PDA

View Full Version : Did they ask Bernie and Randy to be part of the reunion in 1994?



shunlvswx
09-14-2013, 10:24 PM
I've been thinking about this for a while. I wonder if Bernie and Randy were asked to be part of the reunion in 1994 or they just wanted the line up they had when they broke up. I always wonder. They ask Bernie back for the current tour and I think I heard (I could be wrong on this) they ask Randy too, but he was having health problems at the time.

sodascouts
09-14-2013, 10:35 PM
Neither Bernie nor Randy was asked back for the HFO reunion. Glenn called it a "resumption" ie they were picking up where they left off with The Long Run, and that included a lineup with Tim on bass and Joe/Felder on guitar rather than Randy and Bernie.

shunlvswx
09-14-2013, 10:49 PM
Thanks, Soda. I didn't know that. I guess I was thinking about that since they did ask Bernie to be part of the current tour.

It also makes you wonder. If Felder didn't sign that contract to be part of the 1994 reunion tour, would they had asked Bernie anyway or just had only Joe or get a new guitar player(which I think they were going to do if he didn't sign it).

GlennLover
09-14-2013, 11:00 PM
I've been thinking about this for a while. I wonder if Bernie and Randy were asked to be part of the reunion in 1994 or they just wanted the line up they had when they broke up. I always wonder. They ask Bernie back for the current tour and I think I heard (I could be wrong on this) they ask Randy too, but he was having health problems at the time.

You heard correctly that Randy could not be part of this tour due to health reasons. He had suffered a collapsed lung recently when he choked on some food. He used to play with a band called The World Class Rockers but he has not performed with them for several years. I have heard uncomformed reports that it is because of heart problems. Maybe someone else could shed some light on this as to whether or not it is true.

shunlvswx
09-14-2013, 11:27 PM
I remember (or in my case just heard he was in this band)Bernie was in the band Run CMW and I think that group was formed around the time the Eagles were reuniting. I remembered that group, but I didn't know Bernie was in the group.

Prettymaid
09-16-2013, 09:52 PM
I always figured the only reason Bernie was asked to join this tour was because its the History of the Eagles tour.

shunlvswx
09-16-2013, 10:12 PM
I agree, PM.

Its good to see him back. To tell the truth. Before the documentary, I've never heard of Bernie.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-04-2013, 09:18 PM
No Randy and Bernie were not asked to the Hell Freezes Over Reunion. According to Don F, they did not even want to sing any of the songs that they wrote because they did not want to give Bernie and Randy any royalties from the video or CD. Wow that was really nice on there part considering that Bernie and Randy were part of the first 4 & 5 albums that they made. Nice guys.

randymeisnerrocks
12-04-2013, 09:30 PM
Frey & Henley have it the way they want it now, I guess, but to me it would have made sense to honor those who helped them make it. After all, it was their HARMONY that got people to buy those first records. But, hey, there's only so much money to go around, right?

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-04-2013, 09:39 PM
Agree, now it is a two way split. Only minor side expenses.

UndertheWire
12-05-2013, 03:15 AM
The HFO DVD is weighted towards Henley and Walsh. Other songs were recorded but didn't make the cut including Peaceful Easy Feeling (Tempchin). It's an odd selection but doesn't really support Felder's allegation that it was to avoid paying royalities to Meisner and Leadon.

There's a strong correlation between the writer and the singer of an Eagles' song and so it doesn't seem surprising that a song gets dropped when the singer leaves rather than have someone else sing it. The exception is Take it to the Limit and each time Frey sings it, Meisner will be collecting royalties.

None of us know what went on when the Eagles were putting together Hell Freezes Over but it must have been a delicate process and it's hardly surprising that they didn't complicate things by trying to include all the former band members.

randymeisnerrocks
12-05-2013, 01:01 PM
Yeah, they didn't want to "complicate" things. Makes sense to me!

VAisForEagleLovers
12-05-2013, 08:06 PM
None of us know what went on when the Eagles were putting together Hell Freezes Over but it must have been a delicate process and it's hardly surprising that they didn't complicate things by trying to include all the former band members.

Definitely! Nothing would kill a tenuous reunion quicker than having back members who quit the band thrown into the mix. Good grief. Would make a good episode on Jerry Springer, and our guys would have ended up as just one more tabloid nightmare.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-05-2013, 08:53 PM
Yes, they quit. After being pushed to the point where they could not stand to be there anymore. GOOD GRIEF!!!!!!!!!!

Springbo
12-05-2013, 10:15 PM
Yes, they quit. After being pushed to the point where they could not stand to be there anymore. GOOD GRIEF!!!!!!!!!!

Absolutely right, Thrill. Does anyone think Randy and Bernie quit a successful band like the Eagles, for any reason other than the fact that they were so unhappy that they didn't have any choice?

VAisForEagleLovers
12-05-2013, 10:18 PM
Which makes my point exactly! Thank you, I didn't word it like I should have.

Freypower
12-05-2013, 10:26 PM
Absolutely right, Thrill. Does anyone think Randy and Bernie quit a successful band like the Eagles, for any reason other than the fact that they were so unhappy that they didn't have any choice?

I have done my very best to stay away from this, but when most musicians leave bands it tends to be because they are unhappy. This is hardly unique to Bernie & Randy.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-05-2013, 10:27 PM
Again, yes they quit. But if you were treated like a POS on a daily basis by your supposed friends, you might quit also.

MaryCalifornia
12-05-2013, 10:31 PM
Agree, now it is a two way split. Only minor side expenses.

I am guessing that Joe and Timothy make millions and millions of dollars a year. Of course Don and Glenn make more, but I don't think JW and TBS's Eagles revenues are "minor". But, like everyone else on here, I don't know what or how they're paid. I can only surmise that they are not being "disrespected" financially by Glenn, Don and Irving, only because they would not have stuck around for so long. I don't think J & T are thought of or treated as sidemen - the Eagles need them, they are not replaceable in the current lineup. If either were to leave, it would be tough to tour as "the Eagles." It would become "Glenn Frey and Don Henley" in people's minds. At least in mine. (Not that that show would be a horrible thing to attend!)

VAisForEagleLovers
12-05-2013, 10:39 PM
The whole show, right down to the introductions, is all about making Joe' The Man', so I agree, MC, not exactly a 'side'. We know, I guess, what the percentages were when they got back together for HFO, but when Felder left, it would have been redone and we don't know how that worked out. I can't imagine any of the guys still in the band ever letting that cat out of the bag.

randymeisnerrocks
12-05-2013, 10:51 PM
The whole show, right down to the introductions, is all about making Joe' The Man', so I agree, MC, not exactly a 'side'. We know, I guess, what the percentages were when they got back together for HFO, but when Felder left, it would have been redone and we don't know how that worked out. I can't imagine any of the guys still in the band ever letting that cat out of the bag.

Well, not if they want to keep their job, anyway.

VAisForEagleLovers
12-05-2013, 11:03 PM
I know I would have made it part of a non-disclosure agreement and binding, but that's just me, maybe. It's really no one's business but their own.

randymeisnerrocks
12-06-2013, 12:17 AM
That's true but I live for conjecture and debate, especially about my favorite subjects. I know it doesn't always come across in my smartass manner but I do love every one of those boys. I just love one more than the others! LOL

VAisForEagleLovers
12-06-2013, 08:25 AM
I know it doesn't always come across in my smartass manner but I do love every one of those boys. I just love one more than the others! LOL

Me, too!

sodascouts
12-07-2013, 07:57 PM
Loss of respect for band members is understandable if you don't believe they did the right thing. What I don't get is the outright loathing some express. And it's easy to tell the difference between simple loss of respect and outright loathing. Examples of loss of respect: comments about how you're disappointed in someone's actions. Examples of loathing: taking pleasure in insulting and mocking a person; wanting them to feel pain.

randymeisnerrocks
12-07-2013, 08:56 PM
Well, it's easy to tell the difference between simple loss of respect and outright loathing. Examples of loss of respect: comments about how you're disappointed in someone's actions. Examples of loathing: taking pleasure in insulting and mocking a person; wanting them to feel pain.

Would that include mocking them over plastic surgery? Probably not.

Look, it is obvious that some people are touchy about their favorite band members. We can all see and understand that. But, Soda, you are just as touchy as anyone but just won't admit it. Its obvious that you're Frey all the way and that's OK but others should feel free to be honest in support their favorite, too.

Here's some real honesty for you with no beating around the bush: I am disappointed in the way Frey treated people while using the "good of the band" excuse, first Bernie, then Randy, and then Don F. I believe he was wrong. I still respect his talent and I love their music but you can't just treat people badly and still expect a good reputation.

sodascouts
12-07-2013, 09:17 PM
Would that include mocking them over plastic surgery? Probably not.

Frankly, it does.

If you think they look horrible because of their plastic surgery, you have a right to that opinion, but making nasty comments about how ugly you think they are as a result of their procedures serves no purpose.

randymeisnerrocks
12-07-2013, 09:19 PM
Frankly, it does.

If you think they look horrible because of their plastic surgery, you have a right to that opinion, but making nasty comments about how ugly you think they are as a result of their procedures serves no purpose.

I did not start the plastic surgery discussion. I believe that it started on the Felder thread, which says everything about the point I am trying to make.

sodascouts
12-07-2013, 09:23 PM
If you don't understand the difference between complimenting the effects of someone's plastic surgery and insulting them, then I don't know how to explain it to you.

I will say, however, that the next person who insults an Eagles' appearance gets a strike. I'm tired of putting up with it.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-07-2013, 09:24 PM
I did not start the plastic surgery discussion. I believe that it started on the Felder thread, which says everything about the point I am trying to make.


Yes the plastic surgery did start on the Felder thread. And talk about loathing, I think Mr. Felder has been loathed quite a bit by the gangs.

VAisForEagleLovers
12-07-2013, 09:56 PM
I'm afraid I'm one of those that said some loathsome things about Mr. Felder (I use the 'Mr.' out of respect for him and NOT to be snarky, please believe me). I was new to posting in a forum that wasn't technical (all my previous forum experience has been about the joys of Unix programming and transitioning to Windows programming). I felt that since I knew basically nothing about him and got my opinions from his own book I was justified in my opinions. I love/loved all the Eagles and reading some of the things he wrote made my heart hurt.

Since then, I've tried my best and have hopefully improved. I just want everyone to know that when I crossed a line or, since I am now a moderator, came close to crossing a line, I have gotten PMs, texts, and even censure in the thread itself from other moderators about it, and many of them have the same favorite I do. My point is, none of us are exempt.

MaryCalifornia
12-07-2013, 10:09 PM
I think I started the Felder thread, remarking on how stinkin' good he looks. It somehow devolved into people criticizing the physical appearances of other members of the Eagles, and claiming that Felder can't possibly look that good without having had surgery. I support Soda's stance that the culture of this board shouldn't be a place where posters can make fun of physical features of band members. I think we should be held to a higher standard. None of our guys are supermodels, they are regular people, like you and me. I'm not interested in hearing from people who make fun of 66-year-olds. I'm sure there are plenty of places on the internet where that is totally acceptable.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-07-2013, 10:36 PM
MaryC, you are correct the eagles are regular people just like us. I have things that sag, lines around my eyes and brown spots on my hands. I can make jokes about myself, such as things that point south instead of west. But then why do we have to set them at a higher level than any of us. Why can't we joke a little bit about the way they look. They are no better than we are. It was not long ago when you were upset because you were being bashed about your opinion. So are we not allowed that same feeling. It sometimes feels like a double standard.

VAisForEagleLovers
12-07-2013, 11:21 PM
Why can't we joke a little bit about the way they look. They are no better than we are.

One thing I've learned between posting here and on Facebook, sending emails, and the little I tweet... What is a joke to one person is not seen/read as funny by another, even with the use of emoticons. I have a sarcastic sense of humor and I'm often taken seriously. For myself, as I often say on Facebook, there needs to be a Sarcasm Font! It's easy to be misunderstood, and of course, everywhere there's people with no sense of humor at all.

On the opposite side of things, there are people who snark and follow it with LOL like that's supposed to make it better. Others say cruel things and aren't even attempting humor, some of the things I see on Twitter and Facebook seriously make me cringe.

I think we've gotten off topic...

MaryCalifornia
12-07-2013, 11:22 PM
I'm sorry if I appear to be setting a double standard, of course I don't like being attacked when I believe that what I wrote wasn't offensive and of course I appreciate it when others support me. What I like about these boards is that in general, the posters don't like to see other posters unfairly attacked. I don't think you guys are being unfairly attacked - the mean-spirited critiques of physical appearances was a distasteful trolling of the Felder thread. I was surprised how diplomatic the admin responded initially, I thought she would have tried to put a stop to it sooner. I don't think the admin and mods try to stop good natured ribbing or observations, or even critical commentary about band member's actions (unless they the posts are getting too sexytime :love:). Perhaps a determination of what is mean-spirited and what is all in fun is a fine line, but it's like the definition of porn - you know it when you see it. The rules of this board are pretty clear - it's not a place for bashing the Eagles, especially about something as juvenile as physical appearances. On this very specific topic, I support Soda's position. I consider myself a comrade to all of you and I will support you if you need it. And I love that we are all Eagles fans.

Edit: I don't go around these threads looking to pile on. The only reason I commented here is because of the connection to my posts in the Felder thread. I didn't like how people criticized me for my supposed naivete about the fact that "celebrities have plastic surgery", when I was speaking specifically to only one particular celebrity, Don Felder. I gave a considered analysis of what I think he's had done to get to his current appearance. Instead of people giving their opinions as to what surgical or non-surgical procedures he may or may not have had, I got "you're stupid if you don't think celebrities have surgery." More thoughtful contributions would have been something like, "Looks like he's had..." or "I'm seeing...." instead of how I don't know what I'm talking about.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-07-2013, 11:26 PM
Yes, we are all eagles fans. I will just leave it at that. Sometimes you can't swim against the tide.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-07-2013, 11:30 PM
I'm sorry if I appear to be setting a double standard, of course I don't like being attacked when I believe that what I wrote wasn't offensive and of course I appreciate it when others support me. What I like about these boards is that in general, the posters don't like to see other posters unfairly attacked. I don't think you guys are being unfairly attacked - the mean-spirited critiques of physical appearances was a distasteful trolling of the Felder thread. I was surprised how diplomatic the admin responded initially, I thought she would have tried to put a stop to it sooner. I don't think the admin and mods try to stop good natured ribbing or observations, or even critical commentary about band member's actions (unless they the posts are getting too sexytime :love:). Perhaps a determination of what is mean-spirited and what is all in fun is a fine line, but it's like the definition of porn - you know it when you see it. The rules of this board are pretty clear - it's not a place for bashing the Eagles, especially about something as juvenile as physical appearances. On this very specific topic, I support Soda's position. I consider myself a comrade to all of you and I will support you if you need it. And I love that we are all Eagles fans.

By the way Mary, I was on your side when you were being attacked. You said nothing wrong and I will stand by that.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-16-2013, 11:25 AM
http://www.westword.com/1995-01-11/music/taken-past-the-limit/full/

Here is another point of veiw about the HOF reunion.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-16-2013, 11:53 AM
This also goes along with what Felder said in his book about Bernie and Randy getting cut out of the Royalties.

Lamorna
12-16-2013, 01:00 PM
Randy usually comes across as whatever happened 'So what' it's in the past but in this article he seems very angry-for him. I don't blame him either. To be cut off and cut out like that must have been dreadful. I have to read it again to take it all in.

MaryCalifornia
12-16-2013, 01:18 PM
Agree, Lamorna. I had not seen that interview before. It's surprisingly negative, coming from sweet Randy. Two observations: 1) I thought it was funny when he said he was the best known member of the Eagles when they started - I always thought it was just taken as fact that Bernie was the most successful, respected, well-known member when they formed, but, they each have their own perspectives of themselves!; and 2) Randy and the interviewer are pretty dismissive of Timothy and his role in the band. The Eagles had a bass player (who had a huge hit on TLR and who seemed to be so well-liked within the band). Can't have two bass players. Why would they dump Timothy to call back a former member who had departed under negative circumstances? It would be like asking Bernie to join on HFO instead of Joe.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-16-2013, 02:14 PM
That is the way I feel. Maybe they could have done it like this tour. Have Randy and Bernie come out and do a certain amount of the concert. There is no reason why he could not have shared time on the stage with Timothy. Having the whole group back would have been awesome. Bernie and Randy were a big part of their success.

MaryCalifornia
12-16-2013, 02:25 PM
Of course he would have loved to have been asked, and of course he was a huge part of their success. I guess I was questioning if he had been asked, and had agreed, how would it have gone down? Probably like you said, come out to sing a few songs, with Timothy playing bass and staying on stage. So for the HFO tour, what songs would he come out for? TITTL, obviously. What else? I'm not being snarky here, I'm trying to start a "what if Randy did join" for HFO...where he could have been featured? Going to go back and look at the set lists...

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-16-2013, 02:29 PM
Why could't they both take turns playing bass? I really don't see why they couldn't do that. They are both very good bass players. I do not believe TITTL was on the setlist but it could have been along with TALA and CKOF. Both of these men are wonderful singers and great musicians.

UndertheWire
12-16-2013, 02:36 PM
It would have been great if they'd found a way to include Randy and Bernie and I understand why he felt upset.

However, the idea that there was a conspiracy to deprive Randy and Bernie of royalties seems rather specious. A new recording could be sold to fans who already had the original recordings which was potentially a huge market. I've been back through the track listings for the first 5 albums to see which songs Bernie or Randy have a writing credit for but didn't sing lead on and it comes down to just three:
- Witchy Woman
- Saturday Night
- Hollywood Waltz
Of those, only the omission of Witchy Woman seems questionable. Of course, Glenn could have sung Take It to the Limit as he already sang that in his solo shows.

On the current tour, Witchy Woman, Saturday Night and Take It To the Limit are all in the set, so Randy and Bernie will be benefiting from publishing this time.

MaryCalifornia
12-16-2013, 03:13 PM
I have to admit I don't understand this whole publishing rights issue. Can someone explain how/why Randy and Bernie missed out on something relating to their songwriting or performing rights because the Eagles released a live album of songs they were involved with? (Is this the issue?) Is it because they didn't put songs written by Bernie or Randy on the HFO album/DVD?

Edit: and, an even more fundamental question - as regards HFO or this tour, we are talking about royalties from album sales/downloads generated by the tour, not the actual live performances of the songs in shows, correct? Or are we talking about potential royalties if the Eagles release a recording or dvd of the current tour?

UndertheWire
12-16-2013, 03:21 PM
I think there are two parts to it
- if the old recordings were repackaged and reissued, Randy and Bernie would get royalties for the songs on which they performed. As these are new recordings on which they did not perform, they got nothing.
- if they had a writing credit on a song that was re-recorded, they would get paid for the use of the song, but as they did not write any of the songs included in HFO they got nothing.

I find the whole publishing and royalty arrangements really confusing. I've read that when a record gets played on the radio, the writer of the song benefits but not the performer, at least in the US.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-16-2013, 03:35 PM
The whole royalty thing is very confusing. But Bernie and Randy did not get anything from HFO because everything was re-recorded. I just think they would have liked to have been asked. They were all friends at one point and all were involved in making this a very successul band. It is what it is.

MaryCalifornia
12-16-2013, 03:40 PM
Thank you. OK, so I think that leaving WW and TITTL off of the HOTE tour would have been cause for suspicion of shenanigans. HFO was just weird, though. It was so Henley-heavy, we've had discussions on this. I'm not as offended by the Eagles leaving those two songs off of HFO as I would be if they left them off this tour. Also, like they talked about in the doc, they were sort of flying by the seat of their pants on HFO - they had no idea they would tour for 2 1/2 years, or that anyone would come to their concerts. In hindsight (even in 1995 hindsight) it's easy to say, wow, they left out some classic Eagles songs off of that super successful tour, but we should try to put it in 1994 perspective, when they were worried and nervous and didn't know what the heck to expect. And, the successful solo songs were more of a focus at that time, also. So, at this point, I'm thinking no shenanigans as far as intentionally depriving Bernie or Randy on HFO, but I could be swayed by more info...

MaryCalifornia
12-16-2013, 03:43 PM
The whole royalty thing is very confusing. But Bernie and Randy did not get anything from HFO because everything was re-recorded.

Now see, this is where I'm confused - if they have songwriter credit, they would get royalties. It doesn't matter if the song is re-recorded in the studio or is on a live album, right? Re-recording something doesn't deprive the songwriter...To the contrary, it would seem to me that a new recording of a popular song would be a boon to the songwriter.

moonlight74
12-16-2013, 03:53 PM
What seems to be continually conflicting is the extension of the future performances that stemmed from the success of HFO. I recall about 10 years ago when the Farewell 1 tour was gathering momentum that these same issues were being brought up then as well.
Publishing rights are king in the music business. Performance based rights are nearly non existent - the loopholes for performers are found in name branding & credits.

randymeisnerrocks
12-16-2013, 05:01 PM
Now see, this is where I'm confused - if they have songwriter credit, they would get royalties. It doesn't matter if the song is re-recorded in the studio or is on a live album, right? Re-recording something doesn't deprive the songwriter...To the contrary, it would seem to me that a new recording of a popular song would be a boon to the songwriter.

Exactly right. There are songwirter royalties and then there are performance royalties. It's apples and oranges.

My father was in a band all my life and my understanding is that a certain percentage goes to the songwriter, a certain percentage to the song publisher, and then a certain percentage to the artist.

MaryCalifornia
12-16-2013, 05:10 PM
Yes, and wasn't there some discussion in the doc about the band members actually not having the publishing rights to some of their early songs because they had "bad" lawyers? And also, didn't Geffen give Henley back some publishing rights at one point because he had been so successful on his solo stuff?

Perhpas there are generally three entities that can own rights/receive royalties to a song: 1) the Songwriters, 2) the band/performers (in this case Eagles Corp. in the '70s, includes 5 members - shares publishing with the studio - has rights to the original recording) and 3) the Studio (shares publishing with the band according to percentages laid out in a contract). So as far as Randy, let's just take TITTL for an example. On the original recorded version, he gets paid off of 1 and #2. If the Eagles released a live version with Glenn singing, Randy would still get his #1 songwriter credit, but he wouldn't get #2. That could be where he's losing out. But that results in an absurd contention that by making a live album that includes a song he has rights to, the Eagles are intentionally screwing him - I don't think he is claiming that.

This topic may have run out of steam here (sorry!), but I have seen this claim in multiple articles or interviews (intent to defraud Bernie and Randy), and have always glossed over it because I didn't understand. The only argument that makes sense to me is that they intentionally left out his songs, as UTW analyzed above.

Edit: I posted this before I saw RMR's post above - so we're on to something!

UndertheWire
12-16-2013, 06:23 PM
The publishing company is separate from Eagles Ltd. To begin with the band had a single publishing company and they all benefited equally, no matter who within the band wrote the song but at some point that changed.

This might help (or it may confuse further):
http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/music-royalties.htm

Just to be clear, I was not suggesting that WW and TITTL were deliberately excluded so as to deprive Bernie and Randy. It's just that I couldn't see any of the other Randy or Bernie songs even being considered.

Ive always been a dreamer
12-16-2013, 06:48 PM
This is an interesting discussion. Regarding copyright, publishing, royalties, etc., I agree it can get really confusing. And it only adds to the confusion because contracts can differ a great deal from one artist to another. Thanks for posting that link, UTW. I remember a similar discussion about this a while back and I did a little research. One of the things I discovered about U.S. Copyright law is that apparently only the writers of a song's melody and lyrics are legally entitled to receive songwriting credit. To me, the writer of a song's music should also be entitled to royalties as well. At least, the members of the Eagles apparently agreed because they did credit the writer of the music.

VAisForEagleLovers
12-16-2013, 09:13 PM
What seems to be continually conflicting is the extension of the future performances that stemmed from the success of HFO. I recall about 10 years ago when the Farewell 1 tour was gathering momentum that these same issues were being brought up then as well.
Publishing rights are king in the music business. Performance based rights are nearly non existent - the loopholes for performers are found in name branding & credits.

One thing that adds to the confusion is that royalties are paid differently depending on the country. Each has their own copyright laws.

randymeisnerrocks
12-16-2013, 09:31 PM
This is an interesting discussion. Regarding copyright, publishing, royalties, etc., I agree it can get really confusing. And it only adds to the confusion because contracts can differ a great deal from one artist to another. Thanks for posting that link, UTW. I remember a similar discussion about this a while back and I did a little research. One of the things I discovered about U.S. Copyright law is that apparently only the writers of a song's melody and lyrics are legally entitled to receive songwriting credit. To me, the writer of a song's music should also be entitled to royalties as well. At least, the members of the Eagles apparently agreed because they did credit the writer of the music.

I'm not completely sure that's right. Queen sued Vanilla Ice over the fact he sampled their song "Under Pressure" and that's was just 8 notes.

VAisForEagleLovers
12-16-2013, 10:00 PM
We've referred to the tour and album by many things, and most refer to it as a reunion album/tour. Obviously, that's not a good term as a reunion tour goes the length of the tour and then it all ends. The Eagles always referred to it as a Resumption Tour, which implies picking up where they left off. Randy and Bernie weren't part of the band when things 'ended' in 1980. We've all discussed, ad infinitum, the reasons why they weren't part of the band but the fact remains they weren't. It never for one moment occurred to me at the time or since that they should have been included, until someone here suggested it.

I never heard any of my friends who were fans or DJs or anyone at the time wonder why Bernie or Randy weren't included. I'm sure there were some who did, just none of the ones I listened to. The conversations I remember hearing went between euphoria they were getting back together and disgust they were getting back together. The only personnel chit-chat I remember was surprise that Felder was back with them, given the rumored reasons for the split. I said it before in this thread, Bernie and Randy left the band, and perhaps neither of them really wanted to, and so there were, at least potentially, negative feelings there.

We all know what happened between Glenn and Felder during that last concert in 1980, and there was a long build-up to it, it wasn't just "I guess" and off went the gloves. Glenn and Henley had a history and both had egos, and neither were certain they could work with the other. Then there was Joe. In a world where failed attempts at sobriety were reported on daily, Joe had a very recent recoverty that hadn't been tested at all. I can totally understand why none of these guys, and especially Irving, wanted to take on two additional potential problems. It seems like Glenn wasn't totally sold on doing it at all, and you know Irving was pushing for the scenario that would most likely last long enough to do a tour.

Given all that, I don't think the guys were wrong to exclude Bernie and Randy, and it wouldn't surprise me if they never even considered it, given it was a resumption vs. reunion/history tour. I feel that if they had, it would have been a shorter tour, and the Eagles likely would have ended again at the end of it. I'm glad they included them when being inducted into the RHOF, it seems a lot of bands don't do that.

sodascouts
12-16-2013, 10:23 PM
I'm having trouble visualizing it, honestly. It would be like bringing back Bekka Bramlett to Fleetwood Mac when Stevie was there, or former lead guitarists/singers Peter Green, Rick Vito, Billy Burnette, and Dave Mason while Lindsey Buckingham was there. I think most of the audience would be scratching their heads.

I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but it would sure be unusual. I can't think of any other bands who have rotating line-ups at various parts of the show, or two bassists, that kind of thing. The closest you get is Bernie coming off and on for HOTE, but no one leaves when he comes on, although Tim and Joe wait a song or two to come out and join him. Maybe there are bands that do this and I'm just not aware of them... anyone know of any?

Still, it is a lovely fantasy to have all of them onstage together again. That would be wonderful. I just don't know if it was feasible back in 1994. Even now it would be difficult logistically.

Grey Sadler
12-16-2013, 10:53 PM
http://www.westword.com/1995-01-11/music/taken-past-the-limit/full/

Here is another point of veiw about the HOF reunion.

The following is from 12 years down the road...check out the passage about "catching someone at a wrong time when everyone was kind of angry at everyone else"...http://www.smoothjazznow.com/interviews/randy_meisner.htm



(http://www.smoothjazznow.com/interviews/randy_meisner.htm)

sodascouts
12-16-2013, 10:57 PM
Thanks for that counterpoint, GS. Randy makes a good point about how the media is always trying to get the dirt - and of course, that's what they focus on if they even see a hint of it.

I really wish Randy would do more interviews nowadays. At least we have the doc.

VAisForEagleLovers
12-16-2013, 11:38 PM
Thanks for posting, GS!


John - I remember a few years ago watching a live Don Henley special on A&E and he mentioned something interesting that he just couldn't believe how long it took to get from the beginning to the end of an album. There were so many different components to making an album.

Randy - Especially for Henley, he is such a stickler. You just have to listen to his music. (laughing)

Really? It takes Don a long time to get an album out? I hadn't noticed. :lie:

MaryCalifornia
12-17-2013, 01:42 AM
I agree. I don't think it's about money and publishing credits and who knows what else? .

I think we are all empathetic to Randy's feelings of rejection. Nobody doubts this or fails to understand. He made multiple overtures, which were consistently rejected from the time he left the band until HOTE, from what we know. However, in the article, he does bring up the money issue - more than once. Meisner notes "And I'm thinking, gee whiz, I wish they'd reunited with the guys who were actually in the group. And then they rerecorded all the old songs on that new CD, just to make sure that Bernie and I wouldn't get a penny of royalties from them." and, "But when Meisner is asked how much he could have made if he, too, had been invited to the party, he suddenly sounds wistful. "Millions," he mutters. "Millions."

This is what I was interested in - understanding HOW was he out "millions?", because we've heard this before. The only way I can see he would have made millions and millions if he were back in the band, as a full time member. He wouldn't have made that kind of money as a special guest, and they certainly wouldn't have given him any rights to anything they created for HFO. But, I'm not doubting that he sees financial loss for himself - I believe him, I'm just trying to understand how it worked.

Not sure what he meant by he wishes they had reunited with the guys who were actually in the group. I think they did. They took 2 big risks in an effort to keep the lineup the same as 1980 - Joe (sobriety) and Felder (hated him but needed him for insurance.) Don and Glenn seem to have been very protective of Timothy and his role, in many ways. I don't see them asking him to share the stage with Randy on HFO. Agree with VA that they probably never even considered it. I am glad that they did consider it for HOTE as it is totally appropriate and I wish Randy were able to join in.

moonlight74
12-17-2013, 02:28 AM
I believe Randy & Bernie could have made millions in 1994. Merchandizing, record sales, new opportunities. This wasn't going to happen though.
I am glad Randy took the high road, all the boy's have grown a lot. Time heals.

VAisForEagleLovers
12-17-2013, 08:30 AM
I believe Randy & Bernie could have made millions in 1994. Merchandizing, record sales, new opportunities. This wasn't going to happen though.
I am glad Randy took the high road, all the boy's have grown a lot. Time heals.

From the way it read, the question was how much he'd have made if he'd been on the tour (not about the songs) and that would have been from the touring itself, including the merchandising and the record sales. The Eagles made a lot of money from HFO, no doubt about it. They've also been fairly vocal in the past about how in this day of copying of music and free listens on YouTube, and the low return on electronic formats, touring is the only way for a band to actually make money. Which implies to me that it's a true money-maker.

ETA: Since the guys usually have their own promotion company, that means they get money off concessions as well.

UndertheWire
12-17-2013, 12:12 PM
In the SmoothJazz interview, Randy says he didn't make a penny on the Poco reunion tour and "paying all this money for merchandise rather than making money on it." Of course, the Eagles were a much safer bet but there was still the risk that it wouldn't work.

Ive always been a dreamer
12-17-2013, 06:46 PM
This is an interesting discussion. Regarding copyright, publishing, royalties, etc., I agree it can get really confusing. And it only adds to the confusion because contracts can differ a great deal from one artist to another. Thanks for posting that link, UTW. I remember a similar discussion about this a while back and I did a little research. One of the things I discovered about U.S. Copyright law is that apparently only the writers of a song's melody and lyrics are legally entitled to receive songwriting credit. To me, the writer of a song's music should also be entitled to royalties as well. At least, the members of the Eagles apparently agreed because they did credit the writer of the music.


I'm not completely sure that's right. Queen sued Vanilla Ice over the fact he sampled their song "Under Pressure" and that's was just 8 notes.

When you talk about copyright, publishing, and royalties, there is a often times a difference in what the legal requirements are as opposed to what is standard procedure and common practice among artist, recording, and publishing companies. That was the point of my post about why this is all so confusing. Then, as someone else mentioned, the fact that laws differ in various countries only adds more confusion. However, the bottom line is that the artists decide who gets the songwriting credit for a song. Once someone is given credit, then they are subject to and protected by the intellectual property laws.

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-18-2013, 10:42 AM
Since I will never get to see Randy play with the Eagles again, I can at least feel solace that when I hear most of their hit songs on the radio, Randy played on them. I get to hear his back up singing and his bass playing almost daily. He is very talented.

moonlight74
12-18-2013, 03:27 PM
Since I will never get to see Randy play with the Eagles again, I can at least feel solace that when I hear most of their hit songs on the radio, Randy played on them. I get to hear his back up singing and his bass playing almost daily. He is very talented.


I so agree. Anyone that can compose & play rhythm & blues, waltz ballads and basic rock & roll while staying consistently in tune & on key has TALENT!

The Thrill Is Never Gone
12-18-2013, 03:40 PM
I think all the Randy fans feel denied.

luna65
12-18-2013, 03:49 PM
One of the things I discovered about U.S. Copyright law is that apparently only the writers of a song's melody and lyrics are legally entitled to receive songwriting credit. To me, the writer of a song's music should also be entitled to royalties as well. At least, the members of the Eagles apparently agreed because they did credit the writer of the music.
That is a practice which is fairly common I would say (the latter, I mean). In certain cases a band member having nothing to do with the writing of a song might receive credit as recompense for other reasons; it's sort of the same situation as someone else owning all or part of an artist's publishing. The industry in its various permutations has a core practice: external forces often dictate who ends up with the cash.

moonlight74
12-18-2013, 06:01 PM
That is a practice which is fairly common I would say (the latter, I mean). In certain cases a band member having nothing to do with the writing of a song might receive credit as recompense for other reasons; it's sort of the same situation as someone else owning all or part of an artist's publishing. The industry in its various permutations has a core practice: external forces often dictate who ends up with the cash.


I so enjoy reading posts by those who know what they are talking about!

luna65
12-18-2013, 06:04 PM
Yeah I'm still not sure whether knowing some of the inner workings of the industry is a good thing or a bad thing. :rofl:

sodascouts
12-19-2013, 01:19 AM
Thanks for the info, dreamer and luna.

Topkat
11-02-2015, 02:28 PM
I don't think that HFO was in any way shape or form a "reunion tour" . It was the band reuniting & staying together. The HFO album & tour was the start of that. Berne & Randy were no longer in the band, & from what I understood had both"quit" the band a long time before the 1980 demise.

I don't think anyone expected them to appear since they were both replaced with new band members.

Funk 50
11-03-2015, 05:51 AM
I'm pretty sure that Randy, rather than Timothy was the expected bassist for the Eagles reunion. The Long Run was the only previous Eagles album that Randy hadn't played on. He was the bassist on the two mega-selling Eagles albums. He even appeared on Greatest Hits II and Eagles Live that were released after he'd left.

It was a creditable decision to ask Tim first but I reckon most Eagles fans would have preferred a reunion of the Hotel California line up.

Didn't turn out too bad though :smile:

GlennLover
11-03-2015, 08:51 AM
Glenn uses the word "resumption" to describe HFO.

Brooke
11-03-2015, 10:38 AM
I'm pretty sure that Randy, rather than Timothy was the expected bassist for the Eagles reunion. The Long Run was the only previous Eagles album that Randy hadn't played on. He was the bassist on the two mega-selling Eagles albums. He even appeared on Greatest Hits II and Eagles Live that were released after he'd left.

It was a creditable decision to ask Tim first but I reckon most Eagles fans would have preferred a reunion of the Hotel California line up.

Didn't turn out too bad though :smile:

Why would you think that? Timothy was already established as their bass player? Why skip over him and go back to someone who had quit? This boggles my mind that you would think this!

UndertheWire
11-03-2015, 01:59 PM
While I can see that a fan, without the resources we have these days for tracking the comings and goings of band members, might have expected Randy to return, I can't believe it was ever seriously considered by anyone associated with the band.

MaryCalifornia
11-03-2015, 02:12 PM
I don't believe we have any information that Randy was expected to be the bassist for HFO. Except maybe in his own mind he was hoping...

Freypower
11-03-2015, 04:57 PM
I'm pretty sure that Randy, rather than Timothy was the expected bassist for the Eagles reunion. The Long Run was the only previous Eagles album that Randy hadn't played on. He was the bassist on the two mega-selling Eagles albums. He even appeared on Greatest Hits II and Eagles Live that were released after he'd left.

It was a creditable decision to ask Tim first but I reckon most Eagles fans would have preferred a reunion of the Hotel California line up.

Didn't turn out too bad though :smile:

Sorry, but I am with Brooke on this. 'Expected'? By whom?

Like the fans had any say in it. I have no idea what 'most fans would have preferred'.

Funk 50
11-04-2015, 05:20 PM
Why would you think that? Timothy was already established as their bass player? Why skip over him and go back to someone who had quit? This boggles my mind that you would think this!

When rock bands announce a reunion, I don't think it's unrealistic to expect it to be a reunion of the most successful or classic line up.

Being, for a moment, a self appointed spokesperson for most, pre HFO Eagles fans, I'd say that's the Hotel California line up.

I think the Eagles released 10 albums before HFO, Randy was on 9 of them, particularly the two Eagles albums that are in the top twenty best selling albums of all time. Randy would be the original bassist on most of the Eagles songs in the HFO set list. Most of Tims work, at the time, was still as a member of Poco.

As GlennLover mentioned, Glenn clarified that it was actually a resumption rather than a reunion.

Freypower
11-04-2015, 05:33 PM
Yes. It was a resumption, with the bass player from the lineup that existed before the breakup.

Never mind the fact that several of those albums Randy was on were compilations or live albums. Never mind that he quit the band in 1977.

Congratulations on your 'self appointed spokesperson' status. Very clever.

Brooke
11-05-2015, 02:52 PM
Exactly.

Btw, I'm a pre- HFO fan and I would have never expected Randy to be included in the resumption. I honestly don't think anyone would. I have nothing against Randy, but he quit and they found someone to take his place. :headscratch:

F50, I'm sorry, but your statement is just ridiculous. :shrug:

Funk 50
11-06-2015, 09:43 AM
Please yourself Brooke. I mean, it's ridiculous to think of bands reuniting with band members who have quit, isn't it! What an idiotic concept! :crazy:

UndertheWire
11-06-2015, 11:30 AM
I didn't pay any attention to the reunion, but as I didn't even know that Randy had left the band, I might have expected him to be in the line-up. My preference, rather than expecation, would have been for a reunion of the original four.

Brooke
11-06-2015, 05:32 PM
Please yourself Brooke. I mean, it's ridiculous to think of bands reuniting with band members who have quit, isn't it! What an idiotic concept! :crazy:

Well, it is to me, but I guess not to all. Sorry!

Topkat
11-17-2015, 06:29 PM
I don't understand all the expectations of Randy rejoining the band for HFO???
Tim was the bass player when the band broke up, so I would assume he would be when they reunited.

chaim
11-19-2015, 11:38 AM
I would assume that "the masses" think that the bass player they see in the Eagles today has always been there. Not sure if any of them went "I wonder which bass player they'll choose" when they started hearing about the reunion/resumption.

As for Eagles fans, I would assume that most people expected Timothy, although some (including myself) probably would have preferred Randy.

Having said that, I can see Funk 50's point. In rock music "reunions" often mean original or at least classic lineups (when Deep Purple reunited, it wasn't the last lineup before the breakup - although Bolin, of course, couldn't have been there anyway). I don't remember if the Eagles made it clear when they were coming back that it was a "resumption", or if it was just seen as a "reunion" at that point. Personally I remember hearing them talk about this only later (Glenn's "For the record, we never broke up..." on HFO etc.). But my memory is very hazy there.

Topkat
11-20-2015, 02:22 PM
Yes, Glenn said, We never broke up, we just took a 14 year vacation! It's on the HFO DVD.

As for Randy & Bernie, they both supposedly "quit" the band, so I was not expecting either of them for HFO.

Topkat
11-20-2015, 02:33 PM
Sorry, but I am with Brooke on this. 'Expected'? By whom?

Like the fans had any say in it. I have no idea what 'most fans would have preferred'.

I am also with Brooke on this one. I didn't expect Randy & have no idea what "most of the fans" were expecting or preferred. They did what they were going to do without asking for "the fans" opinion.

NightMistBlue
11-23-2015, 02:24 PM
According to "The Long Run" book, Henley in particular had great loyalty to Tim and Felder. I'm sure that's not the only reason, but one can imagine that Henley's vote/wishes carry tremendous weight in band decisions.

Freypower
11-23-2015, 04:48 PM
According to "The Long Run" book, Henley in particular had great loyalty to Tim and Felder. I'm sure that's not the only reason, but one can imagine that Henley's vote/wishes carry tremendous weight in band decisions.

The quotation is by Azoff & refers to the failed 1990 reunion:

'Tim & Felder desperately needed this to happen & Henley felt a great loyalty to them'.

That may be the case, but the first attempt at a reunion was vetoed by Frey. In 1994 it was only after Frey & Henley agreed to reform that the other three were approached.

OutlawManNJ
02-25-2016, 02:16 PM
Just wondering when the Eagles reunited in 94 any reports on if Randy was ever considered or asked to join the band again or was Timmy automatically invited?

chaim
02-25-2016, 03:20 PM
I have never seen anything that suggests he was considered, so I'd say no. He left the band, Timothy didn't.

OutlawManNJ
02-25-2016, 05:12 PM
I have never seen anything that suggests he was considered, so I'd say no. He left the band, Timothy didn't.

Well over a 14 break, lots of things can happen.

timfan
02-25-2016, 05:40 PM
Glenn had reffered to HFO as a "resumption" meaning they were picking up the band where they had last left it in 1980.. with Don H, Glenn, Joe, Don F, and Timothy.

Freypower
02-25-2016, 05:50 PM
Here is the existing thread on this issue:

https://eaglesonlinecentral.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4595

Ive always been a dreamer
02-25-2016, 08:09 PM
Yeah - I went ahead and merged the two threads.

MaryCalifornia
02-25-2016, 09:10 PM
Well over a 14 break, lots of things can happen.

During those 14 years Timothy was an in-demand musician and singer who performed on Don Henley's, Glenn Frey's, Joe Walsh's and Don Felder's projects - http://www.allmusic.com/artist/timothy-b-schmit-mn0000604940/credits

The point being, they remained collaborators, and I assume friends, during the "break."

Randy didn't work with any of them, from what I can tell
http://www.allmusic.com/artist/randy-meisner-mn0000394931/credits

Freypower
02-25-2016, 09:40 PM
Actually Don Henley & Glenn did sing on Randy's One More Song album.

MaryCalifornia
02-25-2016, 11:56 PM
Thank you for the correction, FP, I didn't search it from that perspective!

UndertheWire
02-26-2016, 06:14 AM
Wow, there's some nasty stuff early in this thread. I'm glad that all settled down.

Going back to why there were no songs co-written by Randy or Bernie in the HFO TV concert, I had a further thought. There were only four songs where Bernie or Randy had a co-write but which were sung by someone else (Witchy Woman, Saturday Night, Hollywood Waltz, On the Border) and all of these were sung by Don Henley. As the show was already Henley-heavy, I don't think there was room without cutting Henley's solo material. Even then, I'd have rather they included "Peaceful Easy Feeling" and "One of These Nights".

Updated: Toni pointed out that Bernie had a co-write On the Border so I've included that.

NightMistBlue
02-26-2016, 08:16 PM
Randy worked with Joe and Timothy on the first Richard Marx album. Randy and Timothy also performed "Take It to the Limit" with Marx at a 1988 television appearance.

You'll also recall that Henley and Frey contributed backing vocals on Randy's "One More Song" in 1980.
Randy was very disappointed that he wasn't included on the Common Thread project. Bernie would have been ideal for that too. Bernie and Randy toured together in 1986 as part of a band called Black Tie.

Freypower
02-27-2016, 01:23 AM
Randy worked with Joe and Timothy on the first Richard Marx album. Randy and Timothy also performed "Take It to the Limit" with Marx at a 1988 television appearance.

You'll also recall that Henley and Frey contributed backing vocals on Randy's "One More Song" in 1980.
Randy was very disappointed that he wasn't included on the Common Thread project. Bernie would have been ideal for that too. Bernie and Randy toured together in 1986 as part of a band called Black Tie.

Given that Common Thread was about other musicians singing Eagles songs, and Randy & Bernie were former Eagles, I don't understand why Randy would have been disappointed at not being on that album. Not one Eagle appears on it.

chaim
02-27-2016, 01:45 AM
Don F complains in his book that they played no Randy or Bernie songs (including co-writes), and mentioned On The Border as one of the examples. Did they play that song live often in the early days? If not, why would they have played a rare track Bernie co-wrote now? Just to show people that "There are no hard feelings between us and the ex-members. Look we're playing one of their songs and giving them money"? I wonder if Don was concerned about this AT THE TIME? Somehow I don't think so, but maybe I'm wrong.

I know there were songs on HFO that hadn't been hits, but they were written by a person who was in the band at the time. Joe was there to sing Pretty Maids All In A Row etc. When we look at Bernie and Randy, there were two hits one of them had co-written. One of them was Randy's signature song, and if they had played it at that point, imagine all the whining: "Boohoo, they played Randy's song, but didn't invite him to sing it. They're trying to write him out of the Eagles history".

It's very childish IMO to suggest that the Eagles had some kind of a financial obligation to play Randy or Bernie songs. I know Randy complained about it too, but I like to think that he sees it from a broader perspective now.

sodascouts
02-27-2016, 02:24 PM
It's very childish IMO to suggest that the Eagles had some kind of a financial obligation to play Randy or Bernie songs. I know Randy complained about it too, but I like to think that he sees it from a broader perspective now.

Seriously. I've never heard Fleetwood Mac fans argue that the band should feel obligated to play Peter Green songs - much less play at least one song co-written by each one of their former members in concert. Why are expectations different for the Eagles?

SilverAcidRayne
02-28-2016, 11:33 PM
Whoa. My head is spinning from reading everything. Lol I would think they asked them but with personal reasons I'm thinking they didn't

NightMistBlue
02-29-2016, 12:17 PM
Given that Common Thread was about other musicians singing Eagles songs, and Randy & Bernie were former Eagles, I don't understand why Randy would have been disappointed at not being on that album. Not one Eagle appears on it.

I don't know what Randy meant by that - maybe he wanted to be in the video, or maybe he thought that the other Eagles sang or played on the album.

And to what Soda says about complaining that they didn't cover any of his songs in concert: it is silly on the face of it. I dimly recall someone on these forums figuring that a performance royalty - even for a big-time band like the Eagles - would only amount to a piddling sum per year, less than $1,000.

But then didn't the Eagles (seemingly) respond to Randy's complaint by putting "Take It to the Limit" in their setlist? Just as we can never know what goes on in a marriage, we can never know what goes on in a band. Maybe there's something we're not understanding between these guys.

GlennLover
02-29-2016, 12:21 PM
Timothy did sing backup on I Can't Tell You Why. Maybe Randy wanted to do something like that?

NightMistBlue
02-29-2016, 12:45 PM
Quite possibly. We may never know; Randy is such a mystery.

OutlawManNJ
02-29-2016, 01:03 PM
Would there be a market for a Randy Auto-Biography? I would think so even if not at best selling levels. I would love to hear Randys side on everything.

UndertheWire
02-29-2016, 01:04 PM
And to what Soda says about complaining that they didn't cover any of his songs in concert: it is silly on the face of it. I dimly recall someone on these forums figuring that a performance royalty - even for a big-time band like the Eagles - would only amount to a piddling sum per year, less than $1,000.
The money would come less from performing in live shows than from sales of the CD and VHS/DVD sales of the new recording. What actually happened was that the HFO MTV show and tour generated a lot of interest in the back catalogue and Randy and Bernie will have benefited from that. In one interview from the 90s, Bernie described GH1 as being like having an album go platinum every year.

According to the RIAA, in December 1993, GH1 was 14x multi-platinum but by June 1995, it was 22x multi-platinum. That's 6 million units in 18 months! In the same period, the Hotel California album sold 4-5 million, and GH2 (on which Randy played on half the tracks) sold 6 million.

NightMistBlue
02-29-2016, 02:32 PM
Good news for his ex, who gets 40% of his recordings royalties.

Outlaw, I think there definitely would be many people interested in Randy's autobiography. Sadly, he is a very private person and doesn't appear to be changing his status any time soon.

Freypower
02-29-2016, 05:02 PM
Whoa. My head is spinning from reading everything. Lol I would think they asked them but with personal reasons I'm thinking they didn't

They were not asked.