The feud between George Harrison and The Hollies 

In reality, Allan Clarke was the principal lead singer of the Hollies, not Graham Nash.

It is very important to note that this entire debacle could have been avoided, had the writer with NME not been a complete tool with the way he asked the question. I'm certain George would have given a more gregarious answer had the question been phrased as, "I see The Hollies are covering one of your compositions. How do you feel about their interpretation of your song, 'If I Needed someone'?" Instead, the question was phrased as if George wrote the song FOR The Hollies to sing, and Harrison was, quite correctly, upset about having it phrased that way. Everything that follows is just bruised egos from both parties.

The Hollies were a great band and made some ground breaking records.

The interviewer caused the fuss by suggesting George wrote it for the Hollies. And George is entitled to his opinions. We all have opinions that would cause awkwardness if said out loud - but are not judged or castigated over having critical thoughts - because we all pretend no one has such thoughts. Humans are weird.

Although I’ve never actually bought any Hollies records, I always enjoyed hearing their great songs on the radio or TV. They seemed to me to be a superior pop group to many during their 1960’s heyday, so I’m quite surprised that George got uptight about their cover of his song… I would have thought he’d have felt flattered by it! As for his comment likening them to ‘session men’ - to me that is a backhanded compliment, as session men have to be extremely competent, knowledgeable musicians!

Great video Mike. Very nice narration. It always amazes me the wealth of knowledge you bring to your channel and videos. I always learn something new with each video. God bless and rock on 👍😎🎸

came across this because of my interest in the Beatles , i was intrigued by Mike needing someone to voice this, and having done some research i wanted to wish Mike all the best, especially as there is so much feedback on what a good bloke he is! Top man.

Great content. A good story well told. When everyone has forgotten the personalities and hype of these pop groups, all we will be left with is the music. And that is the only important thing. I am grateful to be able to listen to these wonderful recordings of the past.

Love these littel snipits of rock and roll history. Keep them coming Mike and hope your keeping well .

Enjoying the content Mike. Loving the guest storyteller idea. Each brings their own atmosphere. Jackanory for grown ups!

I'll gladly take the Hollies over most current pop acts today..

On July 1, 1966, the Hollies would release their album "Would You Believe?", which a song would reach number 3, being remembered with great difficulty, but The Beatles would release "Revolver" on August 5, 1966, which was not has said, innovative, advanced, nothing like it before, the future of music, as beautiful as it is complex, the effects, ambient sounds, loops, distorted voices, backwards guitars, lysergic lyrics, unusual instruments, harmonized guitars, rhythms out of R&B, the word rock appears by itself, the album was number 1 on all charts and considered one of the 5 best albums in music history, etc., etc., etc. The Beatles are and will be the highest peak of popular music indisputably.

Graham Nash, lead singer with The Hollies....really ??.....I think you'll find it was Alan Clarke

To me, Mr. G. sounded like he was having a moment of displaced anger ...there were certainly real issues going on with him from the Lennon McCartney team... and... between him and his wife, Pattie.😢 I really liked Hollies music...but Harrison was my very favorite Beatle.

I've never heard of this story! I really like this type of content Mike!

All the drama helps no one. Pride and ego have caused may problems for many people. Just be nice, it’s more rewarding than being negative in every way.

I think “Think for yourself” is better than If I Needed Someone.

Both groups are legendary, period!

Great video. Thanks Mike

"I Can't Let Go" actually topped the `New Musical Express` charts for a couple of weeks.

The way the writer asked the question that George wrote the song "for the Hollies" is probably what set him off. And he's not wrong about the instrumental abilities of the Hollies. Graham Nash can only strum chords on an acoustic guitar and never plays electric guitar. With C,S,N & Y, during their electric set he would still just strum chords on an acoustic guitar, which no one could hear anyway. There aren't any stand out guitar lines or keyboard lines from the Hollies, even from the few hits they had. Graham is a very good songwriter. Our House and Teach Your Children are great songs. But, for live concerts he really only contributed vocals, not any memorable work with stringed instruments. I never have known the names of any of the other Hollies, and only knew Graham as a Hollie from learning it when C,S&N put out the first album. George was caustic, but he wasn't wrong about this.

Love Mike's videos... really missing him! 💔🕊✌️🕯

I feel bad if these two groups were really at odds because they were both great. I adored them both but actually liked the style of the Hollies a little better. May they both go down in history as two of the greatest bands ever.

You're such an inspiration Mike!! A real never surrender warrior!! God Bless you brother, you're absolutely awesome!! Jack ~'()'~

I'm a big listener to the Beatles, and I also enjoy the Hollies music. Given the information in this video, I wonder if there was still some animosity between George & Graham when his new group (CSN) auditioned for Apple Records in 1968. Interesting thought

Wrong - Terry Sylvester was a fellow Liverpudlian and was quite friendly with George. Terry said that George gave him a big hug after he scored his 1st number hit "He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother" with the Hollies.

Very clear pronuntation. Thanks

I never understod this discussion about -If I needed someone-, To me both groups were good to listen to and I did so. It was two different bands with about the same type of music 1960s Brit POP.

The interviewer set George up by suggesting he simply wrote the song for The Hollies, as if to say the Hollies made it popular and not him.

I very much like "If I Needed Someone". It's a great song IMHO. I never heard the Hollies version before today (on Spotify), and I have to say that I much prefer the Beatles version - it's way better. Actually I think I fully agree with George Harrison's assessment. The Hollie's version sounds to me like one of those that would appear on records sold cheaply in supermarkets sung by unknown people to cash in on the popularity of current chart hits at a very low price. Whilst I can see why the drumming on the Hollies version might be said to be better owing to it being more complex and probably harder to play, it sounds completely inappropriate for the song and detracts from it rather than complementing it. I'm with Ringo on this one. Starr always played as a member of a group seeking to blend in with the music not as a soloist trying to draw attention to himself. A great team player. I should add that I do very much like both the Hollies, and Graham Nash with the Hollies, Crosby Stills and Nash and as a solo artist. But not in this case. Their version of this great Beatles song is a dud.

As a child of the 60's and loving both the beatles & the Hollies, I'm just now leaning of this riff of this song that George wrote & the Hollies recorded. A song that I truely feel was one of the Hollies best singles, other than another one of my favorites, "Look Through Any Window". I only say this because when I discovered it in the late seventies (roughly being in my late teens) it immediately caught my minds "music sound" appreciation, and when learning that George Harrison had written it, I thought "how great" that the Hollies had done a song written by one of the members of the Beatles and that member bering George Harrison. The one Beatle that I also feel was the one unsunge member of the group. In listining to what had transpired with George's immediate dismissal and some what anger of the Hollies version, I can't help but fell that with George, it came out of frustration that his own work with in the Beatle's at that time, was mostly brushed off. If he had no talent, how was it he did quite well after the Beatle's split. I think it a blessing in disguise that at least George's song got the recognition from another great group of the time, because it seems it wasn't one of Rubber Soul's most known songs, altho it was a good one. In the end, I hope that George thinks "well done" at least in the time it was at least recorded by a fellow group of the era, wonder how the Stones would have performed it had they done it. Michael

While the Hollies were certainly not Beatles level creatives they were a great pop band easily on the level or better than say other bands of their era such as Herman’s Hermits. With hits such as Carrie Anne, Bus Stop, Pay You Back With Intrest and Long Cool Woman In A Black Dress they were better than most pop of that era. Thanks for the great Video Mike! And the excellent voice over Phil!❤😊

Never been a fan of Nash and I was happy when he tootled looed the Hollies it really improved their sound without him!

The Beatles always had a problem with other people saying they stole their music if I needed someone was one of my favorite songs I never really did like the holidays. The only songs I liked was long, cool woman and sometimes there and then I breathe. May be a couple of more, but that’s about it, seems like the Supremes tried to sue George Harrison remind Sweet Lord over the song he’s so fine how do you think people were just jealous of the Beatles remind part of it I’ve been a fan of yours since 1964 at the ripe old age of 11 and still loving them today, and nothing will ever change my mind Thanks for sharing your video.👍🏼💖🎸😎☮️😁

I'm glad to see that you are doing OK Michael! Hopefully you are able to play your instruments.still. Keep up the good fight my friend!! 👍🏻👍🏻🇺🇸

Saw the Hollies live when I was a teenager. Amazing sound. You got live what you heard on recordings. Just listened to the Beatles and the Hollies versions of If I Needed Someone and the production quality of the Beatles’ version is far better. The Hollies’s vocals are amazing but there’s something about the recording of the instruments…

I THOUGHT THE SONG WAS ALRIGHT JUST A DIFFRENT VERSION WELL DONE LADS !!!

I just listened to the Hollies' version for the first time. What was George's problem? Their cover is quite nice, and really very true to The Beatles' version! George always griped that he wasn't taken as seriously as a song writer, yet part of knowing that you've "made it" as a composer is that others want to cover your stuff. Here a very established artist/band is covering his song and he trashes it? That's just wrong. Paul loves when people cover his stuff -- never heard him badmouth any of it. George was kind of a sour, bitter person at times.

Paragraphing is everything.

Graham Nash wasn't lead singer of the Hollies, that was Allan Clarke. Graham Nash was rhythm guitar/vocals. The only reason 'none of the Beatles' catalogue appeared in the top 10' while 'I Can't Let Go' was spending three weeks at #2 was because the Beatles were in between single releases ('Day Tripper/We Can Work It Out' and 'Paperback Writer'). Maybe this was a conscious move by the Hollies to avoid any further conflict, in which they would have inevitably come off second best. As for Graham Nash's comment saying that the Hollies were 'holding down places on the same top ten as the Beatles'. He was right in one sense of course, but the Beatles would have generally been at #1 and the Hollies somewhere lower down in the top ten so his comment didn't really stand up to close scrutiny. Very interesting video, but more care should have been taken with the pictures used of the Hollies as a couple of them were of a later lineup (after Graham Nash had left).

The Hollies are probably my favorite band of the 60s, besides the almighty Beatles of course. Interesting insight!

It was interesting to see this video, and I went to listen to the Hollies version of that song. It sounded to me like a very close imitation of the original. Very well done with a little variation. It wasn't all that good of a song, but it was really interesting to hear their version, and they executed it well.

The Hollies were a great 60s group that I always liked and looked forward to hearing their every release, they were/are brilliant, like lots of artists they had ups and ups but also the odd down , the Hollies cover of Harrisons If I needed Someone, flopped, but they went on to further great deserved success, long live the sixties !

Interesting that the Beatles gave a reel of Sgt. Peppers to Graham Nash before it was released. I don't think that 'fued' was quite as terrible as this video might have us think.

He wrote it for his wife. The question was framed as writing it for the hollies. Given he had so much competition within his own band getting any of his songs on an album, totally underst understand him bristling.

If I wrote a song that a group liked enough to want to record it, I would have felt flattered.

2 minutes in - Graham Nash wasn't the lead singer - the lead singer was Allan Clarke

Alan & Graham and The Hollies were originally Ricky & Dane Young and the Fourtones

The Hollies version is not as good. Roger McGuinn's (George's arrangement of the song was his response to the Byrd's sound) was not as good. George's version is one of the best tracks on Rubber Soul. I play an electric 12-string today because of George. One of the first songs iI learned to play on it was If I Needed Someone. (In 1966, I saw both the Hollies and the Beatles)

The Hollies were great!!!!

I'd never heard this one before Mike. The Hollies weren't played much here in Australia as I grew up in the 70's and it was only their Long Cool Woman and Magic Carpet Ride songs that got any air play. But The Beatles were all around on the TV and radio even in the 70's. For that, I'm not the biggest fan of the Hollies and it was only a couple years ago I downloaded their catalogue to have a listen. For me I could get away with just a greatest hits I reckon as not a lot popped out at me. But it's a bit of a shame George pretty much buried them in the media. Their response was fair. I suppose George seen a lot of what he'd class as Beatles imitators and bunched them all together. There's a heap of musical feuds around like: - Lemmy's review of The Darkness first album (Why Justin Hawkins hated Lemmy) - Ritchie Blackmore about Joe Satriani when he filled in before Steve Morse (talk about getting burnt by a guy you styled your playing after). I suppose the old saying "Never meet your idols" rings true.

To quote Mike Love….”Don’t f*ck with the formula!”….that’s what the Hollies were all about. The Beatles never really stuck to a formula….

Weird. I remember reading in 1983 that Graham Nash wanted to collaborate with George and that he felt their careers paralleled.

I love the Hollies music and always have. Incredibly wrong that Harrison would criticise them like he did. The Hollies like the Beatles, had some fabulous hit records.

I've never heard The Hollies' version until today but after hearing it I prefer The Beatles' version but I'm biased I've been a Beatles fan for 50 years.This supposed feud reminds me of the supposed feud between Jagger & Richards in the eighties both were created by the reporters who exaggerated comments that were made by the musicians involved.

Thx for this video. Great piece of information. Just listened to both versions of the song back-to-back on Spotify. And to me the Hollies version is nowhere near the Beatles version. And I agree to another post: The phrasing of the question to George Harrison was the real reason of George getting angry. It was his song. Had enough Beatles-song-writing-competition from Lennon/McCartney.😉

I don’t know who the fudge the Hollies are, but I certainly know everything the Beatles did as band and as solo artists. So I guess that settles that!

After all the groups doing Lennon/McCartney covers you'd think George would've appreciated a group as famous and respected as The Hollies releasing a single of his song. McCartney once said there's no greater compliment. But I suppose George felt differently. Shame, really, and I think The Hollies reaction was very adult and fair, considering that it must've hurt them.

Very interesting story, I've heard Graham Nash compliment the Beatles on numerous occasions as a big musical influence. I just listened to the track for the first time and it sounded very Beatle-ish but maybe a bit over produced compared to the very clean straight forward Beatle version. George is my favorite Beatle and should have been flattered, instead, appeared insecure with his negative feedback. Maybe the Hollies version gave him flashbacks of how Paul wanted the song to be recorded 🙄🎸

The totality of what George Harrison was saying might be that " Youse couldn't come up with your own composition worth putting to vinyl so youse nick one of ours, one of mine, in fact ", bearing in mind both the simultaneous-ness of it and that it was a ' premier ' feature, being a single.

Excellent, no nonsense factual summary of a difference of opinion between 2 bands. In essence, depending there’s probably no right or wrong answer. On a separate tangent, the continued zooming in and out sequences in the video made me feel a tad queasy.

Hmm Tony Hicks and George were happy neighbours for years. I think they were well over this feud. Delia Morris

Interesting video... as a "bloke" growing up on the west side of the pond in the 60's I envisioned the British Invasion as an attack of one great sounding group after another closing in from the east. It's a pity to hear that there was any animosity among the invaders at the time but it didn't appear to effect the sound or popularity thankfully.

Harrison always seemed to be a bit spikey.

Allan Clarke is the lead singer of the Hollies bot Graham Nash

I didn't know nothing about that story,and to be honest I 'm not a fan of the Hollies,but they has a few interesting songs that I liked.But after I heard what George said about their coverversion of》If I needed Someone,I listened to that version from the Hollies and please forgive me,but their version is...Well I agree with George ! Maybe his reaction was so harsh cause he wrotte that song for Patti B.and so he had special feeling about that song.However□But I also heard a story from Jimmy Page that George used to say to Jimmy》Jimmy the problem with Zep is,that they don't do enough ballads🙄😂However Jimmy took this critic to his heart and took one chord from Something and used it for Zeppelins》Rain Song😁Well Well ! (Rest in Peace George🕉Namaste🙏]

Rubber Soul IMO is the real masterpiece of the Beatles

It’s funny the Hollies said they didn’t want to ride the Beatles coattails yet release one of their songs as a single. And really, in ‘66, the Beatles were blowing up the idea of what rock music could be, what were the Hollies doing?

The Beatles is my top favourite band of the 60s. The Hollies is one of my favourites too, and they actually wrote some of my most treasured songs of all time. But learning that george and the hollies got into these kind of word exchange in the past over something is a bit dissapointing. Both were great groups and both fed so many families especially in my country were 60s music is very much alive and there re bands including mine that make a livelihood by covering these wonderful songs.

It’s the robot at the start and end that needs re-voicing. “China Guitar Septic”…LOL

Interesting how Graham Nash waited to do his biography/autobiography after George Harrison's death! The Hollies were very good! However, the Beatles are LEGENDS!!! Great musicians, songwriters & entertainers!!!! There is a huge difference between good and GREAT!!!

Very interesting bits and pieces, needles and pins :) I love The Hollies almost as much as The Beatles. I always considered The Hollies cover of If I Needed Someone a failure, though, very disappointing as for the arrangement and the execution. George needn't have voiced his opinion in such a harsh way, probably, but I have to agree with him on this one. It was nice to hear a reviewer praise Bobby Elliot's drumming. Such a great tone and imaginative fills (I don't mean the song in question but his overall contributions). But I would never deem Hollies' harmonies superior to The Beatles'. I like the Beatles colour more, it's all subjective of course, but The Hollies would often fall slightly out of tune, especially Tony Hicks on the lows, but neither Allan nor Graham were super precise as well. And - to my ears - they tended to overdo the three-part trick, which The Beatles never did. One more thing, it's a bit of a stretch to call If I Needed Someone "a love song for Patti", as the lyrics are clearly addressed to some OTHER girl, who the singer kind of rejects for Patti's sake.

Yes, I agree, think its one of Harrison's best early compositions. I've just listed to both versions and there's really not to much difference. The Beatles version sounds warmer/fuller and yes, a bit more organic, but that might be the way both songs were posted/transferred to You Tube (and were recorded). The vocals on both versions are great but Nash's high harmonies on the Hollies version gives it a bit more cut through. Yes, Bobby Elliot is a superior drummer to Ringo and it comes through here although I like the tambourine on the original. Perhaps the biggest surprise and most noticeable difference between the two versions is the superior guitar sound of Harrison - I know he used a 12 string for this recording. Tony Hick's guitar sounds very tinny and thin, almost amateurish. Tony is a very good player too so I can only blame the Producer/engineers? Both are Parlophone recordings though and probably recorded in the same studio at Abbey Rd. Interesting!

Even if I just started liking George Harrison it doesn't mean that's my favorite singer will always be Allan Clarke of The Hollies nobody can match his beautiful voice

I suppose there was no good communicating between the groups producers and the groups. The Hollies obviously thought the Beatles' producer would have given the song exclusively to the Hollies - so they were more than surprised when Rubber Soul contained the same song they had recorded weeks before. In comparison both songs don't differ much from another, although "authenticity" is evidently on the Beatles' side.

I like their version. It's " Beatlesque " but go figure. I agree with George, but for the time? Brit groups were in pretty tough competition. It's a complement to George they didn't do a Lennon/McCartney tune. Allot of groups and performers were at the time.

Hollies were a bloody good group, great musicians and vocalists, often surprising with different songs. The Beatles were great innovators too! No need for silly stuff.

Who are the Hollie’s?

I'd always place the Hollies, In the top five of British sixties groups.

Aside from the musical spat between two huge British pop legends I can't see the logic in the timing of the Hollies cover version. Firstly, it comes out as a song featured on Rubber Soul in December '65 and the Hollies released their version at the same time, ffs. Give the Beatles recording a chance to circulate among the public, accumulating feedback et al, and then, perhaps in tribute, release a different version for comparison. The same stupidity was repeated with "Michelle". Both the "Overlanders" and "David and Jonathan" were vying for success with the Rubber Soul version; it was chaos!

There are good reporters, and there are those who say "You gave your love song away", as you're about to go on stage. Having said that, Harrison is right in his criticism, even if worded a bit sharp due to the question. Listen at The Hollies on "Look Through Any Window", the song before and "I Can't Let Go", the song after. (If I got that right.) Then listen to their "If I needed Someone", if you can bear. It's like they suddenly realised it's a top-level song, but they are not. The song didn't fail because it was boycotted; it failed because it was inferior. Mind you, "inferior" at that level is still in the top 90%, but it still wasn't good enough. Considering they were advised against it, I can imagine they were unconsciously not really doing their best. In the end, there are bad reporters and there are those who say "You gave a feud-inspiring comment, yesterday. Do you maybe want to polish those words, before we publish?"

I’m a certified Beatle maniac, and I love the Hollies. In my opinion, George was having a “moment”/ hyper sensitive/angry/unappreciated/frustrated etc…. You see this in him, popping up randomly. Hey, he’s human(was). Ridiculous, the comments he made on the hollies version. As if it’s not at all the same song. He’s obviously irrational at that point. Oh well. 🤷‍♀️ I like that Nash didn’t kiss his ass. Bravo!

The beatles never like competition.

There was no feud between George and The Hollies. I was at George's house out in the country one day and two members of The Hollies came over and we all drank jasmine tea and listen to Pop records. So this is a falsehood. 😁

Cover version might be a complement but then again could be kind of a slap in the face. The Hollie's had enough song writing talent not to need to cover a beetle's song.

Well, I do like the music of both groups (The Beatles and Hollies, and the music of their members), but on this case, and set aside about business point of view which is the cover version is legal & royalty comply, the fact that it was George Harrison's who wrote it and he personally created it for his own music/his own group (The Beatles) and not intended at all in the first place to wrote for other groups/music acts (on this case Hollies), I see George's commenting/reacting to a quality of a cover of his own song (whether the comment is like or dislike) is totally fine (no problem at all), it is his right to say any opinion. While on the other hand, i think the Hollies side is the one that should be (for this case) just accept every comments with ease (whether a like comments or dislike comments), no need to be "triggered". The main point is: "If you don't like an original artist/writer make bad/dislike opinions about your cover version of their work, go make and write your own music, don't do covers."

I liked the Hollies. They were not bad.lots of people bought their records.

i suppose they were all very young at the time and their hot headed ness got in the way.55/56 years later it seems exactly like that a youthful quarrel .I like both version and i wont get involved which version is apparently the better one,as everyone has different tastes and there is no wrong or right

Thank you Graham Nash but Allan Clarke is the lead singer of the Hollies and George Harrison was mean by making the smart ass remarke

It really does annoy me when people voice over comments that they really don't know what they are talking about. 1) Graham Nash wasn't the lead singer of The Hollies. It was Alan Clarke was. 2) When interviewed about this, you made about a Statement from Graham Nash. Graham Nash had already Left The Group. And moved to America, to start CROSBY, STILLS, NASH & YOUNG

The Hollies were great.

Allan Clarke lead singer!

Me-Ouch!

Love George's music but he always came across as a bit of a whiner.

I hear beatles music and hollies music, but I can hear betles music very often and long time, why its so different stuff, with a strong curve of evolution. The hollies? Only a very fine beat band.

The Hollies were a great band vocally and musically, Mr Nash, typically outspoken and knows it all as usual, strange he left them to go on to bigger things?? and then complain The Hollies should not have recorded 'He Ain't Heavy' without him-KNOBHEAD!

One of my problems with the Hollies was exactly what Nash said. He said if we have to wait for the right song then we will wait. The Beatles did not wait because they went out and wrote their own stuff while you wait for other artists to write stuff for you. George can say whatever he wants about your version of his song. And you can say whatever you want about the Beatles or George’s versions of one of your songs. Oh that’s right they never did one of your songs.

< < < GEORGE HATED THEIR GUTS. HE OFTEN TOLD ME SO. > > >

Seems that George wasn’t the silent Beatle but the angry Beatle. Hope you’re doing well Mike. Take care brother.

Did not know this feud, despite being a young Beatles fan in the 60s. Either arrangement is ok to me, neither is outstanding, song is pretty good though. But I can see George's annoyance. George was already sore he didn't get more of a voice in the Beatles, then both Beatles' and Hollies' versions came out at the exact same time. Now he's personally overshadowed by both the "other" Beatles and the Hollies with one of the few songs he wrote and performed, confusing fans and music journalists.