Hi all,
Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version.
FYI
Thousands of young Australian men served in Vietnam, many of them teenage conscripts. The Aussie Govt held a lottery each year to pick out birth dates of * unfortunate ones *. At age 19, I missed being in that draft by exacctly one day.
However, I had a cousin a few year older than me who volunteered in the mid 60s. He came back one year later, different person, hardly spoke.
...... Phil
Hi all,
Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version.
FYI
Thousands of young Australian men served in Vietnam, many of them teenage conscripts. The Aussie Govt held a lottery each year to pick out birth dates of * unfortunate ones *. At age 19, I missed being in that draft by exacctly one day.
However, I had a cousin a few year older than me who volunteered in the mid 60s. He came back one year later, different person, hardly spoke.
...... Phil_____
Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Excellent indeed!
Nice to see John playing a Rick.....nice twang.
Hi all,
Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version.
palli...@gmail.com <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version.
No monitors, EV dynamic on vocals with a chamber reverb. Seems odd.
--scott
palli...@gmail.com <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:No monitors and EV dynamics are not so odd for that time period. I'm not
Hi all,
Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version.
No monitors, EV dynamic on vocals with a chamber reverb. Seems odd.
--scott
sure what you mean by a "chamber reverb"...it sounds like a typical
pedal reverb of that era to me.
On Thu, 6 Oct 2022 12:50:07 -0400, Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com>Yes, I do know about chamber reverb.
wrote:
palli...@gmail.com <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:No monitors and EV dynamics are not so odd for that time period. I'm not
Hi all,
Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version.
No monitors, EV dynamic on vocals with a chamber reverb. Seems odd.
--scott
sure what you mean by a "chamber reverb"...it sounds like a typical
pedal reverb of that era to me.
Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb. Basically it was an asymmetrically shaped room, tiled on its surfaces, and containing a
couple of speakers and microphones.
d
Yes, I do know about chamber reverb.
However:
1) I never saw any television studio had one in that time period (still typically don't).
2) The Ed Sullivan show would have been very unlikely to have one;
3) If a chamber reverb was used, it would have some effect on the instruments, and there is none that I could hear.
4) That is what one would expect if a pedal reverb
On Thu, 6 Oct 2022 12:50:07 -0400, Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com>
wrote:
palli...@gmail.com <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:No monitors and EV dynamics are not so odd for that time period. I'm not
Hi all,
Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version.
No monitors, EV dynamic on vocals with a chamber reverb. Seems odd.
--scott
sure what you mean by a "chamber reverb"...it sounds like a typical
pedal reverb of that era to me.
Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb. Basically it was an asymmetrically shaped room, tiled on its surfaces, and containing a
couple of speakers and microphones.
d
Neil wrote:
===========
Yes, I do know about chamber reverb.
However:
1) I never saw any television studio had one in that time period (still
typically don't).
2) The Ed Sullivan show would have been very unlikely to have one;
3) If a chamber reverb was used, it would have some effect on the
instruments, and there is none that I could hear.
4) That is what one would expect if a pedal reverb
** Wot is a "pedal reverb" doing in 1969 ??
The time warp?
Yes, I do know about chamber reverb.
However:
1) I never saw any television studio had one in that time period (still
typically don't).
2) The Ed Sullivan show would have been very unlikely to have one;
3) If a chamber reverb was used, it would have some effect on the
instruments, and there is none that I could hear.
4) That is what one would expect if a pedal reverb
** Wot is a "pedal reverb" doing in 1969 ??
The time warp?
It's doing what you hear in the Ed Sullivan video.
Neil wrote:
===========
It's doing what you hear in the Ed Sullivan video.
Yes, I do know about chamber reverb.
However:
1) I never saw any television studio had one in that time period (still >>>> typically don't).
2) The Ed Sullivan show would have been very unlikely to have one;
3) If a chamber reverb was used, it would have some effect on the
instruments, and there is none that I could hear.
4) That is what one would expect if a pedal reverb
** Wot is a "pedal reverb" doing in 1969 ??
The time warp?
** You for real ??
Wot 'pedal reverbs' were around in 1969 ?
.... Phil
It's doing what you hear in the Ed Sullivan video.
Yes, I do know about chamber reverb.
However:
1) I never saw any television studio had one in that time period (still >>>> typically don't).
2) The Ed Sullivan show would have been very unlikely to have one;
3) If a chamber reverb was used, it would have some effect on the
instruments, and there is none that I could hear.
4) That is what one would expect if a pedal reverb
** Wot is a "pedal reverb" doing in 1969 ??
The time warp?
** You for real ??
Wot 'pedal reverbs' were around in 1969 ?
Please do your own f****g homework and stop suggesting that the ones I
have lying around never existed.
Neil wrote:
===========
Please do your own f****g homework and stop suggesting that the ones IIt's doing what you hear in the Ed Sullivan video.
Yes, I do know about chamber reverb.
However:
1) I never saw any television studio had one in that time period (still >>>>>> typically don't).
2) The Ed Sullivan show would have been very unlikely to have one; >>>>>> 3) If a chamber reverb was used, it would have some effect on the
instruments, and there is none that I could hear.
4) That is what one would expect if a pedal reverb
** Wot is a "pedal reverb" doing in 1969 ??
The time warp?
** You for real ??
Wot 'pedal reverbs' were around in 1969 ?
have lying around never existed.
** ROTFL !!!!!!
FYI pal : the first reverb pedal was released by Boss in 1987.
Rack mount units like the Yamaha R1000 arrived around 1983/4.
In 1969, the choice was between chambers, plates and *springs*.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJLuNaPVJLs
..... Phil
However:
1) I never saw any television studio had one in that time period (still >typically don't).
2) The Ed Sullivan show would have been very unlikely to have one;
3) If a chamber reverb was used, it would have some effect on the >instruments, and there is none that I could hear.
4) That is what one would expect if a pedal reverb was on the output of
an EV cardioid dynamic mic because the instruments would have been too >off-axis to be picked up at the input level for close-up voice.
Neil wrote:
===========
Please do your own f****g homework and stop suggesting that the ones IIt's doing what you hear in the Ed Sullivan video.
Yes, I do know about chamber reverb.
However:
1) I never saw any television studio had one in that time period (still >>>>>> typically don't).
2) The Ed Sullivan show would have been very unlikely to have one; >>>>>> 3) If a chamber reverb was used, it would have some effect on the
instruments, and there is none that I could hear.
4) That is what one would expect if a pedal reverb
** Wot is a "pedal reverb" doing in 1969 ??
The time warp?
** You for real ??
Wot 'pedal reverbs' were around in 1969 ?
have lying around never existed.
** ROTFL !!!!!!
FYI pal : the first reverb pedal was released by Boss in 1987.
Rack mount units like the Yamaha R1000 arrived around 1983/4.
In 1969, the choice was between chambers, plates and *springs*.
In article <ths8a5$7dgh$1@dont-email.me>, Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
Yes, I do know about chamber reverb.
However:
1) I never saw any television studio had one in that time period (still
typically don't).
2) The Ed Sullivan show would have been very unlikely to have one;
These things are both true and THAT is what is interesting.
3) If a chamber reverb was used, it would have some effect on the
instruments, and there is none that I could hear.
Depends on how much leakage there is into the vocal track. Clearly there isn't that much, which is also interesting for exactly the same reason.
4) That is what one would expect if a pedal reverb was on the output of
an EV cardioid dynamic mic because the instruments would have been too
off-axis to be picked up at the input level for close-up voice.
Pedal reverb?
--scott
"Pedal reverb" is a general term for the various kinds of reverb used
back then. All of them were switched on/off via a pedal. Perhaps the
most popular reverb was the EchoPlex, introduced in 1959 and used by all
of us by the mid '60s.
** You for real ??Please do your own f****g homework and stop suggesting that the ones I
Wot 'pedal reverbs' were around in 1969 ?
have lying around never existed.
** ROTFL !!!!!!
FYI pal : the first reverb pedal was released by Boss in 1987.
Rack mount units like the Yamaha R1000 arrived around 1983/4.
In 1969, the choice was between chambers, plates and *springs*.
Two thoughts for you, Phil.
1) Since all options were turned on and off with a pedal switch "reverb pedal" was a generic reference.
2) Perhaps you should search on the term EchoPlex,
Your off-topic attempts to avoid the subject YOU started just to be
"right" are pretty pathetic.
Those of us who worked through that era in
TV stations, recording studios, etc. can recall it.
Neil wrote:
========
Two thoughts for you, Phil.
** You for real ??Please do your own f****g homework and stop suggesting that the ones I >>>> have lying around never existed.
Wot 'pedal reverbs' were around in 1969 ?
** ROTFL !!!!!!
FYI pal : the first reverb pedal was released by Boss in 1987.
Rack mount units like the Yamaha R1000 arrived around 1983/4.
In 1969, the choice was between chambers, plates and *springs*.
** Shame you have none to give away.
1) Since all options were turned on and off with a pedal switch "reverb
pedal" was a generic reference.
** Giant HUH ??
Two thoughts for you, Phil.
** You for real ??Please do your own f****g homework and stop suggesting that the ones I >>>> have lying around never existed.
Wot 'pedal reverbs' were around in 1969 ?
** ROTFL !!!!!!
FYI pal : the first reverb pedal was released by Boss in 1987.
Rack mount units like the Yamaha R1000 arrived around 1983/4.
In 1969, the choice was between chambers, plates and *springs*.
** Shame you have none to give away.
1) Since all options were turned on and off with a pedal switch "reverb
pedal" was a generic reference.
** Giant HUH ??
Your "Giant HUH"
is merely a reflection of the fact that you were not a
working musician in that era. So you have NO IDEA how we referred to
things.
Neil is a Troll wrote:
=================
Your "Giant HUH"Two thoughts for you, Phil.
** You for real ??Please do your own f****g homework and stop suggesting that the ones I >>>>>> have lying around never existed.
Wot 'pedal reverbs' were around in 1969 ?
** ROTFL !!!!!!
FYI pal : the first reverb pedal was released by Boss in 1987.
Rack mount units like the Yamaha R1000 arrived around 1983/4.
In 1969, the choice was between chambers, plates and *springs*.
** Shame you have none to give away.
1) Since all options were turned on and off with a pedal switch "reverb >>>> pedal" was a generic reference.
** Giant HUH ??
** Was because you posted complete bullshit.
is merely a reflection of the fact that you were not a
working musician in that era. So you have NO IDEA how we referred to
things.
** There were '"wha (or wha wha )pedals" and "fuzz boxes", sometimes both in one unit.
Your claims are pure fiction.
You are both a nut case and a liar.
FOAD
Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
"Pedal reverb" is a general term for the various kinds of reverb used
back then. All of them were switched on/off via a pedal. Perhaps the
most popular reverb was the EchoPlex, introduced in 1959 and used by all
of us by the mid '60s.
Oh, you mean instrument reverbs? No... I don't think you'll find any of those things would be very natural on vocals.
--scott
palli...@gmail.com <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Creedence Clearwater Revival during the Vietnam era.
Live on the Ed Sullivan show, of all places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RUGJAWIslE
Raw and rough, so doubtless a live ( excellent) version.
No monitors, EV dynamic on vocals with a chamber reverb. Seems odd.
--scott
Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb.
I wasn't referring to instrument reverbs, as in those built into guitar
amps. The 1960s EchoPlex couldn't be more unlike any of the other kinds
of reverb mentioned since they were tube units based on analog tape
loops. It was, by far, the most popular reverb unit we professionals used.
As for being "natural on vocals", even echo chambers had artifacts that >changed what would otherwise be the natural sound of a performance. How
the live room and the chamber was mic'd, created different outcomes.
Don Pearce wrote:
Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb.
Wasn't it used long before? The first EMT was mid 1960s.
And there are all sort of stories from the Nashville crowd about
chambers.
Indeed. I'm not sure if I should trust this "television". It being
so new and all.
Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb.
Wasn't it used long before? The first EMT was mid 1960s.
The EMT sound changed a bit over the years as fashion changed and people started setting them up tighter and tighter. And then predelay came along!
By the time I first used an EMT in the seventies people were cranking the things until the clips popped in order to get that shimmery thing.
--scott
Wasn't it used long before? The first EMT was mid 1960s.
** The original EMT140 was released in '57, it was mono while a "stereo" model came along in '61.
Made in Germany.
Apple Studios bought 4 of them.
Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
I wasn't referring to instrument reverbs, as in those built into guitar
amps. The 1960s EchoPlex couldn't be more unlike any of the other kinds
of reverb mentioned since they were tube units based on analog tape
loops. It was, by far, the most popular reverb unit we professionals used.
The Echoplex isn't really a reverb unit but an echo box. Instrument reverbs like the Echoplex and all the various spring reverbs were often used for PA effects but you would not use something like that on studio vocals. You might find them used by the musician himself in the studio on instruments, though.
As for being "natural on vocals", even echo chambers had artifacts that
changed what would otherwise be the natural sound of a performance. How
the live room and the chamber was mic'd, created different outcomes.
Yes, absolutely, which is what I pointed out in the original recording. That's either a chamber or a very dulled-down plate. You would not expect
to see such things in a TV studio. This therefore would indicate that was not a live recording per se, although it may have been tracked specifically for the show (the way Lawrence Welk tended to work).
--scott
Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
I wasn't referring to instrument reverbs, as in those built into guitar >amps. The 1960s EchoPlex couldn't be more unlike any of the other kindsYes, absolutely, which is what I pointed out in the original recording. That's either a chamber or a very dulled-down plate. You would not expect
of reverb mentioned since they were tube units based on analog tape
loops. It was, by far, the most popular reverb unit we professionals used. The Echoplex isn't really a reverb unit but an echo box. Instrument reverbs like the Echoplex and all the various spring reverbs were often used for PA effects but you would not use something like that on studio vocals. You might find them used by the musician himself in the studio on instruments, though.
As for being "natural on vocals", even echo chambers had artifacts that >changed what would otherwise be the natural sound of a performance. How >the live room and the chamber was mic'd, created different outcomes.
to see such things in a TV studio. This therefore would indicate that was not a live recording per se, although it may have been tracked specifically for the show (the way Lawrence Welk tended to work).
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 5:49:03 PM UTC-7, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Neil <ne...@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
I wasn't referring to instrument reverbs, as in those built into guitar >amps. The 1960s EchoPlex couldn't be more unlike any of the other kinds >of reverb mentioned since they were tube units based on analog tape >loops. It was, by far, the most popular reverb unit we professionals used.The Echoplex isn't really a reverb unit but an echo box. Instrument reverbs
like the Echoplex and all the various spring reverbs were often used for PA
effects but you would not use something like that on studio vocals. You might find them used by the musician himself in the studio on instruments, though.
As for being "natural on vocals", even echo chambers had artifacts that >changed what would otherwise be the natural sound of a performance. How >the live room and the chamber was mic'd, created different outcomes.Yes, absolutely, which is what I pointed out in the original recording. That's either a chamber or a very dulled-down plate. You would not expect to see such things in a TV studio. This therefore would indicate that was not a live recording per se, although it may have been tracked specifically
for the show (the way Lawrence Welk tended to work).
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
B.T.W. - ABC-TV[somehow this got posted before finished. Here's the rest.]
I was told=
that Welk didn't like reverb. On other shows I'd been using the EMT 140 p=
late on vocals, strings, etc. I continued that practice and Mr. Welk never=
said a word.
Don Pearce wrote:
Chamber reverb was an alternative to plate reverb.Wasn't it used long before? The first EMT was mid 1960s.
And there are all sort of stories from the Nashville crowd about
chambers.
--
Les Cargill
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 115:49:57 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,334,175 |