Did David Crosby and Graham Nash louse up Stephen Stills' career?

He did after first contributing to a Byrds reunion album.

 

Not as much as the ginormous amounts of cocaine did.

 

About a year after...

Manassas 2 and Byrds reunion album both came out early 73

SHF came out sometime in 74

 

I like them both but I think I like the second one a little better.

 

I think that did ginormous damage. Hard to rage that hard and not see results. That was kind of my point about CSNY, they got so big that it messed them all up for life in some ways.

 

Bolivian Marching Powder

 

Who wrote the song that will stand out above all the others in CSNY?

Stills. "For What It's Worth".

 

Yeah, but Neil has lots more bad stuff than Stills

 

This is very true. It inflated their egos but at the same time made it difficult for them to live up to unreal expectations.

Also they started to think every thought and opinion they had was quite precious and important and a lot of the songs (Nash and Crosby in particular) suffered from a sense of certainty and a simplification of life that bored the crap out of me, at least.

Too much success ain't good for the soul, and as CSN(Y) they were almost instantly appointed as heirs to the Beatles.

 

On the debut, while Stills plays every instrument but drums somewhere on the album, he does not do so on every track. I am not sure he is even on Guinnevere.

 

Suite: Judy Blue Eyes is the one. Find For What It's Worth to be a little boring.

 

I strongly disagree. There is at least an album worth of material by members of CSN I prefer. And another album worth by Young.

I'd say Suite Judy Blue Eyes is Stills' best work. And it would not be half of what it is without Crosby and Nash. He did not dictate their harmony vocal lines. I'd say Stills' second best is Helplessly Hoping.

 

When music historians look back at the 1960s and 1970s, it will be "For What It's Worth" that stands-out as a social protest commentary/anthem. Similarly, Neil's "Ohio" will also lay claim to that.

 

Also kind of average from a melodic, rhythmic and harmonic perspective.

I grant you that it is better than all but a few 60s political tunes, but that is a pretty low bar IMO.

 

Stills and Young each recognized the need to decisively break with their California rock foundations in 1977 - Young went toward Punk and Grunge with Rust Never Sleeps and Stills went toward disco with Thoroughfare Gap.

Neil's album is great but overrated - I think "Welfare Mothers" is one of the worst songs ever (I know, it's ironic) and "Sedan Delivery" is not far behind.

Stills' album is good but underrated - "Can't Get No Booty" is a killer career (I know - It's ironic, but it's also lame)

This is where their paths really diverged. Punk is no more or less musically valid than disco, but the core AOR audience was never going to buy into the disco path - But they could follow Neil into heave punk grunge. After this, Stills never really got his confidence back - "Southern Cross" aside.

Maybe there is a parallel universe where the disco backlash never happened, and Stills is seen as an Afro-Cuban world music sage and Neil tours with Hank Williams Jr on an anti-welfare queen platform, opening for Donald Trump rallies....

 

Nah. They all peaked at the same time.

 

The first time I heard Manassas' "So Begins the Task" I said to myself, "Hmm, that sounds like it could be the brother to 'Helplessly Hoping.'" Then I heard the box set version of "Hoping" and I realized that I was right. Now I sequence them together on any mix tape or CD that I make.

Lee

 

And arguably Nash's "Teach Your Children" too.

 

Again, when you look at the larger picture of how popular music was capturing the political and social climate of the times, "For What It's Worth" will last longer than Stephen's other songs. I am not arguing that it is better musically than "Suite: Judy Blue Eyes" or "Helplessly Hoping". My contention comes from analyzing it in terms of history and impact on greater political culture.

We could go back and forth on which song is "better", but it terms of what is more important to the greater time period: "For What's It Worth", Neil's "Ohio", and as an other poster put forth "Teach Your Children". Songs that capture the mood and times. That each one of them (Stills, Young, and Nash) did that is a testament to their talent. Those songs will outlive each of them longer than, say "Love The One You're With", "Heart Of Gold", or "Just A Song Before I Go".

 

of course he is not on "guinnevere". and probably not on 'lady of the island" although i don't know how prolific nash was on a guitar at that point in time. but everything else is stills, everything else.

 

chris hillman has been in some very interesting bands during his career.

 

Surely Stills career has been elongated because of C&N ? Down the Road was patchy, Stills was pretty good, then you get Illegal Stills (downhill again), Long May you run missed the mark, He then settles up with them again and records the excellent CSN (1977) and the tour buddies then go on forever. But his next solo release in '78 was Thoroughfare Gap- his nadir ...

I think what was very sad was watching C&N in recent CSN shows playing live new tracks (level zero, burning for buddha as examples) where clearly Stills had no part other than to play a few chords along with the rhythm.

 

Let's remember that until he formed a group with Crosby and Nash and released that first album, Stills was not a big name. He had written one hit for a band that no longer existed. His collaboration with Crosby and Nash, and eventually Young, launched his career into the stratosphere and made much of the rest of it possible. It's hard to imagine a similar arc without David and Graham. Neil Young's solo career also got a major boost from his involvement in CSNY.

 

his appearance on mike bloomfield's 'super session" didn't hurt him either. his work on 'season of the witch" from that album is just excellent.

 

Bluebird was an FM underground "classic"