Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: The Wembley Tapes - a study of Pink Floyd's official live releases

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    My imagination most of the time...
    Posts
    1,944
    Thanks
    178
    Thanked 3,620 Times in 41 Posts

    Default

    I've honestly enjoyed this thread more than this show!

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    814
    Thanks
    103
    Thanked 409 Times in 7 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimfisheye View Post
    I've honestly enjoyed this thread more than this show!
    The 1974 tours (both of them) are my least favourite from the 70s. Nick Kent from NME was there and he was right when he said the band was disconnected from it's audience and doing the bare minimum, even the band admitted he was right. They were hiding behind the light show and the screen films at the time. The band was in a creative turmoil that could very well have ended in an extensive hiatus from them, if not breakip them up (they admitted so many times). Inspiration was lacking.

    Apart from Shine On (which was more or less in it's final shape), the first set is a clear example of the band attitude at the time: aimlessly wandering around. Raving and Drooling was seriously unfinished (and quite frankly boring), and You Gotta Be Crazy needed more work lyrically and musically (also guilty of long aimless moments). I can't thank Roger enough to have wisely decided to drop them from the next record as they were not ready for action. Sheep and Dogs are masterpieces.

    But let's be fair: the recording of November 16th is an accurate document of what the tour was like on an average. It's a pretty typical concert from the British Winter Tour 1974, which was sadly the least inspired from them. And frankly it's not that bad

    November 15th on the other hand... but that will be another story when I'll tackle more songs

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Bonn, Germany
    Posts
    266
    Thanks
    1,228
    Thanked 277 Times in 16 Posts

    Default

    Hi,

    would you agree that the recent release of Echoes does sound quite differently from the Immersion release of the Wembley concert. I think it is much more dry, at least the voice from David...

    Best, Nils

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    814
    Thanks
    103
    Thanked 409 Times in 7 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skinny12 View Post
    Hi,

    would you agree that the recent release of Echoes does sound quite differently from the Immersion release of the Wembley concert. I think it is much more dry, at least the voice from David...

    Best, Nils
    Is it? I can't really answer. Who knows? We know now that at least two different stereo mixdown exists from November 16th. One where the audience is muted during the first set, and the released one with the audience mics. Or maybe it was mixed in QUAD with the audience at the back XD That's all that survives since the multitrack from the 16th is lost (and after analysis so far, I believe it to be true). A good thing for the 16th recording is that there is no "Frankenstein" involved at all.
    Last edited by Eckoes; 01-12-2017 at 08:03 PM.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,887
    Thanks
    648
    Thanked 310 Times in 7 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bert13 View Post
    It's seeded now.

    EDIT: btw, I have a sample of this recorder which originates from Jon R and was sent to me by neonknight a few years ago. It's only the first 7:34 of the show, the rest of that tape is not available unfortunately but I can confirm that the mentioned static is also present on the sample, which does sound better than the torrented one. So, the crackle/static is not caused by extraction errors as it wasn't transferred from a digital source.
    Bert, how does the "Black Holes in the Sky" release of 1974-11-16 (recently seeded thanks to floyd_zenith) compare to your sample? It makes for an interesting comparison with the cass[M]>DAT[1]>CDR[2], since the latter has a bit more high end but is very midrangy and less amplified. Black Holes in the Sky has a much fuller bass and smoother sound, but more hiss and less high end that suggests generation loss, so I'm wondering if this is one of those "great transfer of a 1st/2nd gen vs. suboptimal transfer of a master" situations.

    ygbc/littlesheep also lists a cass[M]>DAT[C]>CDR[2] that she says sounds better and has less of the "static" folks have mentioned. I didn't notice the static on the cass[M]>DAT[1]>CDR[2], unless it's just peak distortion -- what's a good spot to check out for that?

    Gosh, this 1974-11-16 concert was full of errors. Rick on Breathe, Roger at the beginning of Us & Them and late in Echoes, the backup singer messing up the lyrics to Eclipse, and I think there are more besides. At least there was one really great 1974 show (1974-12-14).

    Did we decide at some point that OTR was 100% tape effects? Curious to see Eckoes's next post.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Nijmegen, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,313
    Thanks
    923
    Thanked 4,724 Times in 76 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goldenband View Post
    Bert, how does the "Black Holes in the Sky" release of 1974-11-16 (recently seeded thanks to floyd_zenith) compare to your sample? It makes for an interesting comparison with the cass[M]>DAT[1]>CDR[2], since the latter has a bit more high end but is very midrangy and less amplified. Black Holes in the Sky has a much fuller bass and smoother sound, but more hiss and less high end that suggests generation loss, so I'm wondering if this is one of those "great transfer of a 1st/2nd gen vs. suboptimal transfer of a master" situations.
    I don't have Black Holes In The Sky (anymore?). I'm good with the cass[M]>DAT[1]>CDR[2] source, the static/crackle is really very slight, not something to make a big deal of in my opinion. Jon R's sample sounds much better than the cass[M]>DAT[1]>CDR[2] transfer, same analog source but much better preserved and a much better transfer. A shame it's only the first 7-8 minutes of the show (part of the pre-show announcements and tunings and the first 4 mins of SOYCD).
    Last edited by Bert13; 01-13-2017 at 12:45 AM.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    814
    Thanks
    103
    Thanked 409 Times in 7 Posts

    Default

    Okay, I was trying to analyse the first set... oh boy. It sounds like November 15th, I think it is, but... No spoilers yet, but MASSIVE tinkering/adjustments/fix/patch has been applied.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    331
    Thanks
    296
    Thanked 105 Times in 4 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eckoes View Post
    Apart from Shine On (which was more or less in it's final shape), the first set is a clear example of the band attitude at the time: aimlessly wandering around. Raving and Drooling was seriously unfinished (and quite frankly boring), and You Gotta Be Crazy needed more work lyrically and musically (also guilty of long aimless moments). I can't thank Roger enough to have wisely decided to drop them from the next record as they were not ready for action. Sheep and Dogs are masterpieces.
    I've gotten to the point I can't listen to Dogs and Sheep and vastly prefer You've Got to Be Crazy 1974 and Raving and Drooling 1974. Raving and Drooling is a keyboard led instrumental with the rhythm guitar mimicking the gnashing of teeth and the cymbals the rending of claws.. how that became Sheep is certainly some kind of Irony... no doubt intentional but it does neuter the song quite a bit. Yes, the 1975 version does climax better after the rush is over after the first lyrical passage; The audience isn't clapping that the new track is over but that they're liking what they hear. However I feel this rush ruins the middle part of the song which is greatly exemplified from the French version which correctly places the climax at the end of the piece prior to the Sheepish coda. In order to do this, the band physically stops the song to do a slow build to the second lyrical passage. For me, the British Winter tour version meets the balance between the two... not completely stopping right after the song starts and more importantly, not blowing its load with another seven minutes to go.

    You've Got to Be Crazy 74... there's the slow build version of Nov 16 and everything prior and then there's the restart version that debuted on the 17. I prefer the later version as it comes of less of a slow realization after the middle "stone" lyrics but more of a sudden inward redirection... after all the "you"s used in the first half, this is where the "us", "they" and "I" show up and it works better as direct contrast rather than just a bridge to the first half. Things I love: The dual guitar/keyboard solos, insane rhyming pattern and frantic singing, the AHM era return of harmonizing/scat and the overall words on their own which become more distanced being relatable with each rewrite. Oh and the song itself, I probably should repeat that.

    The 1975 version is awful but can we all agree on that? They took five minutes of music and harmonizing out of the song and made all the lyrics... less biting as well as less literally spat out and already more considerate with the slowed down singing... but also closer together giving no one time to reflect. Lyrics, solo, bridge, lyrics, solo and closer. It's still not a song but it's no longer a piece.

    Dogs put the time back in... good, I can't complain about that; I always thought that Pink Floyd (1987) didn't play the song was less because Gilmour didn't like the album or the song but because he couldn't deflate the song like he did with Shine On... but with the firm emphasis put on the subject being one of the titular Dogs, how does the song relate to you now? Not just you you but the "you" of the song. Is it you are all Dogs or are the Dogs all you?

    And that's my main problem with the Animals album; It come a lot less Animal Farm and a lot more like the writer put these names/masks on people. Somehow these songs went from the simple and direct finger pointing of "You" and "I" to "Ha ha, we all are Sheep, Pigs and Dogs; Divy up among yourselves which are which. By the way, I'm a Dog but only when it's convenient. That is, when pigs fly."

    I also like the saxophone in Echoes as it does a better job of distancing the song from its 71 era origin and puts it firmly alongside the completed works of Dark Side of the Moon and Wish You Were Here.
    Of course, I also think the band peaked creatively with Atom Heart Mother and everything past that is just seeing where and how words stick to the music.

    Next time: Rating Dark Sides by the right spot and why: Any Colour You Like.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •