From California Magazine, a two-part interview by Stephen McPartland, used by permission

A recent Email interview by Ivan Pongracic of the Space Cossacks

This interview was conducted by Stephen McPartland of California Magazine with Peter Hood at Atlantics Studio on December 24, 1978.
PETER HOOD drums
BOSCO BOSANAC bass
THEO PENGLIS lead and rhythm guitar
JIM SKIATHITIS lead and rhythm guitar
(PRODUCER - Sven Libaek]
HOW DID THE GROUP FIRST GET TOGETHER? I'VE HEARD THE STORY THAT YOU ALL MET IN THE BUS ON THE WAY HOME FROM THE BEACH. IS THIS CORRECT?
Yes. It was a combination of meeting in buses and we also went to the same school. The one
thing that really started it all was an incident which now looking back, was very funny. One day,
Theo Penglis and this smaller guy, who we used to call "Little Eddie" (Eddy Matsonic), were
running away after swiping some guy's apricots or plums from an orchard in Randwick when they happened to come into this friend of mine's place where I was. They reckoned they were being chased by a guy with a shotgun and were really relieved to be inside. They sat down and had a cup of coffee and we started talking about music. I think this friend of mine and I had been fooling around with a tape recorder ... I eventually said, "How about you come over or we'll go over to your place and we'll have a jam" and that's how it started.
HOW AND WHY DID YOU CHOOSE THE NAME, THE ATLANTICS?
It came from the old petrol company - Atlantic Petrol. We were walking around one day trying to think of a group name. We went through names like "The Eagles". "The Falcons". "The Jet
Streams" -you name it! Then we saw a sign that read, Atlantic Patrol and we thought. "Well..
you can't get more publicity than that" -having your name all over the place! Therefore. we
settled for THE ATLANTICS. It had nothing to do with the ocean, a fact that confused people
later on. A lot of people thought we were an American band, which in one way was good. Over
the years I've met a lot of disc jockeys who have confessed. "Gee. I'm sure if we'd known you
were an Australian band, we would never have played your records".
THAT'S SURPRISING BECAUSE YOUR SOUND WAS VERY DIFFERENT TO WHAT
THE AMERICAN'S WERE PUTTING OUT AT THE TIME. YOU HAD A MORE
RAUNCHY AND DRIVING SOUND.
I suppose so. Hopefully, it was different. We spent about a year perfecting it. We practised to get a different sound or hopefully develop something unique.
WHO WERE YOUR MUSICAL INFLUENCES AT THE TIME?
Everyone I think! The Ventures were a part influence as far as certain things were concerned.
Then. of course. there was The Shadows.ANY AUSTRALIAN GROUPS OR ARTISTS?
I suppose Col Joy And The Joy Boys, or more specifically, The Joy Boys. We learned a lot from them. especially John Bogie. their drummer. He was one of the few blokes around who seemed to know a lot about drumming. I used to go and watch him like a hawk!
ANYBODY ELSE? WHAT ABOUT THE FOUR STRANGERS? THEIR EARLY SOUND
WAS SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU WERE DOING. THEY LATER EVOLVED INTO THE
SUNSETS AND FINALLY, TAMAM SHUD?
Oh yes, I new them later on. They were good too. However, I don't think we were particularly
influenced by them though I thought they were great. I think the funniest band of all was The
Pacifics. I think Nat Kipner put them together In an attempt to match and swamp us. That's he
called them The Pacifics! He gave them as close as possible the same sound as us and up them on the bill against us. They weren't that bad either! Anyway, they disappeared soon after because like anything else, you can't really imitate someone for too long. Another band I thought were really good were The Strangers from Melbourne. We saw them emerge just before Beatles burst on the scene. That was when they were still playing Shadow's instrumentals and getting into some Beach Boys' material. They were probably one of the best groups in Australia at the time. At least that was my opinion. There were really hundreds of good groups and it was very hard to know who were REALLY good. It was just a case of if people liked you or not.
WHAT WAS THE INITIAL LINE-UP OF THE ATLANTICS? WERE THERE ANY
PERSONNEL CHANGES?
There was really only one change from the day the group started and that was Eddy Matsonic's
departure. He left way before we got our established sound. This left me on drums. Bosco
Bosanac on bass and Theo Penglis and Jim Skiathitis jointly on lead and rhythm guitar. We also
had a young guy by the name of Kenny Shane as lead vocalist for awhile. Apart from being the
image of Cliff Richard, he also sounded a lot like him. On many songs, you couldn't tell the
difference. He was a really good singer, but something happened and he left to pursue a solo
career. This must have been just after the end of 1962 or just before. I thought he was great and
it probably would have been good if he'd stayed with us.
SO, BESIDES PLAYING INSTRUMENTALS, YOU WERE ALSO PERFORMING VOCALS?
Yes. We were doing both instrumentals and vocals - Cliff Richard and The Shadows' material as
well as a combination of some of the things from another band from Europe, The Spotniks. They
had good technique and a lot of recording gimmicks. plus they were using a lot of multi dubbing
which even The Shadows were doing. We were performing everything from Johnny And The
Hurricanes onwards. I think we were doing songs from all the American bands of the time. We
had worked up a complete repertoire and sound and then we had our own material.
WHEN DID YOU START RECORDING VOCALS? YOUR FIRST RELEASES WERE ALL INSTRUMENTALS.
Actually, we recorded our first vocal record around the same time we recorded "Bombora", but
vocals were not in then. It was called "Count Down Stomp" and Kenny did the vocal on that.
The record was released as our third single (b/w '.Surfin' Queen"). but died because "Bombora"
was still receiving a lot of airplay.
"MOON MAN" WAS YOUR FIRST RECORDING, FOLLOWED BY "BOMBORA". WERE THEY RECORDED AT THE SAME TIME?
"Moon Man" was recorded first and "Count Down Stomp" was done at the recording session
immediately after or shortly before "Bombora". "Bombora" was already in the can before it was
done. Actually, "Bombora" was written more than a year before there was such a thing as "Surf
Music". The title was added to it when we realised there was something happening. The people
who were into surfing suddenly wanted their own music. Whatever it was that happened, they
made a certain type of music their own and it all became known as "Surf Music".
THE AUSTRALIAN FORM OF "SURF MUSIC" WAS NOT THAT MUCH DIFFERENT TO WHAT WAS ALREADY BEING PERFORMED AROUND TOWN. MOST OF THE
MATERIAL WAS THE SAME EXCEPT IT HAD "SURF" IN THE TITLE.
Exactly. They started to influence each other by adding the titles or changing what they already
had. It was a big craze. We were all too young and closed in and so didn't realise at the time that
it was as big as it was. If I'd known, I would have thought of more ways to cash in on it.
LOOKING BACK AT THE CHARTS AND MAGAZINES OF THE TIME, IT BECOMES
APPARENT THAT "SURF MUSIC" WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE THE BIGGEST SINGLE MUSICAL CRAZE TO EVER TAKE HOLD IN AUSTRALIA. FOR EXAMPLE, AT ONE STAGE-OCTOBER, 1963-SIX OUT OF THE TOP TEN RECORDS WERE SURF RELATED. YET, THE AMAZING THING WAS JUST AS SOON AS IT HIT, IT WAS ALL OVER!
The reason it died so quickly was because of the Beatles. The Beatles made the next biggest
change in music since rock and roll was born.
IN AUSTRALIA THE SURF MUSIC CRAZE PEAKED IN LATE 1963 AND BY EARLY TO MID 1964 IT WAS ALL OVER. HOWEVER, IN AMERICA "SURF MUSIC" LASTED NEARLY TWO YEARS LONGER; AT LEAST INTO LATE 1965.
1 think the music business fizzled it out because they all just latched onto The Beatles' thing. On
the otherhand, the Americans didn't particularly care which way or the other what England was
doing. In fact, until that time England really had no influence on America at all. Even guys like
Cliff Richard could not get hits in the States and he was number one for something like five or six
years in England. He also had about fifteen records in Australia that went Top Ten, or close to it.
I think Cliff Richard And The Shadows were voted Top Group for four or five years in a row here and he could not even dent the charts in America. So that's why it took longer to dent the
American scene and really wipe out what was going on over there. Australia followed England
much more closely and so when England came in with a big music change, Australia latched onto
it very quickly.
WELL, "SURF MUSIC" WAS AN AMERICAN CREATION. IT WAS THEIR MUSIC.
Yes, that's true. It was their invention and so they carried it a lot further.
WITH THE ATLANTICS DEVELOPING THEIR OWN SOUND, DID THE USE OF TWO LEAD GUITARISTS PROVE A BOON?
Yes. it was reasonably odd to have two lead guitarists in those days (especially in a quartet) and it did help us because you can play even the same song with two different guys and never get it to sound the same, which was good. Not that we did that often, but we always auditioned each guy and then we would all vote as to who was the most interesting. Theo did all the super technical stuff because he was really fast. In fact. he was that good that all the other bands were continually making offers to get him. We almost lost him at one stage because he was offered more money and money's always been a good influence.
DURING THE EARLY PART OF THE ATLANTICS CAREER, WEREN'T YOU
INTERESTED IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING?
Well, I was going to join the Navy as an electrical .... I forget what they call it now. I had read a
little about it. but I had not taken any courses. Even today electronics still interest me. The big
trick is knowing how to use it and not necessarily becoming an expert.
I HAVE NOTICED ON A LOT OF YOUR RECORDINGS THAT YOU UTILISED A GREAT DEAL OF ELECTRONIC SOUNDS AND EFFECTS. WERE YOU PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT?
Yes. that was triggered by me. In fact, the whole effect that made "Bombora" interesting in the
beginning was something that I had come across with Jim Skiathitis. We would sit around and
wonder what other sounds we could get out of our guitars and out of the reverb chambers and
echo units. We thought there had to be more there than just all the straight stuff. Therefore, we'd
sit around and experiment. Guys like Hendrix, who came later playing with their teeth. thought
what they were doing was revolutionary. Well, we were doing that back in 1962. When it came to using violin bows like Hendrix, we were well ahead of that. Jim had this special gold ring which had this certain shape and he could do a bird whistle kind of thing using this ring and the guitar. It took the other bands quite a while to figure out just what it was. All it was was this particular ring and only it could do it - you just couldn't do it with just any ring. We just found it out one day by accident while we were experimenting in this Scouts' Hall. I mean. we had everything from bottle tops, violin bows, pieces of wood - you name it. We just sat there scraping guitars, tapping guitars, etc.. We even managed to get a machine gun sound from the guitars using double reverb chambers and two echolettes. We even tried three echolettes. We tried everything else that nobody else thought was normal. Our attitude was, "Let's just try and do it"! As a result, I suppose in our time we came up with maybe half a dozen top effects that we could use both in the studio and on stage. We used to perform "War Of The Worlds" live on stage and if we found we had a really unreceptive audience, we'd hit them with a nine or ten minute version of the tune. It was something like a 1963 version of "Star Wars"! We'd throw in rocket and spacecraft noises and that would really shake up the audience. We even used two amps to get a stereo effect, which made us one of the first bands to have what you could call a live "stereo sound". We had it rigged up so you could shift from right to left with just a foot pedal. In 1963, as far as we knew, nobody else had even thought of it. Gibson had a stereo amp, but it wasn't quite the same thing. I think they had three strings on the left or something like that which meant your highs came from one side and your lows the other. However, we could get a total shift from left to right. After that we tried what became known as "quad" where we had the two amps and shifted the speakers and used further volume separation and control so we could shift our sound from left to right and further right if we wanted to. That way the sound could travel right around the stage. Of all the things we did, I think that was the most exciting. If we'd become as famous as some of the overseas bands, I would have really felt good because then we would have been able to sell all that stuff to the rest of the world, if you know what I mean. You know, an American band that gets to Number One influences the rest of the world. In our own way, we only influenced a small part. We created sounds, etc. that people years later started using and when guys like Hendrix started using the same techniques, well that was exciting because we knew we did it first - years earlier!
INYOUR MIND, WHAT WAS THE ATLANTIC'S BIG BREAK? OR WAS THEIR ON
SINGLE THING?
I thinkyou would have to say that signing up with C.B.S. was our big break. In my mind. if we
had not signed up with them then nothing much would have happened. We had this tough lady
manager, Joan King, who I must admit was very good. I mean she was very tough, a tough lady.
She took our tapes into CBS, and Sven Libaek, who became fairly famous in his own right, liked what he heard. Out of all the record companies, he was the only one to like it. This was probably because he also was so different. When we went into the other record companies such as Festival, they kind of didn't like our material because it was so different to what else was going on at the time. They would always suggest we come back in about a year's time. Anyway, CBS liked it, got us in and we auditioned live in Sven Libaek's office. He went crazy and said something like, "We gotta record you" and so we were signed! I think that was our big break because without CBS, and the chance to put it down on tape, we would have died. Sven was definitely the right guy for us. His mind worked that way - towards something different and that's what we were!
WAS HE HELPFUL AS A PRODUCER?
Like any producer, he certainly was. All the actual musical stuff was ours, but Sven was the
catalyst. Without him actually saying, "I like that" and "We'll do it exactly as You say", it would
have been destroyed because if anybody else had come in and tried to produce it and change it
around, it probably never would have been liked by anyone. Oddly enough, we actually didn't like the stuff ourselves and that's the funniest thing of all. When we actually recorded the material, we hated it. It was just a natural response from us. However. Sven was smart and always said, "Well, boys, don't try and change it. Don't try and be anyone else except yourselves. The thing I like is what you've got". That in itself is the greatest thing a producer can do for you-to bring out your ideas naturally - and not try and change them or twist them.
WHO DID THE ARRANGING?
It was all done collectively. We'd pass votes and that was it.
WHAT ABOUT THE ACTUAL WRITING AND CHOICE OF MATERIAL?
Oddly enough, I got a bit edgy about it all. I was the first to really start writing. I wrote the first song we ever did, "Moon Man", although Theo, Jim and Bosco were also starting to write. I
was lucky because I was the one who seemed to trigger off the hit-type sounds. I don't know
what it was, but it just came out of my head. I influenced Jim because he wasn't really a
songwriter at that time. He really didn't like songwriting. I had already written "Bombora" almost
twelve months before it was released. However, I got Jim involved in it and we finished it off
together. The same with the follow-ups. I'd always start them and then finish them off with
someone.
ONCE YOU HAD ESTABLISHED YOUR OWN SOUND, WERE YOU STILL BEING
INFLUENCED BY OTHER BANDS?
No. Once we got our sound we virtually stayed with it. We were greatly influenced by bands
before we actually hit our sound and once we seemed to get our own sound, at least one that
people seemed to like, we figured it was no use trying to follow someone else anymore because
what we had then was what everybody seemed to want. Therefore. we stuck with it and only
changed it very slightly, but always keeping the same basic frame-work. Then, when The Beatles
came out everything changed. That sort of killed it anyway.
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ATLANTICS WHEN THE BEATLES HIT?
We then started doing vocals! We started getting into things similar to The Beatles, just like
every other band in the world. It was just another case of being influenced by what was happening around us-everything from The Beatles to Merseybeat. Still. we tried to change it and inject some of our own originality, but it didn't work. Therefore. we went back to doing some instrumentals. Actuallly, the biggest thing that killed it for us was the fact that we were making a good living for a long time by just performing live. There were thousands of people who seemed to want to see us as we were. In fact, people would walk out disgusted if we didn't play all of our earlier hits. Well, we got fairly lazy and didn't care too much about getting hit records because we were able to pack the people in and perform to full houses and make money and have a good time doing it.
NONETHELESS, YOUR STAGE ACT MUST HAVE CHANGED SOMEWHAT FROM
WHEN YOU FIRST BEGAN PERFORMING?
Yes. We were doing, a lot more vocals, but we never did any of the standard surfin'-type vocals. We did all the instrumental-type material, but not the vocals although we did do a few Beach Boys' things - but not very well; nowhere near as good as other Australian bands of the time although they were good enough for the stage because people liked the songs themselves.
IT WAS AROUND THIS TIME THAT YOU TEAMED UP WITH JOHNNY REBB. DID HE JOIN YOU OR DID YOU JOIN HIM?
Well. it was kind of a business thing. He was doing well in the business and by then so were we,
so we figured why not try a combination of his act and ours and see what happens ... He was a
really good rock 'n roll sort of singer as well as a performer. It didn't matter that much if his voice wasn't perfect because it worked for rock and roll and the material we were doing.
DID YOU STILL CONTINUE TO RECORD AS SEPARATE ACTS OR WAS IT MORE A JOINT EFFORT?
We recorded together and separately and also under other names! I think BURNING
THOUGHTS was one of our other names. This was around 1965-1966 when we knew The
Atlantics brought up the old surf image. Therefore, we figured we'd try a different name. This
way people would have to judge the music for the music's sake and not go by the group name.
DO YOU CONSIDER THE RELEASES ISSUED UNDER THE "JOHNNY REBB"
MONIKER AS YOUR RELEASES?
Well, we backed Johnny on all his releases after he joined us. It was just our manager's (Sid
McDonagh) idea. I think we all agreed to it because we had a sort of unanimous type thing
happening. If we all agreed on something, then we did it. If we didn't agree, we'd usually argue it
out. We agreed to use Johnny Rebb's name because it sounded interesting and a lot of people did already like him. It was also another way of trying to peg us apart; using a different name to draw a different interest. However, we still had a small problem. Whereas I mentioned before that people tended to associate The Atlantics' name with a surf image, other people associated
Johnny's name with the 1959-60 rock and roll era: the period when he had all his big hits.
Therefore. that was just as bad as far as carrying the weight of an old reputation goes. He was
known as "The Gentleman Of Rock", so that sort of tended to destroy his rock and roll image a
bit. Basically. it was all just a different way of packaging in an attempt to overcome the problem.
THEREFORE, ANYTHING THAT CAME OUT UNDER THE NAME, "JOHNNY REBB",
FROM ABOUT 1963 ONWARDS WAS ACTUALLY THE ATLANTICS AS A GROUP?
Yes. it was all of us and in most cases it was also written by us. From the moment "Bombora"
was a hit until 1970, we were together as a group.
DID YOU CONTINUE TO PLAY THE SAME STYLE OF MUSIC?
The same ... well similar. Here's an example ... You've heard "I Put A Spell On You" ... Well that was getting into The Animals sound (Alan Price wrote it) and Johnny was great at doing The
Animals material. Therefore, you can see a change was taking place by comparing "Bombora" to
The Animals! We did all of their material, so that was another sound we were getting into and
that was nothing like surf music. They had everything from songs like "The House Of The Rising
Sun" to "When I Was Young", where incidently they began using the violin bow trick on the
guitars - you know. the cello bomp. bomp, bomp. bomp, plus I think they were also using
something else on the guitar that gave it a sort of raunchy. raspy clicking sound. So really, The
Animals were our kind of band. They were really soul, gutsy, the whole thing and then there were other bands like The Ivy League - really multi-harmony bands. We were doing some of their material even though we couldn't do The Beach Boys' songs that well. However, with Johnny, our vocal capacity improved and we were able to achieve a pretty good multi-harmony sound. He was capable of handling either high or low which really helped us out a lot. Jim Skiathitis (Jim Addams as he was called later) was really good at putting on a John Lennon voice, so when it came to doing a John Lennon type vocal, Jim was excellent. In fact, on some of the songs it was real hard to tell the difference. So in all, we weren't bad at doing a Beatles' imitation or an Animals' imitation. As I said, we began to get into harmonies, more of the Animals' style. I don't know what you call it; they were calling it rhythm and blues at the time. We were also doing a whole heap of other things, mostly everything off the charts. We found that type of formula worked really well.
SO INACTUAL FACT, THE ONLY REASON YOU BECAME LABELLED AS A "SURF"
BAND WAS BECAUSE OF THE SUCCESS OF "BOMBORA"?
That's right although we were into surfing itself. I mean, I was into it back in school during 1960-
61. I was one of the first guys to put lemon juice in my hair - I had much more hair then. I was
the traditional surf nut. whatever they want to call it, even before "surfie" became a well known
term in Australia. I was a surfie before the word became established as far as the music was
concerned. Sofor me, getting into surf music was only a natural progression. It was funny that
everyone called us a surfing band. I suppose we were all genuine, more specifically me. I and
another friend from school, who wasn't in the band, were both true dyed in the wool surfers as per the American formula even though we didn't know they were doing the same thing over there. Anyway, we got labeled as a surf band purely because of that. However, we did change: I mean anyone who has heard "I Put A Spell On You" live would never think we had anything to do with surf music. Our recorded version was not as good because they had no multitrack recorders inAustralia at the time. The best we ever got was two track. They were using four and eight track in England and that meant you could do better recordings over there. Another reason was we had only just perfected the song and we developed it much better later on. Johnny did it really wel1 and it would tear the house down. We had another song called, "Lonely Guy", but that never did get released. We recorded it at E.M.I.. but they weren't into that sort of thing at the time. It was a real screamy-soul-rock-blues type thing. The flip was "What Kind of Lovin'".
WAS THERE MUCH MATERIAL RECORDED BY THE ATLANTICS THAT DID NOT
FIND RELEASE?
Oh yeah, there was a lot of stuff. In fact, it was that far ahead of its time that was the rotten thing. It was almost a year later before the same type of material began filtering through. Creedenc
Clearwater Revival's material was a good example and once again, Johnny Rebb was the best I've ever heard (and probably still is) when it came to doing the Creedence voice copy. In fact, the two guys had similar voices. That is Johnny's true vocal sound, so when their stuff eventually
came out, we could do it like a carbon copy and as a result, while they were successful, we had a lot of success with it! This was around 1968-69. As you can see, we had a lot of styles and that was the story really.
HOW LONG DID THE GROUP STAY TOGETHER?
The group lasted from around 1961 until 1970. We really would have kept on going except for the fact we all wanted to do slightly different things. These were not musical in nature, rather
concentrated in other areas and that sort of meant we wouldn't have the time to be in the band. As a result, we decided to split up.
WHY DID YOU LEAVE CBS? WAS IT A DRAMATIC DEPARTURE OR A MUTUAL
ONE?
Well, there was only a slight drama - in the sense that C.B.S. must have realised (or thought
anyway) that we'd run our route for them and they couldn't see the thousands of dollars rolling in
anymore. We also wanted to start spending a little more time in the studio and this they didn't
think worthwhile. Therefore, we HAD to break loose. We figured that if we were going to spend
our money, then we might as well spend it ourselves and that's just what we did. We went to
outside studios, for awhile and that was costing us a fortune, so as I've said before, we thought
we had a fairly good sound, so we said to C.B.S.. "Will you let us go" and they said "Yes".
DID THE GROUP CONTINUE RIGHT UP TO THE SPLIT IN 1970? IF SO, WHAT WAS
YOUR LAST RELEASE?
Yes. After leaving CBS, we formed our own company and eventually Ramrod Records which
stood for Rebb-Atlantics-McDonagh-Record-Organization. The group's last release was a thing
called "Light Shades of Dark" Parts One and Two. It had as its initials. L.S.D.. It was fairly
inventive, but we weren't to happy with it. We did have a couple of minor hit vocal records - not
in Australia and this is a funny story. Around 1967 to 1969 we recorded the first version of "I Just Can't Help Believin'" which became a #1 hit for B.J. Thomas and Elvis as well. We got the
original demo from the song's composers - we always got this demo stuff from overseas.
Anyway, we had cut the first version which wasn't bad I must say; actually, it was bloody good,
but like now and like it was then, there's always a limit. There's maybe only one, two, or three
bands that can get their material played. I hate to say this, but its the same old story. If you took twenty Australian records I only one will stand a bare chance of getting airplay and our version of "I Just Can't Help Believin"' was one of those that got dumped. Anyway, we sent the thing to
America and B.J. Thomas heard our version and did a virtual carbon copy of our vocal
arrangement and added a few strings and brass and came up with a number one hit record. The
same thing also happened with another band, The Music Explosion. Again we received a demo
from overseas, this time from England. We completely re-arranged it, but again our version was
ignored in Australia. Therefore, we sent it to America and it was covered by The Music
Explosion, yet their version was worse than ours and it managed to hit the number two spot on
the charts. The song was "Little Bit '0 Soul". We also had a couple of other things that we did
cover versions of - that is brand new recordings taken from the originals - and our efforts
triggered overseas re-recordings. We once again had access to the original demos! Anyway, the
entire episodes were quite interesting because at least they showed us that we were on the right
track. At least our choice of material was not bad!
EVEN WITH THESE "FAILURES", YOU DID MANAGE TO HAVE YOUR RECORDS
ISSUED OVERSEAS.
Yes and that's a thing we haven't touched on. Our records have been released in just about every country in the world, regardless of language. There's no language barrier with most of our
material. Guys have travelled through Italy, and told me they found "Bombora" on juke boxes
and then other guys have said, "Jeez man, I was in Europe in such and such a year and
you wouldn't believe it, but your bloody record was on the_air! You know, I didn't think you
guys got there". I've personally have South African versions of "Bombora", I've got Japanese
versions. I've got... the funniest thing of all are the other groups doing it. You know, I've
got a Dutch version, a French version, etc and that's a real good feeling. Every artist gets
such a feeling when he thinks that other artists are doing his material.
DIDN'T YOU TOUR JAPAN AT ONE POINT IN YOUR CAREER?
Yes, but that didn't really count. I think America is the only place to go and stay. Do what the Bee Gees did; go there and stay until you make it.
YOU NEVER WENT TO AMERICA?
Well no, not in the sense of going there to stay.
DIDN'T THE DENVERMEN TRY THAT?
I don't really know. The Denvermen were sort of friendly and not friendly at the same time. They
wouldn't tell you much. They were real secretive kind of guys. In fact. they were real funny. When they rehearsed. which was at the same place we did - Griffith Hall in Kingsford - they would skulk around and make sure we were nowhere near and able to see and hear what they were doing. Actually, we didn't care less! Even if they sat and watched us, we wouldn't have cared because there was no way in the world that they could play what and how we played.
THERE DEFINITELY WAS A CONTRAST IN BOTH GROUP'S STYLES
That's right, but they were funny like that. They were always very secretive. If we came over and
looked at their equipment, they would become a little cagey, you know, trying to keep us away.
They were all nice guys, but very secretive. They just wouldn't let us near their equipment to see
what they were using.
YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THAT YOU WERE INFLUENCED BY JOHN BOGIE, THE JOY BOYS' DRUMMER. WERE YOU INFLUENCED BY ANYONE ELSE FROM
AUSTRALIAN BANDS OF THE TIME?
Yes, Dave Bridge. The reason he was an influence was because he was one of the few guys in the world who tried to be pure technical at that time. He was so technical that you had to be a real virtuoso-type of guitarist to be able to play like him. For example. "Dark Eyes" was one of his songs we played. It was a song that we got the most requests for, particularly from other
musicians. Naturally, our version was different to how he performed it, but it was still based on
his kind of fast moving skill. We also did a few of his other songs live on stage because he did
have some real good ones. Dave was another guy who if he had gone overseas and stayed there, could have become world famous. Even though he played a lot like Chet Atkins, he still was . different and in many ways ... better! Dave was a real rock and roll version of Chet, you know, the real finger picking sound. He could have been great ... well GREATER!
DID THE FINAL REALITY OF REALISING IT WAS VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE, AT
THAT TIME ANYWAY, TO MAKE IT REALLY BIG IN AUSTRALIA INFLUENCE YOU TO CURTAIL THE ACTIVITIES OF THE GROUP?
Well not really. The decision or the reason why I gave up music was totally a non-musical one. It
was sort of a personal reason. I decided to redirect my energy into recording studios and other
types of things, like hairdressing salons and all that. I would never have given up music. My next
step would have been to go overseas or bust. There's no way I would have stayed in Australia.
Even when you sell a lot of records here, you're still nowhere!
TURNING ATTENTION TO YOUR RECORDINGS, YOU RECORDED A TOTAL OF
THREE ALBUMS FOR CBS. WHAT CAN YOU RECALL ABOUT THEM?
They were all released in a matter of a year of each other. After THE EXPLOSIVE SOUNDS OF THE ATLANTICS-the third one-C.B.S. issued THE ATLANTICS GREATEST HITS. It was just a case of trying to make sales while the name, "The Atlantics", was really hot. We probably should have kept on recording more material, but I think we left C.B.S. shortly after the release of the "Greatest Hits" package and that was our own fault for not recording more lps. As I mentioned before, we got on the road and sort of stayed there. We found we were entertaining people while performing live. The recording thing was our mistake because people were always coming up to us and saying, "What's the matter with you guys! Why don't you record more lps because there are still people who want to buy them". We just didn't realise because we were totally involved in the performing medium, especially performing our earlier material. That was a lesson we learned and a lesson a lot of bands of today should learn. When anyone starts to think, "Jeez ... I'm sick and tired of doing that old song" or "I don't want to do this or that anymore". well that's it. Ask anybody if they had the chance to go out and see, let's say The Beatles, perform again; what would they want to hear - new material? Of course not! They would want to hear all their favourites--the oldies from the early to mid sixties. I mean, those songs were a part of your life, and that's a big thing. We never forgot that lesson, even though sometimes you didn't really fell like playing "Teddy Bear's Picnic Stomp", "Bombora", or a drum solo, especially after you'd played everything from The Animals to The Beatles. You know, you'd done all this really good material and they liked it, but they still wanted to hear our hits and a drum solo by me! Sometimes we were just too exhausted to do it. We always got requests for a drum solo which was becoming reasonably famous at the time. Well, what do you do? If you send them away disappointed you've
blown the concert. So, do or die, we always did everything they asked for and if they didn't want to hear any of our new stuff, then we would throw all the new stuff out and do all the old things; all the hits. You had to learn what to throw to the right audience and that's what I think we did pretty well.
AS FAR AS YOUR EARLIER MATERIAL WAS CONCERNED, PARTICULARLY THE
CBS RECORDINGS, WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TITLES OF THE TUNES AND THE ALBUMS?
In a couple of cases, CBS was, but most of the time it was our suggestion. Every now and then
they would throw in one of their own and if we liked it, we'd take it. I think EXPLOSIVE
SOUNDS was Sven's title. The song titles were all our own.
HOW DO YOU FEEL KNOWING THAT THE BOMBORA LP IS STILL IN CATALOGUE AFTER ALL THESE YEARS?
It's an amazing thing. Royalties are still coming in. It seems to sell in spasms, probably after
people hear "Bombora" on the radio or maybe they're just replacing an old copy of the lp. The
unfortunate thing about the lp is that is was never released in stereo because E.M.I. never had the facilities (It was recorded at E.M.I.'s studios) and that's another reason we left CBS. We formed our own record company and then worked in the best facilities available. Most of this later stuff we leased out to other labels and that's why you'll find our material on so many different labels. It's funny because I still meet guys at the top in radio stations who say they were influenced in one way or another by us. This is nice to know because it proves that our influence was there all the time.

AFTERWARD: THE ATLANTICS, AN AMERICAN VIEW
By John Blair, surf music historian and lead guitarist with the surf/instro band, JON & THE
NIGHTRIDERS. (Riverside, California - 1979)
I've heard a number of surf-styled instrumental groups of various foreign origins - England,
Japan, Scandanavia, etc.-and THE ATLANTICS appealed to me more than the rest.
In the first place, their sound was not what I would call a "surf" sound at all; close but not really
there. Perhaps I'm prejudiced toward the California surf sound, but then that's where it all started
anyway ... right?
The Atlantics' sound is definitely exciting, tight and clean, but lacks that "punch" that the old
Fender reverb used to provide for capturing a certain feeling or sound. The Atlantics used reverb
all right, but it sounds rather altered, changed electronically. In fact, Peter Hood's knowledge of
electronics, which he used with the group to define their sound, probably contributes to the
difference between them and the Californian bands of the same time period.
I think another point worth mentioning is The Atlantics use of fairly intricate guitar melodies and
chord patterns. The end result is not as simplistic as most Stateside surf bands, implying that The
Atlantics were probably more proficient musicians than most of their contemporaries in the States. The closest sounding American surf band to The Atlantics would probably be The Challengers.

This is part of an interview done by Stephen McParland on February 28th, 1988 with Atlantics members Bosco Bosanac, Peter Hood, and Jim Skiathitis and discusses the group's instrumental singles for CBS during 1963-65.
WHAT WAS THE CONCEPT BEHIND "MOON MAN"?
BOSCO: Peter. who wrote it. loved The Spotniks! He was also into a lot of science fiction.
PETER: There was a riff that had a spacey type of sound in it. Really. there was no big
story why we called it "Moon Man". If there was ... none of us can remember it!
JIM: On the original recording. which did not make it to the single. we all yelled
M-o-o-o-o-o-n Man!
PETER: This was even before "Wipe-Out", so the vocal introduction was an original idea by us.
DID "BOMBORA" HAVE ANOTHER TITLE OR WAS IT ACTUALLY WRITTEN AS "BOMBORA"?
PETER: We wrote it one day when we were going to go to the (Sydney) Easter Show in April and it rained. I was going to indulge in my favourite delicacy. Dairy Farmers' flavoured
milk. but it rained so we sat down and I said, "we have to write a song". So we started
writing "Bombora". It was written at Jim's place. We both picked out the tune 'with our
guitars. I played the first piece and that's how we got it started. Then we realised
we needed another piece and I introduced something I had written at least twelve months
previously - which became the middle part. I was never able to put it anywhere because
it was a middle to a song, never a beginning or an end. So we put it all together and
we came to the conclusion that it was a very dynamic sounding piece of music and as
such it needed an equally dynamic sounding title.
JIM: Did we title it or did Sven (Libaek) title it?
PETER: No, no. We titled it. In fact. Joan King (our manager) was helpful in that respect. She sort of went through a few titles that she'd dug out of surfing magazines.
WHOSE IDEA WAS IT TO PUT A SURFING TITLE TO IT?
PETER: We just sensed there was something new happening in music. We couldn't quite categorize it and then all of a sudden we realised. We knew the Americans had just jumped onto this new musical form - SURF MUSIC - and we were the first Australian band to pick up on it.
It was a powerful form of music and it suited our musical outlook. I wouldn't say we
"cashed-in" because I don't remember any conversations where the idea of "cashing-in" was brought up. It seemed a natural thing for us to do. It was a little like Moon Man You asked us why the title "Moon Man". It was just because I liked space things. Why associate ourselves with SURF. Well heck, I used to hang off Maroubra Beach rocks and play chicken with the waves. We all liked the beach, so it was a natural progression. It was a reflection of our lifestyle. [JUST AS THE CALIFORNIA SURF MUSIC SCENE WAS A REFLECTION OF THE AMERICAN/CALIFORNIA BAND MEMBERS LIFESTYLES.] If a guy had been crazy about cars. then the concept of car songs or songs about cars would have been an obvious development. [WHICH WAS THE CASE SHORTLY THEREAFTER FOR A NUMBER OF AMERICAN GROUPS. RECORD PRODUCERS AND VOCALISTS.) In summing it all up, what it boils down to is that we were writing music to fit what we perceived as being the new force it music. It's true "Bombora" may have been written by accident (because we were intending to go to the Show and it rained), but once we realised we had hit upon a dynamic style, we continued with it. What could be more dynamic or exciting than the ocean?! Godly enough, as I remember, "Bombora" was even considered to be called "The Crusher"/. but then we agreed that "Bombora" said it all.
WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO TEAM IT WITH "GREENSLEEVES"?
PETER: It had always been one of my favourite tunes when I was a kid. I'd always loved it and so we decided to record it because it had a nice melody.
WHEN YOU RECORDED "BOMBORA". WHAT ELSE DID YOU DO AT THE SESSION?
PETER: We did four songs - "Bombora". "Greens I eeves" .... I can't remember the other two. We always tried to do four songs. Sven basically gave us three hour sessions in which we tried to do four songs. That was our basic work schedule.
THE CONCEPT FOR AN ALBUM HAD NOT BEEN BROUGHT UP AT THIS POINT ... OR HAD IT? YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THAT AT THE "MOON MAN" SESSIONS YOU ONLY CUT THE TWO SONGS ... SO PERHAPS YOU ONLY CUT THE TWO SONGS AT THE "BOMBORA" SESSION. THERE REALLY WAS NO NEED TO CUT ANYMORE BECAUSE You HAD NOT YET ESTABLISHED YOURSELVES STRONG ENOUGH TO WARRANT AN ALBUM OR EXTENDED SESSIONS.
PETER: That's true. The album idea came after "Bombora" hit. It's also possible that at the session we failed to meet our four song quota. I do know they always pressed us to record as many as possible.
WAS STUDIO TIME BEING BILLED AGAINST YOUR ROYALTIES?
PETER: No. They just paid us a percentage and took all the costs.
WITH "THE CRUSHER". WAS THE IDEA TO PRODUCE A SIMILAR SOUNDING PIECE TT"EMBORA" IN AN EFFORT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ITS SUCCESS?
PETER: It was structured similarly. but it was not a "cash-in". It was more a case of us
liking the style. It was a thundering style. Believe me, to actually perform the tunes.even today. makes the entire stage rock. We were just into that thundering-rolling sound. That BECAME OUR SOUND. "The Crusher" was written and recorded as part of our "flow". Once we started writing anything we thought we liked and would be a good follow-up - in the same thundering
style - usually became a follow-up. "The Crusher" was not written as a follow-up to
"Bombora". More simply, it became a follow-up.
WHAT ABOUT "HOOTENANNY STOMP"? WHAT WAS THE IDEA BEHIND WRITING AND RECORDING THAT?
PETER: "Hootenanny Stomp" was written to try and diversify our style into things Theo (PENGLIS) liked: the real American. almost banjo. style of guitar picking. The Chet Atkins related material we recorded later was a direct result of Theo's taste in music
We actually enjoyed playing the song and I still like listening to it. In fact, when it was released and for a short time. I actually thought I liked it better than "The Crusher". However, it was just a mood I was in and it soon wore off.
THEN THERE WAS "WAR OF THE WORLDS" WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY TITLED. --WORLD WAR THREE
PETER: Yes. I had always wanted to write about the classic nuclear confrontation.
HAD YOU RECENTLY SEEN THE 1953 FILM THAT STARRED GENE BARRY IN THE LEAD ROLE?
PETER: No. I was just totally interested in the idea. At one time I e4en considered becoming a nuclear physicist ... before music wiped all that out! Therefore, I was aware of the entire scientific thing and even today, "War Of The Worlds" is still very significant. Nothing much has changed. The tune was simply my interpretation of what such a war would be like. The music to me conjures that image of moroseness and seriousness of a World War Three.
WHO ACTUALLY CHANGED THE TITLE TO "WAR OF THE WORLDS"?
JIM: C.B.S. They didn't like the title.
PETER: That's right. They didn't like it so we changed it. That way it was noncommittal.
THE FLIP OF "WAR OF THE WORLDS" WAS "THE BOWMAN". WHERE DID THAT IDEA ORIGINATE.
PETER: Theo wrote that and it was. In many ways. an accident. We only called it "The Bowman" because it just happened to have that'sound (like the "twang" of a bow - remember the start of the old Robin Hood television show) in it. The song was written and then titled.
"RUMBLE AND RUN" WAS YOUR NEXT SINGLE AND AGAI N IT WAS A HOOD-SKIATHITIS COMPOSITION
.PETER: That's right. We were influenced by what I called "Marlon Brando music". You remember the film THE WILD ONE"? The motorbike image. Well. "Rumble And Run" was our musical interpretation of that film. You have a "rumble" and jump on your bikes and "run" You can hear in the middle. the sound of a bike taking off and the sirens of the cops chasing the bikes. It was basically a thematic song ... a little bit of atmosphere.
WELL THAT WAS MUCH THE SAME CONCEPT AS "WAR OF THE WORLDS". IT WAS ALSO THEMATIC.
PETER: Exactly! It was also one of the very few times (if not the only time) we had a title first and then we wrote the tune. This was because I had a definite idea of what I wanted to write about.
"THE WILD ONES" COMPLETED THE "RUMBLE AND RUN" SINGLE. WERE THEY CUT AT THE SAME SESSION?
PETER: No. Actually, much different sessions. Even though the idea seems similar. I think
you'll notice that the melody is much sweeter and more melodic. I think "Rumble And Run" is a much more violent type sounding melody; like the battle in "War Of The Worlds". It was supposed to represent a fist fight. On the otherhand, "The Wild Ones", at least to me, projects the image of riding along the highway. Theo wrote "The Wild Ones" and we would often associate him with Marlon Brando because he used to wear this big leather jacket. Unless he contradicts me. I think the song was probably an offshoot of us calling him "Marlon" from time to time.
YOUR NEXT INSTRUMENTAL RELEASE WAS "TEENSVILLE". A VERSION OF CHET ATKINS' 1960 AMERICAN HIT?
PETER: Yes. That was once again, Theo's influence. He liked it and so we ended up recording it. The flipsie was "Boo Boo Stick Beat", another Chet Atkins' hit. This time, I thought. 'Let's do something a bit different.' The idea was to try and revive an old thing by injecting some new ideas into it. We added a few bottle sound effects and tin cans .... a kind of hollow-log sound effect. It was mainly recorded as something to entertain, rather than any other reason. We performed it on stage and it always went over well because the guys would come out on stage with bottles and tin cans and all types of shakers. It was a good audience song. It probably sounded better when we did it live than how it ended up on record.
AFTER RELEASING THE TWO NON-ORIGINALS - "TEENSVILLE" AND "BOO BOO STICK BEAT". You RETURNED TO RECORDING A FOLLOW-UP OF ORIGINALS - "GIANT" B/W "MIRAGE". WHAT WERE THE STORIES BEHIND THESE TWO TUNES?
PETER: "Giant" was one of those amazing songs that you actually write in a matter of minutes.
We were all sitting around at our rehearsal hall one day - the whole four of us sitting there - playing around with this melody when all of a sudden "W-H-A-C-K". the song seemed to write itself. I remember, within ten minutes we had a working song. We then spent the rest of the day honing it up. We never had to work on that song ever again. Initially, it was titled "Flight Of The Banshee" because it sounded like it had this super power to it. "Banshee" is Irish for a female spirit who used to scream and wail in a very loud and powerful manner. We then thought about a big supersonic jet. but eventually we just settled for "Giant" because it still had that "big" sound about it.THEREFORE. THE TITLE "GIANT" SIMPLY REFERS TO THE SOUND OF THE TUNE AND NOT ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH A BIG WAVE. SIMPLY THE SOUND OF THE RECORDING ITSELF.
PETER: Well, thinking about it now .... both.
JIM: I also think we changed the title from "Flight Of The Banshee" to "Giant" because C.B.S. did not like the former title. I thought it was a better title.
PETER: It was and I think C.B.S. liked "Giant" more because it still retained the idea that it could refer to giant waves. After all, the single was being issued during summer. Therefore. the title made then happy because it "referred" to giant waves and it also suited us because the title still retained the sound and feel of what "...Banshee" was in the first place.
LISTENING TO THE FLIP OF "GIANT". JIM'S "MIRAGE'. IT IS OBVIOUS THE TUNE DOES NOT REFER TO THE MIRAGE JET, BUT TO WHAT SOME PEOPLE SEE IN THE DESERT - A MIRAGE.
PETER: That's right. To us it had an eastern sound to it and -so we eventually settled upon a title that suited the tune.
AFTER THE "GIANT" SINGLE APPEARED. ONLY TWO MORE ATLANTICS' SINGLES WERE RELEASED BY C.B.S.. BOTH OF THESE CONTAINED NO GROUP ORIGINALS. WHY WAS THIS?
PETER: Well. some of the tunes were things we performed live that went over very well with the audience.
WELL OBVIOUSLY. RECORDING "GOLDFINGER" WAS MOST OPPORTUNE BECAUSE THE-FILM WAS A HUGE SUCCESS, AS WAS THE VOCAL VERSION OF THE TUNE BY SHIRLEY BASSEY.
PETER: We were performing it and it sounded good to us when we did it. We also thought we would like to do a "Bond" theme.
WAS IT ACTUALLY RECORDED AS A SINGLE RELEASE OR SIMPLY A SONG AT A SESSION?
PETER. As a single release. We always liked it and we had this weird guitar that sounded so-o-o-o-o huge on stage that we just enjoyed hearing the guitar and the sound for ourselves.
YOU TEAMED "GOLDFINGER" WITH "BUMBLE BOOGIE". ANY PARTICULAR REASON FOR THAT?
PETER: Not really. "Bumble Boogie" goes back a long way because we always tried to play it back in our-more teenage years. It was in our repertoire and it always went down well with the audience. It's a technical number and we always wanted to record a technical number that had a good audience reaction. We did it for many reasons.
OBVIOUSLY YOU WERE NOT CONCERNED SO MUCH ABOUT SONGWRITING ROYALTIES? IF YOU HAD BEEN, YOU WOULD HAVE ISSUED MORE OF YOUR OWN MATERIAL AS SINGLES INSTEAD OF USING OTHER PEOPLES COMPOSITIONS?
PETER: No. we never thought that way. If we liked something. we'd put it out!
AFTER "GOLDFINGER" CAME "PETER GUNN". THIS WAS OBVIOUSLY ANOTHER CROWD FAVOURITE?
PETER: Right. We had it in our repertoire and we found we could get a good sound out of it.
However. to be quite honest. we really copped out on "Peter Gunn". We never really did it the way we should have done it. We bummed out. The middle part, where the guitar solos were meant to be, just fell dead flat. I don't know what happened. We must have had a bad day in the studio. Also. at this point in our careers, weren't we trying to shake the "surfing image" by Introducing a broader spectrum of music into the act?
WELL. WAS IT BEGINNING TO WORRY YOU; BEING LOOKED UPON OR CLASSED AS A "SURF BAND"?
PETER: Yes. I suppose it was starting to become a bit of a problem.
JIM: We had been performing the material for at least three years.
PETER: I guess the point is, we were already playing other forms of music before we became known for our "surf" tunes and we continued to perform these all through the "surf" era. but our big hits were the "surf" tunes and I guess many people thought that was all we did. For us, recording these tunes was a change because it was something different. I don't think for us it was an overt attempt to change our image; more a case of introducing something new and to let people know we could do other material.
HOWEVER. IT WAS ONLY YOUR ORIGINALS THAT BECAME HITS. THE LAST TWO SINGLES - "GOLDFINGER" AND "PETER GUNN" - VANISHED QUICKLY.
PETER: That's true. but as I said before. all those songs - "Goldfinger". "Bumble Boogie". "Peter Gunn" and the flip, "Chief Wooping Koff". were things we had always liked. always played and the audience always seemed to love them. We could have written more original material. but we simply decided to record some tunes that were already audience winners. "Chief Wooping-Koff". for whatever stupid reason. always went well because of that Indian beat in it.
YOUR BIGGEST HITS - AND THE TUNES YOU ARE MOST REMEMBERED FOR - WERE YOUR ORIGINALS AND IN RETROSPECT HAD "WAR OF THE WORLDS" NOT BEEN "BLACKLISTED" BY MANY STATIONS, YOUR LIST OF HITS WOULD HAVE BEEN GREATER. AFTER "WAR OF THE WORLDS" FAILED, YOUR CHART SUCCESS WAS ALL BUT OVER, YET YOU MANAGED TO ISSUE FIVE ALBUMS ON C.B.S.. EVEN GROUPS WITH MORE SINGLE HITS DID NOT GET THE CHANCE TO ISSUE AS MANY ALBUMS AS YOU DID.
PETER: Well. that just goes to show you how popular we actually were; even if the stations weren't playing our singles. "War Of The Worlds"'s failure to take-off was a real disappointment. See. everyone was not into that thing of reality then. Because of the title. many refused to play it.
IN SOME RESPECTS IT WAS NOT COMMERCIAL.
PETER: Actually. it was/is the type of thing that needed to be part of a movie soundtrack. Oddly enough, "War Of The Worlds" and "Rumble And Run" can be joined together to make a hybrid-type soundtrack. Although they were written and recorded at two different times, they are in many respects very compatible tunes.
SPEAKING OF "WAR OF THE WORLDS". WHAT DO THE BIRDS (HEARD IN THE TUNE) SYMBOLISE?
PETER: Well. everything had been wiped our except a few birds. If you read about Noah, the first living thing to appear after the flood was a bird and so it was only fitting that they would also be the last to go. Plus ... birds (albeit doves) are a symbol of peace!

Back to Top

From Ivan's Email Interview
The stuff with many '>' symbols in front was Jim's original text; my
replies to him have only one '>' in front, and then his latest comments
have no symbols in front.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:01:24 +0000
From: Jim S <jimskia@hotmail.com>
To: ipongrac@mail.gmu.edu
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: ivan's question about your gear back in the early days

Hi Ivan
What a pleasent surprise this is. I have been meaning to email you for
ages but just never seem to be able to get around to it for one reason or
another.

It is great to hear from you and I look forward to many interesting
chats in the coming months. Altough I don't know if I can handle too many
questions about the old days cause the old memory ain't what she used to be.
I am a little pressed for time today so I will try and answer some of your
questions but if there's any that I can't handle I will ask for help from
some of the other guys and get back to you on them.

> > >In the very early days we only used the Fender amp for leads and
> > >probably also used reverb more then. But after we got our Voxes, (we
> > >had two ac30's), one was a piggy back, we started to use the voxes
> > >more and more because we liked the warmer sound of the vox. we also
> > >used less and less reverb and more and more echolette.
>
>Interesting! When you used a Bandmaster, was Theo using an AC30? Did you
>buy the Voxes later, or were they given to you as part of the endorsement?

We actually bought the Voxes ourselves but I am just trying to remember
what we used to do. I know for awhile we only used the Fender for leads
and one Vox (the piggy back) for rythym. Theo and I used to swap sides
all the time depending who was playing lead. The piggy back was not a very
good lead amp. I am sure we only used it for rythym until we got the
other vox which I used all the time for lead...(I think...???)

We were also one of the first groups to use a stereo effect on stage with
our amps. We split our lead into 2 amps, one on either side of the
stage. So we used the Vox AC30 and the Bandmaster for that and the other
Vox was the rythym...I am sure there is more to all that but I can't
recall at the moment.

>Did you move away from reverb because it doesn't sound quite as good with
>AC30s (which is what I found), or because you just wanted a different
>sound?

I think that we basically wanted a different sound. Everybody was using
that bubbly reverb sound. Especially for surf music. I was in fact that
real American/Californian sound synonymous with surf music. So we just
wanted something else. I think also that it was just a matter of
blending our great love of The Shadows and their sound with this new
style of music that was emerging.

> > We actually had 2 klempts and in some
> >songs we joined them up and ran one into the other.
>
>Do you remember which ones? I'm guessing "War of the Worlds" and "S.O.S
>(Stomp on Stomp)", at least.

Yeah you've guessed perfectly. I can't remember all the songs but certainly
"War of the Worlds" and "S.O.S" were 2 of them.

> > >I know what Ivan means because now even with all the technology some
> > >days we just can't seem to capture the exact sound that we are after
> > >or that is actually coming out of our amps.
>
>It's funny, isn't it? I think those sounds were simply the sound of all
>the 'primitive' recording equipment, which colored the sound quite a bit,
>unlike the modern equipment which is very pure and neutral. However,
>being all tube recording gear, it probably colored it in ways that we
>quite like today!
>
> > >That schreeching treble that Ivan speaks about is certainly there when
> > >we play live but I think we probably try to avoid it for recording.
>
>Hmmm, well, let me rephrase that - I believe it was the treble that gave
>your sound the agression and drama, and I totally dig it! I don't think
>it was unpleasant in any way. I think that's what made you stand out. I
>often think of it as analagous to (or even an evolution of) Hank's tone
>from '60-'61 - stuff like Man Of Mystery and The Frightened City. I think
>it was beautiful, and you should definitely EMBRACE it, rather than avoid
>it, for recording!! In my mind, it's as big of a part of the Atlantics as
>the rolling toms and the echo.

Again, interesting comments and observations. I will give it some thought
and talk about it with the guys and Martin and we may look at 'Embracing'
it, as you say.

I must say though that sometimes on stage my vox is just so sharp and
trebly that it sounds awful to me.. on stage that is. Some nights I just
can't get it right. It seems to vary with the different venues too.

> > >I think the biggest difference is that we now use mainly Vox but back
> > >then most of our stuff was done on Fender which of course had a much
> > >sharper sound than the vox. If you listen to some of our later stuff
> > >and especially a lot of the Vocals (say around 1965 to 69) I think
> > >that the sound was quite different already by then.
>
>It's funny you bring that up, cause over the last week I've been listening
>to a lot of your '65-'69 stuff, and greatly enjoying it. I gotta say that
>you guys were REALLY good at that as well, and it's a shame that you
>couldn't break through with it. The only explanation I have is that maybe
>it wasn't quite as original and distinctive as your instro stuff. Your
>influences were a bit more obvious there - the Animals, the Who, Jeff
>Beck, Cream, etc. But fine, fine songs nonetheless.

Yes, those exact bands were very big influences on us. We, or maybe I
should say I, loved them, so I guess our vocals were not as original as
they should have been.

> > >Now, our old stuff sounds awful to us cause its so thin and tinny. It
> > >was the sound of whatever the sound engineer got on that particular
> > >day.
>
>I have to agree about some songs, that their sound quality leaves a bit to
>be desired. But you also have to understand that the sound quality to the
>listener is also a part of the mood and the ambiance of the song, for
>better or worse. I really think it's possible that those songs wouldn't
>be as special if the recordings were completely clean and full. I know
>that to me all of those songs are special exactly as they are. I really
>love, for example, the second album, and I think it's one of the most
>perfect instrumental albums of all time, exactly as it is! I'm probably
>in the freakish minority, but there you go.

You make some very interesting statements and observations about our music
and your knowledge on our 'stuff' is very extensive and most flattering. I
thank you for being such an ardent admirer.

Anyway I really must go so I'll say bye for now. Thanks again for taking the
time to write and I will look forward to hearing from again real
soon. Please accept my best wishes for a great xmas and new year for
you and family.

Bye for now
Jim Skiathitis

Back to Top