This 1971 live CD in the 'Old School' package

[Gunner]

I have been surprised at how 'together' the band was at that point, and particularly how good Alice vocal is ...I sort of expected him to sound a bit drunk and 'flat' around this era, and Glen's playing to be a bit sloppy too live. Have there been any over dubs?

Also, the instrumental opener - did it ever have a title? I've heard snippets of it before in video clips - did they do this for School's Out shows as well??

[A_MichaelUK]

>Have there been any over dubs?

Of course not.

>Also, the instrumental opener - did it ever have a title?

That is unlikely.

>did they do this for School's Out shows as well??

Yes.

[tuneylune]

This is an absolutely fantastic CD! Have played it constantly and as Gunner pointed out, they really are "together" and it sounds great!

[Gunner]

I don't know why you say 'Of course not' Andy, it's quite plausible that the initial idea was for this to be part of a live album or TV concert or something!! I mean, let's face it, in 1971 that would be one of the few reasons to take recordings out of the mixing desk.

[While Heaven Wept]

I mean, let's face it, in 1971 that would be one of the few reasons to take recordings out of the mixing desk.

As far as i know, most soundboard recordings around that time were basically bootlegs....done by the sound engineer without the bands knowledge.

[A_MichaelUK]

>I don't know why you say 'Of course not' Andy,

Because I was an Associate Producer of the box set on which that recording appears.

>it's quite plausible that the initial idea was for this to be part of a live album or TV concert or something!!

It was not.

> I mean, let's face it, in 1971 that would be one of the few reasons to take recordings out of the mixing desk.

As was the band just wanting a recording for themselves of that particular show.

[A_MichaelUK]

>As far as i know, most soundboard recordings around that time were basically bootlegs....done by the sound engineer without the bands knowledge.

That is also possible (or just recorded for no real reason).

[Gunner]

>I don't know why you say 'Of course not' Andy,

Because I was an Associate Producer of the box set on which that recording appears.

Then just put 'No', it's NOT a matter of course!!!

>it's quite plausible that the initial idea was for this to be part of a live album or TV concert or something!!

It was not.

WHY is it not Andy? Try qualifying your comments rather than just being rude if you could possibly do so!

> I mean, let's face it, in 1971 that would be one of the few reasons to take recordings out of the mixing desk.

As was the band just wanting a recording for themselves of that particular show.

Yes, but my comment is not unrealistic is it then Andy???

So, it IS NOT a matter of course that there would be no overdubs, so stop being so rude.

[RemarkablyInsincere]

If a live show were to get overdubs then that would mean a live release or broadcast would be fairly far along in the planning stages. In that case it's pretty likely that someone associated with the band might have said something about it in all the intervening years.

[Toronto Bob]

I have been surprised at how 'together' the band was at that point, and particularly how good Alice vocal is ...I sort of expected him to sound a bit drunk and 'flat' around this era, and Glen's playing to be a bit sloppy too live. Have there been any over dubs?

Also, the instrumental opener - did it ever have a title? I've heard snippets of it before in video clips - did they do this for School's Out shows as well??

When comparing other performances around the same time, St. Louis is a bit of a reserved performance. It's not a criticism, they just happen to sound a bit more reserved that night. Alice would of sounded more drunk if they didn't edit I'm 18 for the box set.

I think of the Killer tour as a high-water mark in live Alice. This tour and School's Out tour are the band at peak performance imo, accepting of course the occasional sore throat (Portland 1972 03 04) or unenergetic performance (1972 04 02 Mar y Sol).

As far as the motives for recording the St. Louis show, who knows. Maybe they just to document the evening. There's plaenty of references in the B$B book about cassettes being made of the live show. The quality sounds more cassette than multi-track, and if that's the case, overdubs wouldn't be possible and a live album would be extremely unlikely. Even a radio broadcast would is doubtful - unless it was local radio and not syndicated, may have been too early for syndicated live concert programming anyway.

If it is sourced from a multi-track recording, the high-end distortion would have scuttled any plans or a release regardless.

[A_MichaelUK]

>Then just put 'No', it's NOT a matter of course!!!

It is exactly "a matter of course!!!" For some reason, you seem to think there was some kind of grand strategy involved in everything the band did. For one thing, there was no way in 1971 that Warner Brothers would have contemplated spending money on "a live album" given the nature of their relationship, which I assume you (being an expert on the subject) know everything about.

>WHY is it not Andy? Try qualifying your comments rather than just being rude if you could possibly do so!

I just did.

>Yes, but my comment is not unrealistic is it then Andy???

It absolutely is. My explanation is different from the one you gave, yet you seem to think they're similar.

>So, it IS NOT a matter of course that there would be no overdubs, so stop being so rude.

The recording was not made by Warner Brothers, so as "a matter of course", there could not have been any "overdubs" - it really is that simple.

[A_MichaelUK]

>The quality sounds more cassette than multi-track, and if that's the case, overdubs wouldn't be possible and a live album would be extremely unlikely.

I think it came from a reel - to - reel tape but everything else you posted is correct.

[tuneylune]

AMUK, I have a question for you-what do you mean about the "relationship" between the band and Warner's? Don't consider myself an expert, but do remember reading how Warner's was less than thrilled at signing the band. However, "I'm Eighteen" and LOVE IT TO DEATH were successful and it can be assumed that KILLER would do as well. Was it still a matter of "Let's wait and see what happens"?
Thanks for any info You can share!

[A_MichaelUK]

>what do you mean about the "relationship" between the band and Warner's?

The view of many involved was that it took quite some time for the group to be considered a priority and that didn't really happen until "School's Out" became successful. Until then, they weren't as supportive as they could have been.

>However, "I'm Eighteen" and LOVE IT TO DEATH were successful and it can be assumed that KILLER would do as well.

You would think so, but even with one hit single and one hit album, the label considered those successes to be examples of good luck.

>Was it still a matter of "Let's wait and see what happens"?

I think it was more that they wanted to ignore the group because it was so controversial and threatening to what they thought music should be.

>Thanks for any info You can share!

No problem at all.

[old school vet]

A_MichaelUK wrote-I think it was more that they wanted to ignore the group because it was so controversial and threatening to what they thought music should be.

Absolutely right. The ACG were so scary to everyone at this point, not many understood the irony of what they were doing at the time. It is only in the more recent years that Alice has become acceptable and still not fully appreciated for the genius that ACG brought to the music industry, and let's face it Alice, the solo artist also lacks the recognition that he fully deserves....