Interesting article about long lost Hank Williams recordings
Posted by Jack Harden on January 31, 2015, 5:33 pm
Reading this article about a guy finding some old Hank Williams radio transcripts made me think of the collectors out there that have rare Jim Reeves recordings and would rather hoard them for bragging rights instead of share them with the fans. Fortunatley the guy who found the Hank recordings did the right thing, as it says in the article: Gimarc could have kept the priceless records for himself or sold them to another collector, but he is foremost a music fan and couldn't bear to have these radio shows forced back into obscurity.
"When a collector buys something like this, he stashes it in his collection so that he can brag about owning it," he said. "But then no one else gets to hear it. I wanted to get the recordings out there so that anybody who's interested can hear them."
Applause for George Gimarc, who decided to share these rare transcription disks with Hank Williams fans. Too bad more Reeves fans don't feel the same way. Instead they post 7-second sound samples to tantalize fans and then hoard the remaining song. Or so they think... Stay tuned...
The restoration engineer got lucky in this case because the old transcription disks of Hank's that this guy handled were not afflicted with a lot of the problems that can otherwise beset old recordings, especially ones that have been mishandled.
It is such a paradox that often the rarest recordings end up in the hands of people who claim to treasure them, but then play them to death, mindlessly degrading them further with each playing!
A couple of years ago I wrote an account of how VoiceMasters has handled old recordings, and posted before and after samples of some of Jim's songs, to illustrate the clean-up process.
The one major difference between the label releasing the Hank recordings and us is that they aren't doing any overdubs. The challenges increase exponentially when you're trying to fit new music with the old. Trust me on that one.
I definitely should update the essay I wrote regarding people who have helped me along the way in issuing new releases not only on Jim, but also Rosemary Clooney, Bing Crosby and now Elvis Presley. There are more to come.
Some new people have also come on board to help with these projects.
To read about the Reeves restoration. click the link underneath this post.
But to read the background behind the recent "Rosemary Clooney: Rare & Unreleased," which contains a lot of new songs fans have never heard her sing before (ALL of which are derivative of radio performances but are mostly of studio quality), go here: http://www.rosemaryclooneymusic.blogspot.com/
Incidentally, the people referenced in my essay on the Rosemary CD also helped on "JIM REEVES & FRIENDS LIVE FROM NASHVILLE." It contains 23 performances by Jim, only ONE of which had ever been released before. That's 22 NEW VOCALS by Mr. Reeves, along with songs by other Grand Ole Opry stars whom Jim hosted. Richard Moore cleaned up the audio on those so the sound is incredible.
Michael Graves talks bit about the restoration, etc., during the Grammy award acceptance speech. What an achievement for traditional country music!
Re: Hank wins Grammy!
Posted by Larry Jordan on February 10, 2015, 11:44 am, in reply to "Hank wins Grammy! "
Pardon me if I am completely UNDERwhelmed. This is truly ludicrous and a reflection of how Hank Williams has achieved sainted status in the lexicon of country music. His name is gold and even though he was an incredibly talented songwriter and live performer, I dare say Jim Reeves had a far more worldwide impact on the idiom than Williams. Yet, like Patsy, Hank continues to enjoy exalted status.
Acting like restoring transcriptions is something unique in the music industry is downright stupid. This is routinely done by labels in addition to VoiceMasters.
The engineer who pompously describes his approach to dealing with old transcription disks as if it's rocket science has a very uninformed captive audience amidst the reporters asking questions. My God. They cover music and they don't know this stuff is common?
I had to laugh when the guy said he will sometimes work on a track up to "eight hours." Wow! He must be exhausted.
Here's a news bulletin: VoiceMasters has unearthed and released scores of rarities on Jim Reeves over the past 12 years and our team not only restores old audio (ETs, acetates, tapes, vinyl) to perfection, but goes one giant leap beyond that by OVERDUBBING a lot of our music.
We aren't alone. Peruse Amazon and you'll be amazed at the list of artists whose long-forgotten catalogs are being brought back for fans to enjoy, by a plethora of indie labels. This includes one company that has released some new material on Patti Page. The list goes on and on.
So why does this peculiar little release of Hank's deserve a Grammy? When we tried to find a copy last week we were told it was out of print.
The label that released it is based in LA, the producer has worked for big labels and obviously has connections within the industry, and we know that heirs to Williams -- including one viperous woman and friend of a former unscrupulous eBay seller who plundered the Reeves estate -- has powerful connections in Nashville, thanks to her shark of a husband who's a lawyer.
Frankly, the whole thing reeks of politics. It really cheapens the realm of the coin to treat that Hank release as anything spectacular enough to warrant a Grammy, when I could give you a list a mile long of other deserving releases that I have purchased from other labels that have done very impressive work perpetuating the memories of great artists.
I bet those of us who own indie labels are all a bit stunned by this ridiculous accolade, and Colin Escott's involvement in the project only heightens the disdain, because he too is a big award winner but sadly, a sloppy historian, who has made MANY errors in his writing about Jim Reeves. It wouldn't surprise me if Colin probably has a beer now and then with Mike Streissguth. They are cut from the same cloth, though Colin is a far better writer (but not necessarily a better researcher).
Just my humble opinion. I'm frankly sick of Jim Reeves getting overlooked all the time but even Mary used to grouse about that.
Re: Hank wins Grammy!
Posted by Manendra Pedris on February 10, 2015, 1:40 pm, in reply to "Re: Hank wins Grammy! "
I totally agree with you, Larry, that many companies, yours included, go unrecognized for the work that they do. Even more ridiculous is the manner in which such pioneering spirits as Jim Reeves (spearheading the Nashville Sound) are totally forgotten.
However, it is precisely because of this general negligence of traditional country music within the music industry today, that I find this Grammy win for Hank a big deal.
If you strip away the politics and the money involved, what the Grammy win achieves is exposure of traditional country music to the general population, which otherwise would live in total ignorance of the existence of this type of music. This award might at least make the young folks question, "Who was this Hank Williams?" And that question might hopefully lead to further exploration of Hank and, by extension, the genre, as well as other artists who contributed to it.
This situation would be akin to the attention that Robert Johnson received as a result of Eric Clapton releasing an album of Robert Johnson's songs. The album was called "Me and Mr. Johnson." I remember reading in many forums how people were having conversations about Robert Johnson and many of them only heard of RJ because of EC's album. After listening to this album, they wanted the original as well and many folks went on to buy the original RJ CDs.
If Hank's Grammy win garners similar attention towards traditional country music in general, then, despite my grievances about Jim being neglected, I'd consider the event a triumph. And, who knows, this attention might just bring young explorers of the genre face to face with Jim Reeves.
Re: Hank wins Grammy!
Posted by Larry Jordan on February 10, 2015, 6:37 pm, in reply to "Re: Hank wins Grammy! "
You don't think Hank Williams has already received enough publicity?
I didn't put it in my book but I originally had quite a lot of information assembled on Hank, based on various anecdotes that well informed people told me, who knew the man personally. He was unquestionably a very talented man, especially when you consider he was almost illiterate. He suffered from some terrible health problems and was badly mistreated by a quack doctor. I have the highest respect for Hank Williams.
However, it is also true that he didn't completely write ALL of his songs, and he had a lot of help along the way. He got credit for a lot of stuff that he was only marginally responsible for.
But that's the way it is with a lot of legends. Every time something comes out on Hank some people wet their pants. It's treated like somebody discovered Noah's Ark.
The hyperbole surrounding him is ridiculous. He had talent; he died too young. He was a trend setter. I give him all that. But his singing was many times grating and nasal, he was incredibly unprofessional in the way he conducted his career and he did not walk on water. Though some of his fans think he did.
I see this Grammy as just another in a series of accolades that have accrued to his legend that are over the top.
Re: Hank wins Grammy!
Posted by Manendra Pedris on February 10, 2015, 9:10 pm, in reply to "Re: Hank wins Grammy! "
LOL!
Hank walking on water?? That would have been in a treat! :-)
As I've stated in my previous posts, I regard this Grammy win as a victory for traditional country music as a genre, more so than for Hank Williams as an individual. I believe such a victory and such exposure is absolutely essential in this age of country music gone to hell.
I was watching the Grammy performances and found it hard to distinguish between the performances of AC/DC and Miranda Lambert! Now, more than ever, we need to expose the young minds to old music so they can get to know the stuff that existed and perhaps begin prefer what used to be to what they are being indoctrinated with by the radio.
Re: Hank wins Grammy!
Posted by Dermot Devitt on February 13, 2015, 12:14 pm, in reply to "Re: Hank wins Grammy! "
I suspect I know where you're coming from here, Larry, regarding the songwriting of Hank Williams. In two words: Fred Rose. Or, if you prefer, in five words, the truly great Fred Rose. Fred Rose had as much talent for shunning the limelight as he had for composing memorable songs: stunning.
In death, as in life. I recall visiting the Mount Olivet Cemetery, Nashville and getting a blank look from the gracious lady in charge of the office. Considering that Fred Rose was one of the pioneers who put the melody into Music City, USA this ought to have surprised me, but didn't. If Jim Reeves could be neglected, why not another towering talent like Fred Rose?
After a long stroll-search though a superbly landscaped cemetery I eventually located the last resting place of Fred Rose - in a distant, out of the way corner. It is, one suspects, as he would have wished it. By any other name, Fred Rose would sound as sweet.
In many quarters, of course, Jim Reeves is the ultimate Anti-Hank. As if a lack of roughage was the mark of authenticity. By this warped logic, Mozart was decidedly fake.
There is one particularly lame brain in the best selling paper in Ireland, the Sunday Independent, as venomous as he is phoney, who delights in taking down his metaphorical Hank Williams branding iron to stigmatize Jim Reeves as.....bland.
There is none so bland as those who will not hear.
on January 31, 2015, 5:33 pm