What Is Phil Spector's "Wall Of Sound" All About??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mike Freze
  • Start date Start date
Lt. Bob said:
I didn't disrespect him even a little bit.
I simply used an easily accessible example of something very rare .... a record that you can hear both with and without his sound. Name me another record that you can do that with.
And it's widely accepted that 'Let It Be' was one of his spectacular failures as it didn't suit the Beatles in the way it suited the soul groups.

But yes, as I said, istudios didn't have that many tracks back then. 24 tracks often and even the biggest might have 48 so what he did was amazing for its' time.
That doesn't mean every single example is successful.
Click to expand...
I don't belive they even had 24 track machines when let it be came out. The 8 tracks were in use, possibly slaving 2 machines for 16.
 
moresound said:
Hello it's me .... .
Click to expand...
And you know 'Hello It's Me' was a song on that very first Nazz album. I loved it and made the band I was in do it even though no one had heard of it. Something/Anything was the3rd time he put it out there. I'm not sure what the 2nd one was but it took 3 times for that song to be a hit.
 
I remember hearing it on AM radio all of the time. back before FM

I also remember seeing him in concert a bunch of times and that's what he started with. The band would be playing along then out he would come .... hello it's me ....
 
Lt. Bob said:
yeah but Spector came in and added all his stuff afterward.
Click to expand...
On the 8 track. He added 51 seconds to "I, me mine" which was a short song, by replaying the second verse and chorus. Also, apparently, he would cram brass, strings and choir across three or four of the tracks. He would orchestrate the overdubs with all the effects as they were to be on the finished record and throw wild tantrums, pop numerous pills and he had a bodyguard with him at all times. That kind of thing just didn't happen at Abbey Road ! I think some of those EMI engineers will never forget him !
 
grimtraveller said:
Also, apparently, he would cram brass, strings and choir across three or four of the tracks. !
Click to expand...
wow ........ that's interesting but I don't quite understand how, since they did it on 8 tracks , there could be 3 or 4 tracks left over for him to crowd everything in. That would mean they did the album, or that song at least, on only 4 or 5 tracks.
That doesn't sound right somehow. The Beatles did lots of overdubbing although they kinda wanted Let it be to be more 'live' but still, since they didn't know that Spector was gonna be adding stuff ..... seems like they'd have filled the 8 tracks.
But then I read that they kinda abandoned the album after it didn't go well so maybe they only had done initial work on it.
Interesting stuff.
 
Last edited:
man I hate that you can't delete a double post!

:mad:
 
Last edited:
Just happen to me in the microphone forum ..... what can you say?
 
"We didn't puke when we heard it"

Lt. Bob said:
wow ........ that's interesting but I don't quite understand how, since they did it on 8 tracks , there could be 3 or 4 tracks left over for him to crowd everything in. That would mean they did the album, or that song at least, on only 4 or 5 tracks.
That doesn't sound right somehow. The Beatles did lots of overdubbing although they kinda wanted Let it be to be more 'live' but still, since they didn't know that Spector was gonna be adding stuff ..... seems like they'd have filled the 8 tracks.
But then I read that they kinda abandoned the album after it didn't go well so maybe they only had done initial work on it.
Interesting stuff.
Click to expand...
An interesting thought just crossed my mind ~ the Beatles were hugely influential in just about every facet of popular music that one could be in the 60s, even down to having their own record label. But one area where they had pretty much zero input was in the development of multitracking machines. In their time they used 2, 4 and 8 track (plus two 4 tracks slaved together for a hybrid 7 track, which had never been done before and I guess was pretty unique) but these were already in long use by the time they got around to using them. Part of why they were so revolutionary in the studio is because they were really working against the odds {in the form of EMI stinginess - George Martin had been on at them to get an 8 track before he even signed the Beatles}, having to be inventive with so few tracks and they were fortunate to have people around at EMI and AIR that could figure out ways to get new sounds and routinely invent things like ADT and flanging and bring backwards recording to the forefront. I think the Abbey Road LP was the first time that the drums occupied 2 tracks. On Let it be (the album), because the idea was to do away with 'production' (or what it's fiercest opponent, Lennon, called 'jiggery pokery'), each instrument took up a track, 2 guitars, bass, Billy Preston's electric piano or any other keyboard, vocal. When Spector arrived on the scene, he still had some jiggery pokery to do because the band had rejected the 'naked' version {referred to as 'the shitty version'} that Glyn Johns had put together. Originally called "Get back", they found that they'd been spoiled by the way they'd been recording since 'Rubber soul' in '65. I think that because "Happiness is a warm gun" with all it's complex changes had been done live, they thought it would be good to get back to what they'd originally been, a live band that made records, rather than a studio band. It didn't work. The project was shelved and out came "Abbey Road". But Phil Spector had always wanted to work with the Beatles and he was brought in to salvage a project none of them could face (though now, McCartney says he liked it).
I guess in the same way he extended "I, me, mine", he played about with the 8 tracks, possibly doing some transfers. The album track "Let it be" and the single are markedly different, but they come from the same 8 track tape with different solos, for example. And even on "Abbey Road", there is still track sharing going on.
As I said earlier, I don't think Spector did a bad job on the album at all. If you compare his slowed down "choired" mix of "Across the universe" with the version that the Beatles recorded and rejected and gave to a wildlife fund of Great Britain charity LP, I think he did right in putting in a choir and letting Harrison's sitar swirl about more prominently and taking out those awful squeaky backing vocals by two girl fans off the street. It's the same recording. Ringo said "there's no point in bringing Spector if you're not going to like what he does because that's what he does and his credentials are solid". McCartney and George Martin (who was a big fan of Spector) were the ones that didn't like what he did with the album. But Spector's wall of sound wasn't vastly different from the Beatles overdubbing of four pianos playing the same part or two drum parts etc. As Miroslav pointed out, the difference was in the tracking but the essential result was pretty similar.

Of course, I'm totally biased because the 1970 release is the only one that I've known and loved for 34 years.
 
34 years! It's been that long? where has the time gone?
 
moresound said:
34 years! It's been that long? where has the time gone?
Click to expand...
The date that Chibi Nappa gives as his birthdate, that same day was the day I bought the album. I remember it fairly well.
 
Seems as if it were only yesterday. But like the snows of yesteryear they are gone from this Earth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top