Lewisham soundboard

[Dr. Medulla]

There's a lengthy passage in Pete Townshends book, covering several pages, detailing all the technical changes and additions that were made before Live at Leeds was released, so i think it might be fair to say none of these renowned live albums are actually put out in their raw, elemental state. Also, I can't ever recall being at a rock gig and remarking, oh no, the lead guitarist flubbed the crucial middle note in that guitar solo or the drummer missed the hi-hat tap during that complex rhythm change.

Thin Lizzy's incredible Live and Dangerous is more or less a studio album.

When I saw Pete Doherty live, I definitely noted flubs-a-plenty.

KISS’ Alive, the record that broke them by showcasing their live performance, is heavily overdubbed in the studio. My goodness, tho, KISS selling a fraud!?!

[Kory]

Just re-read this thread thanks to Heston's link in the other one. I know this may be a controversial speculation, I'm really just musing here, but I half-wonder if the band are reluctant to release live albums because they recognize how inconsistent they were as a live unit. Shit-hot and exciting to be sure, but a lot more onstage flubs than most bands who have released multiple live documents. Is it perhaps a case of public embarrassment? Again, a not wholly serious speculation, but it has come to mind a few times during my fandom.

I could see that being a record company consideration at least. But i still think there are enough decent tight performances to work on and, as per Shea, there would be the obligatory serious "touching up" before being passed fit for release.

Yeah and obviously the performances on FHTE are tight too (although my hypothesis could be one of the reasons it was a compilation rather than a full show).

I don’t know, there are a lot of flubs on FHTE - that glaring wrong chord on CC before the “I don’t trust you” which they even chose as the single to the meandering hit or miss adlibs on STH (which I happen to love but know they aren’t for everyone).

Yeah, true.

[Marky Dread]

I think this is semi related to the whole TotP thing. While some bands did want to play live or take the piss, the vast majority and the record execs too no doubt, preferred to mime to the studio track to the extent it was common practice to bung a bribe to the head engineer so that the backing track they were obliged to lay down as per Musicians Union rules was discarded. The goal was to shift product and playing some second-rate, live-studio recording was not the way they wanted to do it.

Some great exceptions to this especially when the musicians union went on strike.
PiL playing "Death Disco" a completely different take to the single and album.

Paul Weller redoing partial vocals on "Beat Surrender" replacing the line "bullshit is bullshit" with "bullfrogs are bullfrogs".

[Low Down Low]

I think this is semi related to the whole TotP thing. While some bands did want to play live or take the piss, the vast majority and the record execs too no doubt, preferred to mime to the studio track to the extent it was common practice to bung a bribe to the head engineer so that the backing track they were obliged to lay down as per Musicians Union rules was discarded. The goal was to shift product and playing some second-rate, live-studio recording was not the way they wanted to do it.

Some great exceptions to this especially when the musicians union went on strike.
PiL playing "Death Disco" a completely different take to the single and album.

Paul Weller redoing partial vocals on "Beat Surrender" replacing the line "bullshit is bullshit" with "bullfrogs are bullfrogs".

Yeah for sure, it did lead to some fascinating variations and made the whole thing more interesting in a lot of ways, i think. I recall on one of those TotP annual shows one of the ladies in the Robert Palmer Addicted to Love performance explaining that the actual musicians who played on the track had to be behind the curtain as they mimed because MU insisted on it. All just miming themselves of course, or maybe just drinking a beer because who could see them anyway? I love all that TotP history, so utterly barmy and magnificent!

Of course, bands did have the power to put their foot down and insist on their way, as Iron Maiden proved with their "No live, no Maiden" stance. The Clash i suppose could have done that but maybe just never thought about it.

[Marky Dread]

I think this is semi related to the whole TotP thing. While some bands did want to play live or take the piss, the vast majority and the record execs too no doubt, preferred to mime to the studio track to the extent it was common practice to bung a bribe to the head engineer so that the backing track they were obliged to lay down as per Musicians Union rules was discarded. The goal was to shift product and playing some second-rate, live-studio recording was not the way they wanted to do it.

Some great exceptions to this especially when the musicians union went on strike.
PiL playing "Death Disco" a completely different take to the single and album.

Paul Weller redoing partial vocals on "Beat Surrender" replacing the line "bullshit is bullshit" with "bullfrogs are bullfrogs".

Yeah for sure, it did lead to some fascinating variations and made the whole thing more interesting in a lot of ways, i think. I recall on one of those TotP annual shows one of the ladies in the Robert Palmer Addicted to Love performance explaining that the actual musicians who played on the track had to be behind the curtain as they mimed because MU insisted on it. All just miming themselves of course, or maybe just drinking a beer because who could see them anyway? I love all that TotP history, so utterly barmy and magnificent!

Of course, bands did have the power to put their foot down and insist on their way, as Iron Maiden proved with their "No live, no Maiden" stance. The Clash i suppose could have done that but maybe just never thought about it.

I think initially with regards to the BBC The Clash just saw them as old and stuffy and not very punk. They walked out of their Peel session for dubious reasons. Which was a real shame as most of the Peel sessions caught the bands how they truly sounded and are a match for their official released versions or better than.

[Low Down Low]

I think this is semi related to the whole TotP thing. While some bands did want to play live or take the piss, the vast majority and the record execs too no doubt, preferred to mime to the studio track to the extent it was common practice to bung a bribe to the head engineer so that the backing track they were obliged to lay down as per Musicians Union rules was discarded. The goal was to shift product and playing some second-rate, live-studio recording was not the way they wanted to do it.

Some great exceptions to this especially when the musicians union went on strike.
PiL playing "Death Disco" a completely different take to the single and album.

Paul Weller redoing partial vocals on "Beat Surrender" replacing the line "bullshit is bullshit" with "bullfrogs are bullfrogs".

Yeah for sure, it did lead to some fascinating variations and made the whole thing more interesting in a lot of ways, i think. I recall on one of those TotP annual shows one of the ladies in the Robert Palmer Addicted to Love performance explaining that the actual musicians who played on the track had to be behind the curtain as they mimed because MU insisted on it. All just miming themselves of course, or maybe just drinking a beer because who could see them anyway? I love all that TotP history, so utterly barmy and magnificent!

Of course, bands did have the power to put their foot down and insist on their way, as Iron Maiden proved with their "No live, no Maiden" stance. The Clash i suppose could have done that but maybe just never thought about it.

I think initially with regards to the BBC The Clash just saw them as old and stuffy and not very punk. They walked out of their Peel session for dubious reasons. Which was a real shame as most of the Peel sessions caught the bands how they truly sounded and are a match for their official released versions or better than.

Yeah what was punk about "making tea at the BBC"?! Totally agree though, whatever i think about TotP, the whole Peel fiasco just didn't seem to make any sense.

[Sparky]

I think this is semi related to the whole TotP thing. While some bands did want to play live or take the piss, the vast majority and the record execs too no doubt, preferred to mime to the studio track to the extent it was common practice to bung a bribe to the head engineer so that the backing track they were obliged to lay down as per Musicians Union rules was discarded. The goal was to shift product and playing some second-rate, live-studio recording was not the way they wanted to do it.

Some great exceptions to this especially when the musicians union went on strike.
PiL playing "Death Disco" a completely different take to the single and album.

Paul Weller redoing partial vocals on "Beat Surrender" replacing the line "bullshit is bullshit" with "bullfrogs are bullfrogs".

Yeah for sure, it did lead to some fascinating variations and made the whole thing more interesting in a lot of ways, i think. I recall on one of those TotP annual shows one of the ladies in the Robert Palmer Addicted to Love performance explaining that the actual musicians who played on the track had to be behind the curtain as they mimed because MU insisted on it. All just miming themselves of course, or maybe just drinking a beer because who could see them anyway? I love all that TotP history, so utterly barmy and magnificent!

Of course, bands did have the power to put their foot down and insist on their way, as Iron Maiden proved with their "No live, no Maiden" stance. The Clash i suppose could have done that but maybe just never thought about it.

I think initially with regards to the BBC The Clash just saw them as old and stuffy and not very punk. They walked out of their Peel session for dubious reasons. Which was a real shame as most of the Peel sessions caught the bands how they truly sounded and are a match for their official released versions or better than.

I would agree, Peel sessions are some of my favorite studio live recording. The versions are always slightly different and to my ears have more of an edge to them.

[Silent Majority]

Probably the early morning.

[Dr. Medulla]

Altho Wire did several Peel sessions, as I recall they—or maybe just Colin—thought he never really got them. I'm too lazy too look stuff up, but have any of the Clash histories suggested a frostiness with Peel that was just down to personality?

[Marky Dread]

Altho Wire did several Peel sessions, as I recall they—or maybe just Colin—thought he never really got them. I'm too lazy too look stuff up, but have any of the Clash histories suggested a frostiness with Peel that was just down to personality?

Nope.

From the Peel Wiki page.

Sessions

None. One attempt, scheduled for 24 April 1978, was abandoned. Peel noted in his diary the circumstances surrounding this: "They actually got as far as recording the backing tracks, but then they were so out of their heads they couldn't finish it, and decided the BBC's equipment wasn't good enough. It was one of those things where you thought: How do you argue with stupidity on this level? Not a very punk attitude, I thought." (Margrave Of The Marshes, Corgi Books, 2006, p. 368.) Peel repeats this version of events when answering a listener query on his show on 17 April 2001.

However, Ken Garner's The Peel Sessions contains an anecdote by Bill Aitken, the engineer on that date, which casts doubt on Peel's recollection. Aitken suggests that, when he inquired after Topper Headon's dog, the rest of the band made fun of Headon because of this. The session then became increasingly negative and was finally cancelled by the group (Garner, K., The Peel Sessions, BBC Books, 2007, p. 99)

In an interview for BBC6Music broadcast in October 2013 the three remaining members of The Clash - Mick Jones, Paul Simonon and Topper Headon recalled the session:

"It didn't work, so we just walked out and left it, it didn't sound any good," says Topper. "It was us, I'm sure," says Mick, magnanimously. "Speak for yourself," retorts Topper. "John Peel never forgave us. He liked all good new music, except for The Clash," chuckles Mick.

Mick though is way off as Peely played The Clash on his show hundreds of times.

[Dr. Medulla]

Altho Wire did several Peel sessions, as I recall they—or maybe just Colin—thought he never really got them. I'm too lazy too look stuff up, but have any of the Clash histories suggested a frostiness with Peel that was just down to personality?

Nope.

From the Peel Wiki page.

Sessions

None. One attempt, scheduled for 24 April 1978, was abandoned. Peel noted in his diary the circumstances surrounding this: "They actually got as far as recording the backing tracks, but then they were so out of their heads they couldn't finish it, and decided the BBC's equipment wasn't good enough. It was one of those things where you thought: How do you argue with stupidity on this level? Not a very punk attitude, I thought." (Margrave Of The Marshes, Corgi Books, 2006, p. 368.) Peel repeats this version of events when answering a listener query on his show on 17 April 2001.

However, Ken Garner's The Peel Sessions contains an anecdote by Bill Aitken, the engineer on that date, which casts doubt on Peel's recollection. Aitken suggests that, when he inquired after Topper Headon's dog, the rest of the band made fun of Headon because of this. The session then became increasingly negative and was finally cancelled by the group (Garner, K., The Peel Sessions, BBC Books, 2007, p. 99)

In an interview for BBC6Music broadcast in October 2013 the three remaining members of The Clash - Mick Jones, Paul Simonon and Topper Headon recalled the session:

"It didn't work, so we just walked out and left it, it didn't sound any good," says Topper. "It was us, I'm sure," says Mick, magnanimously. "Speak for yourself," retorts Topper. "John Peel never forgave us. He liked all good new music, except for The Clash," chuckles Mick.

Mick though is way off as Peely played The Clash on his show hundreds of times.

I dunno, I can see some underlying personality conflict possibly at work there. Nothing obvious, petty, or long-lasting—as you say Peel still played them—but something that just didn't jell between them.

[Marky Dread]

Altho Wire did several Peel sessions, as I recall they—or maybe just Colin—thought he never really got them. I'm too lazy too look stuff up, but have any of the Clash histories suggested a frostiness with Peel that was just down to personality?

Nope.

From the Peel Wiki page.

Sessions

None. One attempt, scheduled for 24 April 1978, was abandoned. Peel noted in his diary the circumstances surrounding this: "They actually got as far as recording the backing tracks, but then they were so out of their heads they couldn't finish it, and decided the BBC's equipment wasn't good enough. It was one of those things where you thought: How do you argue with stupidity on this level? Not a very punk attitude, I thought." (Margrave Of The Marshes, Corgi Books, 2006, p. 368.) Peel repeats this version of events when answering a listener query on his show on 17 April 2001.

However, Ken Garner's The Peel Sessions contains an anecdote by Bill Aitken, the engineer on that date, which casts doubt on Peel's recollection. Aitken suggests that, when he inquired after Topper Headon's dog, the rest of the band made fun of Headon because of this. The session then became increasingly negative and was finally cancelled by the group (Garner, K., The Peel Sessions, BBC Books, 2007, p. 99)

In an interview for BBC6Music broadcast in October 2013 the three remaining members of The Clash - Mick Jones, Paul Simonon and Topper Headon recalled the session:

"It didn't work, so we just walked out and left it, it didn't sound any good," says Topper. "It was us, I'm sure," says Mick, magnanimously. "Speak for yourself," retorts Topper. "John Peel never forgave us. He liked all good new music, except for The Clash," chuckles Mick.

Mick though is way off as Peely played The Clash on his show hundreds of times.

I dunno, I can see some underlying personality conflict possibly at work there. Nothing obvious, petty, or long-lasting—as you say Peel still played them—but something that just didn't jell between them.

Nope completely disagree. Peel was the first to play The Clash White Riot on his show. Then many more times on his show and especially on his festive 50s. I think the only time he said anything dismissive about them was when they released Straight to Hell which he didn't care for. But obviously that was years later. Much more to do with that punk stupidity and a dumb dislike of the BBC. I mean why bother to turn up only to walk out. Sounds like they just weren't on it that day. Shame really.

[Low Down Low]

Altho Wire did several Peel sessions, as I recall they—or maybe just Colin—thought he never really got them. I'm too lazy too look stuff up, but have any of the Clash histories suggested a frostiness with Peel that was just down to personality?

Nope.

From the Peel Wiki page.

Sessions

None. One attempt, scheduled for 24 April 1978, was abandoned. Peel noted in his diary the circumstances surrounding this: "They actually got as far as recording the backing tracks, but then they were so out of their heads they couldn't finish it, and decided the BBC's equipment wasn't good enough. It was one of those things where you thought: How do you argue with stupidity on this level? Not a very punk attitude, I thought." (Margrave Of The Marshes, Corgi Books, 2006, p. 368.) Peel repeats this version of events when answering a listener query on his show on 17 April 2001.

However, Ken Garner's The Peel Sessions contains an anecdote by Bill Aitken, the engineer on that date, which casts doubt on Peel's recollection. Aitken suggests that, when he inquired after Topper Headon's dog, the rest of the band made fun of Headon because of this. The session then became increasingly negative and was finally cancelled by the group (Garner, K., The Peel Sessions, BBC Books, 2007, p. 99)

In an interview for BBC6Music broadcast in October 2013 the three remaining members of The Clash - Mick Jones, Paul Simonon and Topper Headon recalled the session:

"It didn't work, so we just walked out and left it, it didn't sound any good," says Topper. "It was us, I'm sure," says Mick, magnanimously. "Speak for yourself," retorts Topper. "John Peel never forgave us. He liked all good new music, except for The Clash," chuckles Mick.

Mick though is way off as Peely played The Clash on his show hundreds of times.

I dunno, I can see some underlying personality conflict possibly at work there. Nothing obvious, petty, or long-lasting—as you say Peel still played them—but something that just didn't jell between them.

Nope completely disagree. Peel was the first to play The Clash White Riot on his show. Then many more times on his show and especially on his festive 50s. I think the only time he said anything dismissive about them was when they released Straight to Hell which he didn't care for. But obviously that was years later. Much more to do with that punk stupidity and a dumb dislike of the BBC. I mean why bother to turn up only to walk out. Sounds like they just weren't on it that day. Shame really.

Very much inclined to agree there's some at least latent anti BBC hostility at play there. Maybe relevant that the Pistols never did a Peel session, don't know why exactly but I'm willing to assume they wouldn't exactly have been a welcome presence around the place. So while I'm sure the Clash were intent on doing a good session, such was their pre-existing prejudices that it would only take the merest spark to set things off. We'll probably never know for sure, but that's the occam version for me anyway.

[Marky Dread]

Altho Wire did several Peel sessions, as I recall they—or maybe just Colin—thought he never really got them. I'm too lazy too look stuff up, but have any of the Clash histories suggested a frostiness with Peel that was just down to personality?

Nope.

From the Peel Wiki page.

Sessions

None. One attempt, scheduled for 24 April 1978, was abandoned. Peel noted in his diary the circumstances surrounding this: "They actually got as far as recording the backing tracks, but then they were so out of their heads they couldn't finish it, and decided the BBC's equipment wasn't good enough. It was one of those things where you thought: How do you argue with stupidity on this level? Not a very punk attitude, I thought." (Margrave Of The Marshes, Corgi Books, 2006, p. 368.) Peel repeats this version of events when answering a listener query on his show on 17 April 2001.

However, Ken Garner's The Peel Sessions contains an anecdote by Bill Aitken, the engineer on that date, which casts doubt on Peel's recollection. Aitken suggests that, when he inquired after Topper Headon's dog, the rest of the band made fun of Headon because of this. The session then became increasingly negative and was finally cancelled by the group (Garner, K., The Peel Sessions, BBC Books, 2007, p. 99)

In an interview for BBC6Music broadcast in October 2013 the three remaining members of The Clash - Mick Jones, Paul Simonon and Topper Headon recalled the session:

"It didn't work, so we just walked out and left it, it didn't sound any good," says Topper. "It was us, I'm sure," says Mick, magnanimously. "Speak for yourself," retorts Topper. "John Peel never forgave us. He liked all good new music, except for The Clash," chuckles Mick.

Mick though is way off as Peely played The Clash on his show hundreds of times.

I dunno, I can see some underlying personality conflict possibly at work there. Nothing obvious, petty, or long-lasting—as you say Peel still played them—but something that just didn't jell between them.

Nope completely disagree. Peel was the first to play The Clash White Riot on his show. Then many more times on his show and especially on his festive 50s. I think the only time he said anything dismissive about them was when they released Straight to Hell which he didn't care for. But obviously that was years later. Much more to do with that punk stupidity and a dumb dislike of the BBC. I mean why bother to turn up only to walk out. Sounds like they just weren't on it that day. Shame really.

Very much inclined to agree there's some at least latent anti BBC hostility at play there. Maybe relevant that the Pistols never did a Peel session, don't know why exactly but I'm willing to assume they wouldn't exactly have been a welcome presence around the place. So while I'm sure the Clash were intent on doing a good session, such was their pre-existing prejudices that it would only take the merest spark to set things off. We'll probably never know for sure, but that's the occam version for me anyway.

Thing is the Pistols were finished by April 1978. It was all over bar the shouting (Swindle etc). The Pistols had also appeared on the BBC Young Nation without any fall out.
There was that crap Russell Harty show thing where Russell, Ronnie Corbett discussed film footage of Derek Nimmo going into SEX on the Kings Rd and meeting Viv, John and Sid and then going out into the Kings Rd dressed in punk gear and getting feedback from members of the public. But I can't see any dumb punk solidarity really affecting the Clash at Maida Vale. I think they were just having a bad day and the stupid squabbling regards Topper knowing one of the guys there put a dampner on things.
Definitely not a problem with Peel who was right to call them out on it later. There's a nice pic of Joe and Peely together later on where they are in a cafe having a cup of tea so no hard feelings I don't think.

[Low Down Low]

Nope.

From the Peel Wiki page.

Sessions

None. One attempt, scheduled for 24 April 1978, was abandoned. Peel noted in his diary the circumstances surrounding this: "They actually got as far as recording the backing tracks, but then they were so out of their heads they couldn't finish it, and decided the BBC's equipment wasn't good enough. It was one of those things where you thought: How do you argue with stupidity on this level? Not a very punk attitude, I thought." (Margrave Of The Marshes, Corgi Books, 2006, p. 368.) Peel repeats this version of events when answering a listener query on his show on 17 April 2001.

However, Ken Garner's The Peel Sessions contains an anecdote by Bill Aitken, the engineer on that date, which casts doubt on Peel's recollection. Aitken suggests that, when he inquired after Topper Headon's dog, the rest of the band made fun of Headon because of this. The session then became increasingly negative and was finally cancelled by the group (Garner, K., The Peel Sessions, BBC Books, 2007, p. 99)

In an interview for BBC6Music broadcast in October 2013 the three remaining members of The Clash - Mick Jones, Paul Simonon and Topper Headon recalled the session:

"It didn't work, so we just walked out and left it, it didn't sound any good," says Topper. "It was us, I'm sure," says Mick, magnanimously. "Speak for yourself," retorts Topper. "John Peel never forgave us. He liked all good new music, except for The Clash," chuckles Mick.

Mick though is way off as Peely played The Clash on his show hundreds of times.

I dunno, I can see some underlying personality conflict possibly at work there. Nothing obvious, petty, or long-lasting—as you say Peel still played them—but something that just didn't jell between them.

Nope completely disagree. Peel was the first to play The Clash White Riot on his show. Then many more times on his show and especially on his festive 50s. I think the only time he said anything dismissive about them was when they released Straight to Hell which he didn't care for. But obviously that was years later. Much more to do with that punk stupidity and a dumb dislike of the BBC. I mean why bother to turn up only to walk out. Sounds like they just weren't on it that day. Shame really.

Very much inclined to agree there's some at least latent anti BBC hostility at play there. Maybe relevant that the Pistols never did a Peel session, don't know why exactly but I'm willing to assume they wouldn't exactly have been a welcome presence around the place. So while I'm sure the Clash were intent on doing a good session, such was their pre-existing prejudices that it would only take the merest spark to set things off. We'll probably never know for sure, but that's the occam version for me anyway.

Thing is the Pistols were finished by April 1978. It was all over bar the shouting (Swindle etc). The Pistols had also appeared on the BBC Young Nation without any fall out.
There was that crap Russell Harty show thing where Russell, Ronnie Corbett discussed film footage of Derek Nimmo going into SEX on the Kings Rd and meeting Viv, John and Sid and then going out into the Kings Rd dressed in punk gear and getting feedback from members of the public. But I can't see any dumb punk solidarity really affecting the Clash at Maida Vale. I think they were just having a bad day and the stupid squabbling regards Topper knowing one of the guys there put a dampner on things.
Definitely not a problem with Peel who was right to call them out on it later. There's a nice pic of Joe and Peely together later on where they are in a cafe having a cup of tea so no hard feelings I don't think.

There is this quoted 1991 NME interview here in which Joe seems to be in less than complimentary mode about Peel. I suppose you'd have to see the full interview to fully grasp the context but really I'm just thinking it's the Clash, it's Joe - and i love them and i love him - but could anything ever be straightforward with these guys? Anything at all?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/mostpunk/p ... ions.shtml