The Spectropop Group Archives presented by Friends of Spectropop

[Prev by Date] [Next by Date] [Index] [Search]

Spectropop V#0021

  • From: The Spectropop Group
  • Date: 11/25/97

  •       =========================================================
                                  _                       
                  ___ ___ ___ ___| |_ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ 
                  |_ -| . | -_|  _|  _|  _| . | . | . | . |
                  |___|  _|___|___|_| |_| |___|  _|___|  _|
                      |_|                     |_|     |_|  
          ========================================================
            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
    
    
    

    Click here to go to The Spectropop Group


    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.