Re: (TV) The Lost Album / Thoughts on "lost" albums

["Philip P. Obbard" <pobbard@yahoo.com>]

--- Cliff McLenehan <klif@volny.cz> wrote:
> Polydor didn't like what they heard and asked Tom to start again. 

So I guess they did NOT get as far as a final tracklisting, running order, LP
title, etc. Makes sense, judging from the material that's been released.

It occurs to me that the VAST majority of so-called "lost" albums aren't lost,
but are actually "never found". I.e., the album wasn't even finished when it
was abandoned, and therefore isn't "lost" so much as it never existed - or was
"never found" by the artist/band.

A lot of albums we call "lost" more accurately fall into this "never found"
category, like Verlaine's '86 sessions, the Beach Boys' SMILE, Public Image's
COMMERCIAL ZONE, the VU's 1969 recordings, or the Beatles GET BACK. In each of
those cases, the recording wasn't complete, the production wasn't complete,
etc. On the other hand, records like Eno's MY SQUELCHY LIFE, Badfinger's HEAD
FIRST, or Prince's BLACK ALBUM really *are* (or were) "lost" - they were mixed,
finalized, etc., only to be rejected, cancelled, whatever, before widespread
release. And some don't fall neatly into either category, like Big Star's 3RD -
the material was all recorded, and the production was done (as far as I know),
but there was no track listing, no running order, etc. Maybe "abandoned" is
better than "never found" to handle all of these non-"lost" cases?

--Philip


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
--------------
To post: Mail tv@obbard.com
To unsubscribe: Mail majordomo@obbard.com with message "unsubscribe tv"