| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Joe Morris
Old Love
3491 Posts |
 Posted - 16/08/2009 : 07:16:03
|
are people interested in Love without Arthur?
thoughts anyone?
me, I've seen Love enough times in my life, don't need to see Love again after seeing Forever Changes live. Best show in my life that, at the Warsaw in Brooklyn, tho too many opening bands!! (FOUR!!)
How do other people feel about Love continuing with Echols? Also, do people feel a new Love album would have a chance, especially if David Angel arranges a follow up to Forever Changes (Gethesemene)
|
|
|
Tina
Old Love
United Kingdom
678 Posts |
Posted - 16/08/2009 : 08:42:51
|
Joe, this is a real funny place to start this topic.
I've commented about this subject before and I'm sure people know my views. I've seen Love perform 20 plus times, a couple of those without Arthur there in body and a few others where he was there in body but not in spirit. The music is tremendous, the band is so definitely well worth watching. This is a new incarnation of Love, one with original member Johnny Echols playing a huge part. Go and see them before you write them off.
As to whether they are going to be successful, who knows, it won't be up to the likes of you and me, we're already fans. I really hope that them getting out there and playing this music to a whole new generation of fans who don't have preconceptions about what Love should be like works out for all concerned. |
 |
|
|
admin
Forum Admin
Denmark
40 Posts |
Posted - 16/08/2009 : 13:40:22
|
| moved the topic to the right place |
|
|
|
ruxprncd
Fifth Love
305 Posts |
Posted - 16/08/2009 : 14:44:41
|
Joe, as far as seeing Love...Arthur was a singular talent who can't be replaced, but the current band features great songs played by great musicians, who happen to be great guys. quit yer whinin' already! (just having fun with that last comment :)
As far as a new album 'having a chance'...if you mean number one top of the pops (or anything along those lines), obviously not - Love were never that. Even generating the interest that was there when Arthur got out of prison is very unlikely IMO. However, there's certainly a good chance it will be terrific music (regardless of the name of the band) given the caliber of talent involved. Let's see what happens and judge the music on its merits. |
|
|
|
caryne
Old Love
United Kingdom
1520 Posts |
Posted - 16/08/2009 : 19:42:46
|
| Joe, this really seems to be something you have a real problem about, no one is making you go and see them so I don't see why you have to keep on about it. However, I agree 100% with Tina on this one. I saw Love with Arthur more times than I can count, maybe I should go back in the diaries etc and count them but it was at least thirty times, and I adored seeing Arthur live. The band without Arthur, who I have also seen several times, put on a fanatastic show and I think it is sad for anyone to write them off without even seeing them. |
|
|
|
caryne
Old Love
United Kingdom
1520 Posts |
Posted - 16/08/2009 : 19:44:55
|
| By the way, 'Gethsemene' won't be a 'follow up' to Forever Changes. If it happens it will be, so I understand, a Johnny Echols solo project. |
|
|
|
jazmaan
Fifth Love
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 16/08/2009 : 22:30:07
|
| Is it Love w/o Arthur Lee? Absolutely. Arthur always insisted that the Love band get top billing (as opposed to "Arthur Lee & Love" which he disliked.) He also insisted that whoever made up his current band was "Love." So unless Arthur has a new band on some other planet, Mike, Rusty, Daddio and Johnny are LOVE. |
|
|
|
caryne
Old Love
United Kingdom
1520 Posts |
Posted - 16/08/2009 : 23:48:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by jazmaan
Is it Love w/o Arthur Lee? Absolutely. Arthur always insisted that the Love band get top billing (as opposed to "Arthur Lee & Love" which he disliked.) He also insisted that whoever made up his current band was "Love." So unless Arthur has a new band on some other planet, Mike, Rusty, Daddio and Johnny are LOVE.
Very well put, plus, as I have said so often the 'Baby Lemonade' guys were Love with Arthur for much longer than anyone else so how can they not be 'Love' |
|
|
|
Joe Morris
Old Love
3491 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2009 : 04:27:40
|
I just have a problem with it being Love without Arthur. He is SUCH a vital part of what made that band
Its cool people are going out to see the band but for me I have no interest in seeing them cos they were so good WITH Arthur; for all his flaws and self destructiveness; I can't see them as Love. I wish they wouldn't call it Love even if they have Echols singing.
The Sundazed disc of Love demos isn't out here yet in the US, sadly. Definitely burning that to cdr once it comes out. Wonder what the story is behind that. Arthur doing an acoustic album in the early 1970s - wonder if Five String Serenade is on it (apparently thats been a song Arthur was playing since the late 60s) |
|
|
|
ladylove
Fifth Love
276 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2009 : 05:27:37
|
Reality check, Joe Morris, Arthur Lee is no longer with us. So I guess you would rather watch old performances and listen to the CDs as opposed to supporting the music that he, Johnny and Bryan created. It's your choice.
I find your negativity a real downer, as I'm sure many others do as well. We can't resurrect Mr. Lee, and this is the closest we will get to the original group. Don't forget, Mr. Echols is a co-founder. Some respect is in order.
LOVE and peace,
JJ |
|
|
|
scully
Fourth Love
United Kingdom
217 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2009 : 09:48:58
|
Have to agree with the comments here -- it was Love with Arthur Lee and now it's Love.
Arthur's not here any more and Joe's going to have to find a way to cope, like the rest of us have to :) Maybe go hear the band, see what you think? |
|
|
|
John9
Old Love
United Kingdom
2154 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2009 : 09:52:44
|
| I think that there is room here for both views.......and it is really down to definitions. To some people 'Love' is a name that can be properly applied only to the original group. To others it would also include the lineups that were recording and performing more or less continually from 1968 until 1971, after which of course Arthur Lee went solo. A third school of thought would extend the term 'Love' to any group of musicians that Arthur Lee ever performed or recorded with. According to this standard, Baby Lemonade, in backing Arthur, would be especially deserving of the name because of their length of service and also the superb job they did in helping Arthur to introduce subsequent generations to the legacy. Whether though the present day Johnny Echols/Baby Lemonade lineup can justifiably lay claim to the hallowed title is a question that will obviously divide fans. Personally I would prefer to think of them as a 'Love Celebration'. But when all is said and done,it hardly matters.... these things are merely labels. What is important is that a bunch of gifted musicians will be paying tribute to a musical genius...and in so doing will help to perpetuate his memory well beyond the marker of his years. |
Edited by - John9 on 17/08/2009 09:58:06 |
|
|
|
caryne
Old Love
United Kingdom
1520 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2009 : 12:39:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by John9
I think that there is room here for both views.......and it is really down to definitions. To some people 'Love' is a name that can be properly applied only to the original group. To others it would also include the lineups that were recording and performing more or less continually from 1968 until 1971, after which of course Arthur Lee went solo. A third school of thought would extend the term 'Love' to any group of musicians that Arthur Lee ever performed or recorded with. According to this standard, Baby Lemonade, in backing Arthur, would be especially deserving of the name because of their length of service and also the superb job they did in helping Arthur to introduce subsequent generations to the legacy. Whether though the present day Johnny Echols/Baby Lemonade lineup can justifiably lay claim to the hallowed title is a question that will obviously divide fans. Personally I would prefer to think of them as a 'Love Celebration'. But when all is said and done,it hardly matters.... these things are merely labels. What is important is that a bunch of gifted musicians will be paying tribute to a musical genius...and in so doing will help to perpetuate his memory well beyond the marker of his years.
Of course, Arthur recorded stuff as 'Love' with very many musicians though so how do you define who is 'Love'? To me it seems that Joe thinks 'Love' can only be a band if it has Arthur Lee in it? That's up to him of course but his real 'downer' on the current Love band I find unfathomable especially as he seems to be refusing to see them live to even give them the benefit of the doubt. Also, as also said here, Johnny is with the band and deserves some credit too, he's a great musician and well worth seeing. |
|
|
|
Kula John
Old Love
United Kingdom
756 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2009 : 14:32:12
|
For me this current form of Love is as important as any other. The BL guys were key to Love's revival and if it wasn't for them I'd have never seen Love's music performed right infront of me. Yes, it's still hard to take that we can never see Arthur performing again but surely the fact we can still enjoy his great music performed by some fine musicians and fantastic ambassadors of Love is something we should all be truly grateful for.
Add to that the fact Johnny is still involved, I find it very hard to accept negative comments about the current situation. I saw Love once with Arthur and once without and both gigs were unbelievable. The BL guys seem to care so much about the music we love and as I said before the longer they can keep performing the better.
LONG LIVE 'LOVE'.
This is the time and this is the time and it is time, time, time, time, time, time, time.....
|
|
|
|
caryne
Old Love
United Kingdom
1520 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2009 : 15:06:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Joe Morris
The Sundazed disc of Love demos isn't out here yet in the US, sadly. Definitely burning that to cdr once it comes out. Wonder what the story is behind that. Arthur doing an acoustic album in the early 1970s - wonder if Five String Serenade is on it (apparently thats been a song Arthur was playing since the late 60s)
By the way, I got the Sundazed 7" vinyl of two demos, from the USA, this morning so it certainly must be out over there... |
|
|
|
boombox
Old Love
United Kingdom
548 Posts |
Posted - 17/08/2009 : 17:33:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kula John
For me this current form of Love is as important as any other. The BL guys were key to Love's revival and if it wasn't for them I'd have never seen Love's music performed right infront of me. Yes, it's still hard to take that we can never see Arthur performing again but surely the fact we can still enjoy his great music performed by some fine musicians and fantastic ambassadors of Love is something we should all be truly grateful for.
Add to that the fact Johnny is still involved, I find it very hard to accept negative comments about the current situation. I saw Love once with Arthur and once without and both gigs were unbelievable. The BL guys seem to care so much about the music we love and as I said before the longer they can keep performing the better.
LONG LIVE 'LOVE'.
This is the time and this is the time and it is time, time, time, time, time, time, time.....
Well said!!
As has been said in other posts, Arthur is gone - naysayers get over it. However, the music is, for now, still with us. And if we needed any further justification for Mike, Rusty, Johnny and Co to carry on, see jazmaan's comment! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Is it Love without Arthurly?
