The band has an incredible catalog, and I know it took Dave Clark until 1994 to officially release anything on CD, but this band deserves more recognition than they get. I just got through listening to the "Glad All Over" album and am now listening to the 1970 album "Till Somebody Loves You". There are several other gems in their catalog. So...?
Fine band. To answer your question: Some bands have the luck. Some don’t. The band falls short of being an instant factor in classic rock. They have fine songs, but how much of it is innovative and long withstanding? Dave Clark was part of The British Invation, but compared to The Beatles and The Rolling Stones -and to some extent, The Kinks and The Who, they did not develop their material much beyond the first boom of invaders. They are forever ‘stuck’ with the first ‘generation’ of British Invaders, because they did not manage to go much beyond Britain. Too British.
The catalog was marketed exceptionally poorly over the decades. I think even Herman's Hermits were marketed better. Love some of their tracks and did back in the day they were current....but they did everything wrong from 1967 on IMO.
Letting your entire catalog go out of print tends not to build demand, as any sane person could’ve told Dave Clark. Quite the opposite. Plus, they were essentially one-trick ponies who were well past their sell-by date by 1967. Fading away into MOR does no good for one’s legacy over the long term.
I bought the 2CD set that came out and the only stuff I liked was the stuff I knew (Anyway You Want It etc..) but the rest of the stuff didn't do much for me though I was expecting more.
This shouldn't be a difficult question to answer. When you can't buy the group's albums because they have been unavailable in any format for 40 years, people feorget about them. Radio stations can't replace worn out copies so the songs don't get played over and over on oldies channels. A song can't become a standard of oldies or classic rock radio unless it gets played often enough. I would argue that the 2CD comp that came out in the 90's was already too late. They should have done CD releases not long after the Beatles catalog came out on CD. I have most of their albums on vinyl in conditions that range from pristine to trashed. Most of these came from garage sales. I would love to get a chance to pick up their catalog on CD. They are a band that would be well served by one (or two) of those 5CD "original album series" sets.
Because they have only about 10 decent songs out of their 200+ output. After 1966 they became just bad joke. Red Balloon anyone?
It's not that difficult a question to answer. Dave Clark did it to his own catalog. Phil Spector did the same thing to his entire label. Ya know what's even more confounding/bewildering/frustrating to me? We know "Brandy" like we know the back of our hands. We even know it's by Looking Glass. Yet, we know less about Looking Glass as an artist, than we know any other artist we've ever heard on the radio in our lifetimes.
Unfortunately they were one of those bands who were perfect for their initial period of success, only. Some bands from those early days transcended time-period..Beatles, Kinks, Stones, Who being four of the most obvious. Once that first phase of "innocence" faded, their true essence exposed itself as guys that appeared really "hip" only while the times dictated. The same applies for their musical aspects. That said, I think the early DC5 records are some of the most exciting ever. But I was still disappointed to learn that Clark didn't drum on most of them.
The 'double-edged sword' of self-ownership; You need to do your own promotion to keep yourself relevant.
They weren't all that good, that's why. A bit of a superficial pop band compared to the competition. They even sounded dated by 1965/66.
They compressed the compression for the most current comp that came out a year or two ago. I bought the vinyl version and found it unlistenable....and I'm generally okay with a bit of compression if it boosts weak low end in some cases. But it's the compression which gave that early drum sound that thickness which Clark, as producer, was supposedly responsible for. It was unique for back then but did give the overall sound of those records a sameness.
Big issue in terms of oldies radio, lack of CD availability of the catalog. The best was the Hollywood Records 2 CD set. Agree with you on the DC5 being underrated (I am a major British Invasion fanatic).
Actually they had a ton of hits but they were all squeezed into a time frame of about a year and a half. After that, poof. An English born poster I communicate with on occasion (born and raised in Liverpool) actually told me one time that the DC5 were considered a joke by many music fans in England and that they were largely considered fake and manufactured. I found that extremely interesting as it contrasts with our revered view of them over here. I'm very curious as to how they're viewed, historically, in England nowadays.
their early songs were right on par with the beatles and stones and kinks and who, but they just did not evolve like the that bands kept going into the future, kind of stuck in that 64 - 66 time warp. and to add what just everyone seems to agree on, when you can't the stuff to listen to it, you kind of get forgotten rather quickly.
The Dave Clark 5 were never cool here in the UK. The are regarded as nothing special, bit players in the history of UK pop. Their US No1 "Over and Over" only reached No45 in the UK, between 1964-67 they had 12 UK top 40 hits and 17 Billboard Top 40 hits.
Get Together was an under rated flop,and its too short,another 10-20 seconds before the fade would have been fine.Unless theres a mix I havn't come across.
Incredibly interesting..and yet, in his 1968 biography of The Beatles, he paints the DC5 as a perceived threat to the former!
thanks, the 60s required a few cultural shifts which they did not join. ruined their careers, saved their lives possibly.... and as noted, DC was an odd character and not as shrewd a businessman as he thought?
While I agree with the second half of your first sentence, I respectfully disagree with the first. Much as I love their early records, I don't think they were on par with those of any of those bands.
