The Searchers - If Curtis Left Before Jackson

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:25 pm

Sheena Colvin posed an interesting question in another thread that I felt was deserving of a topic all its own.

Would the Searchers' music or success have been any different had Jackson stayed and Curtis left?

These woulda, coulda, shoulda questions are always intriguing. We get a chance to rewrite history as it may have otherwise been.

The Searchers' music would have had a rougher edge had Tony Jackson stayed with the group. I also think that if he had the group would have had a higher profile on stage and in the media. The tougher black jacket image was definitely more in keeping with the times. The stage is likely to have been more dynamic without Chris Curtis as frontman.

I consider that one of the reasons that "Love Potion Number 9" did so well is becuase of Tony's great vocal. Just contrast "Love Potion Number 9" with "Magical Potion", for example, and you get a better idea of the direction that the Searchers may have been headed with Jackson.

The Blunt-Jackson combination would also have been of interest as I consider that one would likely have played off the other, leading to a more in your face sound.

Some will argue that without Curtis that the covers chosen might not have been as successful. Yes Curtis certainly did the group some great favours by compiling a decent collection of US B sides to consider, however, on balance it is likely that the most significant favour he had to offer was allowing the group to continue on without him. It was, alas, too late to capitalize on Tony's talent.

"Sweets for My Sweet", "Sugar and Spice" and "Love Potion Number 9" had the edge that made folks sit up and take notice. Needles and Pins, When You Walk In the Room and the like were catchy songs that in their own brilliant way got the attention of avids. BTW, it has been said that Tony is responsible for the little lead riff on "Don't Throw Your Love Away" right after "lovers of today they give their love away and say ...." I consider that they would have been even more successful with Jackson sharing lead roles with Mike Pender, rather than writing Tony out of the mix altogether.

Jackson was an innovator and this was evident when I spoke to him shortly before he died. On that occasion he was still remaking "Sweets For My Sweet" as he demonstrated a change in tempo in the song that he would have liked to have seen.

Personalities often ruin otherwise successful groups. This was certainly the case for the Searchers in the early to mid-1960s.

I am pleased to see the current Searchers doing so well.

jjr · Post by **jjr** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 6:05 am

If Chris had left before Tony, the pluses would have been:greater versatility in lead vocals, styles of music, and more of a rock attitude. They wouldn't have been the predominantly mid-tempo harmony band they became.Minuses include:song selection (Who would choose the material, how good would they be), frontman (remember, Tony was in the band before Chris, and Chris still fronted ther band, so he must have acquiesed in it), and their relationship with Tony Hatch and Pye (I recall reading that Tony was vociferously opposed to "Sugar and Spice", which Hatch wrote). Since Mike and John seemed rather passive in band decisions, Tony might have adversely impacted their relationship with their producer, given his strong personality. And the surmise that Blunt would have been the drummer may be misplaced, if for example, Chris left in '64, when Tony actually did. We have no idea who (or how good) Curtis' relacement would've/ could've been (a Dave Clark wannabe?). In '64, they might have considered a hometown boy-say Pete Best.You are right, though. It would have been a much different, and possibly even more successful, band.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Mon Nov 08, 2004 1:48 pm

If's are always interesting, the observation I would make is that 18 month after TJ left the Searchers chart career in terms of top 20 records was over, 12 month later it was over totally. After three number one's and a number two it must have surprised them that Some day we're gonna love agin failed to amke the top 10. Perhaps if TJ had still been in the band thay would have resorted back for the next single to his lead vocals.

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 2:55 am

Very good point Roy. A great retrospective comment. I think it very likely that producers and group members would have asked "Hey what about another one by Tony." Surely, the success of "Love Potion Number 9" would have also raised a few eyebrows.

As dysfunctional as things were for The Searchers with both Curtis and Jackson in the same band, it did provide the group with some depth and options that were not available after Jackson's departure.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:23 am

Some would make the point Peter that the actual next single after "Someday" was "When You Walk In The Room" a number as synomonous with the band as Needles and Pins, but apart from Goodbye My Love they never reached the top 10 again.

You make a very astute observation with regard to Love Potion Number Nine, which mad number 3 in the states in December 64 but TJ left in July 64, so in my view they were not able to capitalise on it's success, as their sound in respect of that song would be different.

I beleive with the failure of When I get Home TJ would have certainly been restored to lead vocal on the next single and next album for that matter. But then again it could be rightly pointed out that TJ did not acieve success in his own right.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 11:00 am

Can i make another "heretic" suggestion? It is often mentioned that Chris Curtis had a huge support from Tony Hatch... so what if the latter split with the band? In that case, Curtis wouldn't have the support needed to "suppress" the others and the story might have been a lot different... but that's another story...
As i see it, if Curtis was the first to leave, a) the band could've been more democratic; b) the other band members'd possible start writing something of their own (they'd HAVE to); c) could be that Mike Pender would leave in a couple of years not satisfied with Tony's domination as "front man".
But i'd rather doubt, as John has already pointed out, that Blunt would be a replacement for Curtis in this case. In 1964, if i'm not mistaken, he was about 15 and i don't think his mum would let him start a career of a 'rock star'...

admin · Post by **admin** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 9:10 am

Sheena, you have presented a number of interesting hypotheses.

First, with regard to Tony Hatch, as talented as he may have been he did not seem to be right for The Searchers. They probably would have been a very different band under Epstein, had he succeeded in wooing them, especially had George Martin also been pajrt of the picture.

Chris did write some interesting tunes, however, none of them were hits and as such I would not attribute the bands success to his compositional skills. Mike Pender has gone on record as acknowledging that "we weren't very good at it" when it comes to song writing.

I think Mike Pender would have seen that Tony Jackson had much to offer the group and he has also said that he shared the singing responsibilites with Tony and that this was acceptible at the time. I think it likely that Tony and Mike would have learned to live with one anothers talents. I am still of the opinion that Tony left largely due to problems with Chris rather than with the band per se.

Johnny Blunt was indeed too young to make it work. He was of a different generation and did not seem to fit in from the beginning. I would very much like to hear his comments, but attempts I have made to contact him have not been successful.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:02 am

Not totally correct Peter, He's Got No Love written by Pender and Curtis was a hit, albeit only reached number 12 in UK.

The tension almost certainly was between Jackson and Curtis. I believe Pender and McNally would have been happy for Jackson to remain.

However in the scenarion we discuss here TJ would not in my view have lasted long once the band became a permanent feature on the cabaret scene. Frank Allen's temperement was far more suited to the band then.The endless social clubs and dodgy venues the band played in the 70's would have disillusioned TJ.

admin · Post by **admin** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 12:39 pm

I stand corrected Roy. Your point is well made. However, as a quick cover and perhaps a hair-splitting response, my definition of a hit is a song that most listeners of the time would recognize as a hit even though it may not have been performed by a group that they favoured.

You are in the UK, and would be better able to judge than I, however, how many folks on the street would today can identify He's Got No Love" as a hit?

I still agree with Pender who did not consider himself as a good song writer. Curts, by his own admission reworked the Stones' hit "Last Time" in arriving at this number 12 song. "Last Time" was a hit in my books. While we are on the subject of Curtis' compositions, I found "I Pretend I'm With You" to be as strong as any of his songs and have always been surprised that it did not do as well as many of the songs of this period.

I agree that TJ would have taken a quick exit from the Cabaret scene, however, had he stayed they might not have needed to go on this circuit at all.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:19 am

Personally i think, when Pender speaks about their songwriting skills as being not good at all, he'd better speak for himself. I don't mean there was any "songwriting genius" in the band but there certainly was something to be developped. A coincidence or what: both Allen and McNally, who had "sponcored" the band with some worthy tunes, claimed that it was a shame they didn't try to concentrate more on creating something of their own? However, the scenario we're discussing now, doesn't involve Frank Allen...
What seems really enigmatic to me, is that apart from Curtis and Jackson, there were two more "boys" in the band who probably weren't really endorsing Jackson leaving. Even if we let alone McNally whose word maybe didn't mean anything at the time, there was Pender who had a higher profile and who is said to be good friends with Tony. It is not my business, of course, but why on earth didn't he give a support to his good friend?..

admin · Post by **admin** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:19 am

A very good question concerning Tony's leaving and perhaps a lack of support from Mike.

I can tell you that when I spoke to Tony Jackson about this situation he made a number of interesting comments.

To begin, he indicated that he and Mike were close and that he did not blame him at all for the situation. In fact, Mike Pender asked Tony to join MIKE PENDER'S SEARCHERS in 1985 and there are promo photos to back up this statement.

Moreover, Jackson put the cicumstances of his departure on the shoulders of Chris Curtis and not Tony Hatch and the decision to use Mike as lead on Needles and Pins and other songs. Chris wanted Frank in the band and was relentless in this wish.

Finally, Tony also told me at this point that he was totally fed up with Chris Curtis and that there was a part of him that wished to leave as well.

To my way of thinking, the climate was so tense that it was a bitter sweet departure, sad but a sense of relief that there would be some peace.

This peace was not to last, however, as Chris Curtis' emotions and personal feelings would eventually make it impossible for him to cope with the stress of performing, as we can see from Frank Allen's account of the Australian Tour.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:54 am

I believe Mike asking Tony to be in MP's Searchers was purely a business and some may say cynical move, he would rightly have been able to claim that his band had two orginal's from the line -up that had the very big hits. They could not agree on finance arangements as I understand it. As for He's Got No Love, yes few would recall it even in UK. I Pretend I'm With You" was the "b" side to "Don't Throw Your Love Away" so as such would never get promoted, probably a wasted opportunity because it was a stronger song than "Some Day We're Gonna Love Again".

admin · Post by **admin** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 3:19 am

Roy: An interesting perspective with regard to Mike Pender's offer that I have not considered. Not as altruistic as it might first appear perhaps.

I agree a wasted opportunity to promote a Curtis song. The famous "B" side outcome. While we are on the subject, were The Beatles the first group to have recognition of B sides that rivaled their A sides?

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Sat Nov 13, 2004 4:37 am

In my view no Cliff Richard and The Shadows had some singles where the "B"Side was as popular as perhaps the "A" side.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun Nov 14, 2004 2:34 am

Thanks for this observation Roy and the added bonus of letting me know that the Ventures covering "Cry For A Shadow." The Ventures play Beatle instrumentals. Who would have expected this?