Has Sandy Golden On Masterpiece Been Booted?

[Reforee]

With regard to the Great Expectations release on The Pheonix label.

Besides the Nate Fortier connection there is also Tim Lawson and another more telling reference of Masterpiece on the label which all tie in nicely with the Sandy Golden 45.

The plot thickens! But sadly the pot of Sandy Golden 45s is still pretty thin!

Dave H.

[Steve G]

Oh come on Steve. You honestly don't think something dodgy is going on? How come it's suddenly appeared as a re-issue with the original blue The Phoenix label then? Is this another one that we somehow managed to miss over the last 45 years? Must be 'cos it's not in Manship or Brown's guides either. Strange that.

 

Anyway, it's been good fun this thread. I am firmly of the belief that there is something very very dodgy about the Sandy Golden record. I've seen similar things happen with other records - all strictly behind-the-counter stuff at certain record shops in the U.S. where the owner will wait until no one else is around and then pull out a stash of rare or obscure records which are obviously brand new. 

 

Time will tell no doubt....

 

Ian D 

 

Oh come on Ian. You have provided nothing to suggest the blue La Phoenix Great Expectations record is anything other than an original 45.....a link to the "discogs" website and a notation "RE" - purleeeeez, whilst "Discogs" can be a useful source, there's more accurate information to be found in a Noddy & Big Ears book...... Come to think of it I think I've got Great Expectations on Phoenix as well as Phil La somewhere, I am sure I've got other stuff on Phoenix too.

 

I know what you are talking about when you say "behind the counter" etc....but Sandy Golden was discovered in a small shop off the beaten track in the early 80's, not a Richie Rosen type place, and it was discovered at a time when if you believe the media supposedly everyone had left "the scene" to have their families.

 

I've already said I think the Sandy Golden 45 may well be an early 70's release, same with the La Phoenix stuff which obviously is early 70's. Questions sure, as said it's always been a talking point record amongst collectors.

 

But why do you persist in this bootleg / re-press / smelly rat / Soussan / Under the counter conspiracy theory malarky? Why is it everything West Coast has to go back to your old sparring buddy Simon Soussan? If no one knows why do people have to make something up?

 

And Gareth there's tons and tons of West Coast "vinyl" out there. Without even looking I can rattle off Eddie Foster, The Exits, Ty Karim, John & Weirdest, Chico Lamarr etc etc.

 

Those with copies must be ROFL at all this speculation going on here. I'd keep stumm if I were them and watch the fun, as we get conspiracy theory after theory trotted out from Soul Source University.  

Edited November 4, 2013 by Steve G

[Pete S]

Four

Vandals

[Chalky]

given that most of the west coast produced 45s at the time were pressed at monarch in styrene ....And I presume this is a west coast record

Where was this pressed in vinyl ?

 

My experience with collecting 60s and 70s indies is that it is common for east coast to be vinyl, West coast is usually styrene.

Unless its Okeh or a Major label

 

 

 

 

Although styrene common on the west coast (it was cheaper and the stampers lasted longer) there are plenty of examples of West Coast vinyl presses.  Even Monarch used vinyl and I can think of Highland label 45's on vinyl with a monarch delta number, Kell Osborne being one.  Arthur Wright told me they used whoever was the cheapest at the time and where credit was good.

 

P.S. Just read Steve's response to West Coast vinyl.  And I agree Kitch and Butch must be having a good giggle at this.

Edited November 4, 2013 by chalky

[Ian Dewhirst]

Oh come on Ian. You have provided nothing to suggest the blue La Phoenix Great Expectations record is anything other than an original 45.....a link to the "discogs" website and a notation "RE" - purleeeeez, whilst "Discogs" can be a useful source, there's more accurate information to be found in a Noddy & Big Ears book...... Come to think of it I think I've got Great Expectations on Phoenix as well as Phil La somewhere, I am sure I've got other stuff on Phoenix too.

 

 

If the brand new The Phoenix re-press of Great Expectations is in fact an original, then you would have expected the publishing credits to be the same as both the original Phil LA Of Soul release and the yellow label The Phoenix release. After all, why would the credit suddenly change to Masterpiece Music?

 

Also, Discogs is a pretty reliable source in my view. Not so much for the super rare stuff but more generally. Let's put it this way, it's the only source on the web that actually shows and acknowledges the Great Expectations re-press, which has thus far eluded all collectors and all price guides for the previous 45 years. 

 

Ian D 

[Cover-up]

If the brand new The Phoenix re-press of Great Expectations is in fact an original, then you would have expected the publishing credits to be the same as both the original Phil LA Of Soul release and the yellow label The Phoenix release. After all, why would the credit suddenly change to Masterpiece Music?

 

If the blue label Phoenix single is a re-issue, where can you buy it? Why has nobody on here seen a copy? Even on Discogs it says that "0" people own it and "1" person wants it... And if someone was going to bootleg or re-issue it, then surely they'd just make an identical copy of the yellow label rather than change credits on it...

 

I'm a relative new-comer to collecting soul, but the yellow label copy is distributed by Jamie/Guyden - which is a Philadelphia set-up, right? The blue label copy has a Hollywood, California address on it. So, is it not more likely that the blue label copy is the original California local release which was LATER picked up for national release by Jamie/Guyden, making the yellow label the "re-issue" - or slightly later pressing? As for changing publishing details, I would have thought that was very common practice - when licensing something to just change the publishing deal (and even the writing credits in many cases...)

 

Once again, all pure conjecture, I just can't see why someone would re-issue this, and then put a load of extra made up information to make it look LESS like an original record.

 

BUTCH, PLEASE PUT US ALL OUT OF OUR COLLECTIVE MISERY! PLEASE!!!!!!

[Steve G]

If the blue label Phoenix single is a re-issue, where can you buy it? Why has nobody on here seen a copy? Even on Discogs it says that "0" people own it and "1" person wants it... And if someone was going to bootleg or re-issue it, then surely they'd just make an identical copy of the yellow label rather than change credits on it...

 

I'm a relative new-comer to collecting soul, but the yellow label copy is distributed by Jamie/Guyden - which is a Philadelphia set-up, right? The blue label copy has a Hollywood, California address on it. So, is it not more likely that the blue label copy is the original California local release which was LATER picked up for national release by Jamie/Guyden, making the yellow label the "re-issue" - or slightly later pressing? As for changing publishing details, I would have thought that was very common practice - when licensing something to just change the publishing deal (and even the writing credits in many cases...)

 

Once again, all pure conjecture, I just can't see why someone would re-issue this, and then put a load of extra made up information to make it look LESS like an original record.

 

 

Agree with all the above.

[Ian Dewhirst]

If the blue label Phoenix single is a re-issue, where can you buy it? Why has nobody on here seen a copy? Even on Discogs it says that "0" people own it and "1" person wants it... And if someone was going to bootleg or re-issue it, then surely they'd just make an identical copy of the yellow label rather than change credits on it...

 

I'm a relative new-comer to collecting soul, but the yellow label copy is distributed by Jamie/Guyden - which is a Philadelphia set-up, right? The blue label copy has a Hollywood, California address on it. So, is it not more likely that the blue label copy is the original California local release which was LATER picked up for national release by Jamie/Guyden, making the yellow label the "re-issue" - or slightly later pressing? As for changing publishing details, I would have thought that was very common practice - when licensing something to just change the publishing deal (and even the writing credits in many cases...)

 

Once again, all pure conjecture, I just can't see why someone would re-issue this, and then put a load of extra made up information to make it look LESS like an original record.

 

BUTCH, PLEASE PUT US ALL OUT OF OUR COLLECTIVE MISERY! PLEASE!!!!!!

 

LOL, don't shoot the messenger. I have no idea why someone would go to the effort of creating a blue label with different credits to the original yellow label, but if anyone thinks that is an original label, I kinda give up. I've studied L.A. presses for the last 40 years, spent a lot of time examining L.A. local releases and know first-hand many of the characters and plants involved. All I was pointing out is that it seems a strange coincidence that a new, never seen before label of an old record with different publishing credits that's not in any of the guides or, in fact, anywhere other than Discogs, should suddenly pop up after some 40 odd years. Too much of a coincidence for me I'm afraid. Given the fact that the same people are involved with the Sandy Golden record which prompted this thread, it's surely food for thought isn't it?

 

Anyway, I guess the real answer to all this, will be whether any of these alleged fresh copies actually exist or not. I wouldn't mind seeing the scans of the two fresh copies if the people who mentioned them could oblige. The one that cost 8 euros in France especially!

 

Ian D 

[Steve G]

LOL, don't shoot the messenger. I have no idea why someone would go to the effort of creating a blue label with different credits to the original yellow label, but if anyone thinks that is an original label, I kinda give up. I've studied L.A. presses for the last 40 years, spent a lot of time examining L.A. local releases and know first-hand many of the characters and plants involved. All I was pointing out is that it seems a strange coincidence that a new, never seen before label of an old record with different publishing credits that's not in any of the guides or, in fact, anywhere other than Discogs, should suddenly pop up after some 40 odd years. Too much of a coincidence for me I'm afraid. Given the fact that the same people are involved with the Sandy Golden record which prompted this thread, it's surely food for thought isn't it?

 

Anyway, I guess the real answer to all this, will be whether any of these alleged fresh copies actually exist or not. I wouldn't mind seeing the scans of the two fresh copies if the people who mentioned them could oblige. The one that cost 8 euros in France especially!

 

Ian D 

 

For goodness sake man, put a sock in it please Ian. you are digging yourself into a deeper hole with each posting you make...

 

"Don't shoot the messenger"?

 

"Cover up" is hardly doing that is he? he's shooting a speculative wild guesser!

 

"Yellow original"?. Yellow Phoenix is the national J/G release, blue The Phoenix looks to be the local LA release....not hard when you look at it that way is it? Especially as there were other The Phoenix records from LA....If you've really been studying L.A labels for 40 years you wouldn't come out with this stuff!

 

You "give up" if anyone thinks "it's a coincidence" that a new never previously known label variation of a mildly  collectible funk 45 turns up? Don't "give up" it happens all the time m8. If it's a re-issue as you suggest, how come it's not been for sale anywhere?

 

"Not in the price guides"? Most serious collectors have got boxes of records not in the price guides. Another mis-conception. Proof of that is that every new price guide has additional material listed.

 

Then you talk about "seeing the scans" - Simon has already confirmed what he saw in Amsterdam, that's good enough for me and the other newly found copy has been posted in the first ever post on this thread with some nice pix of the record.

Edited November 4, 2013 by Steve G

[Len]

Let's imagine for one moment that loads of originals have been found - Someone mentioned that he hopes not, and I agree (except that I would love to have one) The question is, if it did end up a 'one in everyone's box' would people lose interest / enjoyment as has happened with other records?

 

I personally think this record is actually too good to 'kill'

 

All the best,

 

Len  Hoping loads don't turn up......or do I?  

Edited November 4, 2013 by LEN

[Pete S]

For goodness sake man, put a sock in it please Ian. you are digging yourself into a deeper hole with each posting you make...

 

"Don't shoot the messenger"?

 

"Cover up" is hardly doing that is he? he's shooting a speculative wild guesser!

 

"Yellow original"?. Yellow Phoenix is the national J/G release, blue The Phoenix looks to be the local LA release....not hard when you look at it that way is it? Especially as there were other The Phoenix records from LA....If you've really been studying L.A labels for 40 years you wouldn't come out with this stuff!

 

You "give up" if anyone thinks "it's a coincidence" that a new never previously known label variation of a mildly  collectible funk 45 turns up? Don't "give up" it happens all the time m8. If it's a re-issue as you suggest, how come it's not been for sale anywhere?

 

"Not in the price guides"? Most serious collectors have got boxes of records not in the price guides. Another mis-conception. Proof of that is that every new price guide has additional material listed.

 

Then you talk about "seeing the scans" - Simon has already confirmed what he saw in Amsterdam, that's good enough for me and the other newly found copy has been posted in the first ever post on this thread with some nice pix of the record.

 

The problem with something like this is that people think there's only three or four copies whatever, but they have no idea really.  I know a member on here who has one but they haven't mentioned it or shouted up, maybe because they don't want people to know, maybe they aren't bothered, but this thing about there only being X amount of copies will nearly always be proven wrong.

[Pete S]

This thing about the synths. On When We're All Alone Tonight you can hear the first synthesiser after around 4 seconds!  There is the original riff, and the synth echoes this in the background.  On 52 seconds it comes back in again.  Now this isn't one of those Gary Numan type synthesisers, it's the sort that can reproduce the sound of strings (fairlight?) so I'm going to throw in the fact that I think this record is even later than suspected, late 70's or even early 80's.  If anyone wants a perfect quality full soundclip shout up and you can hear for yourselves.

Edited November 4, 2013 by Pete S

[Reforee]

You can use the following observations and info to argue both camps with regard to the Great expectations 45

Firstly (as far as my info goes) the California PHOENIX label ran from 1949 to 1958 and has the standard lettering as per the one posted by Ian Dewhirst. However, the one posted is not on that label it is on THE PHOENIX label which ran out of Philadelphia from 1973 to 1975. Now THE PHOENIX label had a more 70s type face (akin to what the old TV Magpie logo was/is).

So the Great Expectations 45 posted by Ian might be what he deems it to be,.......but then again they may well of had permission to press it in California and used their own type face to replicate THE PHOENIX even though the label is out of Philadelphia originally? Hence not in the same style as The Philly releases.

Don't you love a bit of intrigue?

Unless my info is wrong in which case I might be throwing a bonfire night party!!!

Where's the headache tablets?

Dave H

[Pete S]

You can use the following observations and info to argue both camps with regard to the Great expectations 45

Firstly (as far as my info goes) the California PHOENIX label ran from 1949 to 1958 and has the standard lettering as per the one posted by Ian Dewhirst. However, the one posted is not on that label it is on THE PHOENIX label which ran out of Philadelphia from 1973 to 1975. Now THE PHOENIX label had a more 70s type face (akin to what the old TV Magpie logo was/is).

So the Great Expectations 45 posted by Ian might be what he deems it to be,.......but then again they may well of had permission to press it in California and used their own type face to replicate THE PHOENIX even though the label is out of Philadelphia originally? Hence not in the same style as The Philly releases.

Don't you love a bit of intrigue?

Unless my info is wrong in which case I might be throwing a bonfire night party!!!

Where's the headache tablets?

Dave H

 

"The Phoenix" label was from L.A., at least the one that Sandy Golden is on is from L.A.

[Chalky]

If the brand new The Phoenix re-press of Great Expectations is in fact an original, then you would have expected the publishing credits to be the same as both the original Phil LA Of Soul release and the yellow label The Phoenix release. After all, why would the credit suddenly change to Masterpiece Music?

 

Also, Discogs is a pretty reliable source in my view. Not so much for the super rare stuff but more generally. Let's put it this way, it's the only source on the web that actually shows and acknowledges the Great Expectations re-press, which has thus far eluded all collectors and all price guides for the previous 45 years. 

 

Ian D 

 

Have they changed the credit to Masterpiece music.  Might be wrong but I think one side of the original had masterpiece music on one side only, the other side a different music publisher.  

 

 

You can use the following observations and info to argue both camps with regard to the Great expectations 45

Firstly (as far as my info goes) the California PHOENIX label ran from 1949 to 1958 and has the standard lettering as per the one posted by Ian Dewhirst. However, the one posted is not on that label it is on THE PHOENIX label which ran out of Philadelphia from 1973 to 1975. Now THE PHOENIX label had a more 70s type face (akin to what the old TV Magpie logo was/is).

So the Great Expectations 45 posted by Ian might be what he deems it to be,.......but then again they may well of had permission to press it in California and used their own type face to replicate THE PHOENIX even though the label is out of Philadelphia originally? Hence not in the same style as The Philly releases.

Don't you love a bit of intrigue?

Unless my info is wrong in which case I might be throwing a bonfire night party!!!

Where's the headache tablets?

Dave H

 

Nate Fortier is still around and active, maybe he re-issued it? If it is indeed a re-issue.

[Steve G]

Yes Dave I am sorry but you've got that wrong I am afraid. The Phoenix was as Pete says an LA label with an LA address (now a kitchen utensil shop b.t.w you can google earth it)…..They licensed their later product nationally through Jamie Guyden in Philly (Great Expectations, Magnum etc. but as far as we can tell not Sandy Golden's "other 45")….Great Expectation 45 also got picked up on Phil La of Soul….If you look at the credits on the records - it's largely the same people, and it's 100% the same label, just national releases.

 

I am pretty certain (90% ish) The Phoenix / Phoenix was Calvin Wade's label. There is nothing suspect about it at all. 

Edited November 4, 2013 by Steve G

[Reforee]

N

"The Phoenix" label was from L.A., at least the one that Sandy Golden is on is from L.A.

Pete

I don't disagree but something has gone one way back then, with everything all tying in together somehow and the Great Expectations 45 ties LA with PA and with all the credits etc, back into a link with the Sandy Golden 45 in one way or another.

Two labels (Phoenix) one out of LA and one out of PA and all the integration just makes for great research us record hounds thrive on.

Dave H

[Carty]

 Think your instincts are right Ian,   as i read it you are not stating for definate  what the origins or history  of this record are , however many points you have made have got me thinking, fascinating stuff , hopefully time will tell . 

[Reforee]

Yes Dave I am sorry but you've got that wrong I am afraid. The Phoenix was as Pete says an LA label with an LA address (now a kitchen utensil shop b.t.w you can google earth it)…..They licensed their later product nationally through Jamie Guyden in Philly (Great Expectations, Magnum etc. but as far as we can tell not Sandy Golden's "other 45")….Great Expectation 45 also got picked up on Phil La of Soul….If you look at the credits on the records - it's largely the same people, and it's 100% the same label, just national releases.

 

I am pretty certain (90% ish) The Phoenix / Phoenix was Calvin Wade's label. There is nothing suspect about it at all.

Hi Steve

If the THE PHOENIX label is out of LA and the one Ian posted is correct how come the yellow label one only has PHOENIX with the THE missing?

As I previously posted there are 2 different labels in this debate and while my info is the reverse of yours how do you explain the yellow label copy without the THE in the label name, surely not a mistake as the other consecutive release numbers from the Great Expectations release have THE included and have a different logo. It is all very muddled but something has gone on whether in the past or not.

I only have info on 3 releases on THE PHOENIX numbers 313, 314 & 315 so while limited and the SG release on 311 it seems odd that the yellow one has part of the label name missing?

It may be the case that reference to LA on the label was binned when Jamie/Guyden took over distribution or even they bought the label out right?

Just asking a few questions while not pointing any fingers!

Not gonna fall out over this as yer bloody bigger than me lol.

Dave

[Steve G]

Hi Steve

If the THE PHOENIX label is out of LA and the one Ian posted is correct how come the yellow label one only has PHOENIX with the THE missing?

As I previously posted there are 2 different labels in this debate and while my info is the reverse of yours how do you explain the yellow label copy without the THE in the label name, surely not a mistake as the other consecutive release numbers from the Great Expectations release have THE included and have a different logo. It is all very muddled but something has gone on whether in the past or not.

I only have info on 3 releases on THE PHOENIX numbers 313, 314 & 315 so while limited and the SG release on 311 it seems odd that the yellow one has part of the label name missing?

It may be the case that reference to LA on the label was binned when Jamie/Guyden took over distribution or even they bought the label out right?

Just asking a few questions while not pointing any fingers!

Not gonna fall out over this as yer bloody bigger than me lol.

Dave

 

Hi Dave, The Phoenix and Phoenix were the same label, look at the writer credits…..it's the same people credited and the same artists. Sandy Golden's "The Phoenix" release is the only one not to get picked up by Jamie Guyden, but again that's quite natural, it was probably the first one before the LA guys did a distribution deal.

 

ATB Steve

[Reforee]

Steve

I hear what your saying and if your right, there were 3 labels with the same name out of California, one being a gospel label which had the same or similar logo, which may of added to the question/mis info.

Talking of numbers I wonder what was/is on THE PHOENIX label number 312 as it's a missing release, considering the numbering on the 4 known are consecutive..................? .............Sandy Golden............Your love is everything ....now that would be rare!

Dave

[Guest penny]

This thing about the synths. On When We're All Alone Tonight you can hear the first synthesiser after around 4 seconds!  There is the original riff, and the synth echoes this in the background.  On 52 seconds it comes back in again.  Now this isn't one of those Gary Numan type synthesisers, it's the sort that can reproduce the sound of strings (fairlight?) so I'm going to throw in the fact that I think this record is even later than suspected, late 70's or even early 80's.  If anyone wants a perfect quality full soundclip qshout up and you can hear for yourselves.

it's definitely a string machine or something similar, probably introduced around 74.

isnt it most likely that the sg is a 70s release of some un issued 60s cuts, with added synths to try to bring it up to date. Sold like a turd and is therefore now rare. What's wrong with that scenario? Or am I missing something. That would explain it being modern looking and turning up in crap collections as it probably got mingled in with crap mid 70s records and sold in packs.

your love is everything - what a track though

[Autumnstoned]

This thing about the synths. On When We're All Alone Tonight you can hear the first synthesiser after around 4 seconds!  There is the original riff, and the synth echoes this in the background.  On 52 seconds it comes back in again.  Now this isn't one of those Gary Numan type synthesisers, it's the sort that can reproduce the sound of strings (fairlight?) so I'm going to throw in the fact that I think this record is even later than suspected, late 70's or even early 80's.  If anyone wants a perfect quality full soundclip shout up and you can hear for yourselves.

 

Pete

I agree with you that the strings on the track sound synthesized. The strings sound is definitely not produced on a Theremin in the 60's as suggested by another poster in this thread. A Theremin sounds nothing like a string ensemble. Its unlikely to be a Mellotron, for the reasons you mentioned earlier, the only other instrument then available, which generated authentic string ensemble sounds from audio tapes when a key is pressed. The first string synthesizer prototype was made by Ken Freeman in England in1969. Lowrey, a division of CMI ( Chicago Musical Instruments ) then produced a variation of his 3rd prototype in 1973 but by the end of the year the Eminent Solina and Crumar Stringman were launched. Their string synth sounds were considered to be warmer and more lush than Lowrey's which then became an also ran in the market. So by the end of 1973 authentic string ensemble sounds could be produced on a relatively inexpensive instrument which most pro keyboard players and many home keyboard players at the time would have owned and would also have been present in most pro studios or hired in cheaply when needed. All this, in my opinion, lends credence to your suggestion that someone had access to a tape recorded in the mid 60's and added the "strings" in mid 70's. 

 

 

Edit Just seen Penny's post and agree with it.

 

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb07/articles/freemanstring.htm

Edited November 4, 2013 by autumnstoned

[Len]

Fascinating stuff (but I probably won't remember most of it)  I just want to hear it again, and again, and again, so here it is - FANTASTIC!

 

Len  

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jyc7t22suI

Edited November 4, 2013 by LEN

[Ian Dewhirst]

Pete

I agree with you that the strings on the track sound synthesized. The strings sound is definitely not produced on a Theremin in the 60's as suggested by another poster in this thread. A Theremin sounds nothing like a string ensemble. Its unlikely to be a Mellotron, for the reasons you mentioned earlier, the only other instrument then available, which generated authentic string ensemble sounds from audio tapes when a key is pressed. The first string synthesizer prototype was made by Ken Freeman in England in1969. Lowrey, a division of CMI ( Chicago Musical Instruments ) then produced a variation of his 3rd prototype in 1973 but by the end of the year the Eminent Solina and Crumar Stringman were launched. Their string synth sounds were considered to be warmer and more lush than Lowrey's which then became an also ran in the market. So by the end of 1973 authentic string ensemble sounds could be produced on a relatively inexpensive instrument which most pro keyboard players and many home keyboard players at the time would have owned and would also have been present in most pro studios or hired in cheaply when needed. All this, in my opinion, lends credence to your suggestion that someone had access to a tape recorded in the mid 60's and added the "strings" in mid 70's. 

 

 

Edit Just seen Penny's post and agree with it.

 

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb07/articles/freemanstring.htm

 

Purely out of curiosity, what instrument makes the electronic 'whoop' sound on "Satisfy Me Baby"? I always thought it was an early moog but I'm not so sure now......

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOVeNWoXre0

 

Ian D 

[Benji]

Can somebody please enlighten me. I don't hear any synths on SG? Just the Sweets backing track beefed up by added instruments. And overdubbed vocals of course.

[Autumnstoned]

Purely out of curiosity, what instrument makes the electronic 'whoop' sound on "Satisfy Me Baby"? I always thought it was an early moog but I'm not so sure now......

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOVeNWoXre0

 

Ian D 

 

Hi Ian I'm not an expert on electronic music but I think its a frequency oscillator which bends the pitch of the note you hear which has a bit of delay/echo added for good measure. I think the Moog had oscillators built into it so it could well be produced on a Moog but i honestly don't know. 

Edited November 4, 2013 by autumnstoned

[Cover-up]

Can somebody please enlighten me. I don't hear any synths on SG? Just the Sweets backing track beefed up by added instruments. And overdubbed vocals of course.

Listen to the YouTube clip a few posts back and at about 0:50 you'll hear some "strings" come in, which aren't strings... They're at the start but not so prominent...

[Pete S]

Purely out of curiosity, what instrument makes the electronic 'whoop' sound on "Satisfy Me Baby"? I always thought it was an early moog but I'm not so sure now......

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOVeNWoXre0

 

Ian D 

 

Ian - I don't know what it is but Joe Meek was making sounds like that in the early 60's with technology he built himself - Telstar for a start - as were the BBC Radiophonic Workshop.

[Benji]

Listen to the YouTube clip a few posts back and at about 0:50 you'll hear some "strings" come in, which aren't strings... They're at the start but not so prominent...

 

Maybe I'll have to have a closer listen to it. But to me these 'strings' sound like actual strings to me.

[Pete S]

Maybe I'll have to have a closer listen to it. But to me these 'strings' sound like actual strings to me.

 

I'm afraid they sound nothing like real strings to me...

[Gene-R]

The Sonny label was a California label - note the similarity in typeface as the Sandy Golden and the SS boots mentioned here.  Does this help shine any light on the subject, fuel any conspiracy theories, or serve absolutely no purpose at all?  Two sources I've read both date this as a 1969 release.

 

Additionally, I have to say that this is the best, most absorbing (and probably most intellectual) thread I've read on here for ages!

Edited November 5, 2013 by Gene-R

[Steve L]

Listen to the YouTube clip a few posts back and at about 0:50 you'll hear some "strings" come in, which aren't strings... They're at the start but not so prominent...

 

My hearing must be shite, I haven't got a clue what any of  you are on about with all this strings/no strings/ synths/ no synths  

All I can hear is a great record

[Pete S]

My hearing must be shite, I haven't got a clue what any of  you are on about with all this strings/no strings/ synths/ no synths  

All I can hear is a great record

 

It's very simple. The original backing track has been overdubbed with synthesised strings.

[Wrongcrowd]

Just out of interest, and I know this on a bit of a tangent......but... does anyone know the line-up for The Sweets ? Were they the same group that recorded on Valiant in '65, which were Felice Taylor and her sisters?

[Guest gordon russell]

Had another listen.........it,s not strings or a synthasizer.........it,s Nate Fortiers front door bell.....you can clearly hear him (if you really listen) say  "not now l,m busy" in the background

[Guest gordon russell]

Fascinating stuff (but I probably won't remember most of it)  I just want to hear it again, and again, and again, so here it is - FANTASTIC!

 

Len  

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jyc7t22suI

24 CARROT GOLDEN

[Guest gordon russell]

Just out of interest, and I know this on a bit of a tangent......but... does anyone know the line-up for The Sweets ? Were they the same group that recorded on Valiant in '65, which were Felice Taylor and her sisters?

TRust you to spoil it

[Wrongcrowd]

.....and has anyone noticed that the vocals on 'When We're Alone Tonight' are shared, it's not just backing vocals, it's more than that, there are at least two 'lead' vocalists that interchange on the song..... seems to add more credence to theory of it being a group recording.

[Pete S]

.....and has anyone noticed that the vocals on 'When We're Alone Tonight' are shared, it's not just backing vocals, it's more than that, there are at least two 'lead' vocalists that interchange on the song..... seems to add more credence to theory of it being a group recording.

 

Is it not the same person with a vocal overdub maybe?

[Wrongcrowd]

Is it not the same person with a vocal overdub maybe?

 

That was my first thought Pete, it could be, but the vocals are different enough to be two vocalists.

[Ian Dewhirst]

That was my first thought Pete, it could be, but the vocals are different enough to be two vocalists.

 

Will the real Sandy Golden stand up please......? 

 

Ian D 

[Gene-R]

 

Oh My Gosh! I've been after that single for Ages! The

Australian release of it anyway. It was released here

on the Australian version of Masterpiece (MP-004) in

1966. Would love to hear it if anyone wishes to put

it on Musica.

Cameron

 

 

 

Just one reason why the Aussies are not my favourite people.

Edited November 5, 2013 by Gene-R

[Steve L]

It's very simple. The original backing track has been overdubbed with synthesised strings.

 

Yeah I just meant I can't pick out details like that. My ears must be shot, its like when you say you play grade records at 4 or 5 different grades - I just can't differentiate to that level.

Edited November 5, 2013 by Steve L

[Pete S]

Yeah I just meant I can't pick out details like that. My ears must be shot, its like when you say you play grade records at 4 or 5 different grades - I just can't differentiate to that level.

 

I wasn't being sarcy Steve by the way, it really is all I meant - old backing track, jazzed up a little

[Simon T]

It's not a synth, it's some type of accordion.

Edited November 5, 2013 by simon t

[Pete S]

It's not a synth, it's some type of accordion.

 

What type of accordion?

 

 

 

 

[Wiggyflat]

23 rd May 2009 ...Ian Levines s greatest northern soul tracks...Ian loves a synth as well....lol and Richard in on the joke...Leo Costa?? Isn't he the famous bodybuilder??

Edited November 5, 2013 by wiggyflat

[Benji]

That was my first thought Pete, it could be, but the vocals are different enough to be two vocalists.

 

Even though I'm obviously too daft to distinguish real strings from synth strings it's the same singer, just overdubbing.

[Steve G]

Yes I agree sounds like one vocalist, double tracked.