50th Anniversary: 1967 Monterey International Pop Festival: Performance-By-Performance

Oh that's awesome so it was - Enter the Young, The Machine, Along Comes Mary, Windy and Cherish. I never would have found that - thanks so much Malc and tell Jim Yester thank you also. It's seems so appropriate to have 'Enter the Young' first like it was on the album too -but for this concert in particular it makes total sense. I appreciate you following through e-mailing him and taking the time! Thanks again.

 

Fascinating thread going on over at the Beach Boys Smiley Smile board about this. Stephen Desper, the BBs sound engineer was in charge of the console at Monterey, using the BBs equipment, and he makes a few interesting comments. Tho' it seems unlikely that every performance was caught on tape in full... damn...

 

Thanks Malc, I stop by there once in a while and with the Sunshine Tomorrow release next week, I can check that an the Monterey setup. Maybe the BB's should have gotten a street cred for lending the equipment instead of losing some credibility for not playing. I always forget a lot of it was their equipment.

 

Sure looks like him! I'm a BIG Jerry Riopelle fan...

 

And then there was the time when Juan Marichal felt John Roseboro tried to clip him with his return throw to the Dodger pitcher, during an at bat, so Juan bopped Roseboro on the head with his bat, causing a bloody mess. Giants vs Dodgers, 49ers vs Rams and Warriors vs Lakers, USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal; a lot of sports related frustration!

 

If you look at the pic a few pages back of Stills, that speaker on the side of the stage behind him is a monitor, they mostly just had side stage ones pointing in and that's it. Some rock clubs still did this method even into the mid-80s, no front montiors.

 

yes, in broad-stroke, all of that is factual, as far as it goes, except to the extent that it might lead you to believe that Johnny Jenkins & the Pinetoppers "toured" with any regularity in the late '50s, or that Otis was a big feature in those performances; they were chitlin circuit dance dives, filled with patrons there to drink and dance . . . Jenkins sang some, but his guitar was always the main calling card. I don't have (or have ever seen) set lists, but I would think that Otis was mostly singing covers of the day; at this early stage, he was mainly a Little Richard emulator--no shame in that, Ray Charles spent an extended period mimicking Charles Brown (among a couple others) before he fully formed the unique alchemy that would be the Ray Charles sound.

I can provide you more detail early next week--I loaned AN UNFINISHED LIFE to a friend; as I said earlier, I can't recommend it w/o reservation--it's too heavy on broad socio-pol factors; and many will have issues with some of the provocative opinions he expresses as it relates to Otis's early material, as well as key figures in his career--Jim Stewart doesn't come off well at all.

For the most part, I give Jonathan Gould credit for digging deeper to provide new insight and not shy away from well-supported opinions that might fly in the face of conventional wisdom.

For instance, he points out that not only were those early singles from West Coast sessions done at Goldstar (a "hit machine" as we all know), but the players, far from being just another pick-up outfit, included to of the most respected and lauded studio guys of the era--Earl Palmer on drums, and Rene Hall, later to be Sam Cooke's musical director.

If I ever knew that, I'd forgotten it . . . (Otis was intent on getting back to Macon for one simple reason, he'd left his young wife-to-be, Zelma, pregnant with their first child and her family had been very doubtful of his promise to return.)

He also details background to the tragic plane crash regarding the Beechcraft model that Otis and the Bar-Kays went down in that, for me anyway, shed new light.

In short, that model had a great rep for flying in icing conditions, but only to a point; and at that point of heavy icing, the auto-pilot would "over-correct" and send the plane into a dive or out of control . . . on the day Otis died, the conditions on the ground were just about 32-degrees, freezing light rain and very bad visibility.

Gould learned this based on interviewing the owner (a highly experienced pilot himself) of the small company near Macon from which Otis's flights originated--the same fellow who had recommended and found the used plane for Otis; the same fellow who had trained and rec'd the young, but fully certified pilot who Otis hired to fly the craft. Beyond that, he researched 13 years of flight records for that craft, uncovering the telling detail that it had been involved in only 6 fatal crashes during those years--all of them occurring the the Great Lakes region (and I would assume all in winter, but I don't specifically recall if he confirmed that).

Gould also closely tracks Otis's live appearances, singles releases AND sales performance, from beginning to end; in general, I think he links underperforming singles primarily to weaker material . . . though there were exceptions.

He tracks multiple experts in the field to make his assessment of live performance progress, particularly noting the primary booker at the Apollo who kept a card catalog with notes on every performer that came through. Another thing that stood out, Joe Galkin, the Atlanta based record plugger with close ties to Wexler, was a huge player throughout Otis's career (prob even more so than the Waldens) and became very wealthy almost solely based on Otis's success. (Galkin is the one who rec'd that Johnny Jenkins be sent to STAX, and he's the one who was in the booth with Jim Stewart and pushed hardest for Otis to get the small block of time left after Jenkins was shut down with nothing to release . . . he also wastes no time in dismissing Johnny Jenkins' claim of pushing for Otis, saying it was a complete fabrication to avoid appearing to sell his buddy short. What if Galkin hadn't been there? Another of a million "what if's" . . . ).



DREAMS TO REMEMBRER I read when it was first published in 2015 . . . hardback 1st ed. sitting on my shelf, along with SWEET SOUL MUSIC (Guralnick), the more recent RESPECT: STAX Records & the Soul Explosion (Robert Gordon), OTIS! The Otis Redding Story (Scott Freeman, 2001), I'LL TAKE YOU THERE, the recent Mavis Staples bio, MEMPHIS BOYS, RESPECT (David Ritz) . . . an amazing Aretha bio, not to be confused with he highly "idealized" auto-bio he co-wrote with Aretha, both Sam Cooke bios, one by Guralnick and an earlier (and almost as good), YOU SEND ME, co-authored by Cooke's business partner and gospel circuit vet, J.W. Alexander . . . there are at least a half-dozen others indirectly related, and I've read them all, some twice. But, reading's reading--not as important as listening, anyway . . .

Let me make clear, I was in no way trying to diminish Otis's career, early, late or otherwise.

I do think there can be a tendency, especially with talents who die so young and at the peaks of their careers, to be somewhat over-zealous in pure praise, and nothing but. I don't see anything in my original post that I wouldn't stand by . . . Otis Redding was an amazing talent, but not an over-night success. His singing, writing and performance chops made great strides once he signed at STAX and began to perform more on a national basis. Nobody outworked Otis, and nobody inspired that great band at STAX more than him.

Likewise, his understanding of the studio, what works and what doesn't and how to get his ideas across to musicians (head arrangements) also rapidly ramped up as his building success justified more time there . . . but he was a gotta make that dollar kind of guy, and for the most part that meant staying out on the road where he really started to justify better-paying dates in the last few years he lived.

d

 

Thanks for the details and your opinions on Otis' music career, I'm sure An Unfinished Life is a very interesting read and you present a case for reading the book.

 

I would like to make a point about the Who. I am a huge fan since 1966 and in 1967 they were at their best imho.

Their performance at Montetey was truly magnificent from all angles and they made an impression. However, they did not made the commercial breakthrough - that would have to wait until Tommy.

Would my forum colleagues agree?

 

I was very familiar with The Who's singles in 67-68 and was quite fond of them all.

 

I also like them all, including those which critics don't like such as Call me lightning and specially Dogs. Magnificent!

 

Phil's View, 50 years later..........


Phil Lesh: Grateful Dead 'Didn't Deliver' at First Monterey Pop

"We have a tradition of blowing the big ones," bassist recalls at 50th anniversary of fest


C Flanigan/Getty
Emma Silvers
3 days ago
The Grateful Dead's impact – on psych rock, on live recording techniques, on the meaning of a fan-based subculture – can't really be overstated. But when it comes to 1967's Monterey International Pop Festival, bassist and founding member Phil Lesh insists he isn't being modest when he calls the band's set forgettable.

"Our place in the show was the most unmemorable possible slot: between The Who and Jimi Hendrix," he told Rolling Stone on Sunday evening, just a couple hours before he took that same stage for a headlining set at the festival's 50th anniversary. Lesh, 77, continues to play regularly at his Marin County restaurant and music venue Terrapin Crossroads, under the name Phil Lesh and the Terrapin Family Band – a group that includes, fittingly, his son Grahame Lesh on guitar.


Monterey Pop Festival's 50th Anniversary: All the Photos
Norah Jones, Leon Bridges, Phil Lesh, Booker T, Regina Spektor among performers at historic California fest

This time around, the band wasn't wedged between anything: they closed out the festival with a 90-minute set of bluesy Dead jams and new tunes, as well as a gut-punch cover of "Like a Rolling Stone." It was memorable.

So I've heard you don't think the Dead's performance at Monterey Pop went well at all.
No. I think we all felt that way, that we didn't deliver what we could. Though, really, it didn't matter. Between the Who tearing it up, doing a great set, and then destroying the stage at the end of their set, and then Jimi playing a fantastic set and then lighting his guitar on fire … what are you gonna remember, who came between them? No. It's gonna be just like a big shadow, some murky space. So I don't know whether that was a subconscious consideration we had, but we did not play well.


It was the beginning of our tradition, really – we have a tradition of blowing the big ones. So no, [this festival] was not a big career-changing moment for us like it was for so many others. But that was fine. We didn't really care.

What was your reaction when you heard they were planning this festival? You still write and play all the time, and you don't seem like someone content to bank on nostalgia.
I said "Oh, another 50th anniversary thing." [Laughs.] They've been coming every year for a while now. But then I found out I could come down here and play with my son and the younger guys, and I am really excited about this band. So yeah, I don't think of it in terms of nostalgia. It's an opportunity to play, especially with these young musicians who've been growing so much at Terrapin Crossroads.his is the fruit of all that writing and playing and singing at Terrapin – this is now a band that we can take out into the world.

Looking toward the future, then – are there places, or current music, where you see your legacy?
I try not to think about that. It's not about me. It's about the community and what happened in San Francisco in the Sixties. It's a light that still shines in this world, and if there's any legacy at all to the Grateful Dead or the Haight-Ashbury, it's in situations like this, where people get together outside of the political environment and come together in a kind of communion. That's the only way we're going to be able to move forward, is to elevate ourselves above that left-right ********. A house divided cannot stand. That's my political statement for the day.

Do you think about the role or purpose of music in politics, or vice-versa, these days? Clearly that was a big part of this festival the first time around.
Well, you don't want to really get me started on our current political situation. Obviously I see a lot of comparisons [between our situation then and now]. But the thing I remember about San Francisco and our scene in the Sixties there was we were not interested in radical violent protest. We were there to demonstrate a new way of living, so all that **** didn't really affect us. The political stuff was pretty much only in Berkeley. And that's my hometown, I'm proud to be a People's Republic of Berkeley product, but that was just not our scene. We felt there was another way.

And the purpose of music is the same as it's always been: to bring enlightenment to sentient beings. Beethoven said, "Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy." It's bigger than politics.

 

Mostly, I would agree . . . I'd suppose it's difficult to gauge how much impact the Monterey performance actually had; my sense is it was mostly a west coast crowd, though I'm sure it helped with word-of-mouth among those who were there.

It was a tricky time, just because we were still in the early stages of true LP dominance, and for most popular music, a hit single and radio play still were heavy factors; Personally, I had barely bought a few LP's (and never really collected singles); I was still essentially an AM radio guy, so the Who never really hit home with me UNTIL . . "I CAN SEE FOR MILES" started getting heavy airplay--and IT REALLY MADE A HUGE IMPRESSION! It went to #9 in '67--they're first top 40 in the states, and biggest to this day. (I was only 17--I'm sure a lot of the more hep crowd caught them earlier, as a couple other guys have noted above . . . I "backfilled" some of the early stuff through the '70's, and of course, Tommy made a big splash).

To your point, YES, by the time of TOMMY, Lp's were that much bigger, FM radio was really beginning to break out and pure AM singles were less important--and in many people's eyes were to be totally ignored (see: Led Zepplin, etc.)

d

 

Especially Dogs Part II! Arf arf!!!

 

Even that one, yes!
Not so fond of the Entwistle B sides though.

 

OK, can anyone help me here? On the 7 hour radio broadcast "Monterey Pop - The Radio Concert", Tommy Smothers makes an announcement about the Beatles (how he, John Phillips and Paul Simon went down to meet them arriving on the beach in their submarine but couldn't do it so they're up in a plane somewhere, etc). There's a band waiting onstage behind him (you can hear them play the odd guitar chord). It may be a band intro, or he may have come onstage mid-set. Does anyone know who's onstage at the time and where this fits in the overall concert? Just for clarity, it's NOT the Peter Tork announcement in the middle of the Dead's set. Apologies if this is obvious but I don't recall hearing it when I played the whole show.

 

One side note about The Who arguing about who would go on before/after Hendrix, and then subsequently Jimi's threat to smash his guitar...

For those of us in the USA, at the time, Jimi was signed to Track Records in the UK (the label belonging to Who managers Kit Lambert and Chris Stamp), so one can see how angry Pete might have been that someone on "their" label would've wanted to essentially upstage them by doing their same bit.

Here's a pretty good bit about all that from the WHO bio "Pretend You're In A War":
Pete Townshend Vs Jimi Hendrix: The Who Backstage At Monterey | MOJO

Great tidbit: Roger wasn't wearing a cape - it was a tablecloth!

 

[QUOTE="Rupe33, post: 16735350, member: 3794"
Here's a pretty good bit about all that from the WHO bio "Pretend You're In A War":
Pete Townshend Vs Jimi Hendrix: The Who Backstage At Monterey | MOJO

Great tidbit: Roger wasn't wearing a cape - it was a tablecloth![/QUOTE]
Very interesting indeed! I strongly disagree with the quote by Pete that "The effect of LSD on American music made it crap". It certainly had the opposiite effect at least in 1966-1968, it made it better. Mind expanding drugs influenced the approach to composition, the arrangements and the delivery, amounting to the best rock music ever from these white kids, socially conscious, who expanded their folk and/or blues roots and created something beautiful and meaningful. Monterey Pop certainly epitomized all that.

 

Just finished Jonathan Gould's book; like some of his other writings, it focuses so much on the socio-cultural aspects of music that it takes all the fun and joie de vivre out of the subject matter! And I have to wonder what else the guy has gotten wrong when he repeatedly refers to the Confederate Battle Flag as the "Stars and Bars" when it was actually otherwise known as the Southern Cross; the Stars and Bars having three stripes and seven stars. He gave Sam & Dave pretty short shrift in the book, even though the competition they gave Otis did indeed push him to become a more dynamic stage performer, as you said. However, I must admit I have to agree with him on the sheer ineptitude of Jim Stewart as the head of Stax Records through their glory years, both as businessman and record producer.

Otis was certainly sui generis, and we haven't seen his like since, nor will we ever again, sad to say.

 

Time Magazine review, June 30, 1967.

Interesting for the mention of the soul performers at the end.
Although it took three occurrences of the word "Negro" in a sentence and a half to convey.

 

I agree. I'll bet it had more to do with the fact that it wasn't financially beneficial to cancel gigs and recording sessions in NYC and schlep the Mothers to California.

 

The main riff for "Rock & Roll Woman" is a direct lift from the "I think that maybe I'm dreaming" part of Crosby's "Renaissance Fair" from the Byrds "Younger Than Yesterday" album.

 

Stills would make jokes about that when they played the song at Springfield shows.

 

I disagree. Monterey was the pebble that started them snowballing in the US. "I Can See for Miles" reached the top 10 late in '67. Then they didn't up out a proper album in '68, so there wasn't anything to break through with. And "Magic Bus" still managed to reach number 25. But, obviously, Tommy is what took them to the top echelon.

 

It's fascinating that The Who's "My Generation" made no impact on the 60's generation in the U.S. I always thought it was automatically a major hit everywhere.

Some great articles posted since I was last here. I needed to recover some after all the Monterey. I ended up seeing it twice in the theater since I don't expect it back in theaters anytime soon. I was going to put together a best-of list of performances but I didn't get a chance. I wished that somebody filmed some stuff from the Fantasy Faire earlier in the month but there's only a bit of Doors footage. That would have been fun to watch though the lineup wasn't as good. I found out The Merry-Go-Round closed both Saturday and Sunday and then weren't at Monterey. Obviously they weren't big enough but they had a pretty decent album that year.

It's also too bad that many of the festivals that followed in 1968 and 1969 weren't filmed for movie and there's not much audio either but there were a lot of good ones. I guess the Miami Pop Festival would be my first choice. The only thing released I have-the Hendrix performance.