Things Will Be Better - catchy enough. Hard to say any more than though! Cowgirl in the Sand - this has always been one of my favourites. I'm not really a Neil Young fan, though I used to share a house with someone who was a Neil Young nut and they'd always say this song just sounded wrong. I think they play different chords or something, I dunno. Anyway, to me Neil Young's version is a plodding bore (apologies to any fans) whereas this has, well, a classic Gene Clark vocal so it automatically sounds heartbreaking. It's another **** mix/recording though; with John Barbata on drums you'd think maybe Cros would've recorded them better than Mike's drums, but no this is a horrible murky mix.
This is the quote that I always come back to, especially coupled with the album cover. I'd love to think that rather any of the members willingly submitting rubbish songs or trying to get one over on each other in weird passive agressive ways, they were just too mashed to get any real work done. Though it is the Byrds so they probably were just being dickheads about the whole thing.
If one doesn't hear "The Byrds" of antiquity ( even then! ), you just wrote why. The problem about this approach to recording is, the story always gets out. You can hear the difference. It's a fine album as it is, but a Byrds LP? I think this set was a deliberate attempt to follow up The Eagles' success.
It definitely was BS. Crosby recently tweeted that it was Gene Clark's suggestion to cover Cowgirl. That opinion surprises me. It's one of four really decent tracks on the album. Omitting it would make the record much worse.
Real head scratcher that they covered Neil and Joni but not Dylan. Up there with no McGuinn 12 String.
Given Crosby's position that doing a Dylan song on Younger than Yesterday was a step backwards, I'm not surprised.
But I believe he was taking a position that doing anybcovers was a step backwards. Maybe he made exceptions for covers of songs by his other collaborators.
I agree, it's (IMO) an uninspired campfire singalong of a thing. Relentlessly boring it plods along till it stops. Can't stand it.
1966-67 Crosby felt that bands should do only original material, in large part because he had lots of songs he wanted to get onto Byrds albums. 1972 Crosby clearly did not have lots of songs, so he was willing to relax his "rules" about covers because they had to fill the album with something.
"Long Live the King" Crosby’s first composition here, and one of the few that might fit on a classic-era Byrds album — thanks partly to that electric 12-string (played by who knows who). Typically caustic Crosby rumination on the fame game. Extremely short, à la Notorious Byrd Brothers. Some apparently will think I’m insane, but it’s one of the album’s highlights for me. (By the way, what’s with the Crosby gang’s fascination with kings? Around the same time, he also came up with “King of the Mountain” while Nash did “I Used to be a King.” Very confusing.)
I'm definitely in the camp that thinks Roman is insane for thinking Long Live The King is a highlight on this album. To me, it's easily tied with Born to Rock and Roll for worst song on the record. In fact, I find it to be about as appealing as Crosby's between-song rants at Monterey Pop. It seems like it tries to rock but only succeeds in plodding along. Crosby's vocals are strident and over the top, and the lyrical refences to Humpty Dumpty seem silly. Crosby at his worst.
I'm in the camp that says Long Live the King is half great, half rubbish! Croz's vocal isn't great, the Humpty Dumpty section is indeed rather silly and the the ending seems fairly unsatisfying after it gets off to strong start, lulling you into thinking it'll be a more substantial song than it actually is. But anyway, there are some nice moments like the little instrumental section after the first verse that is the nearest this album comes to sounding like the Notorious Byrd Brothers. It's just a shame it sounds like Croz couldn't be arsed to fully realise this song's potential.
This is a good discussion. I like the acoustic foundation of the sound, the presence of Clark's voice ... I like "Long Live the King" for its energy, and because it sounds like the Crosby-era Byrds, but I'm persuaded by Ma Kelly that the song's a mixed result. I like the acoustic crescendo, if I'm using the word correctly, at the end of the record. I think McGuinn's songs are the weakest he wrote for the Byrds, and usually skip them. Much of the record plods. I do enjoy listening to it, but I make allowances for it. After listening to Byrds again a few days ago, I put on the second disc of the expanded Untitled/Unissued, and it's so much richer. The additional tracks on the expanded version include studio recordings of "Lover of the Bayou" and "Willin'," great alternate takes on "Yesterday's Train" and "Kathleen's Song," more live recordings ... I don't have to make allowances for those, and they were outtakes.
"Borrowing Time" Hillman’s second contribution (this one co-written with another Manassas percussionist comrade, Joe Lala) is even slighter than the first. Duellin’ mandolins drive this pleasantly upbeat number that nonetheless is utterly forgettable. It’s the shortest cut on the album, and I imagine it didn’t take too much longer than that to create.
If the band hadn't done Byrds, I wonder if McGuinn, Clark & Hillman would have been more like the Byrds (the band, not the LP). Byrds underwhelmed me, but the disco tinge of McGuinn, Clark & Hillman turned me away. I did see the trio live a few times, and they were much better in concert than on that LP.
Every time I revisit this album I expect to like it a little better. You know, the passage of time, lower expectations, getting mellower as I age and all that. And it always just bores the crap out of me. It’s hard to even listen to full songs, even two minute ones. Bad songwriting, half-assed arrangements, listless playing. Hey! What could go wrong? Crosby was on top of the world. But all the other guys needed a boost at the time. This was the place where they all had a chance to reach a wide audience. A great Byrds album could have been a shot in the arm for all of their solo careers. Their selfishness in saving good stuff for their solo work backfired. (Gene brought good stuff and is excluded from this comment)
It didn't even make the cut on the 2nd Manassas album which is also a bad album. That should tell you something.
Aw, I much prefer the second Manassas album to the first! In large part due to So Many Times, which is one of Hillman's greatest songs (well it's a co-write with Stills, but still...). But yeah Borrowing Time is slight. Very slight. But it's cute and the percussion and mandolins make a nice change in sound from a largely one-dimensional sounding album so I like it a lot for that.
Isnt that the album where two songs start with the line "When I was a Young Man"? I view down the Road as the beginning Stills' decline.
Wasn't the second Manassas album recorded after the Byrds reunion album? Which would suggest I guess that this song was a leftover from the first album sessions that Hillman didn't think was good enough to save for the second album. I think it's a mediocre song, but it's not awful like some of the Crosby and McGuinn stuff, so it stands out on that basis.
The Wikipedia page on this album mentions that in 2009, alternate takes and at least one outtake were discovered. Does anyone know more? Is any of this stuff "out there"?
It came out a month after Byrds but I believe it was started way before. They made some bad choices too like leaving off the song Witching Hour.
