Sweets For My Sweet - Not As Sweet?

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun Aug 26, 2001 4:06 pm

I have listened to the recent Seachers' live performance of Sweets For My Sweet that they did for the Colin Manley benefit. I agree with Tony Jackson when he commented some time ago that The Searchers' perform this song a little too fast. I do not find the increase in tempo becoming. The newer version is still a great number, but I am wondering why the need to speed this up and whose decision it was to make this change. Has anyone else noticed this tempo change or am I just slowing down?

mps · Post by **mps** » Fri Sep 07, 2001 9:42 pm

this has been noted before and not only with this song.i believe it stems from having to play the same songs so many times!!
when mike formed mike penders searchers he was adomant that the band should create as near as possible the original sound and timing. original recordings were repeatedly used by the new band members to learn the exact timings ,phrasing etc
mike is to this day still very aware that what the public want to here is the songs how they sounded in the 60's.most that have seen mps live will agree, it is the sound of the searchers.(after all mike was the lead singer and lead guitarist for all those years- after tony and chris retired from the band)

admin · Post by **admin** » Sat Sep 08, 2001 2:08 pm

Roger: You make an interesting observation. Since The Searchers and Mike Pender went separate ways, Mike has remained true to the original versions of the songs. This is easy for him, of course, as he was the one who recorded most of them in the first place. The Searchers, on the other hand, have had to replace Mike and in so doing, have a very different sound with Spencer James at this point in their career.

jjr · Post by **jjr** » Sat Sep 08, 2001 5:37 pm

Peter,

Good point! But to me,it's not just the vocals. With Spencer there's a tad too much synth., and since he's never (to my knowledge) played a 12 string, the fills aren't the same, and the sound ("Hearts in her Eyes" comes to mind) just isn't the same.

I don't necessarily know that Mike's always that true to the originals. I still think that slow tempo, bluesy version he did of "Needles and Pins" was the most brilliant (and far from the original) alternate version of the song I've ever heard.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun Sep 09, 2001 2:07 am

Right you are John. The Bluesy Needles and Pinza is really well done and very creative to say the least. I have communicated with him about this version and found out that it was an after-thought at the end of the recording sessions for the MPS CD. He said that the lead vocal was essentially complete in a single take and that most of the time was spent getting the background harmonies right. So yes, I cannot argue that the alternate version of Needles and Pins differs markedly from the original. In retrospect I should have commented that, for the most part, he is true to the originals.

tim · Post by **tim** » Sun Sep 09, 2001 5:54 am

I am not sure that The Searchers have speeded up "Sweets For My Sweet" that much. As we are commenting on 'live' versions the best comparison would be with the PHILIPS (MERCURY in the U.S.A.) "Live At The Star-Cub, Hamburg" version. John McNally 'drove' the original along with his unique rhythm guitar style and he remains true to it almost 40 years on.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:20 am

John McNally is an excellent guitarist and that he has my admiration and respect is an understatement. In my earlier comments, I did not mean to say that the increase in tempo I noticed was universal. But as one example, not being able to hear them live as you do Tim, listen to Sweets For My Sweet on the Colin Manley Tribute Concert CD and let me know what you think. Not hearing them live I certainly have to defer to those who do and I appreciate your comment. While we are on the subject of changing tempos or arrangements, what do you think of The Searchers' remake of Needles and Pins on their first Live CD? To me, this change is toward a slower tempo and a more country style.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Sun Sep 09, 2001 9:25 am

I do at times think it is futile to argue over the merits of who as the original sound, frankly neither do. As someone once said you can get back to the place but not the time. The sound that first made me a fan and by far their most succesful album (Meet The) featured predominately Tony Jackson on lead vocals.

That said Mike created his own Searchers Sound and there can be no argument was the voice of The Searchers. He was not though the Sound of the Searchers,each member made their own contribution.

I recall when I first started to see them play live, to being surprised at how much lead guitar John seemed to undertake. The group name was always bigger than individual members hence the reason Mike was so keen on keeping it.
Personally I take the view let's enjoy both groups, Spencer has added a new dimension to the group but it is on the new numbers he cames into his own., not on the old hits.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun Sep 09, 2001 2:06 pm

Quite right Roy, both groups have their own sound and I enjoy listening to both. It is fun, however, to have these discussions and share information and points of view with other Searchers' fans. I quite agree that neither MPS of the "New Searchers" have the same sound as the "Old Searchers". Yes, I would say that it is time to get over it.

The bottom line for me is that both groups can be enjoyed and there is little to be gained overall by being swept away by a polarizing wave that forces one to pay allegiance to one group or the other. They were fine artists when they all played for the Searchers. Why should it be any different now?

tim · Post by **tim** » Sat Sep 15, 2001 2:30 am

Agreed, let's just enjoy Searchers' music whether it's played by The Searchers or Mike Pender's Searchers,