The ShadowMusic Web Community

Wonderful Land is such a perfect unique record that stills resonates more than anything else in 65 years of my very varied music listening and collecting - but the slight glitch on the second damped section grows larger to my ears as the years roll by. Has anyone ever used modern technology to correct this by 'dropping in' the same note from the first section?

Mike

what glitch are you talking about ?

At 1.38 - 10th note of damped section - very minor of course!

no idea what you are talking about, Mike - nothing in there that spoils my enjoyment whatsoever!

Well Mike,

There are more "glitches" in Shadow numbers that are easier to hear.
But we all get used to those, so they became a fixed part of the recordings.
For myself, I always wonder why the guitar-solo in The Savage with warts and all is chosen.... in favour of the slick version of Witch Doctor(the film version of The Savage)

Tin hat in place

Cheers Rob

Hank once said about Man of Mystery ,spot the wrong note in the solo,Bruce said there were wrong notes in Kon Tiki, someone with good hearing and musical knowledge might spot those but I just like to enjoy the records.

Derek Mowbray wrote:Hank once said about Man of Mystery ,spot the wrong note in the solo,Bruce said there were wrong notes in Kon Tiki, someone with good hearing and musical knowledge might spot those but I just like to enjoy the records.

Agreed. There are no actual 'wrong' notes at all, to my ears, in Wonderful Land, perhaps just a slight harshness of tone, maybe, on the tonic (10th note) in the second damped section. Put it down to the essential human factor in the creation and performance of music, recorded or otherwise.

Bill

... interesting one. It is incredible and actually a real tribute to us, the fans, who now see these old recordings as the definitive definition of ‘perfection’ - the fluffs, the simplicity of equipment at the time, the age of the performers (for me, Hank had a wonderful and inate sense of timing and touch even at the age of 17) - that we try to replicate these recordings as we have come to know them - perfectly imperfect. I am sure that the band will hate some particular performances more than others - to to us those recordings are actually beautiful because of the odd mis fretted note, or rattle on the string, or timing anomaly. This is really what makes them wonderful! For example, ‘The Shadows at their very best’ is an oxymoron - because here you have classic tracks re-recorded ‘perfectly’ - but without the edge, rawness, passion, excitement and wonder of those boys back then and those original sessions. That record sounds like a tribute band. It is sterile. Why do that?

Personally, I love the ‘fluffs‘ - one offs, legendary hooks - whatever we call them - and I love that most of us who try and get to the holy grail try to reproduce them exactly! We all have our own idiosyncrasies and loves - for me the bells in Maroc 7!!

Hank didn’t know at the time - but every slip, finger movement, damp release...would have people talking, debating and forensically examining his no events that day 50 odd years later...

It is wonderful.

Tony

Very interesting!

MikeAB wrote:... the slight glitch on the second damped section grows larger to my ears as the years roll by. Has anyone ever used modern technology to correct this by 'dropping in' the same note from the first section?

What I hear in the second damped section is the low C being hit rather harder than the other notes around it. This does not happen first time round.

I think you have spotted an early example of EMI "fixing"!

The unissued unaccompanied version on the "Shadows at Abbey Road" compilation runs a little slower but I think that's simply down to tape speed. If you run it at the "right" speed you can hear that it's the same version to which the orchestra was later added. And it does contain a glitch! In the section you mention, Hank completely misses that low C. My theory is that the studio blended a separate low C into the mix afterwards. There's more attack on it and that's probably why you notice it.

In answer to your question, Yes. I have 'dropped in' the low C from the first time and it now sounds the same. It's a better fix than the one EMI did!

I will send you a listening copy if you PM me

Cheers - Iain

I like the way the Shads left the glitches etc in. Makes them more real and i suppose a musician would say it adds dynamics!

Like the section in Apache that goes a bit quiet, almost lost among the other instruments and then comes back again