Matthew

Phil Spector Dead at 81

112 posts in this topic

I know that Jim Alfredson has been largely absent lately.  It's unfortunate that you've chosen to take advantage of that, in my opinion.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyways, back to Phil Spector.  Even after Rachelle Short, he still was worth 50 million at death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JSngry said:

But I've not yet murdered anybody (that you know about, anyway!).

Credit where credit is due, ok?

Oh, please. There's a simple procedural ploy here that you could have made months(S) ago and still can make. If you stop whining about a marginal pop talent long enough, you can still figure it out.

Hell, there's two procedural ploys that you can make to get what you wnat. But you have to ploy them, don't whine to me about shit and then expect me to help you with it.

Whining is the most impotent way to get shit done.

No whining then - Fuck off. You are a shitty moderator and we all know it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone, 

I'm not a moderator, but I suggest that we all let this go, return to our respective corners, and cool off.  Let's just dial it back for a while, O.K.?  

Peace & Love to All
on MLK Day

 

Edited by HutchFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HutchFan said:

Everyone, 

I'm not a moderator, but I suggest that we all let this go, return to our respective corners, and cool off.  Let's just dial it back for a while, O.K.?  

Peace & Love to All
on MLK Day

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched it in one sitting. He knew what he wanted and how to achieve it in the most beautiful way. Few music producers can claim the same. Everything he said in the interview made sense to me, and I didn't feel an iota of insincerity or contriteness. Even when he compared himself to Leonardo Da Vinci, it was not megalomania...he had the bona fides. 

I'll be picking up the Back to Mono set. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dmitry said:

 

I'll be picking up the Back to Mono set. 

Essential for any 20th century music collection.  Transcendent stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, felser said:

Essential for any 20th century music collection.  Transcendent stuff.

Agreed, but not always for the music itself, moreso for the sheer sound of the records...and if you really want the full impact there, you gotta go for the OG Philles vinyl, and then preferably, the 45s, at least a few of them. It's there that you get the full force of the vision...omg, I found a picture sleeve "Hung On You"...already had the LP and thought I knew that record, but no, not even.

We got digital today, we can make damn near any noisesoundmusic we can imagine, but this shit was analog, not just the technology, but the basic notion of it - to get THAT sound, you gotta get people and do the work. DO THE WORK. No algorithms, no presets, you get people In the room and keep fucking aroun with all of it until you get IT.

At some point...he pissed off too many people, and lost his discipline as it turned into an all-consuming obsession. But...that single with Cher, especially the dirge of "Baby I Love You"...records don't sound like that by themselves or by accident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Dmitry said:

I watched it in one sitting. He knew what he wanted and how to achieve it in the most beautiful way. Few music producers can claim the same. Everything he said in the interview made sense to me, and I didn't feel an iota of insincerity or contriteness. Even when he compared himself to Leonardo Da Vinci, it was not megalomania...he had the bona fides. 

But in the end, he killed somebody, came to trial, faced justice, and died in prison. The art forevermore seperated from the artist, crime and punishment. He did it to himself.

No man is above the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, felser said:

Essential for any 20th century music collection.  Transcendent stuff.

I know this is heresy but I've listened to it a lot and I wish it were in stereo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, medjuck said:

I know this is heresy but I've listened to it a lot and I wish it were in stereo. 

I'm also a stereo guy if originally done that way, but it wasn't.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sound is sound. Deal with what it am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider, if you like, the physics of this record - where is all that sound coming from? Can there be that much noise in that space? How coan loud be so soft and indistinct and yet still be so loud? How can you hear none of that sound and yet hear all of it? Is there really a front? Is there really a back? A top and a bottom? If nothing is there, why is everything there?

imo, the act of recording meant that sound was now longer something potentially independent of - instead of totally dependent on - mechanical faithfulness. It's one thing to make a bad-sounding record because of ineptitude, it's quite another to deliberately  make a record sound deliberately un-natural. Sure, this was already going on in other fields of recording (and music in general). But it was always fringe/novelty/avant-garde stuff. There it was aiming right at the hearts and minds of teenagers, with simple songs, only some of which had "subversive" lyrics. It was the sound of the record itself that was subversive.

"Hung On You" is actually a pretty good song, Goffin-King were getting pretty adult at this time, a lot of that stuff speaks beyond youth, it's kind of timeless. So, yes, it comes off good when perfomed live: There's some real soul in that song.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNk6tMd6tOY

But good lord - WHAT IS THAT RECORD? That's not a song, that's not a performance, that's a...supernatural experience, not spiritually, just in terms of sound, noise, of just what the hell is it occupying space in wherever it is you're hearing it. It's there, the unreality of it accents the reality of it. It's not magic, it's work, choices being made. The process was crazy, but the result was not. You can't get that sound live, yet it is alive. How does that work?

And on a real cracklyass cheap vinyl (I have never heard an OG Philles record on clean vinyl, and I doubt that any have ever existed, if they do, they must be counterfeit) 45 mastered hotter than hell 45...find it, if you want to, spend that money, hear it for real.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, this is the picturesleeve 45 I found...

R-5386386-1392083148-6849.jpeg.jpg

Comments on "Hung On You" still apply, though. As do the Goffin-King songs of this period having a real soul to them, The record's not quite the mindfuck that "Hung On You" is, but it's close.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JSngry said:

Consider, if you like, the physics of this record - where is all that sound coming from? Can there be that much noise in that space? How coan loud be so soft and indistinct and yet still be so loud? How can you hear none of that sound and yet hear all of it?

 

Ha, you succinctly summed up why I always felt uneasy (und fairly unmoved) about those typical 60s Phil spector productions. :lol: Too much sound mixed and mashed together, overproduced, overstuffed ...
Really not the cup of tea of those (like me) who in pop music come from real (50s) rock'n'roll (and its founding ingredients) and go for "handmade" music with clearly played, straightforward instruments that interact by themselves instead of being submerged in all sorts of effects - and that can be reproduced 1 to 1 on stage by the band members with no artificial gimmicks. Yes, I realize that's no scientific nor musically/musicologically "correct" description (and maybe not "a thing to think or write" but WTF? :P) but just a matter of personal preference of musical textures. It's only me but in short, Phil Spector's records never did much for me and they never filled a gap that I felt existed in my (certainly wide-ranging) tastes and collection (I realize some top-notch pressing might have added insights - if these Philles originals really are that sensational, but still ...). This or that hit was pleasant to listen to but you tire of them very fast. In the turn of events (and of the pop/rock music of that time) I'd much rather wonder about where Buddy Holly would have gone if he had lived longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Various thoughts on the discussion:

1 - "Hung on You" is not hard to find on 45.  It was a surprisingly failed A-side following the two classic Philles hits, but some DJ's flipped it, and the semi-throwaway B-side, a 50's retread they didn't even bother to have Bill Medley sing on, did OK.  That was "Unchained Melody".

2 - The climax of "Just Once in My Life" ("I Can't Give You The World" etc.) is probably the most goosebump-inspiring moment in all of music for me.

3 - I am constantly shocked at how "otherworldly" a lot of 50's records sound.  Check out something like Bobby Freeman's "Do You Want to Dance" on youtube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, felser said:

Various thoughts on the discussion:

1 - "Hung on You" is not hard to find on 45.  It was a surprisingly failed A-side following the two classic Philles hits, but some DJ's flipped it, and the semi-throwaway B-side, a 50's retread they didn't even bother to have Bill Medley sing on, did OK.  That was "Unchained Melody".

2 - The climax of "Just Once in My Life" ("I Can't Give You The World" etc.) is probably the most goosebump-inspiring moment in all of music for me.

3 - I am constantly shocked at how "otherworldly" a lot of 50's records sound.  Check out something like Bobby Freeman's "Do You Want to Dance" on youtube.

that's quite an amazing record and I agree with you. The techniques Spector used were ripe for overkill - to my ears it is basically plate reverb  - but there is something incredibly patient is that performances; just let the music happen and don't rush anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14 April 1970, Paul McCartney sent a letter to Allen Klein and Phil Spector demanding the elimination of all the added non-beatle "noises" on "The long and winding road".
 
Imagen
 
More info here.
 
"Don't ever do it again".
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EKE BBB said:
On 14 April 1970, Paul McCartney sent a letter to Allen Klein and Phil Spector demanding the elimination of all the added non-beatle "noises" on "The long and winding road".
 
Imagen
 
More info here.
 
"Don't ever do it again".
 

:lol:

I think I am going to listen to Let It Be and Let it Be DeSpectorized again.

Edited by porcy62

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, porcy62 said:

:lol:

I think I am going to listen to Let It Be and Let it Be DeSpectorized again.

Only way to listen to Let it Be is Let it Be Naked, de-Spectorized. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Brad said:

Only way to listen to Let it Be is Let it Be Naked, de-Spectorized. 

I like Spector's work on some Lennon records, I like it less on Harrison All Thing Must Pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You want Wall of Sound? This IS Wall of Sound. 
 

D60F9BC0-6CAC-4009-8D87-7C9DDF40134A.jpeg

4 minutes ago, porcy62 said:

I like Spector's work on some Lennon records, I like it less on Harrison All Thing Must Pass.

I’m ok with All Things. The record is a classic. I’m curious how it would sound otherwise though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.