Liege and Lief

[Mr Cat (Lewis)]

Hi:

Just wondering if you can recall songs or tunes that didn't make it onto the LP (or the bonus material for the CD re-releases).  I'm assuming that more material was tried/rehearsed etc than eventually made it onto disc.

Cheers

[Swarb]

No I dont recall any out trax although there must be some i suppose,I would have to say though that given my time again I would destroy any out takes ,or at the very least i would make sure that any fooling around in the studio was not recorded. it annoys me greatly that trax that were deemed not up to scratch for whatever reason by the group or even a single member of the group of the time, is released now, I think it reprehensible of the record co to do that.I appreciate though that at the same time these trax are of great interest to afficianados of the group and from an historic or whatever you like to call it point of view they are, both commercial and have a certain fascination.I however hate to have no quality control over the stuff,and to have no say in the matter when, at the time the producer and the co were well aware of the fact that we, did not care for the stuff for, musical reasons.

[koho (Koen)]

Were you, for one, even informed about the recent reissue of L&L as a 2CD set? I am a completist on all things Fairport, but drew the line there as a punter. I find the milking of vintage albums like that, every few years or so, rather pathetic.
Take Who's Next - I guess the most recent version of this album is 3 or 4 times the original albums' length, and its 4th(?) CD release, well after the "definite" Who remasters series. I'd imagine a Who's Next box set within the next year or two.

[Bob Barrows]

There was a recent discussion about bootlegs elsewhere on this board and Jude said something similar: that (and I'm paraphrasing) she thought it was reprehensible that the artist had no say in what recordings got shared, and that if she had any say about some of the recordings that included her, she would definitely have vetoed them because she thought her perfomances on them were lacking.

I wanted to say then that the people who want to listen to those recordings are already her fans and that her personal bar may be set a little higher (or a lot) than her fans' expectations - everyone who talks about Jude's recent performances do nothing but rave about them - and I doubt they are just being kind. And you know, being across the ocean, I really feel left out   so when a chance to hear a recording comes along, I have to listen and, in Jude's case, I'm with the ravers  

In the case of out-takes, many of us consider them a rare opportunity to get inside the head of the performers: to witness the process of creating the masterpieces we fell in love with. " ... oh, the song started out in waltz time, interesting! ... and then they changed it to [some other tempo] and changed the key! ... I wonder if it was to accomodate this bridge verse that wasn't originally there ... yeah, I definitely like it this way better, I can see why they made the change ... " Out-takes are not something I would consider listening to over and over: that's what the final approved version is for.

I always thought the out-takes weren't automatically deleted because musicians would keep and listen to them for various reasons: stimulate new ideas, detect where improvements are needed, pick up on where something great happened that was missed in the heat of making the recording.

[Swarb]

out takes naturally happen in the studio,trying to get it right etc,nowedays all of us are wised up so to speak,and dont leave any musical detritus around to be exploited.Remember too that one has trust in the producer to act in your best interests both in the drawing up of the contract and in the production of the album(in fairport for instance in may be the same person) subsequently that person may decide,or be consulted on the release of certain out tracks/The reason given is always personal "I think they were good etc" even though that person must remember why the track was not chosen in the first place. musically that person may just about be able to tell the difference between major and minor,In evey case that i can think of Money with a capital M was the factor.the decision to release is always made by someone who cant tell the difference between a crotchet, and a hatchet! Like I say though I do understand the atraction that you the listeners and buyers have towards the stuff,and you bear no blame,Its not your fault its out there to be purchased.and finally no, I have never been consulted about the release of any out track, or liege and lief remixes.I find out they are released on most occasions,not all, by the reviews i read in the press,or somebody such as yourself informing me.

[Swarb]

just to follow up a little if I may, your point about the song developing ,and bridges , time changes etc is a good and interesting point of view,its one that i hadnt thought of before.I think I shall bear that in mind in the future.but, you know ,in most cases, not i suppose all,it doesnt work like that.studio time being expensive ,one has the song rehearsed and the arrangement finalised before you go into the studio.on the occasions when i have been involved, and the song has been arranged in the studio. Then ,the expense of producing said albm has soared.the time when a song is honed is when it is rehearsed, and that is for me, and most other musicians i know the the most exciting and creative time  and, I wouldnt mind at all if rehearsal time was recorded and released.

[Mr Cat (Lewis)]

I didn't really mean to stir up trouble re the release of outtakes - my original question was really directed towards finding out if there were other trad tunes/songs tried out and discarded during the L & L sessions, more for pure information purposes than hoping there are further barrels to be scraped by the record labels.

I confess some guilt in buying extended reissues, but in my defence these are usually reissues in which all the parties involved have had a say, rather than a record company cashing in.

[Bob Barrows]

just to follow up a little if I may, your point about the song developing ,and bridges , time changes etc is a good and interesting point of view,its one that i hadnt thought of before.I think I shall bear that in mind in the future.but, you know ,in most cases, not i suppose all,it doesnt work like that.studio time being expensive ,one has the song rehearsed and the arrangement finalised before you go into the studio.on the occasions when i have been involved, and the song has been arranged in the studio. Then ,the expense of producing said albm has soared.the time when a song is honed is when it is rehearsed, and that is for me, and most other musicians i know the the most exciting and creative time  and, I wouldnt mind at all if rehearsal time was recorded and released.

Feel free to follow up as much as you want to!
I'm chuffed to have given you some food for thought  
Thanks for setting me straight about the recording process. You've reminded me of an interview I read with Keith Olsen, the producer of the mega-hit Fleetwood Mac albums, in which he railed about groups he had previously worked with who used studio time to rehearse and work out their songs, and how he insisted that FM always come to the studio prepared to record.
As for recording rehearsals, I remember reading how Jerry Garcia always insisted on recording rehearsals ... some of those have made their way onto boots. So you're not alone in that opinion, anyways.
Thanks again

[Jules Gray]

it annoys me greatly that trax that were deemed not up to scratch for whatever reason by the group or even a single member of the group of the time, is released now, I think it reprehensible of the record co to do that.

There have to be some exceptions though, Swarb.  Personally I think the Full House re-release has benefitted enormously from having Poor Will & The Jolly Hangman reinstated, even if Richard's vocal was a little below par.

Jules

[Swarb]

I beg to differ, poor will is a v good example of what i am talking about, the group with the exception of richard loved the track. Richard hated his rendition of it, and was adamant that he did NOT want it released. what power on this earth has the right thefore to overturn the co writers feeling on the song.in my opinion none, and shame on whoever over ruled his decision.I do of course have a fair idea who that would be, and so would you . and without mentioning names you will i am sure be getting the picture.

[Bob Barrows]

This makes me curious ... again.  
Was time so short that Richard simply could not re-record that vocal? Or had the budget for studio time run out?

[Swarb]

it wasnt just his singing,it was also his feelings for the song which is personal, have you never wondered who poor will is? he had doubts as to whether he wanted the song to happen at all.Time of cource is the healer,but at the least he should have been consulted re the release,for all I know he was, I doubt it.We ie the rest of us were not.

[diddlysquat]

Well as co-composer if you weren't consulted it would seem unlikely that Richard was as well

[Swarb]

I suppose yr right, or rather you could be right, but there are no guarantees of anything in this game. money is all that counts to the suits and the likes.

[Bob Barrows]

it wasnt just his singing,it was also his feelings for the song which is personal, have you never wondered who poor will is?

Actually, I hadn't. I only heard the song for the first time about a year ago and was assuming this was a retelling of an historical event ... but now you have me wondering. I'm not familiar enough with the timeline of events back then, but I think I do have a reasonable guess as to who you are referring to. I'm having a little trouble seeing the parallels between the event I'm thinking of and the song (time to go study the lyrics), but the writer would certainly have a better perspective on that than I, wouldn't he. That certainly clarifies things for me, thanks.

[Jules Gray]

Richard has gone on record as saying that he regretted pulling Poor Will (in fact he released a version with him and Linda overdubbing a new vocal in the mid 70s).  I think he's now fine with the track being reinstated on Full House.

Jules

[Bob Barrows]

Richard has gone on record as saying that he regretted pulling Poor Will

Well swarb did say something about time healing wounds ...

[Swarb]

your prob on the right track, its all there in the lyricks, it concerns the same subject as crazy man micheal,

[Jules Gray]

your prob on the right track, its all there in the lyricks, it concerns the same subject as crazy man micheal,

Ah, right.  Say no more.

Jules

[koho (Koen)]

Whatever reserves Richard may have had about the song must've disappeared pretty quickly, as five years later he revisited the song for the Guitar/Vocal album, using FC's original backing track but with new vocals - and it was played live various times since. As you say though, time is a healer. I can understand why he/you/anyone in the band feels miffed if the original version was used to beef up the 2001 Full House rerelease without consultation (although Simon did the sleevenotes); but the song itself must've been OK'd by Richard ... possibly not in 1970 but certainly by 1975 when he redid the vocals. And good too, as it's in my top 5 of Fairport faves. Must admit: haven't got a clue what it's about though, but that also must have something to do with me not being a native english speaker. [edit - as I was writing this a few more people posted, so that bit is clear - or at least it's subject matter]

That said though, it's frustrating from the musician's point of view how music is apparently used without their go-ahead, just like that, time and time again. As for us punters - well that's how they make us buy it don't they ... ;-) ... for L&L though they went too far even for the buyer, adding "unreleased" bonustracks which were by then, in fact, released elsewhere already, with the exception of some instrumental jam which was really scraping-the-barrel kind of stuff. So as a punter, I draw the line at the 2CD L&L.