I can well believe that the Friends LP was cut in late 1969, presumably shortly after the release of the "I Love Marie" single. Had the single caught fire, my guess is that the LP would have followed before Christmas. But I don't think it did, and Jae's notes about the labels would appear to rule out a 1969 release. However, the switch in font that took place in January / February 1970 doesn't necessarily indicate that it was released then, only that it was released after the switch. With the final single "Friends" not appearing until May, my money is still on an April, May or June release. There is though that specific mention of it in the press in February... is that a note of its release or an announcement that it will be their last LP? Surely its appearance must have been noted somewhere? Maybe in Adelaide, where "Marie" was a hit (I think)? Anyone in the city of churches up for trawling the press archive?
Yes, it's quite possible that it was released even later than February and we haven't found any evidence yet because we simply haven't looked that far afield. April, May or even June, is quite plausible IMHO.
Does anyone have a copy of "Friends/ Rock & Roll Boogie"? It was cut by ARC so I would be keen to know what the matrices are ("I Love Marie" was cut by EMI which to me rules out the likelihood of both album and that single being cut together, however, the "Friends" single being cut by ARC might support a connection).
There's a copy for sale here: The Easybeats Aust Vinyl 45 Record Friends / Rock And Roll Boogie NH-539128 RARE | eBay »
Hi Jae. Matrices for Friends single as far as I can read them are: Friends: MX161410 539128A NH539128-1 Rock and Roll Boogie: MX161411 539128B NH539128-2 Cheers, Richard
Thanks! So cut a little bit after the album. Having said that, there are singles with earlier and later matrices released in January 1970, suggesting this single too was held.
The release date for this single in the UK was definitely 17 April 1970. I've always assumed that the Aussie version was about the same time, possibly a couple of weeks later. Was there no Aussie version of "Record Retailer" that would have listed these things?
For some reason Phonogram wasn't as prolific in announcing releases. The best I have found are the listings in GoSet - for a period during 1969 and 1970 new releases were listed weekly...but unlike EMI's listings, for example, Phonogram's seem to be incomplete. Frustrating.
Not necessarily proof of anything, but interesting nonetheless. All of us are familiar with the ℗ notification on record labels. This is described in Wikipedia as “a graphic symbol to provide notice of copyright in a sound recording and consists of three elements: the symbol; the year of first publication; and an identification of the owner of copyright.” Perhaps the various record labels of the “Friends” vinyl LP may (or may not) offer a clue as to the date and origin of the recording. Or perhaps not… Original Australian pressings of the LP yield no clue at all: no year of publication or source is stated. An Australian vinyl reissue however, released in 1980 by Polydor under the title “Rock Legends,” plainly states the year of first publication as 1969 with the notice “Sound Recording made by Polydor Ltd., UK.” (below). Okay so far. The German issue (on Polydor’s Karussel subsidiary label) also designates the year of publication as 1969 (below) while Canadian copies on the Polydor label itself (released under the title ‘Holding On’) do not state a year. [Interestingly however, both the German and Canadian copies do carry a curious and confusing notation – “Original Recording by Phonogram Australia,” which leads one to speculate about their source for the master tapes, Phonogram being the name of the parent, or holding, company for the Polydor label.] Hmm. Finally the UK Polydor release of the LP states its year of publication as 1970 (a notation under both titles from the single designates them as “1969”) but no notation is offered concerning their source leading one to assume it to be a company-owned master. (UK label copy below.) It can also be assumed that a year of copyright designation refers to the territory in which the record is published and is not a world-wide reference. The above information is offered as evidence but one is invited to draw his own conclusions and decide for himself the various release dates and origin of the vinyl LP.
Hmmm. Very interesting, but does the ℗ symbol really refer to the first year of publication in a particular territory? I tested this theory on The Beach Boys' Surfer Girl LP, a top tenner in the US in 1963 but not released in the UK until March 1967. If this theory is correct, UK copies should say ℗ 1967. But they don't - they say ℗ 1963. So what's going on here, and how does this help us date the release of Friends? Looking again at the 1980 Rock Legends reissue and accepting that the label credit could be wrong... Copyright is rightly vested in Polydor Ltd. U.K., to whom the band was signed. The date for this is 1969, the year the tracks were recorded. So far, so good. Then: "First published, 1969 in Australia". Does this mean that its first appearance in Australia was in 1969 or that its appearance in Australia in that year was its first appearance anywhere? Testing this out, I looked at two other albums in the Rock Legends series, one by Roger Daltrey ("first published, 1973 in the UK") and one by Thunderclap Newman ("first published, 1969 in the UK"). In both cases, the label credit is correct. Is it possible then that Friends was indeed released (or at least pressed up for release) in Australia in 1969? Could the UK label (℗ 1970) simply be wrong? And might this explain both the date and the credit for Phonogram, Australia rather than Polydor, UK on the German label?
The (P) usually refers to the date a title was first published anywhere, not when it was first released "locally" (although, of course, the dates may be the same). You usually see discrepancies, surprise surprise, at the end of the year, for example when a title is released in the UK in November but in Australia in February the following year. The Aussie title will always show the UK year. Here, I've no doubt the label copy for Friends was typed up in 1969. And no doubt the intention was to release in 1969. So no doubt the paperwork states 1969. But was it released then? That's the question. The (P) date on my latest book states 2015 because when it was sent for printing that was the intention. All printer paperwork states 2015...yet it was released 19 Jan 2016, held up due to factory closure over Chrissy. A seemingly common thing around this time of year. In 10 years time when I've long forgotten the book's release date, the paperwork will still say 2015. I think you'll find that the UK (P) date of 1970 simply reflects that the UK version is different, albeit only one song but different nonetheless - perhaps a new recompile. A less obvious example of what happened when the Aussie AC/DC albums were released overseas with same titles but different tracks/mixes. They carry the new year. The German/Canadian releases most likely used copies of the existing Aussie tapes, hence the reference to Phonogram and 1969. It still stands - if no examples exist on the "old" label (like Streetnoise, released Chrissy 1969) then it wasn't released in 1969. Just one example will confirm beyond doubt. I've never seen such an example. Anyone here?
Well we know for sure that the LP could not have possibly been released any earlier than 21st October, 1969. This was the date taping on the '69 Special took place (the cover art). The January '69 date must be product of a default date (01 01 69 being a default date on some sites, when no month is available). The special was broadcast shortly after on the 2nd November. But there's no mention of it on the jacket. I doubt they released it to cash in on the show. The show recieved very poor reviews and has been forgotten by time. I wonder if it rated well (or at all)?
A summation: confusion over the actual publication date for the “Friends” LP lies in the absence of any press attention to its release. This is curious, given the previous popularity of the group at home, but the only actual media mention of its existence seems to be the following: An advert from Go-Set dated 27 September 69 and a small blurb in the Sydney Sun-Herald’s “Glitter” column from 22 February 1970 stating the album would be the group’s last. (Both shown below) This gives a time-frame but is a far cry from specific. Perhaps a timetable of the Polydor singles releases might be of help. In hindsight, the Polydor deal seems to have been relatively straightforward. ‘St. Louis’ was issued as a single on 27 June ‘69 (UK) and 17 July ‘69 (Australia). ‘I Love Marie’ was released in the UK and Oz on 7 November and 30 October respectively. And finally, ‘(Who Are My) Friends’ appeared on 17 April ‘70 in the UK and in May down under. Three singles and one album during a one-year span seems very much like a contract requirement that a label might have suggested, and one that the group probably felt comfortable with when they signed in April 1969. The problems began when it became clear that The Easybeats would be unable to record enough new material to fulfill this obligation. Release dates aside, more confusion over “Friends” also exists due to obscuring details provided by Glenn A. Baker in his otherwise magnificent liner notes in the vinyl version of “Absolute Anthology.” A recording contract dispute, dated as occurring during the US Tour (August / September ‘67) is described by Baker this way: “Up to this point the recording bills had been footed by Alberts, who then sub-leased the material to U.A. However, with five labels claiming, at one point, to ‘own’ the act (UA, Rare Earth, MAM, Polydor and themselves, Alberts was not inclined to pay any more bills.” And later on: “A third British Easybeats album emerged in August 1969 (sic) on Polydor… “Friends” was not an album envisioned by The Easybeats but rather a by-product of the recording deal cock-up. Somehow Polydor got hold of a stack of demo tapes which George and Harry had prepared for other artists and slapped them together with the Ray Singer track (‘St. Louis’)… Though Stevie sang some of the vocals, it was really a Vanda and Young album recorded in their upstairs flat with the pair playing all instruments.” As we have seen, an August release is plainly impossible if the cover was photographed on 21 October 69. And Baker seems to be conflating further events here. A legal dispute most likely did take place in 1967 (this has been publicized elsewhere) and a contract revision resulted in the group owing Alberts / UA one more LP which was resolved with the release of “Vigil,” (June 68). The “five labels” story is an obvious overstatement. Rare Earth did not exist as a record company in 1967 neither did MAM, both becoming record labels in 1969 and 1970 respectively. How this could have affected Polydor’s decision to release demo tapes is beyond understanding. As for Polydor “somehow getting hold of” a stack of demo tapes, it should be noted that there were other Moscow Road recordings that were left behind. ‘Can’t Wait For September,’ ‘The Party’s Over,’ an alternative version of ‘What Becomes of You My Love,’ a demo for the 1969 Coke commercial and others. These undated recordings ended up at Alberts. Obviously what was given over to Polydor was selected from a larger group of tapes by someone who knew what they were choosing. This could have been done to “pay off” a contractual obligation at the time of the Australian tour, one which the group didn’t have the cash to buy their way out of, though it seems we’ll never know for sure. But why all this mystery, especially long after the day? We obviously don’t know but, as has been seen periodically throughout this thread, mysteries surrounding this group are far from uncommon. Compiling this summery came with various assists, knowingly or otherwise, from paulisdead, Mike Griffiths, Jae, and of course the late George Crotty.
I know it's off topic, but here is my final product - AC/DC's "12 Of The Best" CD...and how it might have looked had it have been released by EMI in 1986 alongside TNT and Dirty Deeds (photo of TNT included for reference)... Back to Friends hopefully shortly...
Back to Friends, there is also that odd late Jan 70 Go-Set reference to Little Stevie promoting his latest single 'Friends', to be released shortly. Obviously a translation error of sorts, but...
There must be a way of resolving this. Other than Go-Set, what music and / or entertainment magazines were there in Australia at this point? I think Everybody's had bitten the dust, and I don't think Daily Planet was up and running yet but where there others? Was Music Maker still in print? What about TV Week? Was there anything distibuted to retailers to pronote new releases! German release... anyone got access to Bravo or Musik Markt? Then there's the UK release. I can believe that it failed to appear in Melody Maker, Disc and Music Echo, the NME and Sounds but what about Record Retailer or Record Mirror? Surely one of the latter two at least noted its release; that was their job! Somewhere there must be a magazine entry somewhere - it just isn't online... Libraries, anyone?
Just spotted that the Marmalade Skies website dates the UK release of Friends to October 1970! Wonder where they got that idea...
After the excitement of the 1986 reunion, the next two years were quiet ones for Easybeats fans, with only two notable covers emerging each year. 1987 saw two more covers of "Friday On My Mind" brought to market, while 1988 would offer something a little more interesting. Iriah guitarist Gary Moore had been around the block a few times before his encounter with the Vanda and Young songbook. Born in Belfast, Moore moved to Dublin when he was sixteen, joining local blues outfit Skid Row in 1970. He moved to London shortly afterward, recording the solo album Griding Stone (CBS S 65527). After a brief stint with Irish hard rockers Thin Lizzy, he joined Colosseum II in 1974, staying with the band for three years before rejoining Thin Lizzy in 1977 for a North American tour and then again in 1978 for the sessions that spawned the album Black Rose: A Rock Legend (Vertigo 6360169). Going solo again in 1978, Moore released his second solo album, Back On The Streets (MCA MCF 2853 (UK); Jet NJZ 36187 (US)), a hard rock set that gave him a hit single with "Parisienne Walkways" (MCA 419), a duet with Thin Lizzy mainman, Phil Lynott. Five further albums of guitar rock followed through the eighties, with the last of these, 1987's Wild Frontier (10 Records DIXG 56 (UK); Virgin 0777 7 860062 6 (US)) delivering another hit single with "Over The Hills And Far Away" (10 Records TEN 134). The eight track set also included, at the start of side two, Moore's version of The Easybeats' classic, in an arrangement that suited Moore's rocking style rather better than it did the song. gary moore - friday on my mind - Wild Frontier - Video Dailymotion » With the album selling well, Moore also released the song as a single in the UK (10 Records TEN 164), in Australia and New Zealand (same catalogue number) and in Germany (10 Records 109 080). With memories of The Easybeats' reunion still fresh, the single made it to # 25 in Australia while topping out at # 26 in the UK and reaching # 41 on the German airplay charts. Following one more album, Moore tired of rock and returned to the blues for the 1989 album Still Got The Blues (Virgin CDV 2612 (UK/Europe); Charisma V2 86167 (US)), which was a surprise commercial smash. He stuck with the blues for nearly a decade before returing to rock in the late nineties. Among his releases in this period was the 1993 album Around The Next Dream (Virgin CDV 2745 (UK/Europe); Virgin 8397282 (US)), credited to BBM, a short-lived power trio that teamed Moore with the former Cream rhythm section of Jack Bruce and Ginger Baker, a release that arguably paved the way for Cream's later live reunion. After returing to rock Moore continued to record into the new millenium before passing away in 2011 at the age of 58.
Yes, that is my belief based on the masters from IBC. I do not believe that the UK Good Friday album is comprised of fold downs, but rather that the US Friday On My Mind album is comprised of early mixes (and single versions), the delivery reel supports that.
Having now critically listened to your RSD album, I agree. The RSD Good Friday tracks have less reverb and different mixing levels to the stereo mixes hence can't be folddowns. Having said that, I don't have an original UK mono so can only assume it matches the RSD. Interestingly, the Italian mono Good Friday seems to use the same mixes as the US mono FOMM. Yet the Aussie "Who'll Be The One" single is the same dry mix as the RSD.
Several readers compared these mixes in April when the Record Store Day release appeared (pg. 41 of this thread) and, as I was one of them, I thought I’d weigh in again with a fresh opinion. I sat down and carefully compared copies of 1) a stereo UK pressing (as a point of reference), 2) a US mono pressing and 3) the RSD mono edition. My impressions are thus: I now believe they are all very slightly different. I compared each track one at a time, paying careful attention to instrumental and vocal elements, especially to ‘Happy Is the Man’ since this was Talmy’s own recommendation as follow-up to the ‘Friday’ single and it may have received a bit more attention. As is almost always the case with mono / stereo mixes from this time there are differences in the overall listening experience, often noticeable in the “compressed” or “punchy” nature of the record itself for the former. Differing volumes of respective instruments, in some occasions even missing from one mix or the other, can be apparent. (I don’t hear that here, except for a fuzz-bass present on ‘Made My Bed,’ which is on the mono single and on the US mono album, but is not heard on the stereo mix or on the RSD release. Likewise the double-tracked vocal on ‘Friday,’ judiciously added sporadically to the mono single and US mono LP mixes but is noticeable throughout on the stereo mix and on the RSD version.) To my ears, the most obvious differences here lie in the application of “plate reverb” (or studio echo) to various elements during the mixing stage. In general (and I do stress the term “in general,”) the stereo mix and the RSD mono version both frequently feature “wet” (or reverbed) lead vocals against a “dry” (non-reverbed) band track. For the US mono version it seems the opposite is usually the case: the vocals are up front and dry, without echo, while the band track often seems to be slightly draped in ‘verb. Compare versions of ‘Happy Is the Man’ or ‘Do You Have A Soul’’ for good examples of this. (The above statement is, however, not always the case and there are exceptions among the selections.) I now agree with both Andrew (who has seen the paperwork involved) and with Jae as well, in comments stated just above. And so, for the benefit of those who aren’t obsessive enough to own all three pressings, “Which mix is best?” In truth, for me they are all excellent. In the case of this fine album really, any one will do just fine.
I am still baffled by "Good Friday". Several listens to the original UK mono and I still can't understand what happened or why. Really appreciate the info here as always and if it's true the Italian LP utilises the US mixes I will look for a copy.
I recently got a VBO & Pretty Girl CD and was interested to hear/compare the differences with the CD of Absolute Anthology. I would say it is slightly better for most of the songs. As for the Friday songs, they all run slow compared to the final single. "Pretty Girl" is in fact slow of the US album master (same speed), it was sped up for single release, but you should also note that the single is also a different mix; there is reverb on the vocals. With Made My Bed and Friday, they match the single mixes if you adjust the speed accurately. Obviously I got the edition with the original mixes and not the stereo ones. Another little bit of trivia: there are two mixes of "Old Oak Tree" appearing the single and the EP respectvely. One has considerable reverb, the other is dry.
