![]() |
Paul McCartney "Uncle Albert..." |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page 123> |
Author | |
BillCahill ![]() Music Fan ![]() Joined: 13 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted: 07 November 2007 at 7:29pm |
I just noticed that my mono DJ 45 has reverb on Paul's vocal, not found on any of the CD issues. I never thought the mix was significant enough to note a difference in the database but now I've noticed the reverb.
The mono DJ I have has Uncle Albert Admiral Halsey as one side and Too Many People on the B side, also mono. I do not have a copy of the stock copy but I assume it's the commonly issued stereo version without reverb on Paul's vocal. (the reverb on the mono DJ copy is especially noticable on the intro) I also believe that the Ram album was issued in mono to AM radio stations, and I don't know what mix that might have featured. But if only the mono mix contains this added reverb, a notation might read: "Mono radio station copies contained added reverb". Does anybody have anything to add on this one? Bill |
|
![]() |
|
Bill Cahill ![]() Music Fan ![]() Joined: 27 June 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Update: The mono DJ 45 is also missing the high hat as the Admiral Halsey section kicks in. While I don't have the radio only mono DJ LP, my understanding is that the mono LP matches the DJ 45. So there either needs to be a notation in the database that "mono DJ mix differs slightly from the stereo version" or "Stereo 45 and LP mix" should appear next to all entries.
The missing high hat is reported in the book "8 Arms To Hold You". |
|
![]() |
|
Todd Ireland ![]() Music Fan ![]() Joined: 16 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 23 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Your keen ears come through once again, Bill! I too agree that a notation should be made in the database in cases like this where one side of the DJ 45 is a different mix than the commercial 45 or LP mix.
A side question... I've never quite understood why the B-side of a DJ 45 will occasionally consist of a different song than the A-side. Do record labels do this in hopes that radio stations will play the B-side, or is the B-side designed to be nothing more than a throw-away track like on a typical commercial 45? |
|
![]() |
|
Bill Cahill ![]() Music Fan ![]() Joined: 27 June 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I think it depended on the label and time, they'd change their minds. Some might have been cheap and just printed the same thing as the stock and then just slapped promo labels on them. Or they figured it gave them an extra chance to have a hit by putting the B side on there.
Some might not even HAD a B side ready when they released it to radio so that would be a double A. Others wanted a mono/stereo, short/long, etc. There are probably other reasons for the variations. |
|
![]() |
|
eriejwg ![]() Music Fan ![]() ![]() Joined: 10 June 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 51 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
In this case, I think "Too Many People" has garnered some airplay over time. Perhaps, not at the time of release, but over time.
|
|
![]() |
|
Hykker ![]() Music Fan ![]() Joined: 30 October 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 15 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Were you referring to an alternate B side to "Uncle Albert"? My (stock) copy has "Too Many People" as the B side, just like Bill's promo copy. Off the top of my head, the only 2 singles I can think of that had different B sides on the promo 45 than the stock were "Crimson & Clover" and "That's Life" by David Lee Roth (Spanish version of TL on the B side of the promo, some other song on the stock). |
|
![]() |
|
Bill Cahill ![]() Music Fan ![]() Joined: 27 June 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
"Beatles Movie Medley" Promo had a different B side than the stock too.
Also the B side of the mono promo of "Uncle Albert" is a mono "Too Many People" which is a different mix than the stereo 45 and stereo LP. I understand that some of these promos "Too Many People" on the half Apple slice label, but mine is a full green Apple on both sides. Edited by Bill Cahill |
|
![]() |
|
Yah Shure ![]() Music Fan ![]() Joined: 11 December 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Up until roughly the mid-'60s, the majority of promo 45s had both an A- and B-side, rather than the double A-sides that became the norm in following years. Back when the small market stations were the first to break records, it made sense to include both sides if the record company wanted to see which side caught on with radio. They could then use that early airplay consensus in determining the song to push for the larger markets. We all know the stories of those originally-intended B-sides that went on to become #1 smashes, due largely to that early airplay consensus. That "let radio pick the hit side" thinking may have played a role in the A/B exceptions in the age of the double A-side promos, especially if the record company was unsure of which side might work best for new artists. But as time went by, and the role of the small market stations declined, that approach was more likely detrimental to a record's chances. Radio was interested in playing the hits, and the double-A-sided promos showed what song the record companies were committed to. Pressing plant srewups aside, double A-side promos guaranteed that the wrong side wasn't played by accident. Bill hit the nail on the head: there wasn't any set pattern across the labels. Just about every label would release an A/B promo 45 once in a while. And when they did, there never seemed to be any pattern as to designating an A-or B-side on those. Pressing plant variations further muddied the waters. The real head-scratchers were the ones that had no designations and non-consecutive matrix numbers, leaving all the guesswork to the music directors (and probably leading the record to the throwaway pile.) |
|
![]() |
|
jimct ![]() Music Fan ![]() Joined: 07 April 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
There were a couple of unique, underlying issues involving Top 40 radio and "Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey." AM radio wasn't the least bit happy when Paul decided that no singles would be released from his May 1970 solo debut LP, "McCartney" - in other words, the studio version of "Maybe I'm Amazed", especially given the fact that the Beatles' official breakup announcement didn't come out until just around this exact time. This was obviously the "lead current music story", and Top 40 stations were always totally into the latest news/trends. But at this point in time, Top 40 stations had never really been put in this position before - of not getting a single put out when they wanted/expected one. And although I do remember hearing both of my local Top 40's spiking in "Maybe I'm Amazed", neither one ever added it to their survey. Well, fast forward to June 5, 1971, and, in Top 40 Radio's mind, it's "here we go again!" McCartney's 2nd LP, "Ram", is issued, and McCartney again decides that no singles will be issued from this album, either! (Of course, in between these two albums, he put out the 45-only release "Another Day/Oh Woman Oh Why". "Another Day" would not appear on an LP until the "Wings' Greatest" album.) Well, all 3 of the major Top 40 stations in CT all took a different approach this time around, and I have all three local surveys right in front of me, to confirm this info, as I type this. First up was New Haven's 1340AM, WNHC, who as the city's #2-rated Top 40 was always "trying harder/taking more chances", who first listed "Too Many People/Uncle Albert, from Paul McCartney's Ram", as a pick hit, on their survey of June 4-10, 1971, which was only within a week or so of when the LP was first released. The pair then debuted at #31, and then moved up together to #23 the next week, before WNHC flipped the song order, now showing "Uncle Albert" first, when it moved up to #19 during the last week of June's WNHC survey, and off it went. At New Haven's #1 Top 40 station, WAVZ, they didn't list anything on their Top 60 survey until "Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey" debuted at the stunningly high (for them) position of #16, the week of July 11-17, 1971. It then moved up to #10, then to #2, and then spent the next 5 weeks at #1 on WAVZ, from 8/1 to 9/4, 1971. I remember going to my local record shop, who arranged their 45s (ask for by number!) using the WAVZ survey, on a pegboard wall, using a metal rack that held all 45 copies, and seeing #1 with an empty rack! I asked for #1, and they told me it wasn't a single, and was only on his "Ram" album. Well, I couldn't afford the $4.98, and left unhappy. Finally, Hartford's WDRC handled "Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey" unlike any other song I have ever seen, and I own almost every WDRC weekly survey from 1961 to 1978! Starting the week of June 25, 1971, they invented a special "LP Cut" category, just for "Uncle Albert". WDRC continued this exact setup, for a total of 8 weeks, straight through to the week of 8/13/71. FINALLY relenting to all the radio/consumer pressure to stop all this "no McCartney 45's released" business, and checking my latest "Billboard Top Pop Singles 1955-2006" book, Apple, at long last, did issue a single for "Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey", b/w "Too Many People", the week of 8/14/71. WDRC immediately debuted the song at #12, the week of 8/20/71. Not counting its 8 WDRC "LP Cut" weeks, its WDRC Top 30 chart run was just FIVE weeks (#12-#5-#2-#2-#4-OFF), the shortest EVER for a #2 hit at the station, further confirming the fact that the eventual 45 release was ALMOST too late for "Uncle Albert" in CT! It then hit #1 Billboard on 9/4/71, in just IT'S 4th week on the Hot 100, and for just one week, leading me to believe that CT Top 40 radio was not alone in the way they handled "Uncle Albert". In my opinion, the song was already at its top CT peak, if not even starting it's chart decline, by the time the 45 was finally released. McCartney, still not thrilled with the 45 coming out, decided this would be the ONLY single issued from "Ram". This may explain the rare "Whole Apple on both sides" appearing for the "Too Many People" side. Apple, also frustrated with McCartney's position, also knew how far along the "Uncle Albert" Top 40 story/saga already was, and I believe half hoped that they could turn their "one 45 from 'Ram'" into a double-sided hit. I did hear it on WNHC, but not ever on either WAVZ or WDRC. Moral of the story: can you believe, given today's Top 40 "no-singles" culture, what a HUGE deal it was for a Top 40 station to play/consider playing a song that wasn't put out as a 45? I wonder if Gary Mack, and others in the biz at the time, have any similar recollections?
Edited by jimct |
|
![]() |
|
sriv94 ![]() Music Fan ![]() Joined: 16 September 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
There is one parallel I can think of--Elton John's "Pinball Wizard" was never released as a 45 for charting purposes (although I do believe a reissue 45 was eventually created), but WLS in Chicago played the death out of it (I think WABC in New York also added the track for awhile). While WLS always listed "Pinball Wizard" on its weekly survey as "not available as a 45" and thus never assigned a chart position to it, in its Big 89 for 1975 it finished ranked #2 (trailing only "Love Will Keep Us Together"). How hot was Elton John that year? Of the year end top-10 on WLS, he had four (five if you count "Bad Blood"). The Captain & Tennille, Olivia Newton-John, Barry Manilow, Queen and the Doobie Brothers (and Neil Sedaka if you don't count "Bad Blood") had the other tunes.
Edited by sriv94 |
|
Doug
--------------- All of the good signatures have been taken. |
|
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page 123> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |