=========================================================
_
___ ___ ___ ___| |_ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
|_ -| . | -_| _| _| _| . | . | . | . |
|___| _|___|___|_| |_| |___| _|___| _|
|_| |_| |_|
========================================================
Volume #0021 11/26/97
========================================================
Long Playing Microgroove Unbreakable Records
Subject: Mo' Faux-Phil
Sent: 11/25/97 2:38 AM
Received: 11/25/97 8:01 AM
From: Marc Miller, marom
To: 'spectroies.com', spectroies.com
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this one yet, but Dave Edmunds' versions
of Born to be With You and Be My Baby are some of the better tributes to
Uncle Phil. Besides all the Roy Wood stuff, of course...
Miller
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: more stereo/mono
Sent: 11/24/97 10:52 PM
Received: 11/25/97 1:57 AM
From: dave prokopy, prok.net
> It may take a while, but eventually there will be a single disc stereo
> release, and the mono "the way Brian intended it" will take a back seat.
> I was utterly shocked to learn that Sgt. Pepper even *came* in mono, much
> less that the mono one was the one that Paul and John worked on.
this seems to be just a general problem with the public at large. most
people (particularly those of us who didn't grow up in the fifties and
sixties) don't even REALIZE how predominent mono was back then - that
most artists and producers worked with mono in mind, and spent more time
and attention on the mono mixes. most people naturally just assume
"stereo = better," so that's what they always seek out.
unfortunately, in the late sixties and early seventies, when stereo
really took off (with the advent of hi-fi stereo systems, and the
emergance of stereo FM radio), there seemed to be a big push to release
everything in stereo. so a lot of earlier stuff was mixed (rather
hastily) for stereo to fill a growing market. and mono records all but
disappeared from the market as a result. so it's likely that a lot of us
who grew up in the later part of the sixties and early seventies didn't
even realize that mono EXISTED, much less that THOSE are the versions we
were supposed to be seeking out, if we wanted the "original, as the
artists intended them" versions.
luckily, i think there really is a push in the reissuing industry, if
there IS remixing to be done, to at least make some sort of effort to
remain as faithful as possible to the originals.
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Phil Ochs
Sent: 11/25/97 1:33 AM
Received: 11/25/97 2:19 AM
From: Don Richardson, drichcom
Just wondering if anyone here can shed some light on the lack of public
popularity, or for that matter, public knowledge of Phil Ochs. I
remember from high school in the late 60s that everyone knew of Dylan,
yet I never even heard the name Phil Ochs until he comitted suicide.
Since then I picked up a number of his albums and read up a little more
about him. Even in the mid-60s, Dylan was quoted as saying "I'm just
trying to keep up with Phil Ochs." Tom Paxton was also a great admirer
of him, as well as others involved in the early '60s "folk" scene.
Was it:
1. He waited too long to move from the Greenwich Village folk scene to
the LA folk scene?
2. Were his songs just too topical and controversial for the music
industry executives to embrace?
3. Were people apathetic to the topic, or disturbed that his songs were
not thinly veiled citicisms of political and social topics? In other
words "in your face, like or leave it musical journalism.
4. Was J. Edgar Hoover behind it? :)
5. All of the above
Don Richardson
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Re: Soul and Inspiration
Sent: 11/25/97 10:32 AM
Received: 11/26/97 12:19 AM
From: Marc Wielage, et.com
CC: Brent Kubasta, bkubaccc.edu
Brent Kubasta <bkubaccc.edu> commented:
>i can't remember where i read this, but reportedly "soul and inspiration"
>had been the song selected to follow up "you've lost that lovin'
>feelin'". if i remember the account correctly, spector even began cutting
>tracks; but for reasons unknown the song and sessions were dropped, and
>work proceeded on "just once in my life" instead.
------------------------<snip>------------------------
No, my understanding is that the moment Medley & Hatfield split from
Spector and went to Verve Records, the singers contacted Barry Mann &
Cynthia Weill and asked them if they had any new songs to record. "Soul
& Inspiration" was one they hadn't even finished, because they felt it
was too derivative of "Lovin' Feelin'." I believe Spector had rejected
it the year before. Mann & Weill quickly finished it, and Bill Medley
produced it as a near-perfect imitation of the Wall of Sound.
There were also a half-dozen Righteous Brothers singles issued in the 13
months after "Lovin' Feelin'," including such major hits as "Just Once in
My Life," "Unchained Melody," and "Ebb Tide," so "Soul & Inspiration"
definitely wasn't a follow-up to "Lovin' Feelin'", per se. You could
consider it a sequel, in a way.
--MFW
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
= Marc Wielage | et.com =
= MusicTrax, Ltd. | CompuServe's CENETWORK: 76702,1025 =
= Chatsworth, CA | AOL: mtrax6 =
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Re: Spectropop V#0020
Sent: 11/24/97 10:19 PM
Received: 11/25/97 1:57 AM
From: Jeff Glenn, Jeff_Gl.nba.TRW.COM
Reply to: RE>Spectropop V#0020
Schoolmaster Madani wrote:
<I was utterly shocked to learn that Sgt. Pepper even
*came* in mono, much less that the mono one was the one that Paul and
John worked on. So if it can happen to the hallowed Sgt. P....>
There's an important distinction between the stereo mixes of PEPPER and
PET SOUNDS - the PEPPER mix was made concurrently with the mono mix
(well, actually right after, but close enough), and they were released
simultaneously. And while I realize that various Beatles have stated
over the years that the mono mix is the way the album is supposed to be
heard, I would bet that more people heard the album in stereo at the time
of its release (at least here in the U.S.). PEPPER seems to be the first
Beatles LP to sell more stereo copies than mono (which is why it's
relatively difficult to find those mono copies today compared to the
stereo). And Capitol stopped pressing mono versions of album in early
1968 (anyone know when, exactly, as the BB's FRIENDS from June 1968 was
issued in stereo only). So since 1968 the stereo mix of PEPPER has been
the only one available (excepting limited runs of the mono mix from the
UK and Japan in the late 70's/early 80's). And I actually think the
stereo
But the remix of PET SOUNDS occurred 30 years after the fact, so we all
know there's no way it could be considered definitive. Let's hope that
Capitol continues to resist the temptation to issue the stereo mix as a
single disc (although I, like you, think it will happen eventually). The
only way I would want to see this issued as a single disc would be as a
two-fer with the mono mix preceding the stereo mix (ala reissues by
Cream, Jefferson Airplane, and Buffalo Springfield) and with notes that
clearly spelled out the stereo mix's history.
Jeff "I had to add two sleighbell tracks to my PSLT contribution just to
placate Jack Madani" Glenn
n.p.: "Then the Rains Came" - Ronny & the Daytonas (from BEACHLAND, one
of those gray-area Euro imports, has I think all of their output from
1964-1967 on Mala and RCA), conjures the Ronette's "Walking in the Rain"
with it's similar rhythm track and sound effects.
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Re: Spectropop V#0020
Sent: 11/25/97 1:53 AM
Received: 11/25/97 2:37 AM
From: carol knudson, knudolumbia.edu
> Subject: a technical note
> From: Jack Madani, Jack_Mad2.nj.us
>
> spectropop,spectroies.com,Internet writes:
> >those are 1996 electrons moving through 1996 wires,
> >producing 1996 sound waves travelling in a 1996 echo chamber or digital
> >effects processor, being recorded with 1996 microphones onto a 1996
> >digital tape.
>
> Actually, those electrons date from the creation of the universe, when
> *everything* was in mono.
Just like when *everything* was in black and white, right?
CAROL
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Re: Spectropop V#0020
Sent: 11/25/97 2:03 AM
Received: 11/25/97 8:01 AM
From: carol knudson, knudolumbia.edu
> Subject: Alive And Well In The Southeast
> From: Richard Globman, rglobeocomm.net
>
>
> Without going into a long-winded essay on beach music and The Shag, it is
> now more popular than ever before. There are hundreds of shag clubs, now
> stetching as far as California and tons of deejays who play nothing but
> that kind of music.
Sounds great to me, DICKYG!
You, uhm, wouldn't happen to know where any of these kinda clubs would be
in the NY City area wouldja??!!
CAROL (who's had quite *enough* of dancing with an elastic band like that
chick in the movie..)
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Re: Stereo vs. Mono
Sent: 11/25/97 4:20 PM
Received: 11/26/97 12:19 AM
From: David Bash, Bashm
>at any rate, i don't think anyone involved with the box set ever wanted
>the new stereo mix to be the "definitive" mix - after all, that's why
>they included a remastered version of the MONO mix as a "bonus." the
>stereo mix was just an attempt to give listeners an alternate way to
>listen to the album.
<<But it's like Pandora's box; now that an legitimate stereo mix does
exist, it will eventually be the one that people think of as the
"official" version. It may take a while, but eventually there will be a
single disc stereo release, and the mono "the way Brian intended it"
will take a back seat. I was utterly shocked to learn that Sgt. Pepper
even *came* in mono, much less that the mono one was the one that Paul
and John worked on. So if it can happen to the hallowed Sgt. P.... >>
I'm not sure I agree with this analogy. You must remember that Sgt.
Pepper was released right around the time that stereo releases were
generally replacing mono, and that's the main reason that the stereo Sgt.
Pepper has become the "official" version. Therefore, I don't think that
this event can really be viewed as a portent of the fate of Pet Sounds.
I don't know that there will be a single stereo release of Pet Sounds,
and even if there is I don't think it would ever be seen as a replacement
for the mono version that has been in the hearts and minds of so many
fans for more than 30 years. Of course, I prefer the stereo to the mono,
but that's just me. :-)
--
Spectropop Rules!!!!!
Take Care,
David
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Re: The Swinging Medallions
Sent: 11/25/97 1:08 PM
Received: 11/26/97 12:19 AM
From: Javed Jafri, javedja.ca
Richard,
Would these be the same Swinging Medallions who recorded two of the best
party- rock rave-outs of the sixties. "Double Shot (Of My Baby's Love)"
and "She Drives Me Out of My Mind" I knew they were from the south
somewhere but had no idea that they started out playing beach music.
Javed
> From: Richard Globman, rglobeocomm.net
> >
> The sound of the sixties is very prevalent in the Virginia-NC-SC area...
>
> During the 60's and 70's, a fair number of bands developed throughout the
> southeast who specialize in beach music...The Catalinas, Embers,
> Rhondels, Entertainers, Swinging Medallions, and a few more. Some even
> had a few national hits.
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Who's behind the Wall of Sound?
Sent: 11/25/97 2:16 AM
Received: 11/25/97 8:01 AM
From: carol knudson, knudolumbia.edu
After being recently corrected when I made the embarrasingly incorrect
statement that Phil produced the Ronettes version of I Can Hear Music- I
was wondering how many other tunes done by the artists we normally
associate with Spector were actually produced by Jeff Barry and/or others
under his guidance, and why? Anyone have any ideas?
CAROL
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
Subject: Burt Bacharach - Live!
Sent: 11/26/97 12:16 AM
Received: 11/26/97 12:51 AM
From: Jamie LePage, le_page_ies.com
Just got back from seeing Burt Bacharach. What an incredible show! First
of all, the audience was great. No hooting, yet generous applause in the
right places. Burt, soft spoken, wore a white suit and sat middle stage
playing a black grand piano. His band consisted of two additional
keyboard players, trumpet, wind and reeds, bass, drums and percussion,
and three vocalists (no guitarist!). Burt opened the show with two
10-minute medleys and in that short time went through 25 or 30 smash hits
of one chorus each. I thought, why is he throwing all these great hits
away with just one chorus? As the show proceeded, it became obvious. He
has too many hits to play them all in one show unless he abbreviates 75%
of them. Any artist would be lucky to have 1/10 the number of hits he has
had.
The group performed mostly Bacharach/David material much to my delight,
and his vocalists were very, very good. Fortunately we were spared Burt's
vocals most of the night, although he did sing Alfie accompanying himself
solely on piano. It was surprisingly good and reminded me of early Randy
Newman concerts I have seen where Newman strained to hit notes, but the
emotional aspect was intact. One great surprise was The Blob; I love the
song but never expected him to do it live.
The only negative comments I have are that I wish he would have had an
small string section instead of a second keyboardist, but it's
understandable and although the string synth sounded pretty cheesy, the
string *parts* were wonderful; the other being that he used a few drum
loop sequences which to me were obvious and absolutely not necessary.
Yet, when I mentioned this afterward to my wife and daughter who went
with me, they didn't know what I was talking about and didn't even notice
the loops, so maybe I am being too critical.
I have to admit I had goose bumps most of the show. Bacharach has written
some unbelievably powerful melodies. I didn't think twice that Dionne
Warwick wasn't singing, although much of the set was comprised of songs
she originally recorded.
Ah, sometimes life is very good.
LePageWeb
-----------[ archived by Spectropop ]-----------
END
Spectropop text contents © 1997 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.
