Precedence: bulk
From: Chalkhills <>
Subject: Chalkhills Digest #12-49

         Chalkhills Digest, Volume 12, Number 49

                  Sunday, 8 October 2006


                     Guzzled Warbles
     Not going to mention J*ff L*nne in this post....
                    Re: XTC the Brand
                    Re XTC, the brand
                     Warbles Recieved
           re: the Beatles, reproduction, etc.
                   Chalkhills RSS Feeds
               So demanding - I want more!
                    Re: Dave and Andy
                        The Veils


    To UNSUBSCRIBE from the Chalkhills mailing list, send a message to
    <> with the following command:


    For all other administrative issues, send a message to:


    Please remember to send your Chalkhills postings to:


    World Wide Web: <>

    The views expressed herein are those of the individual authors.

    Chalkhills is compiled with Digest 3.8c (John Relph <>).

Here in the West it's just the same but they're using makeup veils.


Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 15:46:59 +0100
From: "David Edwards" <>
Subject: Guzzled Warbles
Message-ID: <02da01c6e956$4cfe6ec0$cc864ed5@David>

Warbles are fizzing round my way. Winced at 2 Rainbeau Melt first
time, but can't resist the discordant guitar starting 1:36 - a
glittering meteorological phenomenon of a song! And REM Producer
Inquiry sums up Fuzzy Warbles and the genius of AP for me. He's got
the audacity to introduce something that has his (then) wife
interrupting the music for a chat half way through. Outrageous! But
then, when the sound finally comes back up, you get 20 seconds of
harmony perfection from 2:05-2:25. And it never even made it onto an
XTC album. Sonic Boom and Through Electric Gardens are tremendous. And
it's a much better, more melancholy version of Ladybird than on the
album - this is autumnal and rain-sodden, whereas the album version
sounds closer to a perky love song. Also much prefer this version of I
Don't Want To Be Here. 




Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 11:23:19 -0400
From: "James White" <>
Subject: Not going to mention J*ff L*nne in this post....
Message-ID: <006001c6e95b$5ada27a0$2201a8c0@DJTY0Y11>

Hey all,

Taking a moment to 'delurk'.  After reading the glowing reviews of the Fuzzy
Collectors Box from fellow Chalkhilians, I went to the Ape site and ordered
my own along with FW 7& 8.  Haven't received it yet but looking forward to

Someone mentioned a few posts ago about the fact that perhaps sadly there
will actually not be any new XTC material to look forward to.  This is
something I'd thought about ever since the beginning of the Fuzzy Warbles
series.  I strongly suspect that either consciously or sub-consciously, Andy
is likely done releasing anything under the XTC name.  Not good news to
consider but I think it's quite probable.  Maybe we'll even see an Andy
Partridge solo album one day...

Of course, I would love to be completely wrong about this!

I still very much enjoy reading these Chalkhills postings - some great folks
on this list.   Thanks to whoever it was who posted the link to the 'Neon
Shuffle' video - WOW.  I kept watching Andy barking like a seal through that
song and then realizing this is the same man who would later write "Wrapped
in Grey".....


p.s.  Now to go find that ELO album I was looking for....     ;-)


Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 16:56:47 -0400
From: Benjamin Gott <>
Subject: Robyn
Message-ID: <>

Hey guys,

The new Robyn Hitchcock album is amazing.  Andy's co-write is
wonderful, but the whole thing (especially "N.Y. Doll") reminds me of
Robyn's best work from the 1980s.  Pick it up, now!

The new Pernice Bros. is also excellent.  Some good ways to bide our
time until new XTC!



Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 14:32:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jay Gillespie <>
Subject: Re: XTC the Brand
Message-ID: <>

Michael Myers <> wrought:
> Well, suppose Colin either has severe writer's block (I've
> talked about this as well) or just isn't interested anymore...
> [Andy] can either go solo or release something under the name
> XTC.
> So, what do you think?

As long as Colin is fine with it, I don't see a
problem with Andy continuing the XTC brand solo.  It's
already happened with the band, with Andy's dub albums
being rebranded XTC as well as some Colin solo tracks
being included in the XTC Rag and Bone Buffet comp.  I
think some of the recent download-only tracks have
been speculated to be really solo tracks.

Band names are really brand names in actuality anyway.
 There's accounts of what is essentially the same band
having to continue under a different name due to the
loss of a single band member.  Conversely, there's
some bands that no longer have any remaining original
band members but still use the original band name.

I don't think anyone here would like to see such a
situtation play out, most of us would like to see
Colin continuing to contribute to the band, even in a
diminished status.  However, even a diminished XTC is
better than no XTC.



Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 22:54:16 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re XTC, the brand
Message-ID: <>

Mike Myers asked about XTC the brand. I was discussing this self same
topic last night at a Babybird gig, with my mate who is 25 (I think)
and got into XTC after I suggested he try or played them in my car on
the way to gigs, but hey ho...

We both are of the opinion that as well as the songwriting aspect,
that Colin's bass and vocal harmonies would be seriously lacking. Put
simply, a Warble is a Warble becuase it is 99% of the time Andy and a
drum machine. He's good, very good, but he ain't Colin.

Apple Venus would not be the same album without Fruit Nut and
Frivolous Tonight and, onto Wasp Star, I doubt Andy would ever come up
with Boarded Up. 2 albums, 3 songs and I think we know that Andy would
not want to trade as XTC without Colin. At least I hope he wouldn't.

And here's the rub. I had none of the bootleg demos. I just had my CD
collection and a couple of books. Had Partridge dressed up a best of
the Warbles as a 'New release' I'd have been none the wiser until you
far more knowledgeable guys mentioned it, or I had one of those times
when I get the time and inclination to dig deep into mr Relph's magic
kingdom of almost all things XTC.

He could have picked the 12 most commercial tunes and launched himself
either as a solo artist proper or as a songwriter for a
boyband/girlband (come on we all know he has it in him to write the
big hit song he denies).

But he didn't, hasn't. I don't think he'll ever release an album as
XTC without Colin's input. I hope he doesn't prove me wrong.

Skylarking without Grass?
Mummer without Wonderland?
Black Sea without Generals And Majors?
the examples I've already named.

It doesn't bear thinking about really does it?

Now I really am getting back to lurking.



Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 23:00:40 +0200
From: "don device" <>
Subject: Warbles Recieved
Message-ID: <004501c6e98a$7afa4ae0$2a824251@computer>


OK, my lovely Stamp Collection has been recieved and I must say the music in
particular is wonderful... Volume 8 gets my vote for best so far... Rainbeau
Melt is lovely and I love the tanglesd geetars on the follolwing song...

The packaging is quite nice, cute and unpretentious...
Now I'm off to spoon the fragmetns of my first warbles into the slots...



Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 20:21:00 -0400
From: "J. D. Mack" <>
Subject: re: the Beatles, reproduction, etc.
Message-ID: <>

At 02:48 PM 10/6/2006 -0400, Kevin wrote:

>Yes, the Beatles borrowed, songs, licks, chord changes, styles, vocal
>mannerisms, etc., etc., from others' work (most notably American R&B
>records/singers), and made money from it.

All of the songs they recorded by other artists were licensed, properly
credited and royalties paid.  As far as licks and riffs, other musicians
are able to throw in a Beatles lick here and there just fine without
getting sued.  Witness Cheap Trick's use of the "Please Please Me" melody
in the guitar solo for "Ain't That A Shame."  As for styles and mannerisms,
they aren't really protected and lots of bands have made money aping The
Beatles' style (such as ELO).  None of the above are not issues.

>   Now the Beatles' work falls under
>the protective umbrella of EMI; if you borrow some Beatles content, use it
>to make money, and don't ask or pay them first, you're stealing from them,
>and they have lawyers galore.

If you "sample" an actual Beatles recording, that is a different thing from
re-recording something yourself.  It requires permission and payment.  It
doesn't matter if you sell your work or not.  You can't give away what
doesn't belong to you.

Incidentally, The Beatles were sued one time for recording music without
permission.  In the fade out of "All You Need Is Love," the opening riff of
"In The Mood" as recorded by The Glen Miller Orchestra can be heard a few
times.  The song "In The Mood" is in the public domain, but glen Miller's
arrangement is not, hence a successful lawsuit by Glen Miller's
publisher.  This incident illustrates that if anyone had a good reason to
sue The Beatles, they would have in a heartbeat.

>(Was the BBC compensated for their useage of 'King Lear' in 'I Am The
>No.  If they had asked for it, it could conceivably have caused the song to
>be scrapped, since the addition of the 'Lear' broadcast was done in
>real-time during the mixing process by a probably baked John Lennon.  It's
>what happened to be on the radio then, and it can't be changed or erased
>now, I don't think.  Just think if it had been something other than the

Your question is a very good one.  But I don't know if you can answer it
"no" with any certainty.  I do know this.  When "I Am The Walrus" was
remixed for the Beatles Anthology DVD, they were able to create a true 5.1
mix by taking a recording of the BBC King Lear performance and adding it to
the mix.  I suspect that even if they didn't ask permission in 1967, they
certainly asked permission this time around.  And for all we know, they did
get the blessing from the BBC in 1967.

>What about the brass band record used on 'Yellow Submarine'?
>The audience recording on 'Sgt Pepper'?
>At least the second (and probably the first) of those came from the Abbey
>Road sound effects library, to which the copyright was owned by the studio
>(and hence, EMI).  Anyone can buy licensed material for use - samples of
>drum sounds, rhythm beds, cheesy theme music for commericals, etc.  Was the
>band paid?  Probably once when it was recorded.  Maybe it was a field
>recording, in which case, maybe not.

According to Mark Lewisohn in "The Beatles Recording Sessions," the band
were session musicians brought in specifically for this recording.  Session
musicians are paid for the session and that's it.  That's the way it works
and that's the understanding a session musician has when they take the
gig.  And for every Beatles recording played on by a session musician,
there are probably countless other recordings that bombed where the session
musician got paid more than the artist.

As far as the applause, you answered your own question.  Sound Effects
recordings are licensed for this kind of use, even if EMI didn't own
it.  Nothing immoral about using when you've been given permission to use.

>The classical records used on 'Revolution 9'?).
>Probably not.  There were dozens used.  The composers of course would not
>have been entitled to residuals or mechanicals, but the performers may have
>been.  They probably didn't find out until long after, if ever.  In those
>days, there was no legal exploration of sampling or mechanical reproduction
>of a composer's or performer's work.

Here you have a valid point.  "Revolution No 9" is exactly the kind of
thing that, if someone else recorded it using samples of Beatles songs,
would drive the Apple and EMI lawyers into a frenzy.  Another example would
be the 1968 and 1969 Christmas records, which sampled Jean Jaques Perry's
"Baroque Hoedown" among others.  But the main issue is sampling without
permission, and there are only a couple of instances where one could accuse
The Beatles and their record company of being hypocritical on this issue.

J. D.


Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 20:21:10 -0400
From: John Relph <>
Subject: Chalkhills RSS Feeds
Message-ID: <>

Bonjour, people of the collines de la craie,

In case you hadn't noticed, Chalkhills is now offering various RSS
feeds to alert you to things that are going on in the Wonderful World
of XTC (the band not the drug).  For example:

Chalkhills Headlines, that is, major headlines featured in the
Chalkhills News section, can be found in the feed at

Other Recent Chalkhills News, that is, new reviews and stories
featured in Chalkhills, changes to various and sundry pages in
Chalkhills, etc., can be found in the feed at

The most recent Chalkhills Postings can be found in the feed at
This feed might be useful if you do not receive the Chalkhills Digest
in your mailbox, or even if you do...

Updates to the XTC Discography on Chalkhills can be found in the feed at

The latest XTC/Idea Records News can be found in the feed at
(This feed is not authorized, and is generated by an ugly little perl
hack that I wrote which actually visits the XTC/Idea Records News
pages and parses their content.  Cool, eh?)

The latest Ape House News can be found at
(See above note.)

And finally, Everything XTC (all of the above) can be found in the
feed at
Many thanks to Citizen Keith for generating this feed.

Now you never have to surf without a purpose in life.

	-- John


Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2006 08:04:17 +0100 (BST)
From: Paul Culnane <>
Subject: So demanding - I want more!
Message-ID: <>


I found the experience of trying to buy the new Fuzzy box extremely
unpleasant .  It was fraught from go to whoah.  It could be my stupid
computer, or just my own natural idiot-ness, but I wasn't about to
press a button that said I was ordering 15 copies.  Oh yes, I'm
generous but not THAT much.

So, I'm fretting, and I'm gonna head to the pub now, and I'll try later.

Before putting in "My Land Is Burning" which it is.

Steve and the other people at Weatherbox are cool as fuck.  But if
Andy wants my money, I'm only gonna do it once baby.  Otherwise, the
money is gonna go in sinking piss, y' know?

Pissed off

"I can't understand why people are frightened by new ideas.  I'm
frightened of the old ones" - John Cage

Paul Culnane
ICE Productions Australia


Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 14:59:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Todd Bernhardt <>
Subject: Re: Dave and Andy
Message-ID: <>


Mike Myers asked:
>>Suppose Andy asks Dave to rejoin and the two of them soldier on as
XTC?  That would mean that Andy would be the sole songwriter, but he'd
gain Dave's musical genius and skills as an arranger back in the fold.<<

Not possible, unfortunately. Andy and Colin are XTC, and Colin's not
willing to sign away his rights to the name.

Given Andy and Dave's friendship and musical chemistry, though, I
remain hopeful that they'll work together again someday!


The courage of the poet is to keep ajar the door that leads into madness.
  -Christopher Morley, writer (1890-1957)


Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 12:17:47 +1000 (EST)
From: Steve C <>
Subject: The Veils
Message-ID: <>

Wow!  Has it really been that long since I posted?

Was reading the newspaper here in Melbourne, Australia
on the weekend and saw an XTC reference I haven't seen
before.  Forgive me if it's been posted already but I
haven't seen it.

The paper reviewed an Album by a British Indie band
"The Veils" - featuring Finn Andrews. It then pointed
out that Finn's father was Barry Andrews of XTC.

Haven't heard them, but the review seemed positive.

Whilst I'm on I guess I should also say how lovely the
packaging for Fuzzy Warbles is!


Steve Cameron


End of Chalkhills Digest #12-49

Go back to the previous page.