I'm posting a response here since the thread was locked before I could respond. I did ask Pete to reopen the thread but I didn't give him enough time to respond and do it, can a mod please merge this into the thread? this is the statement I'm responding to:

----

It's one of the best British produced Northern Soul records I've ever heard - it's as good as Steve Aldo, John Andrews...you need to understand the genre before you slag it off Bob.

---

There are a few points you just made that I disagree with.

1) I have no idea what British produced or non-British produced has to do with the quality of the record. Are you saying that a record should be considered better than it really is if it is if it's British produced? It seems like a total nonsequitur. There are a bunch of British sweet soul records I like, I don't think of them differently because they are British.

2) I was evaluating it as a soul record, not as a northern soul record. In fact, I think it *is* a soul record (e.g. not a rock record or pop record, etc.). I just think it's a bad soul record, plus it's a cover of a good soul record, why would I want to hear a bad version of it?

3) Whether or not it's an amazing "northern soul" record is something I can't evaluate. In fact, I said in my message that I don't have knowledge of "northern soul". However, I do know enough about soul music to evaluate a soul record and your comment comes across as very dismissive of me like I'm too stupid to have an opinion. The podcast was called "solid soul sensations" and throughout the podcast the music is referred to as soul or even crossover. And I made my specific perspective clear and you know where I'm coming from (a US soul collector with no ties to the northern scene). If you think it's an amazing "northern soul" record, that is totally fine, but that doesn't change my evaluation of it as a soul record.

Also, I'm entitled to my opinion and I wasn't attacking you or Ian with that statement and even qualified it as such. There's no reason to be dismissive of me. I mad specific points about what was bad about the song, you didn't respond saying anything about it except that it was British and I was wrong. Thank you.

No problem.

I never once intimated that you were stupid. I meant that you need to hear a lot of these records to be able to understand why they become Northern Soul favourites.

But I'm not getting into a debate about it.

Apart from stating again that I don't consider it a soul record, I consider it, and all the other examples that I quoted, Northern Soul records.

bob

not going to merge as once a thread is closed that should be that unless exceptional circumstance come up

and don't feels that's the case here

is an interesting offshoot imo as it does cover some various discussion points

what is northern, one persons take, etc etc

if the talk does carry on then will move to box

cheers

mike

I'd just like to support what Boba is saying in that this is very much a personal perspective and opinion thing. He has his views. At the same time Pete S has his own opinions. Both of these are equally valid.

It seems to me that we concentrate on the negative rather than the positive.

It would be nice if, just for once, if we focused on the tracks we like, rather than the tracks we are less appreciaitve of, and respected each others points of view.

.

It would be nice if, just for once, if we focused on the tracks we like, rather than the tracks we are less appreciaitve of, and respected each others points of view.

.

But everything in life isn't good, just like everything in Ian's podcasts aren't good to some. We shouldn't keep negative opinions to ourselves just cause it might upset someone. If going to give an opinion or view about something then it should be a balanced one, both good and bad. As long as the criticism is constructive, or a reason giving for one's dislike then what is wrong with that?

Like you said peoples views should be respected.

But everything in life isn't good, just like everything in Ian's podcasts aren't good to some. We shouldn't keep negative opinions to ourselves just cause it might upset someone. If going to give an opinion or view about something then it should be a balanced one, both good and bad. As long as the criticism is constructive, or a reason giving for one's dislike then what is wrong with that?

Like you said peoples views should be respected.

Agreed. If there were no differing opinions, it would be pointless having this forum. All people have to remember is that I'm right.

Agreed. If there were no differing opinions, it would be pointless having this forum. All people have to remember is that I'm right.

As always Pete

Agreed. If there were no differing opinions, it would be pointless having this forum. All people have to remember is that I'm right.

Boolax Smiffy - your a Wolves fan!

thanks everyone for responding. The Robert Plant did actually sound like they were producing a (blue eyed) soul record to me given the production style, song, etc. What does the other side sound like?

thanks everyone for responding. The Robert Plant did actually sound like they were producing a (blue eyed) soul record to me given the production style, song, etc. What does the other side sound like?

Much slower, bluesy ballad. Don't like it much. Presumably a cover.

Long Time Coming.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evQFCiTNoZ0

The first Plant solo single, Our Song, is horrible, but it's got a decent blue eyed cut on the other side

Previously he recorded this as part of the group Listen...originally by the Young Rascals, also cut by The In Betweens (Slade) who were local rivals to Listen, I had some great memorabilia of both bands a couple of years back, autographs, business cards etc. Prefer the In Betweens version, produced by Kim Fowley, having said that, for an 18/19 year old Plant has a great voice.

Although I already expressed my opinion on whether I like the record, both sides of the record sound like they were clearly trying to make a (blue-eyed) soul record. What makes this less of a soul record than Dusty Springfield's material for example? It actually sounds more soul than some Springfield material to me.

Looks like someone bought a boot of this for £107 recently...

https://www.popsike.com/php/detaildatar.php?itemnr=230774522681

Looks like someone bought a boot of this for £107 recently...

https://www.popsike.c...nr=230774522681

You cannot possibly tell that that is a bootleg from that scan.

I actually had it in my hands, as did Mick Smith and Roy Gelder, and none of us twigged that it was a boot until I got it home and realised the matrix was scratched in. So three very experienced UK collectors all taken in by it, yet you can tell it's a boot from that scan, amazing

(in fact he wouldn't sell it to me at that £107 price I won it at, I ended up paying £160 for it. I got the money back, obviously)

Edited May 28, 201213 yr by Pete S

It is, though, isn't it?

I looked on Popsike - there are two other copies of the boot on there from a few years back - they were a lot cheaper then!

It is, though, isn't it?

I looked on Popsike - there are two other copies of the boot on there from a few years back - they were a lot cheaper then!

See above. When a bloke as experienced as Mick Smith gets suckered into buying a counterfeit, you know it's going to be a good one.

More info here

https://lostvinylgemsofthe60s.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/robert-plant-ive-got-secret-cbs-2858.html

Ooops, didn't realise it was you that had bought it, Pete! Glad you got the money back!

But if you look at the Popsike listings, none of the photos show the label edge where the rumble strips should be - which looks very suspicious to me!

Ooops, didn't realise it was you that had bought it, Pete! Glad you got the money back!

But if you look at the Popsike listings, none of the photos show the label edge where the rumble strips should be - which looks very suspicious to me!

I'd probably still be interested in paying maybe £50 for a boot, £150 or so for a real one...

remember that shop in Bridgnorth - I got a copy of Reg Guest Syndicate - Underworld - Mercury out of there about 6 weeks back, it was in a box I'd looked through at least four times over the past 6 or 7 years and I never twigged, unbelievable that it sat there all that time...I sold it to someone who dj'd at GoGo Children recently, said he was going to play it, never did ask him if he did.

I'd probably still be interested in paying maybe £50 for a boot, £150 or so for a real one...

remember that shop in Bridgnorth - I got a copy of Reg Guest Syndicate - Underworld - Mercury out of there about 6 weeks back, it was in a box I'd looked through at least four times over the past 6 or 7 years and I never twigged, unbelievable that it sat there all that time...I sold it to someone who dj'd at GoGo Children recently, said he was going to play it, never did ask him if he did.

Well, yes, I'd take a dozen real ones at that price!

That's odd about Bridgnorth - I had a pretty good session in there a couple of weeks before I bumped into you there that time, and blokey said I'd been through just about everything by the time you came in.

Didn't see the Reg Guest (obviously!), or it wouldn't have been there. Are you sure it wasn't a new addition?

I think the best thing I pulled was an Alma Cogan for two quid, a few Pamas, some Duffy Powers and not a lot else really...

Well, yes, I'd take a dozen real ones at that price!

That's odd about Bridgnorth - I had a pretty good session in there a couple of weeks before I bumped into you there that time, and blokey said I'd been through just about everything by the time you came in.

Didn't see the Reg Guest (obviously!), or it wouldn't have been there. Are you sure it wasn't a new addition?

I think the best thing I pulled was an Alma Cogan for two quid, a few Pamas, some Duffy Powers and not a lot else really...

You definitely went through the box the same day as I did, it was under the counter, what threw me (my excuse) was that it was in a very early 60's Mercury sleeve so I just presumed it was a very early 60's Mercury 45, of which there is little of interest to me...I wouldn't have even read the label, just flicked straight past it. I very rarely get anything out of there to be honest, the only other thing I got was the legendary Mrs Miller 45 on Capitol

You definitely went through the box the same day as I did, it was under the counter, what threw me (my excuse) was that it was in a very early 60's Mercury sleeve

:facepalm:

never had a copy of that one - I'd have kept it!

:facepalm:

never had a copy of that one - I'd have kept it!

I'd liked to have kept it too but I got some dosh + a Mike Vickers demo for it so was a good deal for me

Did a good cover in Led Zep of this one.

Did a good cover in Led Zep of this one.

[media=]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcbTv_zNtvs

Yes very blues influenced were ZEP and blatantly ripped off riffs and notes and made them into Monsters!