========================================================
o
|
o-o o-o o-o o-o -o- o-o o-o o-o o-o o-o
\ | | |-' | | | | | | | | | | |
o-o O-o o-o o-o o o o-o O-o o-o O-o
| | |
o o o
========================================================
Volume #0009 11/08/97
========================================================
Subject: "songs" vs. "records" and what if _smile_ had been released
Sent: 11/7/97 3:49 AM
Received: 11/7/97 8:29 AM
From: dave prokopy, prokXXX@XXXXXX.net
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
> A good way to gauge whether a particular platter is thought of as a
> "song" or as a "record," IMHO, is to see how often it gets covered by
> other artists. Early Beatles tunes are fairly often covered,
> particularly by country artists, but not so many songs from Sgt. Pepper
> or after get remade.
well, it depends on the era. lots of early beatles songs got covered IN
the mid-sixties, by other not-so-talented artists who didn't have as much
strong original material and/or were trying to cash in on the beatles'
fame. but by the latter part of the decade, when it really WAS required
that any "hip" band write their own material, covers in GENERAL died
down, and the only people left doing covers were more traditional pop
singers.
as for country artists covering early beatles songs, i think this is more
just a result of the fact that the earlier, more straight-forward beatles
songs simply lend themselves to country artists these days. i just can't
imagine garth brooks trying "being for the benefit of mr. kite"!
> And as for Brian Wilson tunes, well fugettaboutit. Almost nobody
> bothers to cover them.
again, i think the reason for this is that probably the most popular
beach boys songs are seen as incredibly dated these days. unfortunately,
people still just associate the beach boys with surf and cars and summer.
it seems to me that, _stars and strips_ notwithstanding, the people who
cover beach boys songs most these days are "alternative" artists, and
they tend to appreciate the non-hits a lot more than your average
listener.
at any rate, i think i kinda disagree with the whole assessment that the
mid-sixties meant the death of "songs" vs. "records." i think there WAS
a point, maybe 1966-1967, when experimentation and weirdness kind of
overtook songwriting, but i think by the LATE sixties, people started to
focus again on composing actual catchy pop songs again. again, the
beatles are a good reference point. _sgt. pepper_ and _magical mystery
tour_ are certainly more "records" than they are "compositions," but by
the time of the "white album" ("revolution 9" being the exception) and
especially _abbey road_, they had evolved into very mature songwriters,
who were experienced enough in the studio (having BEEN through all that
experimentation) to know how to use it to their upmost advantage.
but there was definitely a big second wind in "pop" songwriting in the
late sixties and early seventies. some of the great "bubblegum pop"
classics came out during this period.
> I'm not sure which it would be, but one thing I'm confident of is that
> nothing even remotely close to "Wild Honey" would have been released, and
> in some ways I'm glad that "Smile" wasn't released, because "Wild Honey"
> was showed the band to have such remarkable versatility; besides, I like
> it a good deal more than any configuration of "Smile" I've heard.
couldn't disagree more. i think the world needed a _smile_ album a LOT
more than they'll ever need a _wild honey_. any decent R&B group could
have done _wild honey_, and done it better. _smile_, on the other hand,
was a truly original piece of art.
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: 9 Disk Spector set
Sent: 11/7/97 1:42 PM
Received: 11/8/97 3:17 AM
From: Paul Urbahns, purbaXXX@XXXXXXorg
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
LePage wrote:
There was a 9 disc box set released in UK in the 80's. I never bought it
because the only "track" I didn't have was Lover by the Ronettes. Were
the tracks on that compilation in stereo, does anyone know?
Paul URbahns comments:
I think I have almost all the nine disks in singles. The Ronettes first
album is stereo but the second Greatest Hits is mono from what I
remember. There are a few stereo cuts but mostyly all mono.
Is there any USA CD Mail order place that sells these Marginal label CD's.
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Re: Return To Brill Days
Sent: 11/7/97 6:24 AM
Received: 11/8/97 3:17 AM
From: Darian Sahanaja , monsaXXX@XXXXXXink.net
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
le_page_XXX@XXXXXXies.com wrote:
>
>Brent Kubasta wrote:
>
>>>Cookies "I Never Dreamed"...
>>
>>I *love* this record.
>
>Anyone else? I Never Dreamed could be among the best girl group records
>ever!
I must agree here. Absolutely fantastic record! Then again Dimension
churned out quite a few of the best girl group records ever. Most notably
"Baby, Baby I Still Love You" by the Cinderellas and "Keep Your Hands
Off My Baby" by Little Eva. But The Cookies stuff is song for song the
most consistent. From early tracks like "Softly In The Night" to later
evolved songs like the aformentioned "I Never Dreamed" and even including
the solo Cookie 45's by Earl-Jean and Darlene McCrea, this legacy is most
satisfying indeed. And all of course under the magical guidance of Carole
King and Gerry Goffin (after all, Dimension was really "their" label).
I'd be curious to know what Spectropop subscribers deem as being the best
girl group records ever. And to Jamie. . .what kind of Dimension Records
archive are you making? I myself am trying to make a a Bob Crewe-produced
girls discography. By the way, I'd like to thank David Bash for turning
me on to this very-hard-resist digest. Good going boys. . .keep up the
good work.
-Darian "thinking of rock star moves but still a record geek at heart"
Sahanaja
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Re: Smile
Sent: 11/8/97 5:07 AM
Received: 11/8/97 10:25 AM
From: Chuck Limmer, CLimXXX@XXXXXXm
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
In a message dated 97-11-06, David Bash asked:
<< What if Smile had actually been released in 1967, as planned? How do
you think that would have impacted the Beach Boys career? >>
David:
Hindsight's always perfect, and we've got 30 years' worth to work with in
this instance. I doubt very much that the release of _Smile_ at its
intended time would've made much difference in the Beach Boys' subsequent
career. After all, _Pet Sounds_ *did* come out--and look where the BBs
wound up.
The thing is, Brian was trying to take the band down a path that, in the
mid-'60s, neither the group members nor their fans were entirely ready
for. Despite its brilliance, _Pet Sounds_ was a commercial
disappointment--their third-lowest-charting LP to that point--and it's
hard to believe that the record-buying public would have executed an
abrupt about-face only a matter of months later.
What might the BBs have gone on to record after _Smile_? Depends on your
interpretation of cause and effect. If you believe that _Smile_'s
non-release *caused* Brian's loss of control over the band's artistic
direction, then I guess you can make the case that putting that album out
would have fixed everything. It's more reasonable, I think, to see the
_Smile_ fiasco as a predictable outcome of Brian's well-documented
emotional and/or psychological problems (complicated by substance abuse).
At some point, Brian was inevitably going to be unable to run the whole
show any longer.
The Who without Pete Townshend. The Kinks without Ray Davies. The
Stones without Jagger/Richards. The Beatles without Lennon/McCartney.
The wonderment of the Beach Boys is not that the music they've made since
Brian's creative withdrawal, coincident with the collapse of _Smile_, has
so often been disappointingly mediocre (with both brilliant and
embarrassing extremes). It's that they continued at all.
Chuck Limmer n.p. "I'll See Your Light," Everly Brothers, _Heartaches and
Harmonies_
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Re: What If Smile Had Been Released?
Sent: 11/7/97 5:47 AM
Received: 11/7/97 8:29 AM
From: James K Cribb, jkcrXXX@XXXXXXcom
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
OK, I'll jump in on this one David. (But first thanks to Jamie, et al
for having me here. These first few editions have been very educational.)
If Smile had been released, one scenario I've imagined is that it doesn't
matter what the critical reaction is. I don't think the public would
allow the band to change. The Beatles evolved to Sgt Pepper over several
albums, none of which took the artist/sonic/directional leap that Brian
took with Pet Sounds and then Smile.
And remember the Beatles unilaterally became a studio band. The Beach
Boys continued to tour and had to become an oldies band because they
could not recreate the new material effectively live. And the band (or
at least Mike -- how many of you have heard his vitriolic voice-over
version of Heroes and Villians?) really resented Brian's new direction,
so they purposefully fostered the continuation of the surf/car sound.
The mere existence of Smile, finished, unfinished, warmly received or
snubbed, would have resulted in a similar situation. Brian had fought so
many battles by that time (mostly against Murray), he had to be fragile.
If anything, it was the success of Good Vibrations, that did him in. In
that he achieved the "perfect" three-minute pop symphony and it was
critically acclaimed and it went number one.
He had to not only top Pet Sounds as an album, he had to make an album
worthy of "Good Vibrations." And he had to fight his own personal
demons, Capitol Records (pending lawsuit) and his own band/family. It
was the making of Smile that did the damage. Its release would've had
little impact, as the damage was done during the making.
Yes, eventually we would've had Wild Honey. It seems a fairly consistent
trend that after a great deal of experimentation, artists frequently get
back in touch with their roots.
Only in the Beatles case the much revered Mr Spector ruined it (yes, I am
baiting you).
James
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Signs and Wonders
Sent: 11/7/97 6:59 AM
Received: 11/7/97 8:29 AM
From: David Marsteller, davebXXX@XXXXXXlin.org
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
Hmm, I'm wondering if the pop music world is ready for some more changes:
1) Brill era vets Mann & Weil turn up as cowriters on the Hanson album,
while Carole King cowrites a song for Wilson. Both albums are on Mercury,
with some of the same folks behind them. Coincidence?
2) I saw a recent article (wish I remembered where) on the rise of
'knock-off' copies of hits. Since labels either cut-out singles quickly,
or don't release them at all, entepreneurs are recording sound-alike
versions of tracks like "Barbie Girl" as replacements. Could it be the
era of the song is returning?
Later
Dave
/************************************************************************/
/** "Reach out and grab a fistful of now" **/
/** Thornetta Davis **/
/** David Marsteller davebXXX@XXXXXXlin.org **/
/************************************************************************/
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Smile, Flowerpot Men, and Honeys
Sent: 11/7/97 10:13 AM
Received: 11/8/97 3:17 AM
From: David Marsteller, davebXXX@XXXXXXlin.org
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
David Bash was asking us to speculate on what would have happened if
Smile was completed as planned. Uh, well, first Capitol would've probably
had a fit. They hadn't figured out how to sell Pet Sounds, and at least
that consisted of pop songs, more sophisticated pop songs, but still pop.
It's hard to tell from the unfinished work, but Smile looks like it
would have departed from song structure a great deal. The fans (the old
fans) wouldn't have known what to make of it. The Beach Boys never quite
had the cachet that The Beatles did, where they coul do whatever they
wanted and it would be cool. It might have found a home a couple years
later with the same ones who bought Pink Floyd, but those folks probably
would've looked down their noses at anything from this band. Not hip
enough. Yes, the press may have heralded it, but rock journalism (and FM
rock radio) was in its infancy, and probably wouldn't have influenced
sales much. Bummer, huh?
I have the other Flowerpot Men CD, also called Let's Go To San
Francisco, on the C5 label. My disc only has 14 songs. If I have:
1) Let's Go To San Francisco (Part 1)
2) Let's Go To San Francisco (Part 2)
3) A Walk In The Sky
4) Am I Losing You
5) You Can Never Be Wrong
6) A Man Without A Woman
7) In A Moment Of Madness
8) Young Birds Fly
9) Journey's End
10) Mythological Sunday
11) Blow Away
12) Piccolo Man
13) Let's Go Back To San Francisco
14) Silicon City
would it be worth the effort to get the Repertoire disc for the bonus
tracks?
And as far as Ginger's singing in The Honeys, gee I'll have to go back
and listen. Most of my impression was formed from hearing the Spring
album, which was Ginger-free, right? I think the Rovell sisters are
annoyingly nasal sounding, and that pretty much turned me off to their
whole output.
Later
Dave
np: Twist & Shout! 12 Atlantic Tracks Produced By Phil Spector
/************************************************************************/
/** "Reach out and grab a fistful of now" **/
/** Thornetta Davis **/
/** David Marsteller davebXXX@XXXXXXlin.org **/
/************************************************************************/
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: The Toons
Sent: 11/7/97 5:26 AM
Received: 11/7/97 8:29 AM
From: Kevin & Collette Mangold, discXXX@XXXXXXmail.com
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
I know this probably isn't the best place to ask this, but after posting
the question on the Audities list (and getting only one response -
thanks Jack!!!), but I don't know where else to turn.
Does anyone have any information on the Toons? I know that they did 2
albums for Rhino that are out-of-print, disbanded and have apparently
vanished off of the face of the Earth.
The ... ahem ... kind people at Rhino were absolutely no help; saying
that the Toons are part of the past and they're more interested in the
'now'... (isn't that heavy???).
I'm trying to get some broadcast-quality (read: cd or virgin vinyl) of
'Looking At Girls' as well as information on the band's demise and
possible whereabouts of the members - all of this for a radio special.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks!
Kevin
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Three Dog Night
Sent: 11/7/97 1:50 AM
Received: 11/8/97 10:25 AM
From: Big L, bXXX@XXXXXXt
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
.... and, you forgot:
Try A Little Tenderness - Otis Redding
Big L Check out my "Radio Legends" homepage at:
bXXX@XXXXXXt http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Hills/9816
"I love radio - I just hate what they're doing with it these days"
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Tell That Girl to Shut Up ???
Sent: 11/8/97 1:56 PM
Received: 11/8/97 6:39 PM
From: NazXXX@XXXXXXm
To: Spectropop List, spectroXXX@XXXXXXies.com
CC: jjaXXX@XXXXXXgers.com
A question for you listers.
Can you think of examples of hit records released post 1966 that still
had the classic girl group sound.
I can think of at least three but it's open to argument if they qualify
as either classic or "girl group"
1. Just for Tonight/ The Chiffons--1966
2. Condition Red/The Goodies--1969
3. Love ( Can Make You Happy)/Mercy--1969
There's got to be some others but I can't think of any right now.
Elements of the sound did reemerge in the post-punk/new wave era and
could be heard in groups ranging from Bananarama to Blondie to Holly and
the Italians and more.
Could Phil Spector score a hit today ?
Javed
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
End
Spectropop text contents © Spectropop unless
stated otherwise.
All rights in and to the contents of these documents, including each element embodied therein, is subject to copyright
protection under international copyright law. Any use, reuse, reproduction and/or adaptation without written permission of the owners is a violation of copyright law and is strictly prohibited. All rights reserved.
