US V UK 7

[chriscurtisfan]

The Genes goes straight into the melody's strongest part (Accept me for what I am...) and uses that as the song's key signature

An excellent point Einar and but another example of how the group made songs their own and breathed new life into them. A much more inviting song for me compared to the US version here and a softer side of the Hippy Hippy Shake gang.

I get really annoyed when people (not MY people) claim the Searchers are best known for "covering other people's songs." So what if they use their beautiful musical style to breathe new life into what was a less than steller previous performance! I daresay most successful recording musicians do not compose all of their own music.

Enjoyed SWJ Moe Kicked the Bucket -- and the wonderful Brit accents all the while they are singing! Thanks, Sheena for sharing it! We had Good Golly, Hippy Hippy Shake, and sorry to say nothing that I can recall after that from these lads!

However, now having made Brit friends on YouTube, I have found that we, on the US side of pond, were robbed of more of your 60's Brit music than any of us ever could imagine!! So precious little Searchers music (top of my Personal all time list of musicians) that I am now, at last, getting my Searchers music (that include my hero, Chris) ....40+ years later!! Yes, we had the Beatles, Gerry, Animals, Hollies, P&G, SBJ, Kinks, Stones, Cliff, Herman, Yardbirds, and others I can't quite recall and about a half dozen of the ladies -- but my friend, Gary, has introduced me to so many others who never made it across the pond!!! None like The Searchers, but definitely better than US offerings.....just my never to be humble opinion! I'm a die-hard Brit Invas. fan. I want all that British music, and I want it delivered!!!! Thank you, Brits, your music has brought a lot of joy to the the hearts of the Americans. More than you know!

[admin]

Cheri: The Searchers has always been one of my favourite groups.

There are all kinds of original songs that never went anywhere. At the end of the day I embrace any song that is performed well regardless of wheter it was original to the group or not. I just love it when a remake by another group turns out to be more successful that the original.

I have always been amazed at how many British groups reinterpreted songs in a way that gave me a whole new appreciation for music that I did not know about or intially may have disliked.

[chriscurtisfan]

Cheri: The Searchers has always been one of my favourite groups.

I just love it when a remake by another group turns out to be more successful that the original.

I have always been amazed at how many British groups reinterpreted songs in a way that gave me a whole new appreciation for music that I did not know about or intially may have disliked.

I agree -- perhaps it was the 'lifeless' sound, as you said before. Or -- just maybe young people then, saw it is 'our parents music' -- so not much interested in that.....but whatever magic the British Groups brought to our collective lives, to catch our ear, eye, and overall attention -- I am glad for it, and, also agree it is really wonderful when the remake is more successful than the original....particularly when it's by our Roy's Searchers!!

[sowhat]

I get really annoyed when people (not MY people) claim the Searchers are best known for "covering other people's songs." So what if they use their beautiful musical style to breathe new life into what was a less than steller previous performance! I daresay most successful recording musicians do not compose all of their own music.

Well, the Searchers did have a few interesting songs of their own anyway. As far as covers go, i think to some point making a good cover is even harder than recording your own song (of course, before being recorded, a self-penned song has to be written, but that's another story). Especially if the original was successful and impressing. Not only it takes making a good quality recording, but also "breathing in" a sort of new life into the song, adding something to "make it your own", make it sound different, and on the other hand not to be too — mmm — creative or whatever, that is not to make a mess of a good song just in order to make it sound different.

[nick_allen]

We tend to forget now that prior to the Beatles/Dylan, very few "pop" performers wrote their own material. Frank Sinatra always did "covers"... most of Elvis' stuff was "covers"...
It really was the Beatles and Dylan who put the idea in people's heads that performers should have written their own songs. Prior to that, there were professional songwriters (Brill Building, Tin Pan Alley, Broadway shows), and then the performers, who sang whatever songs were around. Of course, there were the odd exceptions, performers who wrote some of their songs, songwriters who sometimes performed - Hoagy Carmichael, Bobby Darin, Chuck Berry and Carl Perkins come to mind...

[admin]

Nick. Thanks for these great comments. I certainly agree that the tried and true if not accepted tradition was for upcoming artists to get their material from professional songwriters who had established a successful track record.

Recording time was expensive and there would be a very small number of producers who would risk money on young performers' first go at writing a song. There were notable exceptions which seem to have sprung from the country genre as you have mentioned. I would argue that it is the success of these artists that pushed the envelope enough to have record producers go out on the limb.

The rather famous examples were Dylan and The Beatles to name the earlier success stories. From this point on record labels did make changes and who wouldn't after the revenues from originals by Lennon and McCartney and Bob Dylan started to roll in.

To take things further it seems to me that the model for recording and songwriting evolved to the point where artists such as the Beatles, Bee Gees and so forth began to write and record in the studio as opposed to booking in times after compositions were first polished and ready to go. Today, we have more technology for recording in our homes that many studios had during their earlier years.

So have these changes been for the better overall? Do we record better tracks nowadays? Do more young artists get a break who would never see the light in the old days. I suspect the answer is yes. Alas, are the compositions and performances better as a result. On this I say no.

[harley]

I'll make mine the Swinging Blue Jeans version. The Dionne Warwick approach is very polished and professional but doesn't have quite the drive and fire of the SBJ approach.

I also am a big fan of the music from the British Invasion era but I have to disagree about the whole Brit vs US controversy. I don't care where a song/recording came from, good is good, bad is bad and nationality is irrelevant except insofar as the cultural differences affect the music/performance. Earlier someone mentioned the isolation of the Liverpool area as being a force behind the Mersey approach to performing. That's important, the fact that they were British isn't. The same comment about isolation could explain part of the blues and rock music forms that came from the Southeast USA. That would be important, the fact that they were Americans isn't. Nationalism and music just don't make good bedfellows.

As for "covers", it's a good thing they aren't looked down on in classical music because I don't think we HAVE anything recent from Mozart.

[royclough]

Thanks for playing Harley but this is just a bit of light hearted fun, I hope, not an attempt to play politics or create controversy.

I just feel it is a opportunity for some to hear interpretations of hits they may know by the American artist but may not have heard the version that was covered by a UK act and vice versa.

From the mid 60s onwards this tended to happen less with the beat boom

[royclough]

Thanks to all who took part, not as many voted as before but still a overwhelming winner in SBJ's

[harley]

Thanks for playing Harley but this is just a bit of light hearted fun, I hope, not an attempt to play politics or create controversy.

True, and I was looking at it more from a stand point of leaving the "my guys versus your guys" aspect out of it. Too much good music is missed that way. Not only do I get a chance to hear multiple versions of good songs this way, it also helps me expand the way I look at reinterpreting covers my own self. No controversy was intended (certainly no politics - I love music to much to soil it with that subject).