Only The Shadows Know

admin · Post by **admin** » Tue May 09, 2006 3:32 am

I recently had the pleasure of watching the Shadows 2004 Tour, perhaps their final one, I am not sure.

If you like the Shadows this is a treat. If you love them, then it is the ultimate. Primarily an instrumental group to many, I was pleasantly surprised that Marvin and Welsh included more than a few self-penned vocals from the Cliff Richard days and the Marvin, Welsh and Farrar era as well. These harmonies were knockouts and revealed a side of the group that many might not have known.

The live performance is a tutorial on sound and lighting, but the friction between Marvin and Welsh still shone through, during a the odd quip and body language on stage. I would like to know more about the reason underlying the rift between these two great performers.

After listening to this performance, two questions come to mind that I would like to pose here for discussion.

First, Marvin and Welsh wrote so many great vocals for Cliff Richard that became hits in the UK, even a couple in the US. After hearing them perform these numbers 40 years later, why did they not record them for themselves and why did they go with a predominantly instrumental focus given their vocal talents. Did Apache set the tone for the rest of their career?

Second, why was the group not bigger in the United States. Both the Shadows and Cliff Richard enthralled fans in the UK, but why were overshadowed by other instrumental groups such as the Ventures and solo singers in the US. Given the talent and original compositions of both acts, why did neither make their mark in the US as they did in the UK?

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Tue May 09, 2006 6:50 am

I'm biased here so I'll leave it to others to comment on the issues raised before making a comment, though the answer to your question"Did Apache etc" is yes.

I suspect though most who contribute to the forum being predominately North American will not have heard of The Shadows much.

shamustwin · Post by **shamustwin** » Tue May 09, 2006 9:04 am

(Southern California pre-teen perspective included below)
Out here we had a truckload of instrumental bands, surf bands all, it seems.
Apache is generally regarded as a surf tune, IIRC.
But the version we heard here was not the Shadows version, correct?

Isn't it true at that point in time American radio/record companies regarded English records as not up to par? If that were the case, the resistance and subsequent inablilty to be heard by American audiences started there.

We had plenty of post Elvis/"pre-fab" (in both senses) boyish pop stars, so Cliff had some well established competition, probably compounded by "organizations" protecting their turf/stars over here.

For me, I was totally into the instrumental bands, though they had to dress the surf part to have cred. (see Annette beach movies for reference).

Additionally. there were folk bands (Peter Paul and Mary, Rooftop Singers etc.) all vying for my allowance until the invasion stole my attention and wallet.

I think the last surf instrumental to chart here was in 1964. I realize it's unfair to lump the Shadows in with surf music, but IIRC, that's the only instrumental music charting with the kids of the day (Aker Bilk notwithstanding)

chingnchime · Post by **chingnchime** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:27 am

As for the reason the Shadows weren't more popular in the U.S., I think you can blame the U.S. record industry. As today, they had their heads up their a*ses. Well documented, the Beatles had a hell of a time getting played here initially, even though they were huge at home. Fate stepped in and history was made.

winston · Post by **winston** » Wed May 10, 2006 12:26 pm

Roy can add the best value to this thread IMO.

I was a youngster when the Shadows emerged as a top group. They were the best instrumental group by far on the charts in England at the time. The fact that they also backed up Cliff only made them more popular.

Cliff was in my mind (at the time), better than Elvis. The British press portrayed Elvis as a rebel that could sing and play guitar. The first time I saw him on the tele I realised that he could not play guitar. I remember thinking that he was a phony. Cliff on the other hand had a fabulous backing band, a great voice, great songs to sing and he was down to earth.

Cliff did not make his mark in the US because they already had Elvis and he was, despite my first impression, in fact a great performer. That's who, after all, Cliff was constantly compared to. The Shadows did not make it in the US because they were not a surf band. They were British. What would they know about surf music and how could they have ever fit in to that genre?

I did not realise that Hank and the boys could actually sing and hold a tune until well after I left England in August of 1965. So that will tell you how much exposure they got on that front. Besides, by 1965, the Shadows were no longer ultra cool to many fans that had moved on to other music styles.

The sum of the parts though was greater than the whole. Again IMO. The Shadows were better without Cliff but perhaps not visa versa.

Now I know Roy has a whole different viewpoint because of his love of instrumentals and I respect that. So Roy here's your chance to say your bit. Over to you my friend.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu May 11, 2006 7:58 am

The Dakota's remind me of The Shadows, to a lesser extent of course.

It is interesting how these groups that had instrumental releases were backing bands for solo artists.

Unlike The Shadows though, the Dakota's did not achieve nearly the same success.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Sun May 14, 2006 5:16 am

The Dakota's were a great instrumental band, at least from the two songs I've heard, very tight and impressive.

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Sun May 14, 2006 5:57 am

The Dakotas only had the one hit in UK in their own right The Cruel Sea making number 18 in July 63, retitled The Cruel Surf for the American market though I don't think it made any impression.

They released in total three singles under their own name during their hitmaking days with Billy J.

In 67 and 68 two further singles were released both on different labels one a sort of novelty record called I'm an 'Ardworking Barrow Boy.

I have all three Parlophone singles and a unreleased instrumental if anyone wants to hear any. I don't have the aforementioned and frankly don't think I am missing anything there.

Mike Maxfield once told me in conversation that Cruel Sea which, he wrote, had turned out to be his pension fund.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Sun May 14, 2006 6:42 am

The Ventures also recorded "The Cruel Sea", IIRC.
As far as the Shadows go - a bit off the main topic, but here, their tunes were well known even in 70s-80s, being musical background/jingles for TV & radio broadcasts, but many people didn't associate the tunes with the band name (like, "Yes, i know this one, of course! That's the Shadows? Cool!").

admin · Post by **admin** » Sun May 14, 2006 7:12 am

Roy: I would very much like to hear the Parlophone singles of The Dakotas, whenever it is convenient.

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Sun May 14, 2006 8:11 am

I second...

royclough · Post by **royclough** » Mon May 15, 2006 8:00 am

http://www.mytempdir.com/668143

Dakotas singles on Parlophnone plus one demo

Magic Carpet written by George Martin and he plays the piano on the track

sowhat · Post by **sowhat** » Mon May 15, 2006 8:46 am

Thank you a lot!

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon May 15, 2006 9:03 am

Yes thanks Roy your efforts are much appreciated.

The Cruel Sea is perfectly named and still the best of the lot I consider. I think it rivals the early Shadows instrumentals, but sad to say the other attempts are not nearly so good.

I will give them another listen, especially Magic Carpet.

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon May 15, 2006 9:10 am

Roy: Magic Carpet sounds like a Billy J number for sure and ends like a classic Kramer tune. At least now we know where the arrangments came from.

The sound is a real sleeper and without the drums and the involvement of Martin, I am not sure I could listen to it more than once. This is an interesting bit of history for me though.