Sweet Dreams

[Tab]

But isn't that true of most Cliff & Shadows bass lines - particularly the Jet era?

[dave robinson]

I agree entirely with all your opinions which is why I'm offended that someone should criticise it in that fashion. Perhaps he can play it better ?

[KurtFroberg]

One of the finest compositions The Shadows ever recorded. I love that tune!

Here is a video clip from a couple of years ago when we had a jam session with "Licorice" in the hotel room in Nyborg, Denmark.

I am playing on borrowed guitar, echo and amp...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7djUy5OIQPE

Kurt

[GrahamH]

Yes I thought "Sweet Dreams" was a lovely piece at the time, but only more recently have I realised what a less-than-obvious chord sequence it had. Bruce has said that he travelled the world on the strength of his ability to play three chords - well, there's a lot more than that here! Amazing sophistication for a group of guys barely out of their teens.

[Pol]

Sweet Dreams (just to clear this up: the correct title really is Sweet September) is, without a doubt, the best thing the Shadows recorded in 1962, bar none.

PS: 24th July 1962.

PPS: I have most Shadows (and Cliff/Shadows) recording dates in an Excel file.

Such a lovely tune, recorded on my 15th birthday Thanks Kurt for the video clip.
Pol

[Iain Purdon]

But isn't that true of most Cliff & Shadows bass lines - particularly the Jet era?

Not really. All the Shadows bass players performed the same hits on stage and each played them his own way. The important thing is to capture the feel of a number and remember the hooks. Apart from that there's plenty of room to personalise it without spoiling the tune. But not with Sweet Dreams

[Fenderman]

Another disappointing fact about the book is that recording dates for later songs are listed sometimes as just the year, for example something recorded for Simply Shadows would be listed as just 1987. Either he didn't research that era properly or Polydor have destroyed all their studio logs.
I preferred the Beatles book which was done in date order and listed mix sessions and everything, one for the Shadows perhaps 1958 - 1968 would be of interest.
To think i paid over twenty quid for that book!

[Iain Purdon]

I bought it too. It's a different proposition from Malcolm Campbell's scholarly work on the same subject. The Campbell stuff is the benchmark for serious Shadows enthusiasts, whereas Rust covers a range of artistes in his books, inevitably in less detail. That said, there is stuff in his that I've not seen elsewhere and I'm happy to have it.

[UlrichS]

Another disappointing fact about the book is that recording dates for later songs are listed sometimes as just the year, for example something recorded for Simply Shadows would be listed as just 1987. Either he didn't research that era properly or Polydor have destroyed all their studio logs.

I know that the Abbey Road archives are accessible under certain conditions for journalistic/scientific research. It seems that this does not apply for the Polydor archive. If you look at Malcom Campbell's books you won't find any specific dates for the Polydor recordings either.

I preferred the Beatles book which was done in date order and listed mix sessions and everything, one for the Shadows perhaps 1958 - 1968 would be of interest.

To quite some extent this information is available as part of Roberto Pistolesi's book "That Sound!"

[Fenderman]

Might have to check that book out.