Pink Floyd '1965' double 7" Black Friday 2015

[Hadrian]

Great stuff, thanks for that

I remember reading this back in May, but I forgot this is the actual song he was referring to.

Back in May during that Mason & Waters memorial plaque reveal in London "Walk With Me Sydney" was probably on Water's mind because 1965 release was in the pipeline and they were listening to the tapes, but we the public knew nothing about it yet.

[Wolfpack]

Wow! During each replay, this mini album sounds better to me!
Also on headphones, I think the recording sounds surprising.

I think 'Arnold Layne', 'Take Thy Stethoscope and Walk' and even some 'Interstellar Overdrive' are historically clearly connected with sounds that can be heard on 'Pink Floyd 1965'.
The '1965' release remembers me of how awkwardly surprised I was by hearing the garage rock style of 'Arnold Layne' (1967) after hearing the more psychedelic albums 'The Piper at the Gates of Dawn' (1967) and 'A Saucerful of Secrets' (1968).

'Arnold Layne' and it's B-side 'Candy and a Currant Bun' are basically garage rock with a more prominent psychedelic layer than on 'Pink Floyd 1965'.
For example, I think Wright's dreamy keyboard instrumental in 'Butterfly' is an embryo of his keyboard instrumental in 'Arnold Layne'.
'Remember Me' has an instrumental section that sounds to me like an embryo of the instrumental section of 'Take Thy Stethoscope and Walk'.

For a low-budget demo recording, I think the sound quality is remarkably professional.
I think the recording and its commercial value mostly suffer from the master tapes apparently being lost.
I guess most of the restoring went into having to use inferior copies of lost masters.

The book 'Barrett' (2011) contains information on this recording project, done in a "West Hampstead recording studio".
In a January/February 1965 letter, quoted on page 153, Barrett writes:

I'll tell you everything that happened at the recording. We took all the gear into the studio which was lit by horrid white lights, and covered with wires and microphones. Rog [Waters] had his amp behind a screen and Nicky [Mason] was also screened off, and after a little bit of chat we tested everything for balance, and then recorded five numbers more or less straight off; but only the guitars and drums. We're going to add all the singing and piano etc. next Wednesday. The tracks sound terrific so far, especially 'King Bee'.

About the session "next Wednesday", Barrett continues:

When I sing I have to stand in the middle of the studio with earphones on, and everyone else watches from the other room, and I can't see them at all but they can all see me. Also I can only just hear what I'm singing

Note that Barrett mentions recording "five numbers more or less straight off".
If he's not miscounting, then what about the sixth?

'Pink Floyd 1965' is growing on me.
I just hope this release won't turn out to have negative surprises like duration edits being made.
Otherwise, I give it 5 stars out of 5!

[Hadrian]

If he's not miscounting, then what about the sixth?

Over there on SF forum someone noticed that certain songs sound like an acetate, while others sound like a tape source material. It is possible that 1965 is compiled from more than one recording session.

[Wolfpack]

Over there on SF forum someone noticed that certain songs sound like an acetate, while others sound like a tape source material. It is possible that 1965 is compiled from more than one recording session.

If 'Pink Floyd 1965' contains all studio recordings of 1965 and contains what Barrett describes in his letter,
then I guess "five numbers more or less straight" might be a matter of interpretation/interpunction.

This is the misunderstanding I see, as a foreigner, trying to interpret Barrett's information:
- Five original numbers, and the sixth is a cover.
- Five numbers almost without effort, unlike the sixth.
- More or less than five numbers, maybe four or six, he isn't sure.
- Five numbers, sixth was already done.
- Five numbers, and a sixth during next session or on another date.
What to choose???

Maybe the differences of tape source and acetate source have more to do with the way copies of the masters were made?

What's the purpose of an acetate?
Why go to a studio to make some acetate that wears out quickly and sounds crude?
Maybe the acetate was intended as a temporary reference medium before the final selection was done?

If 'Pink Floyd 1965' would be from entirely different sessions,
I guess there would be more difference in sound than tape hiss or acetate distortion?

[Salmonberry Compendia]

Looking at this wikipedia page...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_u ... Pink_Floyd
...it appears that "the 5 songs" are King Bee, Lucy Leave, Butterfly, Remember Me, Double O Bo.
Then it says Walk With Me Sydney was believed not to have been recorded but then they found it fairly recently. So perhaps that one was recorded at a different session to the other 5?

[flippikat]

Looking at this wikipedia page...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_u ... Pink_Floyd
...it appears that "the 5 songs" are King Bee, Lucy Leave, Butterfly, Remember Me, Double O Bo.
Then it says Walk With Me Sydney was believed not to have been recorded but then they found it fairly recently. So perhaps that one was recorded at a different session to the other 5?

I think that's a fair assumption to make, given that Juliette sings Walk With Me Sydney. Wasn't she only a member in 1964-early 1965?

[flippikat]

This really does have me wondering what an "Early Days" set could include.

I've heard that most of the Piper session tapes are lost, apart from Matilda Mother, so it's probably likely there'll just be the odd reference mix or two. The Arnold Layne session tape was found recently, so that's handy.

I really think the big unknown is the mysterious late-1967 tapes - Post 'Piper' rehearsals, sessions for the late 1967 single that ended up being Apples & Oranges b/w Paintbox (but could just as easily have been Scream The Last Scream b/w Vegetable Man).

Then there's 1968 - I'd include 1968 sessions in the mix, as Syd made contributions to the 'Saucerful' album, and they still fit the psychedelic feel. Plus I think more decent source material (especially session tapes) may exist from those sessions than the 'Piper' sessions. Heck, you could even chuck in some of 'The Committee' soundtrack that was recorded in 1968, as it includes variations on the title track to 'Saucerful' that are quite nice.

[brell]

pinkfloyd
1965
THEIR FIRST RECORDINGS

lucy leave
double o bo
remember me
walk with me sydney
butterfly
i'm a king bee

But three of those were recorded in December 1964:
Lucy Leave
Double O Boo
Butterfly

Is that ridiculous E-Bay price the final price on this?

[moom]

Update: the band finally speaks about this via its official Facebook page, of all places...

"If you weren't one of the lucky ones to come across one of these in your local record store (the only place they were available from), don't worry, Pink Floyd hope to make them available in some physical form towards the end of next year".

Hopefully both CD and vinyl

As for Facebook, well, it's now like a the place to be. I've heard of crime stories been posted on FB before the police even knew about them, in Estonia.

[Jimi Dean Barrett]

Argh! That'll teach me to not have a turntable! Although I've read elsewhere on another forum the rumour of a box set of early stuff, so I'll wait until then.
Or wait until someone uploads something to You Tube so I can have a listen.

[brell]

I think 'Arnold Layne', 'Take Thy Stethoscope and Walk' and even some 'Interstellar Overdrive' are historically clearly connected with sounds that can be heard on 'Pink Floyd 1965'.
The '1965' release remembers me of how awkwardly surprised I was by hearing the garage rock style of 'Arnold Layne' (1967) after hearing the more psychedelic albums 'The Piper at the Gates of Dawn' (1967) and 'A Saucerful of Secrets' (1968).

'Arnold Layne' and it's B-side 'Candy and a Currant Bun' are basically garage rock with a more prominent psychedelic layer than on 'Pink Floyd 1965'.
For example, I think Wright's dreamy keyboard instrumental in 'Butterfly' is an embryo of his keyboard instrumental in 'Arnold Layne'.
'Remember Me' has an instrumental section that sounds to me like an embryo of the instrumental section of 'Take Thy Stethoscope and Walk'.

Maybe this "garage" sound is an echo from the time they rehearsed in Mike Leonard's apartment in 1964 (ML was actually a part of the group in the summer '64, before Klose and Barrett, and they called themselves "Leonard's Lodgers" for a short period)

[Hadrian]

The sessions have to be from 1965. Otherwise, the release would've missed the boat on copyright extension.

[brell]

Well, according to Mason's "Inside Out", those three songs I mentioned were recorded in December 1994. The band's name at that time was Tea Set and both Klose and Barrett had joined it in the autumn.

But I guess Pink Floyd Music has the copyright to everything recorded by the Tea Set?

[Hadrian]

My understanding is that Klose left the group circa July 1965, and that (from then on, stable) quartet comprising of Syd, Roger, Rick and Nick reconvened that autumn, following a summer break. Background info regarding Pink Floyd's introduction into the The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame (early 1996) stated that their public debut was on October 12, 1965 - a date when Pink Floyd gave its very first concert, at the Countdown Club in London. This - for me at least - is the date which marks the true beginning or actual birth of Pink Floyd. I have nothing against Bob Klose, but I do not think of the group that he was in as Pink Floyd yet. As long as he was around they were stuck with playing r'n'b cover gigs, and he had to leave for Syd to spread his wings.

Tracks on this release were obviously recorded before October 12, 1965 (anywhere from January to July); nevertheless the record came out as an official Pink Floyd product, even despite the fact that it is very likely they were not calling themselves Pink Floyd at that time either. It is a retrofit for sure, which now goes against my perception in the first paragraph above. I am not sure what the implications are for the official canon.

Mason relies on memory when he states December 1964, but I have no doubt that Pink Floyd's copyright lawyers did a thorough forensic job on it all. My bet is January 1965 at the earliest. By the way, Mason in numerous interviews keeps referring to "Take Up Thy Stethoscope and Walk" as a song titled "Doctor, Doctor", so I advise caution.

[sashwap]

Background info regarding Pink Floyd's introduction into the The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame (early 1996) stated that their public debut was on October 12, 1965 - a date when Pink Floyd gave its very first concert, at the Countdown Club in London. This - for me at least - is the date which marks the true beginning or actual birth of Pink Floyd.

By the way, Mason in numerous interviews keeps referring to "Take Up Thy Stethoscope and Walk" as a song titled "Doctor, Doctor", so I advise caution.

bands often refer to their own songs by working titles, shorthand, etc. they're not all overly pedantic geeks like most of us.

after putting in countless hours writing and recording a track, titling the dang thing is often an afterthought.

also, i don't think the hall of fame criteria really applies. obviously the band had to have been "born" before playing its first public gig. these demos are indisputably an important document of that birth, just as going through several previous names and lineups was part of that birth as well.