Picture this. We are at Wigan Casino on the last ever night. The biggest record on the scene in the late 70s early 80s is We Can Make It by the Mello Souls on Soul, a very popular Motown label. It is unissued in the States, only 2 known copies exist, and it has been re-released in the UK. It is played all the time, and someone pays £15k for an original US copy. At the end of the last night at Wigan, the record is played again and again.
Let's now come back to the present, and we have someone on Soul Source requesting a mint copy of Do I Love You by Frank Wilson. Now whether this is a tad na¯ve or not, surprise, surprise, the request has been met by the usual comments of "I wouldn't have a copy given" (Only costs £15 grand. That's what I call a purist!!!), and the record receives a lot of disparaging comments.
But what if he had been asking for the Mello Souls record as described in the Wigan Casino example above?
The Mello Souls is a brilliant record, rare as well. If this had been played to death at Wigan, been sold for £15k, had a legend built up around it, and then used in a TV advert, would some of the people on here who rave about it, and hold it up as a shining example of us still finding records to equal the discoveries of the 70s, be saying, "I wouldn't have a copy given". I think they would.
Why wouldn't they want a copy given? Simply because it is popular.
Also the comments, (that seem to have been lost from the Brighouse Events thread), following Roccia's spot at Brighouse are ridiculous. He played a brilliant, if familiar spot, but some of the comments such as "if anyone else had have done this spot it would have been boring" but in an effort to wind up or condescend to anyone else who might have the temerity to play these, the comment carries on to say that only because it is Roccia, it wasn't boring! (Apologies as I have had to paraphrase, as the actual comments seem to have been lost).
The point I am trying to make is that tremendous records are criticised on here by the so-called purists, just because they are popular.
I, and others on here have said this so many times before, quality lasts for ever. Like it or not, we no longer discover the Frank Wilson's, Dobie Gray's etc, in the same vast quantities and with the same regularity. Some of the new discoveries eulogized over now would not have been played at The Torch, Wheel, Mecca or Stafford, and probably not the Casino in its worst hour. We want them to be good, we even want them to be great, but in a lot of cases they aren't.
Roccia's spot was brilliant. It contained records that were expensive, but in most cases can be bought by most people with a few bob. So it was constructively criticised on SS because it was apparently judged to be not rare enough.
The scene has always been like this. People not liking or dancing to records any more simply because they have been overplayed, re-released or booted.
Why can't we appreciate records for what they are, not for how much they cost, how many times they have been played, or what label they are on?
What do you think? Its what's in the grooves that counts!
Pete S 8 posts
Simsy 7 posts
Trev Thomas 3 posts
Picture this. We are at Wigan Casino on the last ever night. The biggest record on the scene in the late 70s early 80s is We Can Make It by the Mello Souls on Soul, a very popular Motown label. It is unissued in the States, only 2 known copies exist, and it has been re-released in the UK. It is played all the time, and someone pays £15k for an original US copy. At the end of the last night at Wigan, the record is played again and again.
Let's now come back to the present, and we have someone on Soul Source requesting a mint copy of Do I Love You by Frank Wilson. Now whether this is a tad na¯ve or not, surprise, surprise, the request has been met by the usual comments of "I wouldn't have a copy given" (Only costs £15 grand. That's what I call a purist!!!), and the record receives a lot of disparaging comments.
But what if he had been asking for the Mello Souls record as described in the Wigan Casino example above?
The Mello Souls is a brilliant record, rare as well. If this had been played to death at Wigan, been sold for £15k, had a legend built up around it, and then used in a TV advert, would some of the people on here who rave about it, and hold it up as a shining example of us still finding records to equal the discoveries of the 70s, be saying, "I wouldn't have a copy given". I think they would.
Why wouldn't they want a copy given? Simply because it is popular.
Also the comments, (that seem to have been lost from the Brighouse Events thread), following Roccia's spot at Brighouse are ridiculous. He played a brilliant, if familiar spot, but some of the comments such as "if anyone else had have done this spot it would have been boring" but in an effort to wind up or condescend to anyone else who might have the temerity to play these, the comment carries on to say that only because it is Roccia, it wasn't boring! (Apologies as I have had to paraphrase, as the actual comments seem to have been lost).
The point I am trying to make is that tremendous records are criticised on here by the so-called purists, just because they are popular.
I, and others on here have said this so many times before, quality lasts for ever. Like it or not, we no longer discover the Frank Wilson's, Dobie Gray's etc, in the same vast quantities and with the same regularity. Some of the new discoveries eulogized over now would not have been played at The Torch, Wheel, Mecca or Stafford, and probably not the Casino in its worst hour. We want them to be good, we even want them to be great, but in a lot of cases they aren't.
Roccia's spot was brilliant. It contained records that were expensive, but in most cases can be bought by most people with a few bob. So it was constructively criticised on SS because it was apparently judged to be not rare enough.
The scene has always been like this. People not liking or dancing to records any more simply because they have been overplayed, re-released or booted.
Why can't we appreciate records for what they are, not for how much they cost, how many times they have been played, or what label they are on?
What do you think? Its what's in the grooves that counts!