What's The Chance Of A Byrds Reunion?

drumbob · Post by **drumbob** » Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:45 pm

Does anyone think it will ever happen? The rumor starts every few years and nothing happens. I've heard they don't own the name anymore, or McGuinn isn't interested because he hates Crosby and doesn't want to be considered an oldies act.
Any solid facts?

Don Miller · Post by **Don Miller** » Wed Aug 08, 2007 5:19 pm

They tried it in 1973...and it flopped...

Roger has a thing on his web site..where he quotes Corinthians something something...and says that he can not work with one of the other surviving orignal members....Ive heard of shows where Roger and Chris were on the same bill...and didnt play together.

So a reunion..not likely...

Another suggestion-dream reunion would be something like Roger, Gene Parsons, John Yorke and somebody like Bob Warford doing the Clarence parts...but since both Yorke and Parsons were fired..and Gene doesnt play drums anymore and Bob Warford has a very busy law practice, and and....it aint likely either.

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Wed Aug 08, 2007 5:38 pm

Don't hold your breath, doubtful if there is ever a Byrds reunion.Roger does not hate David, he is simply much happier doing things the way he's been; mostly solo.Crosby owns the "Byrds" name legally now.I enjoy the 3 of them as they are, each in their own space, doing what they do best.
And they have All given us a lot of good music.

lyle_from_minneapolis · Wed Aug 08, 2007 6:04 pm

Count Gram Parsons out...

budrocket · Post by **budrocket** » Wed Aug 08, 2007 6:23 pm

> They tried it in 1973...and it flopped...

I wouldn't call it a flop -- it's a pretty good album. Sure it could've been mixed better, but its definitely head & shoulders above Byrdmaniax & Farther Along, not to mention a goodly portion of Untitled (namely the Skip Battin songs). Crosby had other things going on at the time (namely massive success with CSN&Y), & it wasn't greeted with the enthusiasm they expected. So they got cold feet. Which is too bad.

They've reunited a few times since then, most recently during the Michael Clarke trademark squabbles, & it all seemed to go well.

Bottom line, Corinthians quotes aside, is that McGuinn does better as a solo -- he makes the schedules, he calls the shots, he keeps all the moolah. And why not?

bw

drumbob · Post by **drumbob** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:55 am

I hope against hope that they will reform for just one tour before they get too old. I think they would do very very well in ticket sales, merch sales, etc. I never got to see the original band and kick myself for it now, because I had a chance to see them in Hyannis, Massachusetts in '66 and didn't go. I'm going to email McGuinn and ask him again. Can't hurt. If there's enough demand, it could happen.

loverickbass · Post by **loverickbass** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 8:11 am

I think Roger is very firm on this issue. Unless Crosby becomes a Christian in the next few years I don't see it happening.

byrddog · Post by **byrddog** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 8:53 am

I asked Crosby about a reunion a couple of years ago on his CPR site and he said He bought the BYRDS name back from the Clarke estate in hopes that Roger would do a re-union..and in his (Crosby)own words "he (Roger)just won't do it."
I would be happy if they would get together in the studio and cut some new BYRDS tracks, and not bother with the tour thing. I'm sure a lot of us have worked with folks that have different regligon or beliefs and most of the time without knowing it..but this might be based more on more personal basis than we know...I also believe there must be some bad blood along the trail. One thing for sure they had some real magic in those harmonies and a lot more to offer. Too bad we won't be able to experience that.

budrocket · Post by **budrocket** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:42 am

This is one of the many reasons why I think its insane to base your whole life around some old superstitious Bronze-age scribblings.

*sigh*

lyle_from_minneapolis · Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:51 am

If you had a huge falling out with someone several decades ago, and your differences were even wider apart today...why would you want to join the same band again?

I'm going to let it be. It would probably suck, anyway, and we'd be forced to put on a brave face and discuss what particular aspect WAS good about the new tracks.

loverickbass · Post by **loverickbass** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:23 pm

Call me insane then Buddy.

budrocket · Post by **budrocket** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:35 pm

They resolved those differences long ago, & have played (& recorded) together several times since then.

There's always the chance that it might suck, but I thought they did pretty good at the '89 shows, & circulating boot recordings from those shows tend to bear that out...YMMV of course...

bw

lyle_from_minneapolis · Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:08 pm

Shows what I know: not much.

steambyrd · Post by **steambyrd** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:42 pm

I seem to remember McGuinn quoting McCartney about a Beatles reunion, where Paul compared making the perfect soufle' to re-hashing the Beatles, and Roger felt the same way about the Byrds. If the past ain't broken, you can't improve on it. That being said, "time heals all wounds" supposedly. But to me they are already in their 60's, so I wouldn't hold my breath, even though I and plenty of others would be there.

budrocket · Post by **budrocket** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:31 pm

I think the McCartney quote was, "you can't re-heat a souffle."

My feeling is he's just happier as a solo...lets face it, he's never had much luck with bands. The guys in the Chad Mitchell Trio used to ***** slap him, the Byrds were always warring with each other, he had problems with some of the guys in the latter day Byrds, Thunderbyrd was a negative experience for him, etc. etc.

And besides, Crosby can be challenging. Very opinionated, & not afraid to express it. Definitely not a "yes man."

bw

bw