Gonzales, alternative takes

[Fenderman]

Was that the same session as 'The time in between?'.

[dave robinson]

Was that the same session as 'The time in between?'.

That was recorded on May 10, so it's possibly the same group of sessions.

[Didier]

Some years ago, I picked up a double French CD - The Shadows; Original & Alternate 60's studio versions with Gonzales original mono version and Gonzales original stereo version. Distributed by MAM productions, Magic Records. I assume it's legal.

Yes it's legal, Magic Records is a fully legal company, and only releases what they are licenced for, no bootlegs. Martial Martinay, founder and manager of the company confirmed it to me.

Didier

[iefje]

Some years ago, I picked up a double French CD - The Shadows; Original & Alternate 60's studio versions with Gonzales original mono version and Gonzales original stereo version. Distributed by MAM productions, Magic Records. I assume it's legal. Could that have been the source?

EMI also put out The Shadows: Everything of Value, Rarities 1 and 2 though I don't know the track listing for rarities 1. Gonzales wasn't on Rarities 2.

Cheers, R

I also have the French double CD. It only features the standard mono and stereo versions of the track.
What I find really disturbing though, is that the channels of all stereo tracks have been reversed. The same applies to the CD-issue of the album "Somethin' Else!!", released by the same company.

[John M]

Stand with your back to the loudspeakers...that way the sound is the right way round.

[Moderne]

I have posted on this topic before now, sadly for me I have never been able to hear any of the alternative takes that remain un-released in the vaults of EMI or Bruce's shed !. There are however, some on this forum who have been able to hear some or all of this treasure-trove and have survived the experience. I ask those who have heard it, Did it affect your love of the Band? or were you so shocked by it that you could never bring yourselves to listen to the band again. The answer is obvious, you still like the band as you still read this forum. The Shadows have been a major interest in my life since I was about 4 or 5. I believe that I have just about everything that has been released on a commercial basis, but I would love to be given the chance to hear the alternative takes and other un-released material. I was lucky enough to have been able to purchase Shadows releases as they came out from "Rocking With Curly Leads" in 1973 onwards, others have not been so lucky and yet because much of the Shadows back-catalogue has been deleted they are denied the chance to listen to "Change Of Address" and many others.Why ?. Surely the powers that be must realise that the interest will not be there forever and that the archived material will one day be of no interest to anyone. Looking at it logically, the refusal to allow the re-release of material would suggest that one day we will be treated to some form of re-release programme by EMI/Polydor,but I am not holding my breath.

I've never been a professional musician, however I have made a few recordings with bands in the 1980s and two LPs and a couple of BBC John Peel sessions exist as evidence of my piano and guitar playing! I would hate to have outtakes etc. released featuring me or any band I've played with making mistakes. I can't understand people who don't understand why members of The Shadows or any other group might object to recordings which were deemed sub-standard at the time being released.
Much as I would love to hear anything by The Shadows that I haven't heard before, I totally respect their veto over certain recordings that they're not happy with for whatever reason being released. Isn't there enough of their material available already? Certainly a lot more than in the late 70s when I started to collect their music.

Clive

[wstagner]

The Ventures have a whole series of "in the vaults" recordings they MIGHT prefer were never released, I dunno, called In the Vaults: Volumes 1, 2, 3, 4

I'd not call them outtakes but different mixes of toons we've heard before, rare tracks that previously were on 45s, and even a few unreleased trax. From what I've heard, nothing to be ashamed of, cept maybe for Don Wilson's vocals.

[captainhaddock]

This debate will probably never end, I have only been a member of this forum for a very short time and this is the second time I have been involved. I wonder why EMI in Britain, chose not to release the previously mentioned Original and Alternatives 60's Studio Versions CD, is there now a lack of interest in the Shadows in Britain ? . Were it not for the Wonderful Leo's Den, I would not have heard of this brilliant CD and would have missed out.
I fully understand that The Shadows may wish to veto the release of Out-takes, but the fact that many Shadows LP's are no longer available is a puzzler. Many of the un-released tracks have been heard in Public at one time or another but in order to hear some of them now, one would have to use You Tube or venture into the Bootleg market , ironically the refusal to release material serves only to strengthen the Bootleg market.
Listen to,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mWZHJ8fJ38 , Cool Water has never been released in GB, can you see what the band could object to ?
Listen to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctYqBmXh34A , Chicago has never been released here either, OK it's not briliant but is it any worse than say "Winchester Cathedral" with its rather cheesy spoken intro? on the "Jigsaw" LP ?.
Does any one Shadow have the overall right of veto on what is released ? are all of the Band involved and do they all agree at what stays hidden ? . Were it possible for the archived tracks to appear on limited release CD's, would you be prepared to pay more in order to get one ?

[wstagner]

I would think that any artist only has ULTIMATE control IF they own the material (Dave Clark Five).

But even then, in Japan, Toshiba EMI still owns much of their Ventures catalog. Only recourse for the Ventures was to return to the studio and rerecord whatever they wanted issued on their new M&I label.

Otherwise Toshiba could issue whatever they wanted.

Far as I know, Shadows aren't under contract by anyone cept Eagle Rock/2 Entertain.

There must be at least 1 barrister on this board who can clue us in.

[dave robinson]

With respect, I would have thought a barrister would have better things to occupy his mind than all of this tripe.