LB and Eric Clapton
 

Does anyone know what song(s) LB played on for Eric Claptons 1985 Behind the Sun album?

Lindsey played on "Something's Happening".

gracias:thumbsup:

Did recording "The Challenge" together for Christine's 1984 album lead to that or did they meet before?

I believe they met during the Rumours tour.

don't know how correct any of that is, but i think CAH's book has something about playing darts, guitar jamming, and freezing in clapton's castle while on a tour stop in london. mick and clapton were of course related through marriage.

And, George Harrison & Eric Clapton called themselves "Husbands-in-Law". :laugh:

That was during the Rumours tour.

[From a review of Behind The Sun by Nick DeRiso for Something Else Reviews, April 22, 2014]

http://somethingelsereviews.com/2014...-sacd-reissue/

That led to the addition of a trio of Ted Templeton/Lenny Waronker-produced tracks, including the reggaefied soft rock of “See What Love Can Do,” the rather generic “Something’s Happening and the middling hit “Forever Man.” They are typically the least of this album’s new-found intrigues — despite, or perhaps because, they feature some very big stars (including several members, past and present, of Toto; Lindsey Buckingham and Lenny Castro, among others). Ultimately, they tend to sound over-processed, and too on-the-nose for the times — even within this striking new aural environment.

Well sort of. Mick was divorced long before Eric married Patty.

But, Mick & Jenny remarried while Eric & Patty were married.

[From an article about Behind the Sun]

Fast forward, however, and the reggaefied soft rock of Williams’ “See What Love Can Do,” the rather generic “Something’s Happening” and the middling hit “Forever Man” remain the least interesting of the album’s songs. Warners tried to dress them up with some very big stars (including several members of Toto, Lindsey Buckingham and Lenny Castro, among others), to no avail. Over-processed, and too on-the-nose, they managed to essentially sink Behind the Sun (at least critically) all on their own.

Read More: 30 Years Ago: Eric Clapton Releases the Glossy, Misunderstood 'Behind the Sun' | http://ultimateclassicrock.com/eric-...ckback=tsmclip

Technically, being married to sisters doesn't make you related. I am not related to my husband's brother's wife. She is a "friend through marriage" if anything.

That's right- legally they were not related.
Colloquially though they would still have been considered brothers-in-law.

^I agree. That's how we would talk about that person colloquially and if someone marries my husband's brother, I do have a sense that they're in my family.

Legally, we're not related to any in-laws. I mean, in-laws would not count in intestate succession, for instance.

Or if you were sick and everyone else died, a mother-in-law would not be your "next of kin," for the hospital's purposes. Your cousin might have a claim but your in-law won't.

I suppose it's different in other countries though. In-laws might have property rights elsewhere.

Michele