Cliff Englewood

IIRC the aforementioned Bill Perkins is on some sessions with Grass, maybe with Mr PC and Philly Joe??? I think I had it, might still do. :unsure:

Can we get a solid confirmation of this? Yes, this does not seem possible. The smaller booklet is 68 pages and contains the following; 1. Song Index 2. Ladies Day by Gary Giddens 3. Literary Lady by Farah Jasmine Griffin 4. Discography 5. Production Credits Did the first big one have a track by track analysis as well? Yes, by Michael Brooks, if I remember correctly. Yes, they were by Brooks, and were the same liner notes that accompanied the individual "Quintessential Billie Holiday" volumes that Columbia put out in the late 1980s/early 1990s. So they were not new ones commissioned for the big box???

What's the vintage of your L5N/CC??? And what are those CC pickups really like???

I'd say anything with Bill Perkins is worth checking out. He's one of my favorites.

Great, things just can't get any worse for Liverpool, or can they??? Gillett points finger at Rafa.

Hmm... I think most of your corrections make sense, but it was Freddie King that was a major influence on Clapton (not necessarily to the exclusion of Albert, but Clapton has made it very clear that Freddie was a huge influence on him). Anyway, this whole thing sounded like a string of incorrect assumptions, so I just did a little online searching. It appears that it was Harrison, not Clapton, who dubbed the guitar "Lucy". The Gibson website suggests that Harrison named it after Lucille Ball... the iconic redhead... (?!). At this point, I'm prepared to NOT believe anything I read about this story. The guitar in question was originally a goldtop owned by Rick Derringer, who had it refinished in red. Clapton got it from Derringer, and then gave it to George. Excellent bit of guitar based sleuthing there, likewise, I never remember reading about Albert Collins calling his axe anything at all, a bit strange Macdonald would make such a big goof there. BTW, I wish someone would give me a vintage Les Paul. A further BTW, Macdonald doesn't mention the whole bit about the guitar in the earlier versions of the book, it's only in the third edition. Strange that he would add something like that in and then get his Alberts mixed up.

It might be but the Doggett book is specifically about the break up of the Beatles and all the sundry suing and counter suing that went on afterward. It really does show them in a not too flatering light. As I mentioned above the only one of them that seems to be genuine is Ringo, the other 3 seem like a right bunch of wankers. I'm sure people will nit pick about certin facts and the chronology of his story does jump around a bit but I am finding it un-put-downable. I should finish it tonight.

Great news on "Shout!", I look forward to it when I get around to it but the Doggett book is just so bitch-tastic, so far, the only one of them that is coming out of it with any sense of decency is Ringo, or Richard Starkey as he now prefers to be called. It's not for the faint hearted, and if even half of it is halt true....

Another Beatles book to get upset about, I'm 4 chapters in and it's fucking brilliant, very, very juicy indeed. And for absolutely no reason what so ever...

I really hope he does know something that we don't, I really do. :unsure: Villa are currently 1 up against City, scored by the Honey Monster Dunne.

Hmm... I think most of your corrections make sense, but it was Freddie King that was a major influence on Clapton (not necessarily to the exclusion of Albert, but Clapton has made it very clear that Freddie was a huge influence on him). Anyway, this whole thing sounded like a string of incorrect assumptions, so I just did a little online searching. It appears that it was Harrison, not Clapton, who dubbed the guitar "Lucy". The Gibson website suggests that Harrison named it after Lucille Ball... the iconic redhead... (?!). At this point, I'm prepared to NOT believe anything I read about this story. The guitar in question was originally a goldtop owned by Rick Derringer, who had it refinished in red. Clapton got it from Derringer, and then gave it to George. Excellent bit of guitar based sleuthing there, likewise, I never remember reading about Albert Collins calling his axe anything at all, a bit strange Macdonald would make such a big goof there. BTW, I wish someone would give me a vintage Les Paul.

I agree with your first point, Macdonald does not like the fact that somewhere in the 60's, "Pop" turned into "Rock" and to an extent he has a point, that "Rock", although some of it is excellent, did produce some real shite full of really lazy, excessive noodeling. However after listening to "You Know My Name (Look Up The Number)" a few times I am starting to come around to the idea that it's George. It's just there are a couple of words that really don't sound like Paul's voice, even Paul doing a bad impression of someone. I'm nearly sure anyway.

Tamir Cohen is an Israely guy and he really made a very big step forward since he joined Bolton. His father, Avi Cohen, played for Liverpool from 79 to 81. Yes it was pretty much as you say, I think Chelski just about deserved the win, I just couldn't see Liverpool scoring at any point during that game, no one was supporting Torres, Riera did very little and I would rather have seen Yossi come on earlier to be honest. 3 losses in the league already this season, I'm not happy with that. Benitez needs some new ideas and quick. :angry: The main problem with Liverpool is that they are not a stable team. It was not the same team who scored 6 times only a week ago. But Arsenal was A-M-A-Z-I-N-G this afternoon!!! I think Bolton's manager Gary Megson said Tamir Cohen only cost him something like £37,500, or something like that, it was mentioned in the commentary, good value if it's true. I don't know why Yossi keeps getting dropped, if Kuyt/Lucas/Carragher can play every game then why not Yossi, he always looks a bit more dangerous on the ball then others in the team, home or away. Benitez says they're still in the title race, I'm not so sure myself, I think we will all know more after the African Cup Of Nations, that's going to hit Chelski hard.

Does this help your appreciation any? I don't know why but I have grown to love that song over the years, I don't know many people that like it though, even the other Beatles hated it. It might have something to do with "Abbey Road" becoming a firm favorite of these re-masters. It's just sooooooooo Beatle-y. I know you're joking but that will actually happen. I really am looking forward to the mono versions of the earlier albums. I've been listening to a lot of Beatles lately, and I think they reached their highpoint with Revolver, and after that, I see a decline in the songwriting, with the production overwhelming the music at times. I know that goes counter to what the vast majority of Beatles fans feel, but there is something so attractive to the Beatles up to Revolver, that it fully holds my attention. For me, something gets lost after Revolver, and what that "something" is, I cannot put my finger on, but their music looses some of its attraction for me. Well you're not really alone there, in the Macdonald book he puts their career into three stages, "Going Up" which is everything up to "Revolver", "The Top" which is basically all the recordings from "Revolver" up to the end of "Pepper" and "Coming Down" which is everything post "Pepper". The problem that you cannot put your finger on just may have been too much drugs, by them not you. :tophat:

Yes it was pretty much as you say, I think Chelski just about deserved the win, I just couldn't see Liverpool scoring at any point during that game, no one was supporting Torres, Riera did very little and I would rather have seen Yossi come on earlier to be honest. 3 losses in the league already this season, I'm not happy with that. Benitez needs some new ideas and quick. :angry:

Lucky, lucky Man U, they were just sooooooooooo lucky.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Hall un-plugged for most of the album? It certainly sounds that way. :unsure:

If you can only get one, get "The Western Suite", it's maybe the best of all the Giuffre "3" albums with Hall, but there's not much to choose between any of them, they're all excellent. It took a bit of time for this music to sink in, with me any way, but when it did you find yourself wondering why more of a big deal isn't made about it. The versions of "Blue Monk" and "Topsy" are so enjoyable, especially "Blue Monk", I love what Hall does on this in particular, it sounds like nothing special but it's just so perfect.

Yes, especially that little bit of comping he does in the interlude between Desmond's and his own solo on "Bossa Antigua." I love moments like that! Desmond and Hall were great together! I haven't read the whole thread but just on the whole Jim Hall comping thing, count me in as one who loves it, if you want to hear it at what is, in my opinion anyway, it's best, check out his work with Giuffre, especially "The Western Suite". I don't know if it's the extra responsibility of being the only "traditional" rhythm instrument in the group but he really puts in a shift, with unpaid overtime, on "The Western Suite". :tup

Does this help your appreciation any? I don't know why but I have grown to love that song over the years, I don't know many people that like it though, even the other Beatles hated it. It might have something to do with "Abbey Road" becoming a firm favorite of these re-masters. It's just sooooooooo Beatle-y. I know you're joking but that will actually happen. :cool:

That was one of my favorite bits of George, just classic Costanza.

I think the thing you have to keep in mind about music from any bygone era is the times/context in which they were recorded, especially so with the Fabs. When you take a song out of the particular moment/time frame it was recorded it might look a bit silly later on. My reading of what Macdonald is saying there is more of a "look how times have changed" type of comment, rather than dissing the song at all, ie look how a song written by Lennon at a time when things were changing and people were talking about revelolution has now ended up helping to sell shoes. For somebody like myself who wasn't even around in the 60's, I think one of the things Macdonald does brilliantly, and something that is probably hard to understand now, is detail how important the Beatles were in the 60's and to the 60's, people did actually look up to them in a way that is just so hard to imagine and get your head around. I like the quote he has near the start of the book from Aaron Copland, "If you want to know about the Sixties, play the music of The Beatles."

Can we get a solid confirmation of this? Yes, this does not seem possible. The smaller booklet is 68 pages and contains the following; 1. Song Index 2. Ladies Day by Gary Giddens 3. Literary Lady by Farah Jasmine Griffin 4. Discography 5. Production Credits Did the first big one have a track by track analysis as well?

I was going to post this exact question, but you beat me to it, Bentsy. Any theories on what's happening over there? Off the top of my head, very old squad, new coach Leonardo doesn't seem to be having any impact, that's the 3rd game in a row that they haven't scored in and they also drew against 2 sides promoted to Serie A this season. Other than that though they're fine. :tophat:

I was a bit unclear about this and I apolgize. When he authoritatively says, for example, that Paul is the guitar soloist on "Taxman", rather than George, as always assumed, I take him at his word. It's when he himself goes against those log sheets (my example of "We Can Work It Out" where the log sheets say George played tambourine but no it must be Ringo because Ringo played a similar rhythm elsewhere therefore George does not play on WCWIO, which he asserts several times on minimal aural evidence) without providing terribly persuasive evidence that I raise my eyebrows. Like I said, minor quibble. Yes I know what you mean but as I think I mentioned earlier in the thread, I get the impression that he doesn't really rate George's overall contribution that highly, with the exception of a few songs, either because he wasn't up to the standard of John or Paul, which is a slightly unfair way to judge anybody, let's face it, very few people were. Or because George seemed to be the first one to tire of being a Beatle and maybe he feels George was just coasting during the last few years??? I agree though that it is unwise of him to say he's not on it if he's not sure, it's just he seems so meticulous about every other detail I wouldn't like to second guess him. Although I did think his "review" of Harrison's "ForYou Blue" was kinda like the reviews Spinal Tap got, "Dedicated to Patti Harrison, this forgettable twelve-bar in D was taped in six takes between work on "Two Of Us" and "Let It Be". "Shark Sandwich", Shit Sandwich. In the "Recommended Further Reading" section at the back of "Revolution" he praises "Shout" by Philip Norman as "the sharpest account of the career of the Beatles", anybody read that one?, I have it but probably won't get around to it for a while. I read a review of this today in a music mag. and it sounds very interesting; You Never Give Me Your Money: The Battle for the Soul of the Beatles. Blurb from Amazon; Review `An enthralling new book on the group.' --The Independent Product Description When Paul McCartney told the world in 1970 that he had no plans to work with the Beatles again, it was widely viewed as a cultural tragedy by the media and public alike. His statement not only marked the end of the band's remarkable career, but also seemed to signal the demise of an era of unprecedented optimism in cultural history. But posterity would not let go of the group so easily and one of the most fascinating phases of the Beatle's story was just about to begin. For almost 40 years the four members of the group, their families and business partners, have been forced to live with the reverberations of their incredible success. Now, for the first time, "You Never Give Me Your Money" tells the dramatic story of the personal and business rivalry that has dominated the Beatles' lives since 1969. It charts the almost Shakespearian rivalry of the Lennon and McCartney families, the conflict in George Harrison's life between spirituality and fame, and Richard Starkey's efforts to escape the alcoholism that threatened to kill him. It documents the shifting relationships between the four as they strive to establish their identities beyond the Beatles and it chronicles the transformation of their multi-media company, Apple Corps, from a bastion of 1960s counter-culture into a corporate behemoth. The best of rock'n'roll writers, Peter Doggett gives us a compelling human drama and the equally rich and absorbing story of the Beatles' creative and financial empire, set up to safeguard their interests but destined to control their lives. From tragedy to triumphant reunion, and court battles to chart success, "You Never Give Me Your Money" traces the untold story of a group and a legacy that will never be forgotten. About the Author Peter Doggett has been writing about popular music, the entertainment industry and social and cultural history since 1980. A regular contributor to Mojo, Q and GQ, his books include The Art and Music of John Lennon; a volume detailing the creation of the Beatles' Let It Be and Abbey Road albums; the pioneering study of the collision between rock and country music, Are You Ready for the Country? and, most recently, There's a Riot Going On: Revolutionaries, Rock Stars and the Rise and Fall of 60s Counter-culture. It doesn't seem to be on Amazon.com yet just .co.uk. but if I see it in the shops here I think I'll have to spring for it. Also, this one could be pretty good too. The Longest Cocktail Party: An Insider's Diary of the Beatles, Their Million-dollar Apple Empire and Its Wild Rise and Fall. Blurb from Amazon; Review "Marvellous. If you want to know what Apple was like, this is the book." Alastair Taylor, former General Manager, Apple; "Incisive, evocative and hilariously funny. The Beatles are shadowy figures, but this is a fine view of rock's most inspired folly." Mojo; "Vivid... it views the band's disintegration with the same excluded bafflement with which Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern follow the plots of the Danish court." Guardian" Product Description When American teenager, Richard DiLello, wandered into the Beatles' Apple building in 1968, he was immediately appointed 'house hippie'; he began making tea, rolling joints and listening to dozens of demo tapes. By the time Apple crumbled a few years later he was director of public relations. Along the way he noted many of the stoned conversations he heard and the insane bits of business he witnessed: one-man bands auditioning in the reception, Hell's Angels taking over Savile Row and The Beatles playing on the roof. Full of period detail, The Longest Cocktail Party is fast-paced, witty and immensely poignant about the demise of the Fab Four and the death of the '60s dream.