Secret co-writer of "Chelsea Hotel"?

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:53 am

Hello Tchocolatl ~

You are not a part of my fate, so your faith is better placed elsewhere. I can't help but wonder why it is you keep showing up, however; if you don't read what I write, anyway; and what does it matter what I think, as to whether you do or don't. It's like going to a restaurant where you're not going to eat, and complaining loudly and profusely about the food, and proclaiming that you have no intention of ordering. As I'm recalling, you say that respect and good manners are important to you. I'm missing their alleged presence in your postings. As you print exceedingly large and dark, with admonishment, as though I were a child and needing something I'm not getting; and given the nature of our communications; and the mirror of distortion through which you view your own postings ~ it is looking to me like forgetting you is the best plan. If we should meet upon the road, remember that those rules you love to set, these the rules of engagement, apply to you, as well.

I'm glad these issues seem to be self-resolving prior to my 10,000th posting. Tomorrow really will be a better day. I wish you luck. I wish you well.

~ Elizabeth/Lizzy

Tchocolatl · Post by **Tchocolatl** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 6:35 am

Lz, I wrote "I do no read and answer your insults" not " I do not read and answer your post".

So I guess I should have wrote even bigger, but ey!

"(...) so your faith is better placed elsewhere (...) "

Really? Do you think so? As for me, what if I believe it is my destiny (((((8)))))) that you will understand the difference? Between being polite and being respectful. Between wit and sensitivity. Between a 10,000e post and one that worth 10,000 posts. What if I don't want to listen to anybody, common sense, what if I decide that I don't care for you or anybody else, only me as long as it pleases me to continue and that I decide that I will go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on?

Don't worry, the above comment is not serious. The only thing I want is that you leave me alone (just get off my back for good, for real - not just for the window of time you may post your x post and I could disturb your "award ceremony" OK? ) and then, yes, we both could put le point final to this discussion and go on to other discussions that are meaningful for both of us. This is my wish.

So, me too, I wish you luck, I wish you well.

Kjelling · Post by **Kjelling** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 6:47 am

Greg,
Of course there are differences between the co-called #1 (1972) and #2 (1974) versions of "Chelsea Hotel". But the melody is the same, and that was the matter in question. Cornelius stated implicitly that Cohen wrote all the words.

As for referring this thread at Wikipedia, it is less as a source than it is a gesture to show that the information wasn't taken out of thin air. (Spaces contra commas and periods in large numbers are a matter of stylistic choice.)

Tom,
Three Leonard Cohen CDs are remastered (see the Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:New_S ... _remasters)

Lizzytysh,
Didn't you promise not to write any more posts in this thread?

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:34 am

Hi Kjelling ~ I said it would be my last, as that was my intent; however, I didn't promise [fortunately]. You will be able to return to the real topic at hand, very soon. I just need to clarify something with Tchocolatl.

Tchocolatl ~

These are what you've written:

I don't read your troll posts Lz.

Lz I DO NOT READ YOUR INSULTS.

Do I have to write it bigger? OK?

I DO NOT READ YOU INSULTS. SO YOU ARE LOSING YOUR TIME INSULTING ME.

Writing it bigger won't help, if you can't get the message right. You make statements that you do not "read/READ" ~ Not reading is not reading. Period. "Troll posts" or "INSULTS" ~ of course, you have to read them to determine how you categorize them. However, you not only do categorize them, but you, indeed, state about as clearly as you possibly could, that you don't even "read/READ" them. You also consider all of my posts to you as "troll" posts, and you've already said you don't read my "troll" posts.

This does not relate to the above. This is fiction. I'm not sure where your missing link is, but you're missing what it is that you yourself are and are not saying:

Lz, I wrote "I do no read and answer your insults" not " I do not read and answer your post".

Now, given your own, last line, I trust that we are in agreement; this a rhetorical statement, not requiring an answer.

I'm not even going to delve into whatever else you said. I'd really prefer to return the floor to Kjelling and Greg [including me, as well], as it relates to Leonard, Ron/Don, and "Chelsea Hotel/#2."

~ Elizabeth/Lizzy

tomsakic · Post by **tomsakic** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:33 am

Kjelling wrote:Tom,
Three Leonard Cohen CDs are remastered (see the Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:New_S ... _remasters)

This is the first news. This info obviously comes from some other source, because it was never said in any of the books (Nadel or Devlin would mention that), or Cohen or his management (only info we have are "there's no remasters" and "The Essential is first remaster").

In any case if this is true, this is not REAL remaster because sound of those CDs isn't nothing better than sound of othe rnice price CDs. Maybe Sony referred to every LP>CD transfer as "remaster", but I will always claim that Various Positions is worst sounding Leonard's CD ever (low sound) - you have only compare VP CD with those tracks taken from it to The Essential. (Of course, muddy and muffled sound of Spector's album is out of consideration.) Or remastering progressed so much that I don't hear the difference.
Also, Songs of Love and Hate CD doesn't sound as remastered. Is there any notion on CDs? How can I know which one is the remastered one? All CDs I bought, ending with More Best Of chonologically, were on nice prices, and none of them sounds good like latest releases (1997-2004).

Kjelling · Post by **Kjelling** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:57 am

Tom,

Veteran Vic Anesini is credited for remastering the mentioned albums at Sony Music Studios, New York, in text taken from some catalog and quoted at for instance http://cduniverse.com/ and http://www.buy.com/. I suspect the source is Muze Inc.

What do you mean by "REAL remaster"? My guess is that the other CDs are digitized versions of the LP masters while the Anesini masters were made new in 1995. And no, Sony does not refer to every LP->CD transfer as "remaster".

but I will always claim that Various Positions is worst sounding Leonard's CD ever (low sound)

Low sound doesn't mead bad sound! On the contrary, not pushing it up to maximum (as is custom these days) preserves the dynamic sound of the analog recording. In my opinion a release like Songs of Love and Hate (which also was remastered for LP in 2002) sounds really good. (As for Various Positions, there were also earlier editions than the 1995 remaster, such as the 1989 CD.)

If you want bad, listen to Songs from a Room.

tomsakic · Post by **tomsakic** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 1:02 pm

I am really not in that matter, but under REAL remasters I think of the sound quality like on The Essential, so that all albums should be remastered from tis mastertapes, not onyl as digitised LPs... About VP you're right, the sound is clean, but it's also VERY low and I think it's due only to CD mix, and it has to be better.

So, how can I buy the remastered edition of Songs of Love and Hate, or all CDs in sail are that edition?

PS. I think Mojo's CD was also somehow remastered - something was done, but CD wasn't surelly simpy compiled from existing Sony's CD because early songs are much better sounding than on CDs; of course not even close to quality of The Essential, but better than on Sony CDs.

I know that Hi-Fi puritans say "remastering" is just pumping up ff the volume, and I know it's proven, but still, The Essential sound better to my ignorant hears than nice price CDs.

I'd like to see Doug Sax or whomever going back to the mastertapes and making the new CDs. I even vote for total remastering, like Lou Reed's NYC Man CD, when you can hear John Cale's piano, which obviously wasn't hearable on the original album. Maybe it's intervening into original piece of art, but I'd like to hear someone finally cleans that Spector's record... Or to hear first album with all Simon's orchestration so nice deep in the background, as on The Essential's tracks.

tomsakic · Post by **tomsakic** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 1:29 pm

In any case, some of my CDs don't have the original back sleeves of LPs... Like Songs of Love and Hate, here's backcover of 2002 LP release, from http://www.amazon.de:

Do I have to say that I see this for the first time?

Kjelling, there are some other 2002 vinyl reissues listed at German Amazon from Simply Vin, like Greatest Hits... Are those remastered also?

Tchocolatl · Post by **Tchocolatl** » Wed Dec 07, 2005 3:14 pm

Strange enough I think the big letters helped.

Should you really read my posts you will know by now that I really wrote
(the problem is that you don't take the time to really care about what others are writing you are too busy thinking only about you-you-you. I don't care, only when you are on my back because it please you-you-you, I want you to get off). When there is many posts and they are long, it can be tedious to read them all, I know.

So.

Should you really have read my previous posts here you would not have make the mistake to write the above (btw, may I suggest that in the future you read carefully posts of other people? And also that you did not harass them in an effort to make you feel good "look good" (people who troll others only look like jerks, not like witty spririts, do you know this? well maybe jerks amoung them will like this, but I think that you try to have another sort of image of yourself). It is up to you to decide. Of course.

I was saying, that if you really have paid attention to what I wrote here, you can not have jump to false conclusions as you do too often : you should have known that I wrote :

1) "I stop to read as soon as I see it is a troll post" which is quiete easy.
2) I do not think that all your posts are troll post. I hope that by now you can do yoursfelf the difference and forget about trolling others. Maybe you taste a little how unpleasant it is to be harass?

And in your case you harass people for nothing, only to make you feel good, "better" than the person you hit, to keep the feeling that you always "win".

The problem is, that to harass and to gather other people to harass it not exactly what corresponds to the image you would like have and others as well about you. So please stop it for good. Or choose right now what you want to be and look like.

Lz wrote

I'm not even going to delve into whatever else you said. I'd really prefer to return the floor to Kjelling and Greg [including me, as well], as it relates to Leonard, Ron/Don, and "Chelsea Hotel/#2."

How could you delve at something you do not take into account, anyway? That you don't take the time to read and understand? Your answers reflect the lack of respect you have for others, you are only putting you on the floor and under the spot like a too much spoil child that can not behave amoung adults.

I have faith, anyway, that this time your have REALLY read this post and that you understand the harm you are doing to your IMAGE, by harassing other without a though for them. You want to look good? Be good.

I wish you this.

[/quote]

linda_lakeside · Post by **linda_lakeside** » Sat Dec 10, 2005 9:30 am

What is the story here? Doesn't Leonard have the grace to share songwriting credit, or is Cornelius mistaken?

If you checked with BMI, Kjelling, and they have them down as co-writers, then he is being paid as a co-writer to whatever percentage is listed in their files. Usually, the publisher will file the documents on the writers' behalf. So, he's getting paid, as co-writer, whether Leonard likes it or not.

Linda.

PS: So what if I'm remarking on a comment that was made about 6 pages back?

ForYourSmile · Post by **ForYourSmile** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:08 pm

lizzytysh wrote:I've also seen the jealousy aspect with men in regard to Leonard. You may recall our having delved into that a bit here, a long time ago. I've seen it in my personal life, as well. Who wants to be [even implicitly] 'compared' ~ better to make them, somehow, 'less than,' and then you can feel better about yourself. [As though there were any real comparisons going on, anyway .]

Have you known so insecure male, with so much fear for hearing the Name?

I heard of a man
who says words so beautifully
that if he only speaks their name
women give themselves to him.

If I am dumb beside your body
while silence blossoms like tumors on our lips
it is because I heard a man climb stairs
and clear his throat outside our door.

I remembered this Leonard Cohen's Poem and think of you again. I write it in this forgotten corner with few hopes that you read it, just I do it for need, to say that I long for you.

(I went to see the gypsy and she says that the phpBB has a very big counter and that no misfortune will happen to us if you exceed it).

Kjelling · Post by **Kjelling** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:34 am

Tomislav,

Some people say that the first "import" CD of VP (from Passport Records?) sounds better than the Sony CD.

One should think that when the Sony remasters were made in 1995 (SoLaH, NSftOC, VP), their first editions would no longer be in sale, but I just don't know (I don't know about the other Simply Vinyl LPs either). I bought my CDs in Norway around 2000 and they sound good (the "low sound" could mean that they are clean transfers without equalizers, noise filters, volume boost and such – Vic Anesi is said to be a purist).

I don't think you should pay much attention to the "nice price" stickers. It doesn't mean they were made cheap – they're just dumped on sale.

I even vote for total remastering, like Lou Reed's NYC Man CD, when you can hear John Cale's piano, which obviously wasn't hearable on the original album. Maybe it's intervening into original piece of art, but I'd like to hear someone finally cleans that Spector's record...

You say you hear instruments that weren't there on the original release of an album. It shouldn't really be that way with a remaster. Are you sure the Reed CD isn't remixed as well? That would mean actually panning the instruments and adjusting the volume of each all over again from the original multitrack studio tapes. It's a great idea what DoaLM is concerned, though.

By the way, have you ever compared the sound of "Sing Another Song, Boys" from SoLaH and "Tonight Will Be Fine" from Live Songs? They are taken from the same concert recording ...

Linda,
Cornelius is being paid 50 % of all income from performance of "Chelsea Hotel #2" (such as radio play), but not from record sales (if I have understood correctly).

YankovicGretzky · Post by **YankovicGretzky** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:14 pm

So this is what all the fuss is about?!

tomsakic · Post by **tomsakic** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:29 pm

Kjelling, the fact that we can hear now Cale's piano was happily announced by Lue Reed himself in the booklet... And I agree, that could mean it's remixed also. But I don't know where the intervention begin and remastering stops. Like, we know 100% that Field Commander Cohen was mixed and pasted from three or four shows. Leanne Ungar herself told that, i.e., first night the "Memories" were great, but Ostermayer's say was better the 2nd night, so she cut the sax from 2nd night to 1st night's song. The same was going on with violin, audience clapping... That interview did shock me in a way, particularly because I recalled immediately of fans who - on the old, black board - claimed that they have audience recordings from Hammersmith and other shows, and that there's no those big ovations to Bilezikjian after his oud solo... Is that OK? Or is it too much of interference?

I think that "performing rights" means share (percent) of all releasing but not the copyrights - LC still gets "performing shares" for his back catalogue, but no more royalties of airing and sold copies, after Kelley sold teh royalties (in his name). I don't know is the airing included in "perfoming rights" but I think they aren't (it was told that Lynch told LC his airing royalties aren't enough and that he must sold royalties). If you read carefully the credits for The Essential and Field Commander Cohen, you'll see that copyrights aren't credited to Stranger Music or Bad Monk Publishing but to Sony ATV! Only after Lynch affair I realised why this change (I was thinking over it for some time, but I thought, some kind of re-structuring...

). While Dear Heather is copyrighted to Old Ideas, LC's new company. - So I think Cornelius might get percent of the performing rights for each new release (for The Essential), but I am not sure about every airing - but again, I don't know much about BMI.

I did not compare those two IOW cuts, but it has been told many times that Tonight Will Be Fine from BBC's airing in mid 1990s (for IOW anniversary) is much better than on LC's album. I agree! Do you have it? I have it along with complete IOW's Suzanne, also taken from BBC radio show in 1990s. (Only the part was played in IOW - Message of Love DVD.)

Cohendrix · Post by **Cohendrix** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:55 am

All the speculation in this thread shows how prickly people can get about things they don't have any idea about.

It's possible that Cohen didn't credit a co-writer in the "#2" because he wanted to hog royalties. Yes, it's possible. He ain't the messiah, kids.

However, it's also possible that the co-writer of the "#1" is carping because he is disappointed that Cohen excised his contributions to the composition and cut off said co-writer from potential money.

In either case, we don't know. I don't know Cohen. I don't know what kind of business practice he is or isn't capable of. Nor do 99.9% of the people in this forum. Only the two writers know the truth. Cohen gets the benefit of the doubt. End of story.

Secret co-writer of "Chelsea Hotel"?

Sheesh. Give it up, folks.