Gong - Radio Gnome Trilogy Remastered

[JJ88]

. My guess - and it's only a guess - is that Universal has a) access to original everything

Unless there's been a recent change of circumstances, this is not the case with Flying Teapot itself.

[strawberrybrick]

Unless there's been a recent change of circumstances, this is not the case with Flying Teapot itself.

Agreed, but... my guess here is that there is a joint claim on Flying Teapot, thus Universal could release it, or even by using an alternate master (which exists). Earlier in this thread (post #49) I reported that Flying Teapot was in fact remastered in 2004 when Virgin did Angels Egg and You, but chose not to release it at that time.

Bottom line is, don't buy Charly, have patience for the Universal box, and listen to the vinyl albums in the meantime!

[calyx]

Earlier in this thread (post #49) I reported that Flying Teapot was in fact remastered in 2004 when Virgin did Angels Egg and You, but chose not to release it at that time.

I can confirm this. Mark Powell at the time told me that the reissue would include an alternate take of the title track. He was also doing preliminary work on an expanded "Live Etc." which would have included, if I remember correctly, the entire Marquee Club 9/75 show from which side D of the original double-album was taken. Hopefully some of that will be on the upcoming boxed set.

[JJ88]

What a shame it didn't happen in 2004, I wouldn't have bothered with Charly's release.

[JKL2000]

I really think this needs repeating... From the Planet Gong facebook page (sticky first post)


OFFICIAL BAND STATEMENT

We, the surviving members of Gong, do not support Charly Records upcoming reissue of the Radio Gnome trilogy.

None of the surviving members of the lineups that created those recordings
were ever signed to Charly Records.

The truth is that during the making of Flying Teapot in January 1973, the band learned that the record company - BYG Records (also known as Promodisc) - had gone bust, it's Paris office stripped bare, no phones working. The band was abandoned at the Manor Studios midway through the album. Virgin - at the time just a chain of record stores and The Manor studios - was about to launch their record label.

Faced with an unpaid recording bill, they decided to cut their losses and release Flying Teapot as the second release on the new Virgin Records label. That's the true story.

The booklet advertised as accompanying the Charly/BYG Release is full of untruths, lies and falsehoods claiming to represent Charly and BYG Records as some sort of poor victim of Virgin's wickedness. The truth is that none of the musicians on those recordings has ever received a penny of royalty payments for the Charly/BYG releases, or even a statement. This is understandable because we NEVER signed to BYG or Charly Records as Gong.

Meanwhile, forty years later, we still receive statements from Virgin and, for those of us who cleared our advances, royalty payments, even though Virgin has since been sold to EMI and now is owned by Universal Records.

We know and can confirm as a 100% corroborated fact that the Original Masters of these albums reside in the Virgin Records Archive, and that Charly has never at any time been given access to them, so Charly's claim to have used the Original Masters is false.

Charly has been brazenly abusing our rights as artists for decades. None of us are rich or powerful enough to sue them. All we can do is to let you, our lovely Gong fans, know that we do not support this release. We will be supporting a new boxed set to be released by Universal in a few months with our full collaboration.

DO NOT BUY THIS RELEASE

Does this mean that in 1973 when they were recording Flying Teapot they weren't signed to BYG? If not, why was BYG even involved?

[calyx]

Does this mean that in 1973 when they were recording Flying Teapot they weren't signed to BYG? If not, why was BYG even involved?

Again, it's a complex situation. Daevid Allen, Gilli Smyth, Didier Malherbe, Christian Tritsch and Rachid Houari (although the latter were about to leave) were clearly "BYG artists", and Gong as an entity were contracted to BYG. Now, exactly who else was in Gong ? Steve Hillage had guest musician status and only appeared on part of the album. Tim Blake was a recent addition. Francis Moze and Laurie Allan basically were session musicians on this occasion.

The original plan for "Flying Teapot" was for it to be a 100% BYG release, recorded at the Virgin-owned Manor Studios as paying customers. This was before Virgin had begun its activities as a label (May 1973) although already financing sessions (Mike Oldfield began recording "Tubular Bells" in September 1972 - although as late as January 1973 Virgin were shopping the finished album to potential major labels at MIDEM Festival).

The accepted story goes that when BYG experienced difficulties, Virgin stepped in and went from merely providing their studio to releasing the album on their newly-launched label.

Now I'm not entirely sure why Gong went to record "Flying Teapot" near Oxford in England when previous albums had been recorded at the Château d'Hérouville which was comparatively close by. Perhaps prices at Hérouville had soared post-Elton John/Pink Floyd/etc. recording there, and Manor prices were very low ? I have no idea.

[JKL2000]

So if BYG and Charley can be considered a single entity (I'm a little fuzzy on this), then one of these statements is not true:

<<None of the surviving members of the lineups that created those recordings were ever signed to Charly Records.>>

and

<<Gong as an entity were contracted to BYG.>>

Right?

[zombywoof]

I can confirm this. Mark Powell at the time told me that the reissue would include an alternate take of the title track. He was also doing preliminary work on an expanded "Live Etc." which would have included, if I remember correctly, the entire Marquee Club 9/75 show from which side D of the original double-album was taken. Hopefully some of that will be on the upcoming boxed set.

This would be awesome!

[calyx]

So if BYG and Charley can be considered a single entity (I'm a little fuzzy on this), then one of these statements is not true:

<<None of the surviving members of the lineups that created those recordings were ever signed to Charly Records.>>

and

<<Gong as an entity were contracted to BYG.>>

Right?

BYG and Charly had one founder in common (shared in BYG's case, lone in Charly's).

What the contracts reproduced in the new Charly box suggest is that BYG "owned" Gong as recording entity, since Virgin had to sign a 3-year contract to get permission to release Gong records.

Both statements are correct in that only Daevid ever willingly signed with Charly (in 1977, as a solo artist). The others found themselves signed to Charly as a result of Charly inheriting (exact details unknown) some or all of BYG's former assets. Of course, there is a slight difference between (of the surviving members) Smyth and Malherbe, who were part of Gong in the BYG era, and Hillage/Blake/Howlett, who had just joined when this happened.

The following is from my recent (2013) correspondence with Daevid regarding the Virgin/BYG/Charly/Tapioca mess.

Q : You continued to release albums on Charly into the 1980s. Based on what I know of the Young v/s Gong saga of unpaid royalties, I can only wonder why you did...

Daevid : Throughout this time, in the UK the punk movement was being born and I could easily identify with their anger at the hippified self-entitlement of the English middle classes which Virgin/Branson and Progressive Rock now represented to me. In fact I grew increasingly anti-Virgin. Karakos had always been the rebel outsider, and to a certain extent Young appeared to be continuing in this tradition as well. It was normal that with the emergence of a psychedelic punk Gong with Planet Gong/Floating Anarchy, that our new vision would fit with Charly better than Virgin. It was also because of the growing strength of my friendship with Young. Up to 1981 he was extremely useful to the continuation of Gong with Floating Anarchy in 77 and New York Gong and Divided Alien Playbax in 79 and 80. This ended in 1982 when Young tricked me into signing a paper which voided all my contracts with Charly and signed over ownership of all those albums to him. It was literally a confidence trick.

[JKL2000]

BYG and Charly had one founder in common (shared in BYG's case, lone in Charly's).

What the contracts reproduced in the new Charly box suggest is that BYG "owned" Gong as recording entity, since Virgin had to sign a 3-year contract to get permission to release Gong records.

Both statements are correct in that only Daevid ever willingly signed with Charly (in 1977, as a solo artist). The others found themselves signed to Charly as a result of Charly inheriting (exact details unknown) some or all of BYG's former assets. Of course, there is a slight difference between (of the surviving members) Smyth and Malherbe, who were part of Gong in the BYG era, and Hillage/Blake/Howlett, who had just joined when this happened.

The following is from my recent (2013) correspondence with Daevid regarding the Virgin/BYG/Charly/Tapioca mess.

Q : You continued to release albums on Charly into the 1980s. Based on what I know of the Young v/s Gong saga of unpaid royalties, I can only wonder why you did...

Daevid : Throughout this time, in the UK the punk movement was being born and I could easily identify with their anger at the hippified self-entitlement of the English middle classes which Virgin/Branson and Progressive Rock now represented to me. In fact I grew increasingly anti-Virgin. Karakos had always been the rebel outsider, and to a certain extent Young appeared to be continuing in this tradition as well. It was normal that with the emergence of a psychedelic punk Gong with Planet Gong/Floating Anarchy, that our new vision would fit with Charly better than Virgin. It was also because of the growing strength of my friendship with Young. Up to 1981 he was extremely useful to the continuation of Gong with Floating Anarchy in 77 and New York Gong and Divided Alien Playbax in 79 and 80. This ended in 1982 when Young tricked me into signing a paper which voided all my contracts with Charly and signed over ownership of all those albums to him. It was literally a confidence trick.

Very interesting, and that last bit doesn't sound so good. But it still seems like this statement isn't really true: "None of the surviving members of the lineups that created those recordings were ever signed to Charly Records." Perhaps if they said "willingly signed" or "knowingly singed," or something along those lines.

Anyway, I hope they end up with a good deal for the Universal release of these albums. I'd love to see them make some money, and I'll certainly do my part.

[Munster]

I can confirm this. Mark Powell at the time told me that the reissue would include an alternate take of the title track. He was also doing preliminary work on an expanded "Live Etc." which would have included, if I remember correctly, the entire Marquee Club 9/75 show from which side D of the original double-album was taken. Hopefully some of that will be on the upcoming boxed set.

I really hope this will not be the case as far as the live stuff goes. The Marquee Club show was recorded after both Daevid Allen and Tim Blake had left Gong and keyboards were handled by Patrice Lemoine who, in my opinion, was a very poor substitute for both Blake and the glissando guitar provided by Allen. This 'Marquee-era Gong' line-up can be heard on the Live in Sherwood Forest '75, a CD I find very disappointing as it is well recorded but flat musically, lacking the two vital players I have mentioned. If there is going to be live stuff from Gong on any Universal box set surely it has to be from the 'classic line-up', with Allen, Blake, Howlett, Moerlen, Hillage and Malherbe. The CD Gong in the Seventies showed that there are many crystal-clear recordings out there of this overwhelmingly excellent formation of the band. To rehash the Marquee concert would be a travesty and a hugely missed opportunity.

[happytheman]

The CD Gong in the Seventies showed that there are many crystal-clear recordings out there of this overwhelmingly excellent formation of the band.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention.. I'd seen this release listed on Amazon tons of times but just figured it was "another" best of type release.. Just put it in my shopping cart.. Once again PE has introduced me to another hidden gem.

[calyx]

Finally got hold of a copy of the Charly box set's booklet. I was hoping for a serious case arguing for BYG's rights against Virgin, but apart from the scanned invoices/contracts already mentioned in this thread, there simply is nothing. Worse, the arguments make no sense when you take the chronology of events into account.

Page 9 of the booklet has the best (i.e. worst) examples of this -

"With Virgin accounting to BYG respectable sales of 10,000 copies for Flying Teapot and close to 50,000 for the specially-priced 'Camembert Electrique' [...] the licensing deal seemed to be off to the best of starts. But trouble was brewing. At some point during 1974, Virgin felt they could ignore their contract with BYG and negotiate with Daevid to sign the band directly to the label - despite Allen and his pre-Flying Teapot Gong line-up still being signed to BYG".

This makes no sense. The BYG/Virgin agreement dates from 10th March 1973. The Virgin re-release of Camembert came out in June 1974. The Virgin statement (to Promodysc, BYG had clearly ceased operations by then, although BYG's demise is totally ignored in the text) containing the figures quoted is reproduced in the booklet but is dated 30th September 1974. Seems a little late to call this the "start" of a deal.

"It was an oddly duplicitous state of affairs, all going on at The Manor and seemingly instigated by the BYG-hired Gomelsky wanting to manoeuvre the band closer to Virgin. Whatever the producer's reason for doing so, it gave Branson an opportunity he quickly took advantage of. When BYG discovered what had been going on, an outraged Young rush to confront the whole band and manager Bob Bénamou and seize the tapes".

Again, this reads like a mixture of real events and pure speculation, again with the chronology ruling out that they took place in this order or in such close succession. Bob Bénamou stopped managing the band immediately after the Flying Teapot sessions, and Giorgio Gomelsky's involvement, despite his credit on "Angel's Egg", was largely confined to Flying Teapot also. This would place the "confrontation" described in early 1973, which was before the BYG/Virgin agreement was even signed, and 18 months before any of the other events mentioned could have taken place. Clearly, this is bullshit.

"BYG were too small to take on the vastly expanding Virgin empire to get their band back - but they would fight for what they had. One court battle of note saw BYG win back Gong songs originally published by them which Virgin had seen fit to claim as their own".

Again, this makes no sense. BYG was long gone by the time Virgin could be called a "vastly expanding empire". The earliest time to call it that would be early 1974 with the release and success of "The Exorcist" and the resulting effect on "Tubular Bells", which until then had been a very good seller but nowhere near the record-breaking hit it then became. With the court case documented as taking place in October 1974, to still use the name BYG when discussing this (by then Young was running Charly, and it was Charly who took Virgin to court, not BYG) is disingenuous.

There are discrepancies in the Hillage/Blake/etc. version of events but clearly it is closer to the truth than this crap.

[JeffCarney]

Thanks for these additional insights, Aymeric.

I never did buy this set and I'm inclined to doubt that I will. I was curious about it, but in the end I'm not sure there is much to be curious about. To me, the main question is whether a superior source tape for Flying Teapot has been unearthed and used here. But frankly, I think the original Virgin LP already sounds wonderful and my copy is quite clean. Iirc, there have also been claims that later Virgin LP pressings (80s?) were inferior, so it may be that the problems on the Charly CD are not exclusive to the Charly source tape. This is something that I had forgotten about. Whatever the case, whether we will ever know if the stereo master actually exists and who controls it seems to be a question that will remain.

[Udi Koomran]

I had a bit of doubt regarding this part of the band statement
The truth is that during the making of Flying Teapot in January 1973, the band learned that the record company - BYG Records (also known as Promodisc) - had gone bust, it's Paris office stripped bare, no phones working. The band was abandoned at the Manor Studios midway through the album

Sure Byg "disapeared" off the scene and seemed to go bankrupt
But
Their connection with Virgin was masterminded by Gomelsky and started in October 72 when Deavid met Simon Draper and it was Draper's intention to release Gong on the upcoming label
So the band wasn't "abandoned" at the Manor

[calyx]

Sure BYG "disappeared" off the scene and seemed to go bankrupt.

This seems to have happened in the latter half of 1973, or possibly as early as Spring. Again, the box's booklet makes NO reference to the fact of BYG going bankrupt at all, nor does it explain what "Promodysc" exactly was in relation to BYG, or Charly.

But their connection with Virgin was masterminded by Gomelsky and started in October 72 when Deavid met Simon Draper and it was Draper's intention to release Gong on the upcoming label.

I don't see what Giorgio Gomelsky had to do with this. Gong knew the Virgin people from the time of their very first UK tour (October/November 1971), in which Virgin had some promotional involvement.

From my interview(s) with Giorgio :

GG : One day Karakos called me and asked me if I cared to go to England and produce a record with Gong. At time I had worked out a "work-schedule" for Magma which covered an 18 month period, 3 albums, tours, rehearsals, etc., I thought that by mapping out a "cycle" of work theband(s) would have more stability, build up confidence, be kept busy (!) and have a "life"!!

Before deciding if I was going to London I wanted to talk to Daevid and feel him out about the "cycle" idea and some other ideas I had. Daevid was delighted and confirmed he had plenty of material and had veeb thinking along similar lines.

I never quite understood what the situation between BYG and Virgin was and it remains to this day a mystery. Not wishing to get involved in complicated accounting procedures and by now knowing their poor reliability when it came to money, I had asked BYG to pay me a one-time fee, about $2,000/album in cash!! It was a rather humble fee, but I wasn't hard up at the time and wanted to help Daevid, but because of the one-time payment, I never had a view of the contracts or a % of the royalties. Daevid of course knows the BYG/Virgin saga very well. He explained it to me once, but I couldn't follow too well. Strangely enough, some years later, when I got into a dispute with Karakos and Jean-Luc over the Rock Generation series, I got accused by Karakos to have sold out BYG to Virgin by encouraging Daevid to sign with them and even negotiating the contract. Totally untrue, Daevid can vouch for that.

In short, I don't see ANYTHING indicating that Gomelsky could have been "Virgin's man". Apart from returning to the Manor later in 1973 to produce a Supersister album (a Polydor release), I don't know of any further involvement by him with Virgin. In those years he was busy enough managing Magma.

So the band wasn't "abandoned" at the Manor

Indeed. The making of the album seems to have followed its logical course with members of the band returning to England (Manor & AIR in London) to mix the album in February 1973. There is no indication of BYG disappearing from view that early - although it was likely experiencing difficulties at that time as I don't think they released much if anything after the Autumn of 1972.

[Udi Koomran]

Listenin to the title track of Flying Teapot of this remaster It seems like a diffrent mix then what was used on the Virgin album
This seems free from all the terrible artifacts that plagued the previous Charly editions
will listen more

[strawberrybrick]

Again, this makes no sense. BYG was long gone by the time Virgin could be called a "vastly expanding empire". The earliest time to call it that would be early 1974 with the release and success of "The Exorcist" and the resulting effect on "Tubular Bells", which until then had been a very good seller but nowhere near the record-breaking hit it then became. With the court case documented as taking place in October 1974, to still use the name BYG when discussing this (by then Young was running Charly, and it was Charly who took Virgin to court, not BYG) is disingenuous.

I know the albums sold like hotcakes, but I thought that Virgin received a lump sum ($50,000?) for its use in the Exorcist.

[calyx]

I know the albums sold like hotcakes, but I thought that Virgin received a lump sum ($50,000?) for its use in the Exorcist.

Maybe, but this was worth it with 20,000,000 sales, the profit from which ALL went to Virgin (and a few percent to Oldfield).

[Bazcrim]

Here is a quote that appeared on the SH forum taken from a facebook message from the Alchemy mastering engineer, regarding the vinyl box. Adds some interesting comments.

"Hi. It was a couple of years ago that we worked on these titles, so this is a little from memory; The master tapes were BYG quarter inch masters, and in general sounded excellent, especially considering the age of them. (BYG was the label that the band were signed to in France). The vinyl was mastered pure analogue, with no digital stage between the analogue master tape and the vinyl cutting lathe. There may be some pictures of the tape boxes in the accompany artwork which would give you some more information. As we understand it the accompany sleeve notes discuss the contracts between BYG and Virgin, which may give you more insight into that relationship). The work that Alchemy undertook was on the basis that the record company releasing the remasters had all the required licenses in order to do so legally, as our terms and conditions of business require all of our clients to do so in regard to every project that they enlist our mastering services for. We are aware of the subsequent issues that have arisen, and we hope that all the parties involved can come to a mutually beneficial agreement soon regarding this release."

[Mister Triscuits]

Here is a quote that appeared on the SH forum

My first thought was to interpret this as "the Steve Hillage Forum."

[Udi Koomran]

I just compared Flying Tepot Charly to the original vinyl
Virgin vinyl is easily supiriour

[Bazcrim]

My first thought was to interpret this as "the Steve Hillage Forum."

No, Steve Hoffman sorry.

[Rand Kelly]

I really think this needs repeating... From the Planet Gong facebook page (sticky first post)


OFFICIAL BAND STATEMENT

We, the surviving members of Gong, do not support Charly Records upcoming reissue of the Radio Gnome trilogy.

None of the surviving members of the lineups that created those recordings
were ever signed to Charly Records.

The truth is that during the making of Flying Teapot in January 1973, the band learned that the record company - BYG Records (also known as Promodisc) - had gone bust, it's Paris office stripped bare, no phones working. The band was abandoned at the Manor Studios midway through the album. Virgin - at the time just a chain of record stores and The Manor studios - was about to launch their record label.

Faced with an unpaid recording bill, they decided to cut their losses and release Flying Teapot as the second release on the new Virgin Records label. That's the true story.

The booklet advertised as accompanying the Charly/BYG Release is full of untruths, lies and falsehoods claiming to represent Charly and BYG Records as some sort of poor victim of Virgin's wickedness. The truth is that none of the musicians on those recordings has ever received a penny of royalty payments for the Charly/BYG releases, or even a statement. This is understandable because we NEVER signed to BYG or Charly Records as Gong.

Meanwhile, forty years later, we still receive statements from Virgin and, for those of us who cleared our advances, royalty payments, even though Virgin has since been sold to EMI and now is owned by Universal Records.

We know and can confirm as a 100% corroborated fact that the Original Masters of these albums reside in the Virgin Records Archive, and that Charly has never at any time been given access to them, so Charly's claim to have used the Original Masters is false.

Charly has been brazenly abusing our rights as artists for decades. None of us are rich or powerful enough to sue them. All we can do is to let you, our lovely Gong fans, know that we do not support this release. We will be supporting a new boxed set to be released by Universal in a few months with our full collaboration.

DO NOT BUY THIS RELEASE

Call me crazy,old fashioned,even loyal to Steve Hillage and Tim Blake if you like,but I am on their side with this Charly crap and have been since discovering how much they have exploited Gong and the fans. I will not be buying this unless the remaining members condone it.

[JKL2000]

Call me crazy,old fashioned,even loyal to Steve Hillage and Tim Blake if you like,but I am on their side with this Charly crap and have been since discovering how much they have exploited Gong and the fans. I will not be buying this unless the remaining members condone it.

You should do what I'm doing - buy the Charly set, and if Universal also releases one, buy that too. Then you're covering all your bases. What if it turns out Charly was right all along?