I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned here, but neither the Douglas nor the EH releases of the BBC material were presented in true mono, which is how they were recorded. That may also explain some of the aural wonkiness.
ATPTB doesn’t appear, so they don’t have to pay royalties to Whitfield & Holland (and their publishers, edited to correct songwriters, the Doziers weren’t involved) for something that’s not there. But it could be somebody thought the jam went on long enough. There are a whole bunch of odd edits on the collection (one of Brian Matthew’s interviews is missing part of a question, The Korner intro missing”with another 15 minutes of rhythm and blues”) Still wish we could’ve gotten a Can You See Me from the Feb session, but he filled up his segment. Was their part of the March show just 10 minutes instead of 15?
Aint too Proud to Beg is not listed / mentioned but the audio is included titled as I was made To Love Her! That song has been referenced as Midnight Hour Jam or Stevie Wonder Jam. But the point is, the material or at least the bulk of it was included and I don't see a royalties issue. Its not the first time something has been titles to avaiod paying money to whoever penned the original tune!
While I don't doubt that the quality of the BBC recordings was compromised right from the actual act of recording, I've always sensed that the official compilations came from less-than-stellar sources, as well. Anybody have any knowledge of the lineage?
There are bootlegs that present many of the recordings in the original mono configuration. While they sound less "wonky" perhaps they are still not hifi. I don't think anyone knows the lineage of the Radio One or BBC Sessions comps. Both obviously have "fake" stereo and the BBC Sessions comp is mastered way too hot and sounds harsh.
Right. My gut (and ears) are suggesting to me that we are dealing with poor engineering right from the get-go -- they just didn't have the tools to wrap their arms around the storm that was the Jimi Hendrix Experience . But I have serious suspicion that we are also dealing with compromised sources. The differing characteristics of multiple tracks that should be somewhat "standardized sounding" are just all over the map with their varying anomalies. It reminds me of the old tape-trading days when the copy that you eventually received had stories to tell -- ugly ones. Dubs using tape machines that just didn't match up well. The heads, the speed drive, s/n ratios, blah blah. Some definitively identified genealogy components (or clues, even) might shed things in a new light. I would be prepared to learn that the BBC tapes never had a chance of breaking into the wild with an acceptable sound stage, because the BBC boys just weren't up to the task. But I also wouldn't be surprised if the latter day engineering "last line" received largely compromised "sources" and tried to work the "magic of the month" treatments on them to bring some stability to the eventual product output. And it just didn't go well. I'm babbling. There's a couple of points in there somewhere, probably repeated. Final analysis: The BBC commercial packages are "listenable" -- that's about it. And it's heartbreaking, because there's plenty of one-of-a-kind items included --which, taken as a whole, are a collection of legacy enhancing material that just aren't representing the gravity that they carry in the big Hendrix picture -- due to substandard reproduction. (My most pointless post ever. Glad you could all be a part of this...)
I always thought fans preferred Radio One sonics over BBC Sessions because at least Radio One had true mono. This is not so?
I don't know but it certainly sounds better to me so consequently I never sold it after buying the BBC Sessions CD which had all the Radio One cuts.
I'm with you on your 'Final analysis ' part. Unique musical document, less than prime production. Keeping Radio One or letting it go is a matter of assessment. This reminds me I think I did find a mono copy online which I might have in digital. Really don't know what quality it might be in.
The Peel Sessions cd EP from the same era is mono, but not the main album. True mono versions were broadcast by Westwood One, and those have been booted over the years but never officially released. So you have to enter the black market.
Its all swings and roundabout with the BBC official releases. How complete, either by content or edit per song each release is against how it is presented. The BBC and Hendrix and Co. were all learning back then so some if not all recordings are not the best, or as good as they could have been. These recordings are some of the most important recordings we have, so telling. Its a little churlish to banging on about minor detail of a few edits or "wonky" stereo, annoying as it is. The material exists in mono if anyone wants to go look for it. Though it is a good example of not moving on early records when a newer release pops up
But I have to say. The BBC material is studio, yes I know it was "live" but hey, that's what bands did back then as big enough bed rooms were not available So I personally feel this is not material for a true live thread, jmo!
Yep, plus I'm sure that many, if not all of us, has plunked down money for the official releases (be they what they are). But, because of its live nature, one could argue that the variance is there enough to consider it. By and large they weren't just mimicking studio performances. Just playing devil's advocate.
I bought enough of them and the boots back in the day! I don't think they were mimicking when they made the core albums either But they are studio recordings as are/is the BBC material. Live in the studio is the point being made, that was the way music was recorded back then!
It is of course you're thread so you get to make the call ;-) But all the sessions have a studio address and no audience. The latter point simply says these sessions were not performances, simply takes.
Legally? Then I suggest you download the recordings and try to prove they are "free" against Janie in court, Gordon. Good luck, I can sponsor you with 5 bucks. And a fat mattress for your bum
Have a look at my post where I brought it up Gordon. I actually did ask for the ok. Raised it here because I knew it would get some informed comments. Thanks everyone. It's not that far of a stretch. The cricket thread is talking about net curtains and tea.
You originally said booted! That was what I replied to in saying that anyone can have free access to this material from collectors series.
Noel Redding will never be mistaken for the greatest bass player to play rock, blues, and psychedelia -- but I think he fared better than to be labeled a bum. And then there's Fat Mattress.
I didn't say boots are they only way to obtain the material. The circulation of any officially released Hendrix material, including "collectors series", is illegal. So let's curtail this topic as we're edging towards violating the forum rules.
I'll always stick up for Noel; he was the prefect bass player for the first year at least. No one deserves being was reduced to surviving by eating road kill. Or being dumped on by socially awkward fusion jazz bedroom musicians in 2019 who think they are "better" than Noel.
