What if: The Beatles and The Doors play Woodstock

Gwendolyn Ingolfsson · Aug 15, 2009

Just like it says on the tin. From wikiAnswers:

The Woodstock promoters contacted John Lennon about The Beatles performing. Lennon was agreeable but the rest of the band wasn't. Lennon offered the Plastic Ono Band as a replacement but the promoters said no. The Doors at first agreed and then cancelled. The cited explanation was that Jim Morrison did not like performing in outdoor environments.

So. What if the Fabs and The Lizard King had been there for those legendary "three days of peace and music?" Epic or mega-epic?? And how much would the subsequent album sell? My guess: lots. Much lots.

Cornwall · Aug 15, 2009

Mega Mega Epic...to say the least

What a thought!!!.....The Beatles and the Doors lining up with the likes of The Who, Hendrix, The Grateful Dead, Neil Young, Joe Cocker in a sunny field in New York State....that would have BEEN a gig!!! I probably would have made my way there for the gig....if I was old enough, but I wasn't, so I'd have to have asked my mum, which isn't exacly rock 'n' roll is it.

Unfortunatley though, from a Beatles perspective, they were descending into their slow break-up by '69, cracks having appeared as early as 1967 after the death of Brian Epstein. Also they weren't exactly the best of buddies by then with all sorts of business and personal divisions going on, and they weren't collaborating artisticallly in the studio that well either, which the 'Let It Be' sessions are evident. Also, they had given up performing live by 1966, so the chances of them ever agreeing to the Woodstock gig were slim. Although, I did hear that John Lennon did initially agree to it.....but how true that is I don't know. You never know, performing live again and being in touch with their audience and the music and not just being stuck in the studio may have kept them together longer, despite their differences.

The Doors did in fact turn down their invitation, due to Jim Morrison's apparent dislike of performing outdoors, that's well-documented, but they would have been one hell of an addition to the line-up. As would the Fab-Four, who showed at the Apple rooftop gig that they were amazing live. As for album prices and sales....well, I think they'd still be counting the money now.

Many other bands turn the gig down apparently...Led Zepp, The Byrds, Jethro Tull, Moody Blues... there may have been some regret at missing, as it turned out, one of the best festivals of all, because the Moody Blues and Tull were both present at the Isle of Wight festival a year later...and The Doors were there too. The Beatles?.....well we all know what happened to them. Makes me think what they would have sounded like if they had survived as a band well into the 1970s....

Snowman23 · Aug 15, 2009

That would have made me even more jealous I wasn't a Woodstock.

Sigma7 · Aug 15, 2009

The Beatles hadn't performed in a live concert in 3 years at that point.

If it were announced they were coming, the tickets sell out in a record time never to be broken.

The question becomes: If the Beatles are there, just how beefed up is security? Enough to hold back the gatecrashers OTL or does an abosolute catastrophe ensue when insufficiant security (and resources) are crushed by an even larger number of gatecrashers, and I got a feeling the number of gatecrashers goes up exponentially once the Beatles are announced. What happens to the New York freeway system with the huge crush of cars, hitchikers, etc...flooding into an area that can't accomodate that many people? The gridlock alone would cripple the state of New York, never mind the fact that in OTL the crowd was so large and the resources were so overwhelmed that Rockefeller had to call out the New York state national guard for assistance in delievering relief.

If the Beatles go to Woodstock, a larger venue has to be found and the planner's have to turn the deal over to a promoter or someone else who actually knows what the hell they're doing, because if it still goes down at the same site, with the same people running it, it'd have been a calamity rather than the near-calamity/crisis averted that it was OTL.

I read somewhere that the actual number of people that attended Woodstock was around a quarter of a million people and that the number of people that claim to have been at Woodstock is well over a million.

If the Beatles had been there, over a million people really would have would have shown up.

Basically, Woodstock would have had to have been a massive comercial endeavor if the Beatles were added or else it would've ended up the proverbial "bad trip" for all involved.

The Dean · Aug 15, 2009

As it happens the Beatles were not a good live gig, especially at large venues. The Doors? I dunno, never saw them, wish I had though. Saw the Beatles, wish I hadn't.

I've seen most of the British and a lot of the American 60s and 70s bands, I grew up then.

Gwendolyn Ingolfsson · Aug 16, 2009

Sigma7 said:
The Beatles hadn't performed in a live concert in 3 years at that point.

If it were announced they were coming, the tickets sell out in a record time never to be broken.

The question becomes: If the Beatles are there, just how beefed up is security?

Jesus nipples, a lot I would hope!

Sigma7 said:
Enough to hold back the gatecrashers OTL or does an abosolute catastrophe ensue when insufficiant security (and resources) are crushed by an even larger number of gatecrashers, and I got a feeling the number of gatecrashers goes up exponentially once the Beatles are announced. What happens to the New York freeway system with the huge crush of cars, hitchikers, etc...flooding into an area that can't accomodate that many people? The gridlock alone would cripple the state of New York, never mind the fact that in OTL the crowd was so large and the resources were so overwhelmed that Rockefeller had to call out the New York state national guard for assistance in delievering relief.

If the Beatles go to Woodstock, a larger venue has to be found and the planner's have to turn the deal over to a promoter or someone else who actually knows what the hell they're doing, because if it still goes down at the same site, with the same people running it, it'd have been a calamity rather than the near-calamity/crisis averted that it was OTL.

I read somewhere that the actual number of people that attended Woodstock was around a quarter of a million people and that the number of people that claim to have been at Woodstock is well over a million.

If the Beatles had been there, over a million people really would have would have shown up.

Basically, Woodstock would have had to have been a massive comercial endeavor if the Beatles were added or else it would've ended up the proverbial "bad trip" for all involved.

Yeah. And I have no idea who what promoter they'd have to hire to take the reins. Bill Graham? Sid Bernstein? Organizing something like that would be a nightmare.

Ooh!

I just had a thought.

One more addition to the lineup:

Elvis. Is that even possible, or a no-go? Oh, let's have mercy on the poor promoters.....

Gwendolyn Ingolfsson · Aug 16, 2009

The Dean said:
As it happens the Beatles were not a good live gig, especially at large venues. The Doors? I dunno, never saw them, wish I had though. Saw the Beatles, wish I hadn't.

I've seen most of the British and a lot of the American 60s and 70s bands, I grew up then.

Beatlemaniac that I am, I've heard some of their live stuff and it is indeed hideous (excepting of course the Ed Sullivan show and the Hollywood Bowl album). However I got the impression that it was due to the technology of the day and not necessarily the band itself.

Sigma7 · Aug 16, 2009

Gwendolyn Ingolfsson said:
Yeah. And I have no idea who what promoter they'd have to hire to take the reins. Bill Graham? Sid Bernstein? Organizing something like that would be a nightmare.

Bill Graham.

If anyone could pull it off, it'd be Bill Graham.

How about Zep and Floyd at Woodstock?

Granted, they weren't as big in 1969 as they would get in the 70s, but they were capable of incredible live performances and had pretty good play lists to bombard the crowds with.

With good performances at Woodstock, they'd have gotten bigger even sooner.

Gwendolyn Ingolfsson · Aug 16, 2009

Sigma7 said:
Bill Graham.

If anyone could pull it off, it'd be Bill Graham.

How about Zep and Floyd at Woodstock?

Granted, they weren't as big in 1969 as they would get in the 70s, but they were capable of incredible live performances and had pretty good play lists to bombard the crowds with.

With good performances at Woodstock, they'd have gotten bigger even sooner.

Yeah. I like that idea. Floyd was still in it's Piper At the Gates Of Dawn/Ummagumma stage however, so might some of that material been a bit difficult to do live back then?

Still and all, as someone above posted, they're gonna need a bigger venue. Just adding the Beatles is gonna require one; throwing on the Doors, Floyd & Zep to boot....I don't know....the Grand Canyon, perhaps?

The Dean · Aug 16, 2009

Gwendolyn Ingolfsson said:
Beatlemaniac that I am, I've heard some of their live stuff and it is indeed hideous (excepting of course the Ed Sullivan show and the Hollywood Bowl album). However I got the impression that it was due to the technology of the day and not necessarily the band itself.

I used to like their studio stuff but after seeing them live it turned me off. There were loads of other acts that could perform live using exactly the same equipment they had. In fact in most cases they couldn't afford the gear the Beatles had but were able to set the audiences on fire.

Cornwall · Aug 16, 2009

As Keith Richards I think once said, out of the two of them the Stones were the better live act and the Beatles were the better studio performers.

The Red · Aug 16, 2009

Cornwall said:
As Keith Richards I think once said, out of the two of them the Stones were the better live act and the Beatles were the better studio performers.

HEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEY

The Red · Aug 16, 2009

The Red said:
HEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEYHEY

Can I just say this was not me this was my little brother.

My apologies.

The Dean · Aug 16, 2009

The Red said:
Can I just say this was not me this was my little brother.

My apologies.

Don't apologise, he makes more sense than most just a bit repetitive.

roronoa7 · Aug 16, 2009

hmmm Pink Floyd doesn't seem very likely, although they were HUGE in Britain at the time, they never really broke through to the US until Dark Side. But who knows? Maybe they do a set and reach earlier American popularity?

Someone else who was big at the time that hasn't really gotten a mention yet: Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention. They would have made an....interesting addition to the festival

MrP · Aug 16, 2009

The Red said:
Can I just say this was not me this was my little brother.

My apologies.

Be careful with that. There's no way for Ian to know whether you're telling the truth or not (and he errs on the side of cynicism), so if your younger brother puts up something ban-worthy, you'll be screwed. So it might be an idea to change your password/lock your door/chain your brother to the TV/similar.

the_lyniezian · Aug 16, 2009

The Red said:
Can I just say this was not me this was my little brother.

My apologies.

MrP said:
Be careful with that. There's no way for Ian to know whether you're telling the truth or not (and he errs on the side of cynicism), so if your younger brother puts up something ban-worthy, you'll be screwed. So it might be an idea to change your password/lock your door/chain your brother to the TV/similar.

I was about to say... that's what Rockingham said before he got banned. (With reference to The Red.) This of course being before he was known for endlessly sockpuppeting (presumably in revenge?)

The Dean said:
Don't apologise, he makes more sense than most just a bit repetitive.

Given it's in a thread about Woodstock, it makes perfect sense...

The Red · Aug 16, 2009

MrP said:
Be careful with that. There's no way for Ian to know whether you're telling the truth or not (and he errs on the side of cynicism), so if your younger brother puts up something ban-worthy, you'll be screwed. So it might be an idea to change your password/lock your door/chain your brother to the TV/similar.

Oh don't worry it won't happen again.

I've made sure of it

AmIndHistoryAuthor · Aug 16, 2009

Cornwall said:
The Doors did in fact turn down their invitation, due to Jim Morrison's apparent dislike of performing outdoors, that's well-documented, but they would have been one hell of an addition to the line-up.

It would've been quite a different Woodstock, Morrison shouting at blissed out hippies, "You're all a bunch of f*cking slaves!"

It's even funner to imagine if Morrison left the group earlier and Iggy Pop had replaced him (as he almost did IRL). Iggy at Woodstock cutting himself with glass or diving into the audience...

flippikat · Aug 16, 2009

Sigma7 said:
How about Zep and Floyd at Woodstock?

Granted, they weren't as big in 1969 as they would get in the 70s, but they were capable of incredible live performances and had pretty good play lists to bombard the crowds with.

With good performances at Woodstock, they'd have gotten bigger even sooner.

What about the Jeff Beck Group?

They were due to play Woodstock but broke up just a few weeks before the festival.

In hindsight, they could've leapfrogged Led Zep in the popularity stakes - even if it was temporarily...

Oh, and along the lines of whoever suggested Frank Zappa, what if The Velvet Underground play Woodstock?
Sure, it's too late for them to roll-out the whole 'Exploding Plastic Inevitable' thing.. But it makes me chuckle thinking of the great unwashed masses getting their heads around something like "Sister Ray"!