Metamatic Forums John Foxx John Foxx Endlessly Endlos

You just can't help yourself, can you, Pete!

I still want to know the full story about the Slow Motion 7-inch single version of Hiroshima Mon Amour (from the Slow Motion [single disc] 7-inch single of March 1981). It's not just an edited (shortened) version of the Ha!-Ha!-Ha! album track, it's actually a slightly different mix as well and includes a different piece of C.C.'s saxophone track ... in fact, I know he did two takes, so I'm wondering if this additional piece is from the second (unused) take, or is an additional part of the first take that was edited-out of the album version?

If anyone can answer this one, then you really are a true pedantic twat and sincerest congratulations will be in order.

Hi Rodney. I can't answer your query but would love to know the answer. I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who's head is full of questions that in the scheme of things don't really matter to anyone but us.

Cheers, Andy ... yes, agreed, some of us are more inclined towards these mysterious details that no-one else would generally be bothered with!

In fact, it may actually be the album version of Hiroshima Mon Amour that includes the edit of C.C.'s saxophone track ... there could possibly be an edit at 3':19". So, perhaps the 7-inch single edit/version (approximately 4':40" in length) contains the full version of C.C.'s first take?

Pete, we 'discussed' this at length on the Ultravox Forum several years ago, but unfortunately the 'Search' function doesn't appear to be working on the site and I no longer have a copy of the 7-inch single edit/version of the track.

Inevitably, there are a number of things like this which are peppered throughout John's catalogue. The intention when I created the new look Metamatic Website was for there to be the flexibility for things like this to be explored in detail as and when pages get added and expanded. The problem is that - despite every best intention - Martin and I can't be everywhere at once - and our priority at the moment has got to be with the Archive and Discography sections. Once those sections are on-line and we've been able to flesh-out the accompanying pages, then we can start trying to resolve some of these other points.

Rob

Shouldn't you be working at work about now, Rob? I should be in bed!

Surely this particular example is chasing something of a ghost? We'd have to question the people involved in mixing the original tracks and then quiz them about this very specific detail of the saxophone track(s) ... who's honestly going to remember something like that - John? Billy? Warren? Chris? Steve Lillywhite?

So, no, certainly not something worth pursuing (at the moment, anyway).

I wasn't thinking of doing it now...



I completely agree - but unfortunately there are always going to be instances where something (like this, or similar) which has been overlooked for over thirty years will suddenly become the most important thing in the whole wide world ever to some people - and a question which simply must be answered.

In reality, it's very unlikely that anyone who was involved with these recordings would remember why certain decisions were made all those years ago. After all, how many people here could remember the reasons behind a specific decision they made during the course of their day-job some thirty years after the event?

Rob

Interesting point, but artists and writers think differently and have a relationship with every piece they create.

I know it's never going to happen, but I bet John would have a reason why everything sounds the way it does on the original 30-year old tracks, even if not the edits and versions.

I know I would. When I look back through the maps I made and leaflets published etc from my first job (85-94) I can still justify the design decisions that were made. Wrongly, in many cases, but I'd still know the reason behind things.

Just catching up on this thread (still not getting emails) and thanks for your inputs on Endlessly chaps...and the new intriguing HMA 7" version.

I have a copy of that too, but still no record player.

Mysterious ways....

Oh, yes, Endlessly ... what this thread was actually about before I hijacked it with Hiroshima Mon Amour conspiracy theories ...

I concur that the 1983 double 7-inch gatefold single (of Endlessly) does appear to have been more obtainable than the single 7-inch release, as the former was readily available here in New Zealand and my copy was certainly bought here, brand new (probably excess stock sent out to the 'arse end of the world' ... where did it get in the UK singles chart again ... 66?).

Having now read back through this thread more carefully, I must apologise for the inadvertent torture, Rob. I had no idea that you didn't really like italicised text ... and you think you know someone, eh?

I've always endeavoured to present track titles in italics with subtitles in parentheses, with an unofficial subtitle detailed within single quote marks within the parentheses, thus: Endlessly ('7" single edit') 3:35, as opposed to an official subtitle such as Enter The Angel (Extended Mix) 5:54, although this is often compromised due to artistic presentation within the layout and packaging. But, certainly, it can be difficult with some edits, mixes and versions not being labelled as such (particularly with releases in different countries) and with track playing times also listed incorrectly, as it can certainly lead you on the proverbial "wild goose chase" (I've now got a headache, myself).

Cheers ...

No problems Rodney, and some interesting points about cataloguing and discographing have been raised.

I really wish we could get a proper official discography going, especially as far as the singles are concerned. Alex has already done an excellent job with the albums on Quiet City, and has included a singles page too, although there is so much more detail to go into as my attempted Endlessly (my italics) wikipedia page has proven.

I'm a bit miffed (read: p*ssed off) with Wikipedia as they have such strict rules about what can and what can't be published. e.g. they refused my page on "He's A Liquid" as it didn't meet the rules of having enough "notability" .. pah! Whilst I agree that rules have to be made and kept to, this can only mean that only stuff which is already "notable" will be published. Name any David Bowie track though and it's on there .. Is "I'm Deranged" a notable song?
I don't think so.