Burns Track Listing Wanted - Please

[Iain Purdon]

which backing tracks are available for them?

Just noticed that no-one has answered this. I can tell you that Ian McCutcheon's CDs http://shadowsworkout.ucoz.com/ deliberately explore beyond the hit list in order to avoid duplicating the UBHank series, so you may find some Burnsy stuff there.

One other thought. People talk about Burns numbers to mean what was recorded during the period. But no need to restrict the use of a Burns to that part of the canon, the Shads didn't! They used the Burns in all public appearances for five years and played all the Fender hits with them (some good examples on YouTube if they've not been removed). And Hank went on to use the Burns in his post-Shads work right up to the time of the great van robbery...

Iain

[JimN]

There was once a quite amusing radio interview with Hank (I think!- I last heard a taped copy of this in the late '60's) and whilst talking about them getting the new Burns to replace their Fenders which had tuning issues, they also included a short recorded comment from Jim Burns himself- who joked in his Geordie accent that Hank and Bruce had locked him up in his workshop, and pushed his tea under the door, telling him that they were not letting him out until he got the guitars to their liking!

That sounds uncannily like the BBC Radio 1 programme "It Was In Tune When I Bought It", broadcast on Monday 31st August 1981.

I could post an mp3 version of Hank's parts of the programme (it also featured Pete Townshend).

JN

PS: Yes, Radio 1. In those days, it still sounded as though there were a few adults on hand.

[asimmd]

Hi All

Many thanks for the replies,I am especially grateful ti Iain for the link to the Shadowsworkout site
where Ian McCutcheon very kindly lists the tracks for his Workout CD's.

Saves me trawling through them,as I have nearly all of them.

I take the point that for 5 years Hank played all the Shads hits on the Burns,and
having just received my Burns Custom,I will have great pleasure i trying it out
on all the usual tracks.

Alan

[cockroach]

JIm N

Yes, maybe that was the interview I remember- my dear old friend and member on this site , Keith Bateman, and I used to exchange message cassette tapes for years between UK and Australia after I emigrated, years before e-mail, and that radio programme was on one he sent me. My memory is fading- I turn 61 next week- sorry!

It occurred to me back then that Hank and Bruce may have had a special affinity with Jim Burns, and had naturally sought his help for improved guitars,as not only did he have a firm making good quality British guitars, but he was also a fellow Geordie?

I must say I like the look of those S type Marvins (prototypes?) on the You Tube clips from Australian pop music TV shows which they appeared on during their Australian tours in the mid-late '60's.

I would guess that the record shows that they used Burns for longer than they used Fenders during the '60's?

[Iain Purdon]

I would guess that the record shows that they used Burns for longer than they used Fenders during the '60's?

I couldn't date it exactly (although I know a man who can!)

But it's pretty clear that they all went to Burns shortly after John Rostill joined, so nearly 6 years using them. The white Fenders would have been on the go for about a year, maybe, and the red ones for perhaps 3 years before. In the earliest days it was much more of a mix of kit, as we know.

But I think Burns would be the most appropriate instruments for a Shads-style band doing the 60s material to use, not Fenders! Not only did they have the longest run, they are also the only instruments built and branded specially for the group.

Try telling that to anyone though

Iain

[dave robinson]

Iain P wrote
"But I think Burns would be the most appropriate instruments for a Shads-style band doing the 60s material to use, not Fenders! Not only did they have the longest run, they are also the only instruments built and branded specially for the group".

You can try to justify the Burns guitars all you like but here are the facts;

1 The big, significant hits of The Shadows were recorded using Fender guitars. Their legendary sound that they are instantly identified with was down to the sound of the Strat/Vox combination. The Burns period co-incided with their failing popularity.

2 It's been well documented that John Rostill hated the 'awkward' Burns bass and played his Fender whenever he could get away with it.

3 Hank doesn't care for the Burns either, when I met him in the early seventies he was playing a white Strat and commented that the Burns guitars had been stolen and he didn't seem to distressed and he was pleased to have a Fender once again. I recall that he mentioned something about the Burns being 'clumsy' .Yes - I too was surprised.

I have several Burns guitars, Marvin 2004/Shadows 2005 and the budget D6 and love the look of them - but the playability of the Strat and P Bass are superior in every way. Hundreds of thousands of Strat players (as well as Jazz & P Bassists) can't be wrong.

[Bojan]

I suppose there was a period sometime during 1962-63 when Hank and Bruce were trying out the prototypes..but whether they risked using them on stage or in the studio...???? I bet they don't remember either!

There was once a quite amusing radio interview with Hank (I think!- I last heard a taped copy of this in the late '60's) and whilst talking about them getting the new Burns to replace their Fenders which had tuning issues, they also included a short recorded comment from Jim Burns himself- who joked in his Geordie accent that Hank and Bruce had locked him up in his workshop, and pushed his tea under the door, telling him that they were not letting him out until he got the guitars to their liking!

What tuning issues did/do the Strats have? and if so, why did Hank go back to the Strat when his Burns was stolen and not to another Burns?

[neil2726]

it seems to be a batch of Strats that the Shads had were prone to tuning problems - even Bruce's who didnt use the tremelo arm and in theory his should have been more stable. Hank didnt go and get another Burns because at that time the company had gone bust, and you could get a Strat from almost any good music shop. It wasnt until Barry Gibson resurected Burns they became available again.

[JimN]

it seems to be a batch of Strats that the Shads had were prone to tuning problems - even Bruce's who didnt use the tremelo arm and in theory his should have been more stable.

I'm not so sure about the tuning problems. There have been two quite distinct versions of the story.

Version one has 1962/1963 Fenders fitted with inaccurate fretting or with some similar fault (perhaps a misplaced bridge position) which affected intonation. How likely is that? The fret slots were and are cut by machine. The bodies and neck blanks likewise. Hank never reported tuning problems with his Strats. There was no mention of problems with the Precision and Jazz Basses used by Licorice over the relevant period? Have you ever hear any complaints or wariness about 1962 or 1963 Strats from any other source? No, neither have I. They command very high prices and are regarded as superb instruments from a golden age, even if their secondhand value did drop nearly into the Watkins Rapier or Hofner range in the mid-1960s.

Version two (as told by Hank and reported in the Mike Read biog) has the tuning difficulty as a by-product of (at the time, well-publicised) stress suffered by Bruce, and "cured" by the simple expedient of his entrusting the tuning of his guitar(s) to John Rostill after he arrived in the group.

Hank didnt go and get another Burns because at that time the company had gone bust, and you could get a Strat from almost any good music shop. It wasnt until Barry Gibson resurected Burns they became available again.

Hank could have had a replacement Marvin had he wanted one. I was present in 1974 when a Marvin-owner (of three instruments) offered to sell him one for £100...

JN

PS: No, it isn't still for sale.

[Bojan]

Yes, the whole tuning problems story sounded fishy to me from the start. So, the fact remains that in spite of both Hank and Bruce being heavily involved in the making of a (Burns) guitar basically custom built to their specifications and intended to be a superior instrument than the ones they used before (Strats), they both went back to Strats . . . and never looked back . . . The logical answer that comes to mind is that they were not happy with the Burns and realized that the Strats were better guitars after all?

Having said that, I really like the Burns sound, but then again, even a Gibson would sound good in Hanks hands!