he was a brilliant, meticulous drummer who was clearly interested in growing as a musician. He never really got that chance in the Heartbreakers — instead, his role actually diminished over time.

In the distinction between the two categories of his dismissal from the band: 1. his attitude/personal relations with his bandmates and 2. his performance on the drums, he certainly didn't do himself any favors in the first category. He was a fight-prone man with unrealistic expectations and and immature, stubborn tendencies. But from a pure musical point of view, however, this article shows how Stan was stymied and ultimately got shafted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was great, thanks.  Sounds like it was right after the Long After Dark tour.  Little did he know what a mess that next recording session was going to be.  I can see how it would be hard to be told exactly what to play - considering by that time the band was pretty well established and all were clearly very talented.  That might create some tension, and not just between Stan and Tom.  As he said, he wasn't the only one that quit a time or two. I do miss his style and the flair he had back there - and his vocals. I always thought he sang great.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/2/2018 at 9:09 PM, TomFest said:

 I always thought he sang great.  

 I didn’t think any of the band were/are great singers more passable but I did enjoy when they played Psychotic Reaction with Stan singing which I saw them do  I think it was the tour when they used the twisting tree on stage. Great Wide Open Tour ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having reread some of Zanes book and an interview with Modern Drummer from the Petty Archives I again came to the Duck Dunn anecdote; it wasn't the only place this story is told and I think it says quite a bit. Basically Dunn was happy with the take and per Stan, without this highly repsected outsider musician's opinion it would've been torn apart, Tom saying it was too fast, Iovine saying it was too slow. Or the other way around, it doesn't matter.

 
I think it was the combination of Stan's personality and what Tom wanted from a drummer, it seemed, especially after Full Moon Fever that Tom had achieved more of an elevated position in the band and for his vocal, this in conjunction with the change in songwriting Stan wasn't happy about all led to a stew of negativity.
 
Certainly I do believe Tom wanted Stan to stay and tour Widlfowers but from what I've read it just seemed like it wasn't going to work between them anymore.
 
In some ways, one could say ITGWO was the last album of the original band, or Heartbreakers 1.0. After that album the jangle sound and what Benmont called the chamber music element of the band seemed to go away; now everyone continued to play tastefully but the songs themselves seem different, less about the differnet players mergiging together to form someting and now stricly supporting the structure of the song. Listen to anything from let's say, Long After Dark or Damn the Torpedoes and then Echo or Mojo. Or even the Last Dj. Benmont still finds the right space for the keyboard but that interesting combination of instruments isn't there in the same way.
 
Of course, the band had to progress.
 
Back to the drums. Tom and Mike were blown away by Steve's precision. If one were to boil things down, it would seem like this:
 
Stan: lots of personality in his drumming but erratci in the studio,t eh trade-off being his unique feel never quite became metronome precision.
 
Steve: lots of precisoin, just metronome like, no problem. But early on he's told to keep to a basic drumming, eliminate a lot of fills etc. So he never had a chance to share whatever was potentially unique aoubt his drumming the way Stan did. 
 
So maybe in some ways, comparing the two isn't fair since Stan had more of a free reign though the producers and maybe Tom didn't always like the results.
 
Steve was the new guy and entered this one-in-a-million chance to play with a HUGE  band and certainly wans't going to rock the boat.
 
Another point: Stan said that he came up with his own feel for Mary Jane's Last Dance instead of doing what he was told which was to emulate the drums from Gimme Shelter. And it's a good thing Stan stuck to his guns! He was right.
 
I think maybe he was right more often than perceived, but suffereed from the perfectionist atmosphere of the time, Iovine and Lynne. I don't think the band nor Tom would have the same approach to the drums by Mojo.
 
I guess some of it was the freshness of Steve as well, no drama, which would've been a huge factor. Not only does he nail the first take he's given but he's willing to do whatever they want and seems like a nice guy.
 
In the end, for better or worse Stan was out but as he said, he had a nineteen year run which is pretty damn good!
 
And his playing his heard across the world too.
 
And Steve was there for Tom's last big hit album and the band's progression as they went along.
 
It just seems, that sure, Stan was a handful to deal with and maybe wasn't the easiset, but I wonder how much of his playing was nitpicked. I realize we don't know but what do you all think?
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great comments and great topic, mostly they mirror my own feelings.   I thought I'd add my 2 cents, since MJ2LD brought this topic to my attention a couple of months ago, and the other topics are somewhat less active now.   Those who know this band as well as you all do, also know how important Stan was to the band's sound, and how significant his personality was as part of the band.  After his departure, they became somewhat less of a band and more of a TP project, though they were already heading in that direction with FMF and beyond.   

A lot has been discussed about Stan's role as drummer and main backing vocalist (until Howie joined, though even when Howie was new to the band, Stan was the main backing vocalist while Howie focused on bass); Stan had a great "feel" for the music and was very creative, developing a unique drum pattern for each song.  Stan's style of drumming also seemed to leave more room for the rest of the band to be heard, as MJ2LD points out it's what we think Benmont meant by their "chamber music" period. 

What I also see, beyond just his role in making the band sound as they did, was Stan's role in forming the band.  In many ways I think Stan viewed it as "his" band, with of course Tom being the most significant member, but Stan having an important say in the music.  And TP seemed to respect that Stan and the other members were not just "sidemen" but that they were essentially voting members of a somewhat skewed democracy, not a dictatorship of himself.  Plus I think TP wanted to keep everyone happy, but it may have been more than that with Stan, as he was a founding member and technically in the band before even he (TP) was a member.

Consider that Stan and Benmont were founding members of the band that effectively became TPATH, at least according to the Playback booklet.  Beyond that, we have read that Stan recruited Ron to be the bass player.   And when the band came together to perform TP's songs, with TP as lead vocalist, they note that it was Stan who most enthusiastically said "Let's do this", i.e. let's be a band, with TP at the head of it.  The others agreed, the others were likely leaning in that direction, but Stan gave them the push and the cheerleading that they may have needed. 

Further along the way, Stan brought in Phil Jones (at least from what I can tell, PJ was Stan's roadie and Stan likely brought him on stage to add percussion).  Phil became important to the band's sound in the early 80's, and later to the FMF album as drummer.  Later, by all accounts I've read, Stan was the one who brought in Scott Thurston as a multi-instrumentalist to fill out the live sound. 

So if I understand it correctly, Stan was actually in the band before TP himself, Stan brought in Ron Blair, Phil Jones, and Scott Thurston at various points.  TP often commented that he would do some harder-edged songs "to please Stan".  It's safe to say that Stan had a large role in the band even beyond his drumming and backing vocals, which were themselves very significant. 

Now I'm going to go out on a limb a bit and even say that I think Stan saw the band as something of a "family" that he belonged to.  I've never actually read a comment from him along those lines, but consider the fact that he was very young when he joined the band, he wasn't married and didn't have kids (at least not while in TPATH), and despite a feeling from TP that Stan was drifting away from the band, I feel that Stan was emotionally "all in" on the band, at least for their first 10+ years.  He'd "started" the band, he'd shaped the band in a significant way (3 new members, 2 of which were there at the end). So I think that being fired and without the band was emotionally very tough on him.   

I agree with those here who say that Stan showed he could do well with the quieter songs, and could have stayed through TP's more subdued period of the mid/late 90's.  Stan might not have loved those type of songs, he'd have argued with TP, but he could have done them.  This despite his comments on "Behind The Music" that he didn't know how to play that kind of music, even if he wanted to (or something like that). 

Steve helped the band carry on, and as others have said he was a professional who did what he was asked.  I would guess that if some generic rock band auditioned both Stan and Steve for the role of drummer, Steve would win due to his precision and ability to play whatever was asked.  But for my listening enjoyment, Stan was always the better drummer for this band, due to his feel and creativity (things which might not be immediately obvious in an audition).    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheSameOldDrew said:

I thought I'd add my 2 cents,

Drew, 

I don't pretend to be an expert when it comes to Stan/Steve but I think what you wrote was insightful and made a lot of sense to me; with some very good points about the origins of the band and Stan's role, not something I'd really read on this 'Farm before. Perhaps others will engage with your very thoughtful breakdown of the drum situation. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TheSameOldDrew said:

Great comments and great topic, mostly they mirror my own feelings.   I thought I'd add my 2 cents, since MJ2LD brought this topic to my attention a couple of months ago, and the other topics are somewhat less active now.   Those who know this band as well as you all do, also know how important Stan was to the band's sound, and how significant his personality was as part of the band.  After his departure, they became somewhat less of a band and more of a TP project, though they were already heading in that direction with FMF and beyond.   

A lot has been discussed about Stan's role as drummer and main backing vocalist (until Howie joined, though even when Howie was new to the band, Stan was the main backing vocalist while Howie focused on bass); Stan had a great "feel" for the music and was very creative, developing a unique drum pattern for each song.  Stan's style of drumming also seemed to leave more room for the rest of the band to be heard, as MJ2LD points out it's what we think Benmont meant by their "chamber music" period. 

What I also see, beyond just his role in making the band sound as they did, was Stan's role in forming the band.  In many ways I think Stan viewed it as "his" band, with of course Tom being the most significant member, but Stan having an important say in the music.  And TP seemed to respect that Stan and the other members were not just "sidemen" but that they were essentially voting members of a somewhat skewed democracy, not a dictatorship of himself.  Plus I think TP wanted to keep everyone happy, but it may have been more than that with Stan, as he was a founding member and technically in the band before even he (TP) was a member.

Consider that Stan and Benmont were founding members of the band that effectively became TPATH, at least according to the Playback booklet.  Beyond that, we have read that Stan recruited Ron to be the bass player.   And when the band came together to perform TP's songs, with TP as lead vocalist, they note that it was Stan who most enthusiastically said "Let's do this", i.e. let's be a band, with TP at the head of it.  The others agreed, the others were likely leaning in that direction, but Stan gave them the push and the cheerleading that they may have needed. 

Further along the way, Stan brought in Phil Jones (at least from what I can tell, PJ was Stan's roadie and Stan likely brought him on stage to add percussion).  Phil became important to the band's sound in the early 80's, and later to the FMF album as drummer.  Later, by all accounts I've read, Stan was the one who brought in Scott Thurston as a multi-instrumentalist to fill out the live sound. 

So if I understand it correctly, Stan was actually in the band before TP himself, Stan brought in Ron Blair, Phil Jones, and Scott Thurston at various points.  TP often commented that he would do some harder-edged songs "to please Stan".  It's safe to say that Stan had a large role in the band even beyond his drumming and backing vocals, which were themselves very significant. 

Now I'm going to go out on a limb a bit and even say that I think Stan saw the band as something of a "family" that he belonged to.  I've never actually read a comment from him along those lines, but consider the fact that he was very young when he joined the band, he wasn't married and didn't have kids (at least not while in TPATH), and despite a feeling from TP that Stan was drifting away from the band, I feel that Stan was emotionally "all in" on the band, at least for their first 10+ years.  He'd "started" the band, he'd shaped the band in a significant way (3 new members, 2 of which were there at the end). So I think that being fired and without the band was emotionally very tough on him.   

I agree with those here who say that Stan showed he could do well with the quieter songs, and could have stayed through TP's more subdued period of the mid/late 90's.  Stan might not have loved those type of songs, he'd have argued with TP, but he could have done them.  This despite his comments on "Behind The Music" that he didn't know how to play that kind of music, even if he wanted to (or something like that). 

Steve helped the band carry on, and as others have said he was a professional who did what he was asked.  I would guess that if some generic rock band auditioned both Stan and Steve for the role of drummer, Steve would win due to his precision and ability to play whatever was asked.  But for my listening enjoyment, Stan was always the better drummer for this band, due to his feel and creativity (things which might not be immediately obvious in an audition).    

He says in the VH1 Behind the Music back in 1999 that he basically thought of it as a family, a band, and fun. When it stopped being fun, he left/got fired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the comments.  After reading through this topic and writing my own comments, I did some internet searching.  And I found this very interesting topic regarding Jimmy Iovine disliking Stan's "behind the beat" drumming.  This is from the Steve Hoffman forum, and the commenters there seem to be extremely well-informed about TPATH, about as much as you'd expect to find on a dedicated TPATH website.   And while the opinions vary, they are overwhelmingly in Stan's favor, against Iovine's attempts to change him and perhaps sow dissent between TP and Stan (if unintentional in that aspect).  

This is really worth reading for TPATH fans, and very much on topic here.  Probably it's been discussed on this forum too, but if not I think you'll enjoy reading it.  Also interesting is a page 4 description of someone wanting Stan's signature on a FMF poster, which Stan initially declined to do.  Stan especially bristled (according to the writer) at being told "his boss" (presumably meaning Tom Petty himself) had signed the poster.   

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/jimmy-iovine-dissing-stan-lynch-for-being-behind-the-beat.766067/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:-) well everything you say here may well be true. Fair enough though, that it did end. I feel that's okay. Twenty years is a long time. It's good to enjoy each others' company - certainly better than arguing with each other.

Loads of things can derail a creative process (or any collaborative project). Sometimes it's big issues, sometimes if many smaller ones. So, if you're all in the band to create music & yet your relationships are getting in the way of music... well, what can you do? Even if there are years of history, I can still understand them getting to a point where it's "enough is enough". Especially if arguing is squashing the creative spark & new songs. Maybe they could've done things differently (to paraphrase Wilburys' "Congratulations". If they were to go back again. But you only step in the same river once. 

Or what if Stan had stayed on? What would we be saying in that case? "TP kinda went off the boil as a songwriter after 1990s? such a shame they all fought so much? all those times of tension in studio & on stage? TP said he was so unhappy that he just couldn't create new music..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Big Blue Sky said:

Or what if Stan had stayed on? What would we be saying in that case? "TP kinda went off the boil as a songwriter after 1990s? such a shame they all fought so much? all those times of tension in studio & on stage? TP said he was so unhappy that he just couldn't create new music..."

Hard to know what could have been.  I don't think that TP would have stopped writing, or that he would have left Mike and Ben to go (truly) solo, for good.  The Wildflowers album was essentially TPATH minus Stan, not "solo" in the traditional rock/pop sense.  TP could have done more "non Stan" TPATH albums, if he'd been so inclined, and if Stan was being a pain about recording.  Then they could get back together to do an album more to Stan's liking (such as HE would have been, or possibly TLDJ). 

Of course I'd have loved it if they just learned to work with each other, and frankly if Stan stopped whining and just did whatever he could to play on the songs Tom wanted to create.  In the "Behind the Music" interview, Stan says something like "I used to offer my opinions whenever I had them, now I hold back and wait for them to ask my opinion, because they KNOW I'll have one".  A more mature view from a more mature Stan, plus one who had earned the respect (musically) of the others. 

It's unclear to me exactly when Stan was fired, obviously it was some time after October 1994 (Bridge School concert) and the 1995 tour.  But most probably Stan was about 40, or nearly so, and Tom was 44.  So by the time they'd have been working on the next album (post WF), Stan would have been about 41, Tom 45.  I would like to think they'd have had a different approach to collaborating in their 40's, 50's, 60's than when they were in their 20's and 30's.  Stan's post TPATH work (often country-rock) suggests he's not as committed to the faster/rocking songs as TP may have thought he was (or would be as time went on).   So I do think it would have "all worked out".  But only if Stan had committed to the songs TP wanted to do, while still giving his input, when asked (and maybe selectively when not asked).     

    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I listen to the Outro of the extended version of Here Comes My Girl or the live version of "Kings Road" ( The Forum, Inglewood, California, June 28, 1981) both from "American Treasure", I'm stunned how damn good and fitting to the band and the songs Stan was. Such a shame I never got to see the Band live with Stan. To me, he was the perfect drummer for them. I like Steves drumming, but Stans was so unique, one of a kind and had this certain feel and personalitiy in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to be honest, i love Stan's drumming but I don't love him.  I think I became a much bigger fan of the band about the time Stan was getting wrestles and doing a deep dive into the history of the band and such the last 5 years or so reading the Zane's and Zollo books I've found myself "taking sides after the divorce" with Tom.  How dare Stan dislike FMF! How dare he criticize out 'dear Tommy!'   

Further Steve seems like such an amazing guy for the New Guy.  I would LOVE to have a beer with Steve as he seems like the type of bloke who would let innocent insider stuff slip about the band and behind the scenes stuff. Seeing and hearing stories about Steve being the guy that helped Tom off stage nightly also makes me even more endeared to Steve vs

Stan who left, got fired, got tired... he took it hard.. Then he just quit,  let me down, dropped the ball to paraphrase...  💘

Stan has gone on to do some good things and is a great producer and a good singer to boot.  Reading what the @TheSameOldDrew  wrote does give me a new appreciation of Stan though, thinking of him as more of a founding father and driving force helps me come around to liking him a lot more. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hoodoo Man said:

I have to be honest, i love Stan's drumming but I don't love him.  I think I became a much bigger fan of the band about the time Stan was getting wrestles and doing a deep dive into the history of the band and such the last 5 years or so reading the Zane's and Zollo books I've found myself "taking sides after the divorce" with Tom.  How dare Stan dislike FMF! How dare he criticize out 'dear Tommy!'   

Further Steve seems like such an amazing guy for the New Guy.  I would LOVE to have a beer with Steve as he seems like the type of bloke who would let innocent insider stuff slip about the band and behind the scenes stuff. Seeing and hearing stories about Steve being the guy that helped Tom off stage nightly also makes me even more endeared to Steve vs

Stan who left, got fired, got tired... he took it hard.. Then he just quit,  let me down, dropped the ball to paraphrase...  💘

Stan has gone on to do some good things and is a great producer and a good singer to boot.  Reading what the @TheSameOldDrew  wrote does give me a new appreciation of Stan though, thinking of him as more of a founding father and driving force helps me come around to liking him a lot more. :) 

I've grown to take Stan's side over the years. What, Benmont, Howie and Stan aren't good enough to play on the album but you'll have them do the songs live? That'd be annoying. Plus, the one thing that I found to be very irritating and hypocritical was how over the years, Tom was on the junk the same time Howie was but never brought it up until just a few years ago while lambasting Howie for it. Stan and Benmont were extremely close with Howie and I can see why Stan would be pissed about it. Tom's also been hypocritical about bashing the music industry on the Last DJ and not having corporate sponsors for his tour and then by the time 05 comes around, he's partnered up with Live Nation and TicketMaster.

Now should Stan of stayed? No. If you insert him into any album post 94 it probably wouldn't have sounded right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Hoodoo Man: In all fairness, you never HAD to like him. Stan didn't have to be the band equal to your snuggly bear, in order to punch swing your socks off, surely.

This was always curious to me, this.. if somewhat understandable (lack of fresh air, religious worship or whatever, sometimes do this to people, lead to a dizzying sensation, a warped sense of reality, if you will), this how much people invest their own innermost personal emotions in various "relationships" with public figures in general and rockstars in particular. How much projection is going on.

Sure, some stars seem nicer than others. Sure, some seem more involved in the creative processes than others. Some lead, some follow, some are just hard to grasp in general. Still some seem to get on each others' backs every first chance they get...  But really.. all we really can judge fully, is their work. It's what we have and usually the reason for all this love in the first place. The craft behind the songs, the recording and performing of the songs is what matters. A certain biografical piece of information can help you de-code the art, maybe, it can deepen the fascination, help you elevate certain aspects of understanding. But it can also limit your scope quite a bit, forcing you to fit poetry into very narrow explanations, reinforcing myth. 

Most of all, it may be important to remind oneself sometimes, how little, generally speaking, we really know about the private person behind the art and his or hers inner mystery. Surely, "taking sides" between Stan and Tom is not really necessary. (It was a bumpy ride, according to official history. It was madly creative, loads of fun, but perhaps not the smoothest way to grow old. I personally don't think they were ever mortal enemies NOR best friends, and frankly I don't care, as long as they respected each other and kicked out the best music around. It's all very interesting, but I can't claim them as my own friends.) Taking sides between Stan and Steve on the other hand.. :D May not be necessary either. Depending on how you view things.* But at least such comparisons can be made on an actual informed analytical level, right. We can discuss the qualities, the styles, the pros and cons of what they technically brings to the table. Subjective, sure, but still... It's quite possible to take sides, if one whishes too do so, when discussing art. To reason. (I do, myself, if not in an overly black or white way, prefer what Stan "did" to the music, but this does not mean I love him necessarily, nor that I wouldn't love Steve if I got to know him.) But judging private character in cases where I have no personal experience, or detailed personal reason to, seems a bit like... shall we say artificial social approximity to me.. I don't really know these guys. It's not my "dear Tommy". It's the deepest respect for his work and his public persona, is all. 

But sure, if a personality gets too much in my face in a bad way, shows too much double standard, too much hypocricy, this is very likely to tint my whole experience with that person's art. (Martin seem to think along such lines just above... :D ) Undoubtly. Sometimes it can even ruin the whole thing, but to this never happened with TP or any of the HB. It must be ok to discuss professional decisions and professional choices. To discuss people's private person is something else. Although, surely, there are personal behaviour that seem troublesome, that are sometimes hard to know if they are first and foremost private or professional.

Anyway.. Not sure if Stan was ever that "bad" to you, and of course you love or hate anyway you want. I just think this is interesting to ponder and take this opportunity to say this. After all, there has been countless occasions, on various TP oriented platforms over the years, where people really have seemed unable to set TP the person aside from his work, where they just seem to be able to handle that other fans don't like a certain song or even discuss a certain aspect of what they think is holy groung. A very unfortunate and narrow minded, side effect of idol worshipping, if you ask me.

That said, I think Stan deserves one of those beers too.

 

-----

*Apples vs pears? Or drummer vs drummer? How about each of theirs' effect on the rest of the rhythm section? Their fit for the songs? Awesome stuff of interest, but not, to me at least, very personal. I am boring that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah Shelter, don't get me wrong, there's a bunch of double standards and hypocrisy with TPATH. They had their foibles, but it's never been enough to make me not like their music, think any less of it, it's just always made me grounded in the fact that their not beyond reproach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"lambasting Howie"

a) cool word b) steady on, are you sure about that? Where did this lambasting happen? Because, to be honest, I never saw that in interviews I've read / seen. I'd say the approach was more of: "Love the person (Howie), hate the behaviour (druggishness)." And Howie did hit the wall more obviously & spectacularly than TP. Arrested. Then, well, yeah, it's in public. 

Personally, I feel public figures have a right to their privacy. I don't see that as hypocrisy. Just like living in a small town or island, where sometimes it seems everyone knows your business. If they & their families & doctors feel it's better to be discrete? Well, do that, of course. Unless putting it all out in public's gonna help. Oh, it's all very horrible. 

"There ain't no easy way out." Who really knows what's helpful & what's enabling? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Shelterwell for me the strange this is I really like Benmont, Mike, Howie Steve and of course Tom,  Scott seems like a pretty nice guy but he is definitely the most low key member and Ron Blair seems nice and grounded with a great back story on leaving the band having some anxiety about having left, learning most of the catalog and coming back when Howie passed away.   

Stan on the other hand for me looms large in the background as a strong presence. Not always a favorable one either based on snippets here and there, in the end, he played games with showing up for sessions and was halfway out and halfway in which is never good. Yeah he gave a solid 20 years to the band, was a founding member, sang backup before Howie had opinions on the recordings and contributed quite a bit over the years and was a very solid drummer with a lot of heart and soul.  I think its his whining about what Tom wanted from him toward the end that made me feel negative towards him.  I saw him live a good four or five times before Steve took over and enjoyed Psychotic Reaction  and his vocals as well as IIRC he did another song live as well but there was a certain arrogance in how he carried on that made me not so much a fan of his vs Steve who as I said comes off as very affable with an amazing resume behind him playing with Clapton, the Average white band etc. so for me I'm much happier to see the New Guy play and he is also quite funny. If you watch his review of cymbals someone posted he just seems like a cool dude...  My 2 cents fwiw :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Big Blue Sky said:

"lambasting Howie"

a) cool word b) steady on, are you sure about that? Where did this lambasting happen? Because, to be honest, I never saw that in interviews I've read / seen. I'd say the approach was more of: "Love the person (Howie), hate the behaviour (druggishness)." And Howie did hit the wall more obviously & spectacularly than TP. Arrested. Then, well, yeah, it's in public. 

Personally, I feel public figures have a right to their privacy. I don't see that as hypocrisy. Just like living in a small town or island, where sometimes it seems everyone knows your business. If they & their families & doctors feel it's better to be discrete? Well, do that, of course. Unless putting it all out in public's gonna help. Oh, it's all very horrible. 

"There ain't no easy way out." Who really knows what's helpful & what's enabling? 

 

I agree, they do have a right to privacy. I don't have any interest in their private life, but if they put bits of it out for consumption, their decisions can be scrutinized. And it is hypocritical to say in the Zullo book that you tried heroin and never did it again in the 80s because of how addictive it is to admitting later on that you were an addict as well. How that isn't the very definition of hypocrisy, I'll never know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, fair enough, that lacked transparency, some might say a lie. There's another interview (in doco, from memory) where TP says "thing about drugs is they get you wanting more..." Pause. "You don't have any do you?" And TP does a big ol' cheerful laugh. 

Well, this image might make you crack a smile. I laughed when saw it on eBay. I'm guessing holding beers & grinning awkwardly for the camera was all part of their interview / profile with Creem. From haircuts... maybe '79?

Unless this is proof they were wickedly commercial sell-outs back in the day. 😉

There was one tour where they were linked to beer company, early on. Otherwise - correct me if I'm wrong - they stayed well clear of sponsorship. 

PS Agree, Steve seems like he's  fun, positive, affable. Usually wearing a big smile. 

s-l400.jpg.b3d002e716b8234559415ecc4266bf0c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Hoodoo Man said:

My 2 cents fwiw :) 

No, I get it. And it's all good.

Again, your post there just reminded me of how people sometimes won't separate a person from his/her work. I realize there's no bulkhead between the two, but for me, I prefer to focus on the latter, since 1 - it's more interesting, and 2 - it's easier when I don't actually know the person. People just generally seem to project very strong emotions and feelings about their idols private qualities, is all I'm saying. Rightfully or wrongfully , but to what point. But, well.. to each their own, surely. 

Again, a reason to bring it up, is that paradoxically that level of love - or contempt - for the person tends to undermine any serious discussion of the actual work. Deep personal investments in a perceived reality a lot of the times get in the way of any productive attempts at discussing the actual reality, I have come to experience.   

Again, I have no doubt Stan wasn't your average Saint. But what most people fail to consider, I think, is that Tom wasn't either. (Or Scott. Let's not even go there, you might get upset. Haha.. ). And, most of all, that none of that matters that much, at the end of the day. It's not that it's totally void of importance or interest - since we love what they do musically and the dynamics that's behind it. It's just that, at least to me, it's second (or third?) rate priority for the most part. And that we don't really know them, so it will only take us that far.

Sorry if it seems like I was critizing your emotions. They just got me thinking is all. It's all good. Your personal feelings are none of my business, so I may owe you an appology, if that's how it came across. So what if you feel that, besides snare and kick, that affability should be part of the kit (pun!). 

Finally. Behind this line of reasoning, I do find a paradox, I must say. You seem to suggest that in terms of personality Stan is cold and Steve is warm. In terms of their drum sounds/techniques, it strikes me as being the other way around. Hu!

 

16 hours ago, martin03345 said:

Yeah Shelter, don't get me wrong, there's a bunch of double standards and hypocrisy with TPATH. They had their foibles, but it's never been enough to make me not like their music, think any less of it, it's just always made me grounded in the fact that their not beyond reproach

Indeed. Not beyond. That's the whole point. Quite right. We all love their work in various ways around here. Their qualities and character as private persons may in all likelihood be a lot more complex (for better and worse) than the cummulative public image will let on. People should make no mistake about that. Surely that all have informed their public personas as well as their cataloge of work. But whatever the origin - I think these guys are/were more authentic, unfiltered and frankly "real" than most rock stars - there has been... shall we say.. anomalies. It's silly to deny it - that would be exactly the type of religious worship that strip their work of all their talant and hard work. And whether or not such "anomalies" shall be allowed to be pointed out or discussed, should not (IMO) be dependent on any perceived notion about how "good" or "evil" a certain person is. Making good or bad calls, I'm sure they are all just human beings, really. Sorry to break it, folks. It's only natural. Sure - some of them happen to be virtual geniuses as well. And I'm sure that haven't hurt the masterful quality of their work.

 

5 hours ago, Big Blue Sky said:

TP says "thing about drugs is they get you wanting more..." Pause. "You don't have any do you?" And TP does a big ol' cheerful laugh. 

Ok.. so I do have a dark side.. but I think that is very funny! :D

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...