now at:
http://home.rhein-zeitung.de/~mdenger/
Michael
Swedish Radio Sessions Part Three
Great Michael.
As someone said, "if you want to know what the band is actually worth, go for the live sound". Oh well... sometimes it can really be frustrating mean a band can sound grrreat as far as the studio recordings are concerned, but when it comes to a live show... notes missed, guitars not actually played ('screwed' rather), drums 'stumbling' and the stuff. Not so much the Searchers case, in fact, although two of their singers' vocals seem to be of 'lower than average' quality. I won't tell you who are these two, i'm a bit too young to die. That's not about notes missed, actually, it doesn't bother me so much (although Jackson does miss some). It's rather about 'power' - either you have it or don't. Two of the boys just 'don't'. Not very important, however, instrumental sound compensates well for that. Jackson is a power. "Let the four winds blow" is a mass-kicker (especially the second version of). The band proves not only to be a bunch of 'pretty faces' but also a bunch of good musicians. And there's diversity as well - "boom, boom" rock'n'roll (some call it punk as well), pop, folk, etc. Although the third session sounds a bit weird to me. Though i actually like Blunt's drumming on "When you walk in the room".
As someone said, "if you want to know what the band is actually worth, go for the live sound". Oh well... sometimes it can really be frustrating mean a band can sound grrreat as far as the studio recordings are concerned, but when it comes to a live show... notes missed, guitars not actually played ('screwed' rather), drums 'stumbling' and the stuff. Not so much the Searchers case, in fact, although two of their singers' vocals seem to be of 'lower than average' quality. I won't tell you who are these two, i'm a bit too young to die. That's not about notes missed, actually, it doesn't bother me so much (although Jackson does miss some). It's rather about 'power' - either you have it or don't. Two of the boys just 'don't'. Not very important, however, instrumental sound compensates well for that. Jackson is a power. "Let the four winds blow" is a mass-kicker (especially the second version of). The band proves not only to be a bunch of 'pretty faces' but also a bunch of good musicians. And there's diversity as well - "boom, boom" rock'n'roll (some call it punk as well), pop, folk, etc. Although the third session sounds a bit weird to me. Though i actually like Blunt's drumming on "When you walk in the room".
Nothing will get you dead quicker than being deadly serious about yourself.
I urge you to be a bit daredevelish, Sheena! Put in some names, and maybe we'll have a discussion!
Einar
Einar
Searchers amongst my teenage favourite music. Still fond of them, but earnestly a little puzzled they are considered THIS big! But I'm very excited about this forum, and will love to read it regularly, and also contribute!
Sheena,
I'm not sure if you refere to the Swedish Sessions (generally, or part 3 only), or even The Searchers in total generality! Needles and Pins (second version)- is that from the "middle" sessions for Sveriges radio? The two guys (who just don't have it) then must be Chris/Mike (and Frank?). From other of your statements, I've understood that Frank's voice is not a favourite of yours. I agree he's not a first class lead singer (and he agrees, too). I've also understood that John holds a rather strong position (as a singer) with you. You even (!!) are kind when referring to Spencer's lead vocals.
SO: My feeling is that you hold that two of the three (or even, the two most favoured) singers the Searchers ever had, is still in the band?!
That's charming!
Or am I totally out of tune?!
Einar
I'm not sure if you refere to the Swedish Sessions (generally, or part 3 only), or even The Searchers in total generality! Needles and Pins (second version)- is that from the "middle" sessions for Sveriges radio? The two guys (who just don't have it) then must be Chris/Mike (and Frank?). From other of your statements, I've understood that Frank's voice is not a favourite of yours. I agree he's not a first class lead singer (and he agrees, too). I've also understood that John holds a rather strong position (as a singer) with you. You even (!!) are kind when referring to Spencer's lead vocals.
SO: My feeling is that you hold that two of the three (or even, the two most favoured) singers the Searchers ever had, is still in the band?!
That's charming!
Or am I totally out of tune?!
Einar
Searchers amongst my teenage favourite music. Still fond of them, but earnestly a little puzzled they are considered THIS big! But I'm very excited about this forum, and will love to read it regularly, and also contribute!
Not Chris, Einar, although he misses notes here and there, because to me, he anyway has "that incredible stage presence which you either have or don't have" (uh. sorry for quoting my 'favourite' "target text"). I mean, that's how i feel it. I'd put it like this: when you go on stage, you'd better sound like "I came, I sing, and I'll win". Tony, Chris and John (and Spencer as well) do sound like that (to me). While Frank and especially Mike Pender rather sound like "I came, and would you mind if I sing something?" Well at least Frank is loud enough to keep in touch with (while at times, Mike is almost unheard). I mean, no matter how good your voice is, when onstage, you just must be loud, you must be energetic, even if it makes you miss a note or two or sound not as delicate and sweet as you usually do. (Although, to be true, i dearly love Mike's vocals on "Where have all the flowers gone" and the first studio version of "Take me for what I'm worth", and i cannot imagine anyone who'd be better on "Be my baby" than Frank!)
And yes, my two personal favourites are still in the band (wonder who do you think is the third?! and why is it charming?)
Sheena.
PS: Spencer is cute!
And yes, my two personal favourites are still in the band (wonder who do you think is the third?! and why is it charming?)
Sheena.
PS: Spencer is cute!
Nothing will get you dead quicker than being deadly serious about yourself.
Punkrocker Sheena!
Your points are charming, because they are controversial (if any opinions about the Searchers could be controversial)! Well, I rather agree with you,that John is an underrated singer. Whether your comments regarding Mike are justified, I can't say at the moment. I never thought about it that way. Maybe he had lost all hope already? I think they put considerable energy into "Take Me.." and "Western Union" in Stockholm, and it's rather sad to hear Frank hoping everybody will buy Western Union. Which we know they did not..
Who's your third medal winning Searcher, I don't know. When it's not Frank and Mike, I'd think Chris or Tony. But to tell the truth, it would not surprise me very much if you come up with another John!!
Best wishes,
Einar
Your points are charming, because they are controversial (if any opinions about the Searchers could be controversial)! Well, I rather agree with you,that John is an underrated singer. Whether your comments regarding Mike are justified, I can't say at the moment. I never thought about it that way. Maybe he had lost all hope already? I think they put considerable energy into "Take Me.." and "Western Union" in Stockholm, and it's rather sad to hear Frank hoping everybody will buy Western Union. Which we know they did not..
Who's your third medal winning Searcher, I don't know. When it's not Frank and Mike, I'd think Chris or Tony. But to tell the truth, it would not surprise me very much if you come up with another John!!
Best wishes,
Einar
Searchers amongst my teenage favourite music. Still fond of them, but earnestly a little puzzled they are considered THIS big! But I'm very excited about this forum, and will love to read it regularly, and also contribute!
While none of us can truly know the tension that seems to have been present in the band between Tony Jackson and Chris Curtis, it would seem that it paled in comparison to the emotional volcano that errupted when Curtis had his problems coping with the tour in Australia.
In retrospect, I have come to the place where I think one of the greatest downfalls of The Searchers is when they pushed, or strongly encouraged, Tony to leave. Jackson had the unique voice (not smooth and sweet like Pender) that put the Searchers on the map. His rough edge was popular at the time and one need only look to The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and others to see that the "Bad Boy" image was appealing to the music buying public at the time. It still sells today.
I consider that the group only truly appreciated the pitfall of listening to the advice of the temperamental Curtis after Tony had gone.
Tony, had the energy and raw edge to sell records. Mike Pender had an outstanding voice, but in the words of John Lennon, "If you want to be successful you have to put it on a bit." Pender, an outstanding singer of ballads, did not consistently have the presence to persuade others to take notice. A few original compositions wouldn't have hurt either.
Sadly, the Searchers were too tentative when they needed a bold and more forceful approach to compete with The Beatles, Stones, Hollies, Animals and the like. While testosterone does not have to be coming out of your pores in your private life to win over a dynamic youthful population, it certainly has to be part of the mix on stage and in the studio. This was not part of the Searchers after Jackson departed.
The Searchers' best days were the early ones and this, I will argue, was in no small part due to Jackson's efforts.
Mike Pender became the voice of The Searchers and sings many of my favourite tunes. He did not have the charisma and captivating personality required to hold the attention of a fickle teen audience for too long. The times were a changing, but the Searchers were not. This was their demise.
In retrospect, I have come to the place where I think one of the greatest downfalls of The Searchers is when they pushed, or strongly encouraged, Tony to leave. Jackson had the unique voice (not smooth and sweet like Pender) that put the Searchers on the map. His rough edge was popular at the time and one need only look to The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and others to see that the "Bad Boy" image was appealing to the music buying public at the time. It still sells today.
I consider that the group only truly appreciated the pitfall of listening to the advice of the temperamental Curtis after Tony had gone.
Tony, had the energy and raw edge to sell records. Mike Pender had an outstanding voice, but in the words of John Lennon, "If you want to be successful you have to put it on a bit." Pender, an outstanding singer of ballads, did not consistently have the presence to persuade others to take notice. A few original compositions wouldn't have hurt either.
Sadly, the Searchers were too tentative when they needed a bold and more forceful approach to compete with The Beatles, Stones, Hollies, Animals and the like. While testosterone does not have to be coming out of your pores in your private life to win over a dynamic youthful population, it certainly has to be part of the mix on stage and in the studio. This was not part of the Searchers after Jackson departed.
The Searchers' best days were the early ones and this, I will argue, was in no small part due to Jackson's efforts.
Mike Pender became the voice of The Searchers and sings many of my favourite tunes. He did not have the charisma and captivating personality required to hold the attention of a fickle teen audience for too long. The times were a changing, but the Searchers were not. This was their demise.
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
Peter,
I agree that the loss of Tony was the first, biggest and most damaging nail in their musical coffin. By losing his voice, they were forced into a steady diet of mid-tempo ballads,or "rockers" that sounded like they were bellowed ("Take Me For What I'm Worth"), or forced ("Have You Ever Loved Somebody"-and Blount's drumming didn't help). They also lost the one voice they had that could do the blues well.
Additionally, with the loss of his personality, they were stuck with the mercurial Curtis as their front man, giving him additional leverage and power over their musical direction. And (at least in the States), his loss led to a level of anonimity for the band that killed them. People knew the songs, but never remembered the group. Still largely don't.
I agree that the loss of Tony was the first, biggest and most damaging nail in their musical coffin. By losing his voice, they were forced into a steady diet of mid-tempo ballads,or "rockers" that sounded like they were bellowed ("Take Me For What I'm Worth"), or forced ("Have You Ever Loved Somebody"-and Blount's drumming didn't help). They also lost the one voice they had that could do the blues well.
Additionally, with the loss of his personality, they were stuck with the mercurial Curtis as their front man, giving him additional leverage and power over their musical direction. And (at least in the States), his loss led to a level of anonimity for the band that killed them. People knew the songs, but never remembered the group. Still largely don't.
You play the hand they deal you
Einar: another John?! you mean John Blunt, i guess? Could be, but i've never heard him sing. May be Eddie, although i've never heard him sing as well.
Peter: bet you're right.
Well... and if, only for the hype, we'd try to imagine another way out of this controversy: Tony stays while Chris leaves? What it could be like?
Hungry for your thoughts,
pr (?) Sheena.
Peter: bet you're right.
Well... and if, only for the hype, we'd try to imagine another way out of this controversy: Tony stays while Chris leaves? What it could be like?
Hungry for your thoughts,
pr (?) Sheena.
Nothing will get you dead quicker than being deadly serious about yourself.