Paul H posted:
BRANDO BRANDT posted:
So the idea that bands are simply in it for the love of music is very romantic but also naive. 

Make no mistake, Neil and Nick are (and deserve to be) looking to maximize the exposure and profit of their next project (whatever it may be).

Why shouldn’t they call it Crowded House? Why shouldn’t they be allowed to attempt to reach new audiences and achieve higher levels of commercial and critical success?

I find it funny how some fans become Uber-Purists who believe they know more and better, than the actual artists who’s  work they so passionately adore.

Personally, I don't see it as "knowing more" or being naive. Music is a commodity, but it also has the capacity to stir emotions. It isn't just product. And I think its mildly patronising to those who invested their emotions heavily in the work of any band to call them naive when they complain at how that band's reputation is being used.

I don't know the legal side of things. I strongly suspect that once Capitol's original deal with Crowded House (to which Neil, Paul and Nick were signatories) ended, Neil took sole ownership of the band name. As a result, I suspect that anyone (including Nick) is now merely a salaried employee of Neil's. In that situation, it's clearly Neil's call as to who is in (or out) of CH.

But there's a wider point here: CH generated a massive amount of goodwill among its fanbase. Goodwill that has sustained Neil's solo career far longer than that of many of his contemporaries. And that goodwill was generated as much by the personality and musical ability of the other members of CH as it was by Neil and his songwriting. Neil acknowledged that back in 1998 when he refused to continue to use the band name for his solo work. It was something I was immensely grateful to him for doing, because it also acknowledged the he was aware of the emotional connection the band had made with people like me.

His decision to release Time on Earth as a CH album and now his decision to just jettison MH suggests to me that Neil has long since disregarded the special connection he, Nick, Paul and Mark made with their fanbase. And that saddens me.

Of course, from a practical point of view, I'm not sure what else he can do. If he wants to work with Nick, his choice is to either rehearse a show's worth of material that will be new to Nick (and which, of course, Neil quite publicly chose not to work with him on in the first place) or rehearse and play CH songs. And if Neil and Nick are on stage playing CH songs, well, it would be bizarre not to bill the band as CH...

 

Why bother calling it Crowded House then ?

I think the idea of Crowded House being a band (they way some here think of it) ended in 1996. The reality is that perhaps Mark and Matt were both salaried members who do not have the same level of control that say Neil and Nick have. 

I'd have been very happy for Crowded House to be Neil, Nick, Mark and Matt but am happier that an iteration of Crowded House that has Neil and Nick will be performing next year and that is something to be looking forward to and excited about.

Mark's message was clear that he had been told that he was not going to be part of the next phase. He seemed gracious and appreciative and offered a nice message. Neil equally described Mark the other night as a good friend. For me there is nothing more to say based on what we have been told.

Why do we need to know what else may or may not be happening or what may or may not have been said? Its easy to think badly of something or look for the negative side of things but we probably don't know what had gone on or the conversations that arrived at the announcements.

Looking forward to plenty in 2020 from Crowded House; Neil, Nick, Mitchell and whoever else is involved. 

 

 

 

 

Monsieur Nick posted:

I think the idea of Crowded House being a band (they way some here think of it) ended in 1996. The reality is that perhaps Mark and Matt were both salaried members who do not have the same level of control that say Neil and Nick have. 

I'd have been very happy for Crowded House to be Neil, Nick, Mark and Matt but am happier that an iteration of Crowded House that has Neil and Nick will be performing next year and that is something to be looking forward to and excited about.

Mark's message was clear that he had been told that he was not going to be part of the next phase. He seemed gracious and appreciative and offered a nice message. Neil equally described Mark the other night as a good friend. For me there is nothing more to say based on what we have been told.

Why do we need to know what else may or may not be happening or what may or may not have been said? Its easy to think badly of something or look for the negative side of things but we probably don't know what had gone on or the conversations that arrived at the announcements.

Looking forward to plenty in 2020 from Crowded House; Neil, Nick, Mitchell and whoever else is involved. 

 

 

 

 

Mark was not happy at all , but what was he supposed to say ?! He’s a very decent man after all . 

You are entitled to your opinion , but if this notion that Mark is ok with this  is making Neil’s plans sit with you easier , then I think you are sadly mistaken . 

stuartjb posted:
Monsieur Nick posted:

I think the idea of Crowded House being a band (they way some here think of it) ended in 1996. The reality is that perhaps Mark and Matt were both salaried members who do not have the same level of control that say Neil and Nick have. 

I'd have been very happy for Crowded House to be Neil, Nick, Mark and Matt but am happier that an iteration of Crowded House that has Neil and Nick will be performing next year and that is something to be looking forward to and excited about.

Mark's message was clear that he had been told that he was not going to be part of the next phase. He seemed gracious and appreciative and offered a nice message. Neil equally described Mark the other night as a good friend. For me there is nothing more to say based on what we have been told.

Why do we need to know what else may or may not be happening or what may or may not have been said? Its easy to think badly of something or look for the negative side of things but we probably don't know what had gone on or the conversations that arrived at the announcements.

Looking forward to plenty in 2020 from Crowded House; Neil, Nick, Mitchell and whoever else is involved. 

 

 

 

 

Mark was not happy at all , but what was he supposed to say ?! He’s a very decent man after all . 

You are entitled to your opinion , but if this notion that Mark is ok with this  is making Neil’s plans sit with you easier , then I think you are sadly mistaken . 

What makes you think Mark was unhappy? I'm not saying he was happy, I'm just saying there's nothing to be read for or against in the tweet.

It's hard to imagine CH, especially live, without Mark but let's not be under any illusions CH is anything other than Neil's band.

Personally I just hope it doesn't turn into another Finn family project. I'm sure it's all nice and lovely for Neil to record and tour with his wife & kids but Neil hasn't made a decent album since he started getting the family involved in literally everything.

Stuart "Mark was not happy at all , but what was he supposed to say ?! He’s a very decent man after all . 

You are entitled to your opinion , but if this notion that Mark is ok with this  is making Neil’s plans sit with you easier , then I think you are sadly mistaken."

 

Stuart, 

Unless you know Mark personally (and I welcome being corrected), he has not expressed his feelings other than to wish everyone well. I am not going to look for or guess at a hidden meaning in the tweet... I mean do the 1st letters in each sentence spell out a secret message that only you can see?

We would all have probably preferred for Mark to be involved but it is nothing to do with us. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that privately that Mark is maybe disappointed with the decision but equally not surprised as he has more class than to throw a tantrum about it, you can do that for him.

What is clear is that you personally are not happy about this. You will have the opportunity to Skype Neil in the coming days or weeks and ask Neil directly the wheres and the whys if you have the bottle to do this.

For most of us, there will be a Crowded House to get behind and look forward to it. In reality, I am glad Neil has got Crowded House off the blocks and it all sits very nicely with me.

 

Monsieur Nick posted:

 

For most of us, there will be a Crowded House to get behind and look forward to it. 

“For most of us,” really?  That’s not what I’m seeing from posts both here and elsewhere.

I always look forward to new music from Neil, but a new band without a sacked Mark Hart should not be called Crowded House.  I don’t get behind that at all.

Sorry but Crowded House existed before Mark and is going to after this. He may well roll up on a record in the future. This is Crowded House. How many writing credits does Mark actually have? 

Many people have spoken about Together Alone and Mark's contribution here but what I have read and heard about Together Alone is that it was a time of great change within the band. TA is pretty much down to Neil, he wrote the songs, he found the place to record, he figured out who the producer should be. It was Neil (and family) who had decided to return to New Zealand as it was felt to be inspiring, home and they wanted to be there. This was his idea; he felt it was a good moment to call Mark more formally into the band. 

What do people think Mark has actually been doing for the last 10 years? He has a life, other projects and in the last decade, there has only been at best 6 weeks of Crowded House (in 2016 perhaps, rehearsing and readying for the Sydney shows). 

For me, I think both Mark and Matt are replaceable members of Crowded House probably as they are not original members. Thats for me anyway what makes it still Crowded House. To be honest, with Mitchell Froome being involved, he feels 'more crowded house' than either Mark or Matt. Personally, am hoping Liam is also involved next year, he is a great musician and has a great stage charm and presence. Things change and that is a nice thing, not something to be so upset about!

IainK posted:

It's hard to imagine CH, especially live, without Mark but let's not be under any illusions CH is anything other than Neil's band.

Personally I just hope it doesn't turn into another Finn family project. I'm sure it's all nice and lovely for Neil to record and tour with his wife & kids but Neil hasn't made a decent album since he started getting the family involved in literally everything.

Re his family involvement , I think you are about to be dissapointed . 

Monsieur Nick posted:

Stuart "Mark was not happy at all , but what was he supposed to say ?! He’s a very decent man after all . 

You are entitled to your opinion , but if this notion that Mark is ok with this  is making Neil’s plans sit with you easier , then I think you are sadly mistaken."

 

Stuart, 

Unless you know Mark personally (and I welcome being corrected), he has not expressed his feelings other than to wish everyone well. I am not going to look for or guess at a hidden meaning in the tweet... I mean do the 1st letters in each sentence spell out a secret message that only you can see?

We would all have probably preferred for Mark to be involved but it is nothing to do with us. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that privately that Mark is maybe disappointed with the decision but equally not surprised as he has more class than to throw a tantrum about it, you can do that for him.

What is clear is that you personally are not happy about this. You will have the opportunity to Skype Neil in the coming days or weeks and ask Neil directly the wheres and the whys if you have the bottle to do this.

For most of us, there will be a Crowded House to get behind and look forward to it. In reality, I am glad Neil has got Crowded House off the blocks and it all sits very nicely with me.

 

Re my comment about how Mark feels , I’m happy to stand by what I said . 

The Pineapple Head posted:
stuartjb posted:
Monsieur Nick posted:

I think the idea of Crowded House being a band (they way some here think of it) ended in 1996. The reality is that perhaps Mark and Matt were both salaried members who do not have the same level of control that say Neil and Nick have. 

I'd have been very happy for Crowded House to be Neil, Nick, Mark and Matt but am happier that an iteration of Crowded House that has Neil and Nick will be performing next year and that is something to be looking forward to and excited about.

Mark's message was clear that he had been told that he was not going to be part of the next phase. He seemed gracious and appreciative and offered a nice message. Neil equally described Mark the other night as a good friend. For me there is nothing more to say based on what we have been told.

Why do we need to know what else may or may not be happening or what may or may not have been said? Its easy to think badly of something or look for the negative side of things but we probably don't know what had gone on or the conversations that arrived at the announcements.

Looking forward to plenty in 2020 from Crowded House; Neil, Nick, Mitchell and whoever else is involved. 

 

 

 

 

Mark was not happy at all , but what was he supposed to say ?! He’s a very decent man after all . 

You are entitled to your opinion , but if this notion that Mark is ok with this  is making Neil’s plans sit with you easier , then I think you are sadly mistaken . 

What makes you think Mark was unhappy? I'm not saying he was happy, I'm just saying there's nothing to be read for or against in the tweet.

Would you be happy in Marks Shoes ?! 

He has too much class to make anything other than a dignified statement . I stand by what I said . 

 

Just to quote Mark's tweet;

"Hello All, I feel it’s time to let you all know that Neil has informed me that I will not be a part of the band’s new lineup. Being a part of Crowded House for 30 years was a pleasure and a privilege. I wish them well and hope you all enjoy the new band".

To re-iterate, there may be more to this. There might be details we are not privy to and don't need to know - If that is the case and who knows, they are none of our business. It may also be that this is nothing more than an ambition to just do something different. 

If I was Mark, I could imagine he may be disappointed, I could equally imagine that he might be glad to have been involved as he said and life will carry on happily. It really is between him and Neil and Nick. 

Just to be clear; I am happy and looking forward to a new iteration of Crowded House that contains the 2 remaining founder members and their producer. I welcome new participants who will help present Crowded House in 2020. I hope Liam will have a part in this as well.

I'm not in Mark's shoes so its kind of irrelevant. 

If you are not happy with what has happened to Mark, you can Skype Fangradio and ask Neil directly; why not do that? 

If I ring Fangradio, I will tell Neil how much I am looking forward to the possibility of Crowded House and hoping for shows in the UK!

Would you boycott seeing Crowded House over Mark not being part of the show? 

I myself would not boycott them. I'm too curious where this is going.

If we're interpreting tweets can I throw in Peter Green's? "Nice to hear from NF today, as always." My first reaction was "oh, so it can't be that bad". But maybe I'm wrong. 

The Pineapple Head posted:

I predict that this will be an evolution of Crowdies 2.0, which was an evolution of Crowdies 1.0. Which I'm fine with.

The new lineup is actually more like Crowded House 7 --

1. pre-record deal with w/Craig Hooper

2. original album lineup

3. Tim joins

4. Tim leaves, Mark joins

5. Paul leaves, Peter Jones joins

6. Time on Earth lineup

7. whatever's happening now

Versions 2 and 4 tend to overshadow most of the rest for me, and many here seem to feel the same way.  But that requires you to conveniently forget how many changes there have really been.  I'm sorry to see Mark go, but I'm excited for whatever the new incarnation will be and it's not at all out of character for the band's history.

 

To me, the difference here is that - while all of those earlier changes were organic; that is, individual members chose to leave - in this case it appears that Neil has decided to force a change for change's sake. 

It occurred to me that, while rationally there is no reason why this would not be a legitimate move - I'd have accepted it more willingly had Mark chosen to leave - it comes down to my own view of what constitutes Crowded House. For the first three albums, it had a core of three members. When Paul chose to leave, in my mind the core three-man membership changed but remained a three-man core.

It would seem that, in Neil's mind, it didn't. It became a two-man core. That would also explain why he was happy for Time on Earth to be branded as a CH record (although it doesn't explain why it wasn't considered as such from the get-go and only became a CH album when Neil decided to reform the band by inviting Mark back!). Of course, Neil is human and can change his mind or hold contradictory views.

My only frustration in all of this is that it seems to take us ever further away from Neil's original intention of being respectful to the legacy of the band as it had been at the time it was first dissolved. Otherwise, Neil might as well have kept the name on for all his post-TA work.

Paul H posted:

To me, the difference here is that - while all of those earlier changes were organic; that is, individual members chose to leave - in this case it appears that Neil has decided to force a change for change's sake. 

It occurred to me that, while rationally there is no reason why this would not be a legitimate move - I'd have accepted it more willingly had Mark chosen to leave - it comes down to my own view of what constitutes Crowded House. For the first three albums, it had a core of three members. When Paul chose to leave, in my mind the core three-man membership changed but remained a three-man core.

It would seem that, in Neil's mind, it didn't. It became a two-man core. That would also explain why he was happy for Time on Earth to be branded as a CH record (although it doesn't explain why it wasn't considered as such from the get-go and only became a CH album when Neil decided to reform the band by inviting Mark back!). Of course, Neil is human and can change his mind or hold contradictory views.

My only frustration in all of this is that it seems to take us ever further away from Neil's original intention of being respectful to the legacy of the band as it had been at the time it was first dissolved. Otherwise, Neil might as well have kept the name on for all his post-TA work.

This in an absolute nutshell . 

Carefull saying this on any of the Finn facebook pages ! At best many just wont get it . At worst they’ll hurl childish insults at you ...

 

 

I've been thinking about this the last day or so and can sum up my thoughts accordingly: i strongly disagree with the decision, but it's Neil's band in much the same way another band leader like Tony Iommi, Lemmy Kilmister, Nick Cave, Billy Corgan, or Anthony Kiedis can decide to push forward with or without certain members. 

Yes, I know I have cited musical examples that are mostly worlds apart from Crowded House, but they are the most fitting examples by  comparison in terms of band structure. I've purposely avoided examples that are more sonically comparable examples because the ones I had in mind don't quite structurally compare.

Point being, it's his baby irrespective of how I feel. 

Why do I think it happened? I don't think it's personal. Not at all. 

I have a feeling it either came down to money (as it does with MANY bands), creative reasons (not sure what but...the fact Mark is being replaced with another musician allows for this possibility) or geographical logistics. 

Regarding the latter; yes, I know Nick lives in Ireland but i'd say he travels out to Australia and NZ more often than Mark or Matt. I remember Neil tweeting a long while back where he wished the guys lived closer so he could work with them more often. Perhaps Neil has found a way for CH to be more of a regularity by replacing a musician who may have less qualms with long distance travel even for short stints. Perhaps he wanted someone who could answer the call on demand where Mark was unable to this time around and Neil felt this could be an issue moving forward on a more regular basis. Keeping in mind, the poster for Blues Fest have Crowded House's appearance being billed as "Exclusive Australian Performances" below their name in brackets. Maybe Mark just couldn't make the gig and Neil needed a musician but didn't want to risk Mark not being available in 2021? 

Again, all speculation on my part. Either way, it's very sad news for me as Private Universe and Fingers Of Love ALWAYS sounded its best when performed with Crowded House. Yes, Mark's presence were a significant part of why these two particular tracks resonated in a live setting. 

 

Matt's role has had no confirmation. 

I think some have surmised that Matt won't be there on the basis that Neil said, during his podcast, that he looks forward to working with Nick. 

Meanwhile...I suppose you could say Matt's silence is deafening but, at the same time, I don't think he's one to really stay afloat on social networking media. I remember, after Intriguer, some had speculated he was out of the band because of how quiet he is on Social Media. 

Until you hear otherwise, Matt is still in the band and he's been silent many a time before now. 

Whysus posted:

The more I think about this, the more I think there has to be something more going on. It makes no sense to dismiss Mark and replace him with Mitchell Froom. Froom is first and foremost a producer, not a band member (particularly for a one off concert).

You wouldn’t specifically bring Froom in for a live performance ahead of Mark. It makes no sense unless Neil had already planned to be doing something with Froom at that time. 

(Wild speculation time again) That makes me think that there may be a Froom produced Crowded House album planned. We already know that Froom doesn’t consider Mark to be a key ingredient to the classic CH sound. He didn’t want him for Woodface and then reduced his involvement in the Recurring Dream tracks. 

Maybe Neil and Froom got discussing the prospect of working together on a new CH album (potentially after a planned FM one with Froom fell through again). Froom once again told Neil that he didn’t see Mark being required. Mark either needs to be 100% in the band, or out altogether - you can’t deny him being an active participant in a new album then just roll him out for concerts. Neil could of said that if Froom wanted Mark out for the album then he would have to replace Mark on live performances himself.

Again, just speculation... But it is hard to make sense of this.

This does raise an interesting question though, who is more important to the essence of Crowded House - Hart or Froom?

Froom was largely responsible for shaping the original CH sound (going back to StuartJB’s Beatles analogy - he was the George Martin) with the first 3 albums. 

Hart became a full member for Together Alone onwards when Froom has no involvement.

It’s seems that you can either have Hart or Froom involved with CH but not both for whatever reason (I am guessing, creative differences). It looks like Neil has gone with Froom.

Again, this makes no sense unless there is an album at play. If Neil and Nick wanted to perform together and bill it as CH without getting Mark and Matt onboard, Neil could have grabbed Eddie Rayner, Elroy or any number of others who have been in or around CH in the past and who would be in the Southern Hemisphere at the time. 

I am still confused by it and just trying to make some sense. It is one thing to play with Nick for a gig in Aussie, call it CH, not include the guys who weren’t part of the original band and grab some fill ins (be it family or friends), but it is another thing to fly in a Producer from America who was so instrumental in the first 3 albums, and have him play the gig at the expense of the guy who he doesn’t rate, despite being an integral member since 1993.

I can only see the logic if there is a new Mitchell Froom produced album on the horizon.

From all wild guesses, imaginations, predictions, this sound most logic for me.. I can go with that..question really is - who is more important for sound of CH in 2020s, Froom or Mark? To be honest, Marks magic didnt sparkle at all on 4 songs on TOE (tnx to so-so production of S. Lillywhite), and almost didnt sparkle on Intriguer, again because of production... on the other hand, live perfomances of Either side of the World showed Marks magic exactly like I/we have loved it.. Froom is now in his 60s, if I am correct, and dont blame me for "ageism", but I am not sure that producer in this stage of life could give some new/old/new sound to the band...we ll see what ll become of all of that, if there will be anything exept this one concert.. but, still very sory for Mark been sacked, and because his words on twitter sounded like farewell to CH for all, not just for this one stand... 

In early 1989, after a tour of Australia and Canada, Finn fired Seymour from Crowded House. According to music journalist, Ed Nimmervoll, Seymour's departure was due to Finn blaming him for causing the latter's writer's block. However Finn cited "artistic differences" as the reason. Seymour said that after a month apart, he contacted Finn and they agreed that he would return to the band. He subsequently stayed with the group until their disbandment in 1996.

I was saddened to hear the news today. Although there have been line up changes along the way, Crowded House has always felt more than Neil Finn + invited session musicians. If it's a one off date, maybe it doesn't make sense for Mark to be involved (didn't some reunion Split Enz gigs not involve Nigel Griggs?).

Also, another of my favourite bands are Squeeze. They've had more line up changes then Enz and House combined. Even since they reformed in 2007, two bass players have been and gone (one of them being from the classic 1979 - 82 line up).

The latest version touring the States at the moment has morphed to a 7 piece, complete with percussionist and lap steel player. The tour is getting rave reviews and it very much still is Squeeze. So maybe too early to write off Crowded House mk whatever number this is yet.

Of course very sad for and will miss Mark Hart being part of it.

Very, very sad about this. I love Mark's playing and the contributions he has made, particularly to live performances.

I totally get that it's Neil's band at the end of the day, but I echo others when I say that I always thought the alchemy of Crowded House was something special, something beyond Neil + session players. I say that as someone who's seen Neil perform live in every incarnation of his career. 

I'll refrain from further speculation until we know the full picture, but it is something of a sucker punch. Excited that it looks like there's upcoming CH activity, but also a little sad. 

In one of Neil's recent newsletters he referred to Crowded House as a "brand" rather than a band. I had assumed it was a typo, but clearly it wasn't.  

Bevster posted:

Very, very sad about this. I love Mark's playing and the contributions he has made, particularly to live performances.

I totally get that it's Neil's band at the end of the day, but I echo others when I say that I always thought the alchemy of Crowded House was something special, something beyond Neil + session players. I say that as someone who's seen Neil perform live in every incarnation of his career. 

I'll refrain from further speculation until we know the full picture, but it is something of a sucker punch. Excited that it looks like there's upcoming CH activity, but also a little sad. 

In one of Neil's recent newsletters he referred to Crowded House as a "brand" rather than a band. I had assumed it was a typo, but clearly it wasn't.  

Sums it up perfectly for me

Neil seems to have changed his tune .

slowpogo posted:

It’s a little confusing how Neil says on Fangradio that Mark “will not be joining us for these shows.” That seems like an intentionally open-ended phrasing. Maybe he’s just being oblique out of politeness, rather than bluntly saying “I’ve sacked him.” It’s just a notable contrast from Mark’s posting which really seems like he’s out of the band for good.

I’m really disappointed to hear this, in any case. Mark is great and a huge part of the CH story. I just hope he’s not going to fill parts in with Liam and Elroy...no offense to them, they’re really solid and talented. It just seems like CH is the last of Neil’s projects to be a distinct entity from his family (I know Liam has played with them but it was as a utility guy) and I hope that remains true.

I think you will be proved right , and I completley agree with all you have said .

As it says above, if its Neil, Nick and mum on bongo's its still Crowded House. 

I am appreciative of Mark and his part in the band, Matt too; I was particularly keen on the era of Crowded House 2007+ but am open minded to a Crowded House 2020+. 

I understand all that people say about bands but Crowded House probably stopped being that sort of band in 1996. As others have mentioned, there are lots of other bands that operate with founder members and interchanging support members. 

As for 2020, I am hoping I will be able to see Crowded House with 2 of the 3 original members. I look forward to new players bringing something different to the show.

Does anyone plan to boycott the shows because Mark isn't going to be there?

IMO - any version of Crowded House in 2020 is better than NO version of Crowded House in 2020.

Respectfully to everyone who's played a part (big or small) in the story of Crowded House (and there are so many great people who sadly won't show up in the next chapter),  I'm very excited ... then again I'm a 'Glass Half Full Person'.

Too much negative in the world; let's enjoy happiness and if you cant (some people are wired differently) then don't ruin it for the rest of us.

 

BRANDO BRANDT posted:

IMO - any version of Crowded House in 2020 is better than NO version of Crowded House in 2020.

Respectfully to everyone who's played a part (big or small) in the story of Crowded House (and there are so many great people who sadly won't show up in the next chapter),  I'm very excited ... then again I'm a 'Glass Half Full Person'.

Too much negative in the world; let's enjoy happiness and if you cant (some people are wired differently) then don't ruin it for the rest of us.

 

Exactly my opinion. 

Very well said Brando Brandt. 

I am sorry that Mark isn't going to be involved. I was probably a late fan to Together Alone. I missed Crowded House first time around, have heard the joy of the live shows from those days but the 2007+ version of the band is the one I know. 

A 3rd era of the band is very welcome to me. The thing that piqued my interest was Neil saying there would be several things happening next year; there have been rumours of a new Finn Brothers record floating around as well but as is often the way, things just come out of the blue which is nice.

I hope Neil has songs and ideas ready for a re-booted Crowded House that take the sound into new and curious places. Neil has taken plenty of risks and tried lots of things with his recent records (Pajama Club, Dizzy Heights, Out of Silence and Light Sleeper); I think he is as creative as he has ever been and look forward to what comes next. 

 

Monsieur Nick posted:

As it says above, if its Neil, Nick and mum on bongo's its still Crowded House. 

I am appreciative of Mark and his part in the band, Matt too; I was particularly keen on the era of Crowded House 2007+ but am open minded to a Crowded House 2020+. 

I understand all that people say about bands but Crowded House probably stopped being that sort of band in 1996. As others have mentioned, there are lots of other bands that operate with founder members and interchanging support members. 

As for 2020, I am hoping I will be able to see Crowded House with 2 of the 3 original members. I look forward to new players bringing something different to the show.

Does anyone plan to boycott the shows because Mark isn't going to be there?

I won’t boycott anything , even though I feel disappointed about mark . I don’t think it “ stopped being that type of band “ in 1996 . In 2007 it was The same band that recorded Together Alone - but they needed a new drummer . That line up lasted till 2016 .

They don’t need to replace Mark now - but they are going to . 

If the songs are going to be played with the mindset of 'This is Crowded House' rather than just as 'Songs of Crowded House played by Neil + Others including Nick', then I think that we are very lucky.

I thoroughly enjoyed the November 2016 Sydney gigs because the band sounded fresh and vital when the 4 of them were together...it reminded me of seeing the band in March '92 when Mark had replaced Tim; the songs were breathing their own lives with each performance. Beautiful songs outlast the life of any band, and Crowded House has a surplus that is the envy of so many musicians (why are there so many tribute bands plugging the holes in venues these days?). This is not to distract from Mark's role or Neil's decision; they'll talk more when they're ready...the dark horse in all of this (for me) is Nick Seymour.

Nick's style and approach is the glue between Neil and everyone who has been in the band in my very humble opinion. The 7 deluxe sets highlight this in spades. Neil is exacting and very particular about who he works with over a long period of time; Nick outlasts just about everyone in this regard. Neil's current international profile will undoubtably reflect well in terms of timing the return of Crowded House; while I'm saddened that Mark won't appear at Byron Bay, I'd prefer to wait until further insights are shared IF it's appropriate for the public to know.

I don't think that Mark can be replaced when considering his harmonies, lap steel, keyboards, guitars, and harmonica prowess....a new musician will have to carve their own niche. I am however intrigued and very hopeful that Crowded House will outlast a temporary visit next year.

 

 

Alphonse posted:

If the songs are going to be played with the mindset of 'This is Crowded House' rather than just as 'Songs of Crowded House played by Neil + Others including Nick', then I think that we are very lucky.

I thoroughly enjoyed the November 2016 Sydney gigs because the band sounded fresh and vital when the 4 of them were together...it reminded me of seeing the band in March '92 when Mark had replaced Tim; the songs were breathing their own lives with each performance. Beautiful songs outlast the life of any band, and Crowded House has a surplus that is the envy of so many musicians (why are there so many tribute bands plugging the holes in venues these days?). This is not to distract from Mark's role or Neil's decision; they'll talk more when they're ready...the dark horse in all of this (for me) is Nick Seymour.

Nick's style and approach is the glue between Neil and everyone who has been in the band in my very humble opinion. The 7 deluxe sets highlight this in spades. Neil is exacting and very particular about who he works with over a long period of time; Nick outlasts just about everyone in this regard. Neil's current international profile will undoubtably reflect well in terms of timing the return of Crowded House; while I'm saddened that Mark won't appear at Byron Bay, I'd prefer to wait until further insights are shared IF it's appropriate for the public to know.

I don't think that Mark can be replaced when considering his harmonies, lap steel, keyboards, guitars, and harmonica prowess....a new musician will have to carve their own niche. I am however intrigued and very hopeful that Crowded House will outlast a temporary visit next year.

 

 

Neil Sacked Nick in 1989 ...

Add Reply

Likes (2)
Secret God (Stew)brownie
Post
    All times London, UK.

    ©1998-Eternity, Frenz.com. All post content is the copyrighted work of the person who wrote it. Please don't copy, reproduce, or publish anything you see written here without the author's permission.
×
×
×
×
×