Rockin' Rockfield Recordings (1979-80)

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 12:57 am

I have recently spent some time listening once again to the Rockfield Recordings that the Searchers made in 1979-1980 with Mike Pender, Frank Allen, John McNally and Billy Adamson. Without a doubt these tracks represent quite an effort. To those who have followed the Searchers' career, however, it will come as no surprise that these recordings did poorly on the charts.

There are two things that come to mind for me when listening to these recordings. First, why did they not do well and second, the noticeable departure from their style that won them such success in 1963-1965. On the surface it may be argued that The Searchers did not get the exposure that was necessary to let the world appreciate their efforts. While they may have been played in the UK, these recordings were not promoted to any reasonable extent in North America. Was this the reason for their lack of airplay? I would argue that even had they been given substantial exposure that the outcome is likely to have been the same. Why?

To begin, the rapid departure from the "original sound" is, at least to me, not as appealing. In an attempt to create the "new sound" the producers, engineers and musicians pulled out a number of musical effects that I think did not serve them well. The compression/sustain effect is over used to my ears and a little too much overdrive is thrown in for good measure. Distorted 12 strings certainly lack the appeal of the jangling clean sound that had made their sound unique up until that time. Moreover, the hallmark of the Searchers' sound, namely the layered vocals with tight harmonies was kept to a minimum on the Rockfield Recordings. There are some shining moments, but Mike is on his own too much for my liking.

In the end, this was an experiment that attempted to make The Searchers a contemporary group. While this was an admirable attempt, I think the departure from what they do best, left them with many songs that sound quite similar in their style without the presence of distinct guitar riffs and unique vocals. I will certainly be giving these recording a second chance, but as always I would be most interested in hearing how others feel about this era.

tim · Post by **tim** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 10:11 am

I have to disagree. The SIRE albums represent an artistic peak in The Searchers recording career. Simply re-creating their 60s sound on new songs would not have been enough to restore them to the charts. The SIRE albums were a brave attempt to rekindle The Searchers chart career. They did receive critical acclaim in the U.S.A. although it may have been regional. They were certainly given bookings in the New York area on the strength of these two albums. There are some great tracks: "Hearts In Her Eyes", "Love's Melody", "Silver", "It's Too Late" and the self-penned "Another Night". Another favourite of mine is "Love's Gonna Be Strong". Musically and vocally The Searchers have a lot to be proud of in these two albums.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 11:30 am

Tim: The songs you list are, in large part illustrative of the point I was attempting to make. First, while I realize it was not your intent to review all the tracks, the ones you have listed are six standouts from the total of 23. Just in passing, my favourites are "Love's Melody" and "Love's Gonna Be Strong". These two tunes along with most of the others your have identified demonstrate the tight harmonies characteristic of The Searchers. To my ear, which may need tuning, the remaining 17 lack this vocal quality. Try listing to the introduction of "Hearts In Her Eyes" and then listen to the introduction of "Silver". Great tunes but very similar in guitar work. Although the Searchers were moving in a new direction I find it of interest that the "standouts" really do resemble the vocal style of days gone by while the guitar work is quite different.

While it can certainly be argued that artistic peaks do not always result in chart success, I am still wondering why this material was not more successful. I am not putting the Searchers down, but rather trying to ask why this material did not chart in spite of its creativity and in spite of its US promotion as you have noted.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 11:43 am

In my article "Take It or Leave It" which both Peter and Tim have been kind enough to publish, I touch on my reasons for the failure of the Sire stuff, although others will understandbly have opposing views.

The sound which Peter refers too basically ended when Curtis Left, from that point on, whilst not versed in the technicalities of "mixing" Mike's voice became more prominent on recordings.

The RCA years certainly were a far cry from the sound that made them.

At the end of the seventies the sound they achieved through Sire was in voque to some degree, indeed the second single "It's Too Late" nearly broke through and that info came from someone in the know,but sadly it did not happen.

The band were in a dilemma to some degree, they had become ensconsed in the cabaret circuit, which was no doubt lucrative but was not going to persuade audiences to rush out and buy the Sire stuff. Whilst I thought the new songs were great, when mixed with the hits, it at times confused audiences. Most audiences on this circuit only wanted to hear the hits, little promotion was done and airplay was virtually non exsistent, except for secod single as mentioned.

The Sire recordings were excellent for the time, even better was the return to Pye and release of "I don't wanna be the one" which was a return to some degree to the "Sound". However the tracks that were recorded for a shelved album were again a radical departure.

I think The Searchers were right to crate the Sire Sound because as they say you can get back to the place but not the time and the sixties sound was gone.

jjr · Post by **jjr** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 1:24 pm

I have always thought that the Sire Sessions represented the ultimate evolution of the Searchers sound,particularly "Silver", "Everything But a Heartbeat", "Hearts in Her Eyes","It's Too Late" (best use of piano since Tony Hatch), "Almost Saturday Night" (GREAT harmony). I even enjoyed "Switchboard Susan" (although not live- wat too long) and "No Dancing" (both for being different.

As to why they didn't succeed, I recall reading that just when "Hearts In Her Eyes" was taking off, Sire pulled the LP to change something, and the momentum was lost.

I saw the Searchers, with Mike, at a bar in Hampton Bays N.Y in '85 and they played a lot of those two LPs on two twelve strings. Sounded great.I think the Sire sessions updated and revived theSearchers sound, which to be honest sounded a bit tired by "Second Hand Dealer". It gave them their best shot at a comeback. Its major downside (if you believe Mike) was that the lack of success, after all the work, contributed to his decision to leave.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Aug 12, 2002 4:30 pm

John: Listening to interviews with Mike Pender it does seem that the disappointment following the lack of success of these recordings was a central factor in his leaving.

einar · Post by **einar** » Fri Aug 16, 2002 1:31 am

Peter: I join Tim's and John J.'s party here. I think the Sire sound anno 1980 did as much justice to the Pye sound from the Sixties as you could expect. The Searchers had lost some talent since then and all that, of course. But to add a few views:
The first Sire album (My copy SRK 6082, the "flight" cover) came with a poor 10 songs, not much more than 30 minutes music. Ironically, in good PYE tradition. In my view, Hearts In Her Eyes was a very pleasant re-hear from the Searchers. I was not very impressed with the rest of the material, however. The Tom Petty song Lost In Your Eyes was another good track, the rest a little disappointing. Simply not strong enough song selection, in my view. Strangely, another version of the same LP appeared a little later, in a new, "posh" wrapping. One song was let out, three others added, total of 12 tracks, offering a little more for the money. One of the new tracks, Silver, added positively to the average quality.
The second SIRE album did hit me entirely different! I had expected to find it with the poignant title Play For Today (did it ever appear as that somwhere in the world? What was the cover like?). I found it in my record shop as Love's Melodies (SRK 3523(!)), a silly title which lowered my expectations. But how surprised I was! In my ears, a wast improvement in the material quality. Silver and Love's Melody were brought over from the second edition of the first LP. I could have lived without the latter, and I also find the two self-penned songs below average (understatement). That leaves 9 out 12 tracks, which I think is more or less great stuff!

So a major point from me, concerning the Sire records: The second one being SO much more satisfying than the first! If I should make a 10 track Sire Searchers selection, I'd include at least 8 from Love's Melodies!
A minor point: The Searchers' selfpenned songs were all disappointing. (The Raven CD incudes all songs from the three LP's, except the selfpenned Little Bit Of Heaven. But it includes another one; Changing, which was not released on vinyl. Also being an Allen/Pender/McNally song, I think it matches the four that were included).

I know tastes varies, but won't you agree that the second time around was superiour??!

He said, He said,

Einar

admin · Post by **admin** » Fri Aug 16, 2002 2:08 am

Einar: I would agree that the second relase was superior and I was especially interested in the Searchers' own compositions. I found "Changing" to be the best of these, but concur with your position that they were not standouts. The album that I purchased in Canada was indeed "Play For Today."

Mike Pender's cover of "Lost In Your Eyes" was well done. I recall listening to an interview earlier this year in which Mike Pender mentioned that the Sire recordings were some of the best work that the group had done. He did not elaborate as to the reasons why.

Without a doubt, the comments made by everyone here have been helpful in considering this material and its importance in The Searchers' history. After listening to the Rockfield recordings again I have now settled on "Love's Melodies" as being my favourite Sire recording.

marie · Post by **marie** » Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:19 am

ALTHOUGH NOT AN EXPERT ON THE MUSICAL CONTENT,I DO HAVE A COPY OF THIS ALBUM, CAN SOMEONE PLEASE TRY AND EXPLAIN THE COVER TO ME, AS TO ME THIS IS ONE OF THE "WEAKEST LINKS"OF THE WHOLE VENTUREARE THE FOUR OBJECTS SUPPOSE TO REPRESENT SOMETHING, AND WHO DESIGNED IT?, ISEE EACH SEARCHER IS HOLDING ONE OF THE OBJECTS ON THE REVERSE, IS TNIS THIER "FLIGHT" TO A NEW SOUND?THEY ALL LOOK FAIRLY NONPLUSSED HOLDING THE THINGS.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Fri Aug 16, 2002 8:08 am

For the record the Raven CD was missing two Sire Tracks "Little Bit of Heaven" as mentioned and "Sick and Tired" which was on "Play For Today". The Cover by the way was of a radio dial but the title was actually inspired by a series which ran on the old BBC TV, every tuesday night in which a "Play For Today" was aired.

The Silver on Love's Melodies(Play For Today) was a remixed version to that issued on the re-released first Searchers album. Also the track "It's Too Late" was a slightly remixed version, this was the single version.

Changing was released on Vinyl, it was released as the "B" side to the Single "Loves Melody" ( See "Searchers Sing Searchers" on "Clough Links" an unashamed plug!!!), the single again being a remixed version.

As for Maries question the symbols are supposed to represent some flight symbol, can't at the moment though fully recall what.

If Peter is interested it may be of interest to post some reviews that appeared in the British press concerning these albums.

As for the comments regarding their own compostions Einar, in "Take It Or Leave It" I quote what one reviewer said of "Another Night" which would not support your view, but it's all about opinions.

I would also make the point that in relation to number of tracks on the albums, the CD format was not in commercial use and ten or twelve tracks were about all you got on virtually ALL albums .

einar · Post by **einar** » Sat Aug 17, 2002 2:09 am

Roy and other Searchers' friends,
I'm going for the mountains now, but a short note:

-Sick and tired (= the "old" song, which they featured e.g. in the Hamburg days?) was not on the "Love's melodies" version of the second SIRE LP. "LM" had 12 tracks. Did "PFT" have 13? If somone give me the track list of "PFT", I'll venture(?) same for "LM"!

I've read your (Roy) comments that someone saw potential in "Another Night". I'm glad to read it, but can't agree! (But to be a little positive: When the "30th year anthology" came with 4-5 till then unreleased "newer" songs, I quite liked the selfpenned "Hollywood", and think it is the best from this period).

A 33' LP had its limits, of course. But, as the LP's from the sixties often presented below or about 30 minutes of music (being 10-14 tracks), in 1980 many artists had the habit of putting 45 or even more than 50 minutes of music onto them.
Look to Rolling Stones' Aftermath from 1966(?).

Einar.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Sat Aug 17, 2002 1:36 pm

Einar
Hope you enjoyed the mountains, was it a short break or has the pressure of Journalisim finally got to you?

Tracks on PFT were Another Night/September Gurls/Murder In My Heart/She's Made A Fool Of You/Silver/Sick And Tired(New Verion) Radio Romance/Infatuation/Almost Saturday Night/Everything But A Heartbeat/Little Bit Of Heaven/New Day 12 TRACKS IN TOTAL

"Hollywood" was Initially the "B" Side of "I Don't Wanna Be The One"

I know I had Loves Melodies in my collection, bought it in Toronto in 84, but whan I went to check can't find it, seems to be happening freguently these days , recently sold a album on E-Bay and when I went to get it out for posting - "Missing". I am sure that the wife is slowly diminshing my collection or am I just paranoid?

jjr · Post by **jjr** » Sun Aug 18, 2002 4:47 am

Just one thing I forgot in my last message, Peter. I have, (with varying degrees of success) tried to expose friends and co-workers to the Searchers' music. Almost invariably they like it. But almost invariably too, the younger ones (30's, 40's) prefer the Sire stuff by an appreciable margin. So maybe it wasn't a bad move on the band's part to do what they did at Rockfield, which, you recall, was the first time they ever got enough time to work on a record,and develop the sound to their satisfaction.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon Aug 19, 2002 1:05 am

Good point John. To my way of thinking, their music has us making interpretive comments decades later and I consider this to be a success. The Searchers have longevity which is hard to achieve in the music business.

I too have reminded my friends about The Searchers and the one aspect that both impresses and shocks them is that the group has continued for over 40 years. A great tradition and something that I respect in the case of John McNally and Frank Allen who have continued with the original group. I also very much like the fact that they continue to introduce new material in the act.

einar · Post by **einar** » Mon Aug 26, 2002 1:06 am

Roy &,
I had a wonderful stay in the Norwegian mountains. But missed the Searchers journalism so much, I decided to come down again.
From Roy's information, I can now tell that the difference between "PFT" and "LM" is that the former contains a new version of Sick and Tired, not to be heard on "LM". A rather interesting choice for a re-do of an old song, I must say. I doubt if the 1980 version matches the one from the sixties, with Chris Curtis' dynamatic na-na-na-na performance from the Star Club in mind.
On the other hand, "LM" offers the song suitingly called Love's Melody, which was also found on the second edition of the first Sire LP. Also; the sequence of songs is very different, if Roy listed them in authentic positions.

From the lowlands,
Einar