Record Collector issue 71

[drakula63]

Having just travelled back in time to July 1985, it was with some considerable interest that I read Rob Bradford’s review of The Shadows UK LPs, 1969-1985 in issue 71 of Record Collector. Actually, I just bought a virtually mint copy from Leo’s Den, greatly devalued now, of course, by my grubby finger prints all over it.

Interesting comments, but I was wondering if, with the passing of almost three decades, you’ve revised your opinion of Shades of Rock? I hope you won’t mind if I quote briefly from your review. “...to my mind this was the poorest ever offering from the Shadows, and the least artistically satisfying. It certainly remains the least played Shadows album in my collection and I know of many other Shads’ fans with similar feelings”. The funny thing was, when I first heard it, in around 1981, I was very unsure about it, but now (having once gone about ten years without playing it) I would definitely class it as one of my favourites. Funny how feelings and thoughts change!

I would, of course, agree with your high praise fro the Marvin, Welch and Farrar albums and read with some nostalgia your comments on the various Shads compilation albums from that period. I remember buying a copy of Mustang in a supermarket somewhere in Germany or Belgium, I think, way back in 1978 – it was the version with the colour photo of the lads sitting on a bench on the front. And the Ember edition of Walkin’ with the Shadows was also an early purchase in ’77 or ’78. I don’t think I’ve ever seen the World Records six LP set, although it sounds intriguing; not least of all due to the inclusion of the flexi disc. I’ve never quite understood Brian’s dissatisfaction with Tasty, as I honestly think it’s a great sounding album. I must admit that I too had always assumed that the Riders in the Sky single version was just the album version speeded up and with the obvious addition of Bruce’s electric guitar and Brian’s electronic drums. I am intrigued by your assertion that it could be a ‘different take’. Do you still hold with this I wonder? And, sadly for us all, I do agree with you when you say that XXV was ‘something of a disappointment’ and that Guardian Angel was ‘the group’s weakest effort for some time’. There was an awkward period during the mid-80s when they went off-course a bit. Oh well.

In the days before the internet (and sites such as this) it’s worth remembering that these kinds of articles were all we had and they informed our views and influenced our shopping lists. Well they did for me anyway!

Right, back to the time machine. I wish…

[Fenderman]

I used to have that copy of Record Collector but it's long gone now.
I bought Shades of Rock from a record fair around 1993 or 1994? It was mint condition and i think i paid about £7 for it, when i got home and played it i just couldn't get into it, i tried to like it but it felt like it was done for the money (which it was) which was a shame as there are some good rock and roll songs there some even sound made up on the spot! I only liked 'Something' and 'What i'd say'. It doesn't really have a 'Shadows' feel to it, probably because Bruce wasn't on it. I think John Rostill played bass on one or two tracks but no one seems to have cleared up which (if any) tracks he played on.
It's the only album i haven't bought on CD and i don't intend to, but maybe one day just to complete my digital collection (and if its really cheap).

[nivram106]

Hello all

Am I on my own in thinking that 'XXV' & 'Guardian Angel' were two of the Shads best albums? A great selection of instrumentals and a few excellent vocals thrown in, what is there not to like? It was a pity that the Tellydisc album took away a lot from 'Guardian Angel'.
I do agree that Marvin, Welch & Farrar were brilliant and their albums (now cd's) are favourites in my collection.

Jim

[Fenderman]

I think Guardian Angel was their best album of the 80's, (i've got the SFM 1998 CD version with bonus tracks) it had some really good tracks on it and some were quite adventurous (such as the title track, very moody). A pity it sold badly, i can't comment on XXV because i don't have it.

[drakula63]

I really can't see that too many people will think that XXV and Guardian Angel were 'two of their best'. However, I do agree that the release of two albums in the same year with similar content (XXV and the Silver Album) was probably a mistake. As it was, the Silver Album was better. I remember being really, really disappointed by XXV, not least of all because it was their 25th anniversary album and it sounded far too 'tame' for my liking and had no group-composed tracks on it. Not good. XXV excited me more initially, as it was all originals, but it was nowhere near as good as, say Rockin' With Curly Leads or Specs Appeal from ten years earlier. Having said that, Turning Point was brilliant and On A Night Like This should have been a hit. I think the material was generally weak and perhaps the over-use of the Simmons electronic drums has dated it. As it is, I still feel that RWCL is the best album they ever recorded and that by 1973 all real progress and development as far as style and song writing had been achieved and after that it was just an improvement on production techniques that moved things forward (if at all). I mean this generally, not just for the Shadows.

As far as SOR goes; as I say, I bought it in around 1981 and seem to recall that, because I didn't really like it, I didn't play it for about ten years, between, shall we say, 1985 and 1995. I then dug it out one day and, out of curiosity mainly and perhaps because I was having a bit of a clear-out, I played it. To my surprise, the intervening years had perhaps changed my tastes a little or my views and I loved it. I can honestly say that it's an album that gets a lot of play in chez Drake. The recent RPM CD release has some great sleeve notes that go a long way to clearing up the mystery as to who played bass on what tracks (not just as far as John Rostill goes).

[MikeAB]

Take off the kazoo and I think Shades of Rock is a great album - maybe in the direction the Shads needed to go if they were to avoid what actually happened with MOR covers etc. But like always their well loved sound defined them and that is what sold their records outside their dedicated fan base.

[Monty]

I think the presence of Alan Hawkshaw's highly featured keyboards - mostly organ, piano and electric or 'tinkling' piano - might have put some traditional Shads fans off 'Shades of Rock' plus the very loose 'jamming' style take on alot of the well known numbers might have grated a bit with those used to a normally more disciplined 'clean' Shads instrumental format....

I really do like their takes of; 'Memphis', 'Get Back' and 'Paperback Writer' while their menacing cool take on The Stones 'Satisfaction' has grown on me over the years and 'Something' is interesting too...

interesting to compare it with The Ventures 1969 album 'Underground Fire' where they too take famous numbers and expand themes around them...

the stark b/w cover shot on 'Shades...' of a 'Rocker on bike' on both front and back cover minus ANY Shads personnel credits or depiction doesn't do alot for the album either...

I understood it was Hank on all guitars, Brian on Drums/percussion with Alan Hawkshaw (keyboards - then an official group member as on 'Live in Japan') but with various bass players including session ace, Blue Mink, C.C.S. & future Sky bassist Herbie Flowers
- I remember reading (somewhere) that surprisingly John Rostill was not on the album
(I had always assumed John was bassist throughout - any info re this point much appreciated)

'Shades of Rock' is NOT commercial - unlike 'String of Hits' (1979) or the later Polydor covers albums - it's more them jamming & simply playing about 'variations on a theme' etc - as Manfred Mann did on their 'Instrumental Asylum' & 'Instrumental Assassination' EPs (tracks from the former compiled on the 'Soul of Mann' instrumentals LP by HMV/EMI in 1967)

I think Hank, Brian, & Alan do some adventurous playing on 'Shades...' with an energy and free flowing feel as if they are glad to be able to expand on the basic melodies for once free of any commercial expectations or 'aimed at any audience' requirements - I bet they actually had fun during those sessions no matter how much they later felt obliged to defend/excuse it as just being 'done for the money' etc...


only 'Bony Maronie' sounds lacklustre and somewhat half hearted to me...the other tracks all have their merits, but for those into more traditional Shads covers it probably came as a shock and disappointment in 1970 - alot of of Hank & John Farrar's later adventurous harmony guitar playing on the 1973-77 EMI albums had their er 'Deep Roots' in the more free flowing style that was clearly evident on 'Shades of Rock' back in 1970 when they were doing pretty much what they enjoyed doing to fufill a record contract as opposed to doing an album with a view to required commercial success (probably also due to it being minus Bruce keeping it all 'more commericalised')

'XXV' would in my opinion have been FAR stronger if the two naff very forgettable vocal tracks were removed & more fast flowing instrumentals such as; 'Elevenis' & 'Spot The Ball' etc replaced them (if possible) & maybe the (much stronger) 12 inch extended version of 'Dancing in The Dark' (was it cut then ? if not add it on now !! LOL)

'Guardian Angel' has some good tracks - I loved 'Turning Point' and 'Gurdian Angel' was a good vocal track, but alot of it I found rather forgettable to be honest...

[Ivan Pongracic Jr]

I haven't posted much here for a while, so I hope I'm not speaking out of turn, but I have been a HUGE Shadows fan since I was 10-11 (in '80) - and still am! As big as ever, in fact.

I actually have grown to quite like 'Shades of Rock.' I'd much rather hear those kinds of versions of classic tracks than the kind they started doing in the late '70s and '80s - "replicate the original track to the maximum, replace the vocal with Hank's guitar". I think that is dull, dull, dull! But 'Shades of Rock' is incredibly imaginative and creative. They completely rethought most of the songs, and gave them new identities, which is not easy to do. Hank's playing was phenomenal, and I greatly enjoy his use of the fuzz pedal on many numbers. Finally, what possibly strikes me the most about 'Shades' is Brian's drumming, which I think was about 20 years ahead of its time. He uses that James Brown "Funky Drummer" drum beat on several songs, including Lucille, Get Back, and River Deep.... Using that soul/funk drumming style in rock was not very common then, but became HUGE in the late '80s Manchester ("Madchester") scene - the Stone Roses, the Inspiral Carpets, the Happy Mondays, the Charlatans all featured that drum style quite prominently, combined with rock instrumentation, and interestingly enough, quite a bit of organ, just like 'Shades'! I've often wondered if there was some sort of a connection there. (Probably not.) Anyway, I understand why Shadows fans would have a problem with this album, it really doesn't sound much like the Shadows, but taken on its own merits, I think there's a lot to recommend it. At least it's got guts, unlike pretty much all their '80s synth/drum-machines drivel!

[iefje]

The "Guardian Angel" album is indeed quite a product of the 1980's, but in some ways to me it still sounds fresh. It's one of my favourite Shadows albums, in any case one of my favourite 1980's Shadows albums. "XXV" is very good too, but should have featured more new tracks (if not all), instead of just the two vocals in addition to the nine which were already available on the double album "The Shadows Silver Album".
"Shades Of Rock" is also one of my favourites, (for The Shadows in particular) quite a progressive style and sound. It really defines Hank's style and sound of the time, which also features on his first solo album and singles and on the Marvin, Welch & Farrar albums.

[drakula63]

Some interesting comments coming in now.

John Rostill IS on Shades of Rock; although I believe only on TWO numbers. Again, the inlay of the recent RPM release contains exhaustive notes on this.

Brian's drumming has always been a standout aspect of SOR for me, and I know a few others, and his economic, tight style and powerful sound must have influenced many.